From donnawonna at worldnet.att.net  Fri Aug  1 03:21:00 2008
From: donnawonna at worldnet.att.net (Donna)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 23:21:00 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Subject: New J. K. Rowling Book
Message-ID: <4892811A.00000B.03428@LIFESAVER>

No: HPFGUIDX 183939

Donna:
I received notice from Barnes and Noble that a new book, The Tales of Beedle
the Bard, is scheduled
to be released on December 4, 2008.  The book contains all five tales left
to Hermione by Dumbledore in
Deathly Hallows.  This may be old news but it's new to me.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From kaamita at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  1 03:58:23 2008
From: kaamita at yahoo.com (Heather Hadden)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 20:58:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] New J. K. Rowling Book
In-Reply-To: <4892811A.00000B.03428@LIFESAVER>
Message-ID: <228732.78465.qm@web56508.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183940

Donna:
> I received notice from Barnes and Noble that a new book, The Tales
> of Beedle the Bard, is scheduled to be released on December 4, 2008.
> The book contains all five tales left to Hermione by Dumbledore in
> Deathly Hallows. This may be old news but it's new to me.

?
The book will also contain footnotes and cliffnotes written by Dumbledore. There will be two versions of the book. A standard version and a deluxe version.
?
Heather






From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk  Fri Aug  1 06:44:35 2008
From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2008 06:44:35 -0000
Subject: New J. K. Rowling Book
In-Reply-To: <228732.78465.qm@web56508.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <g6ubcj+lvkj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183941

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Heather Hadden <kaamita at ...> wrote:

Donna:
> > I received notice from Barnes and Noble that a new book, The Tales
> > of Beedle the Bard, is scheduled to be released on December 4, 2008.
> > The book contains all five tales left to Hermione by Dumbledore in
> > Deathly Hallows. This may be old news but it's new to me.
?
Heather:
> The book will also contain footnotes and cliffnotes written by Dumbledore. There will be 
two versions of the book. A standard version and a deluxe version.

Geoff:
Over here, Amazon UK are offering standard and collector's editions at 
RRPs of ?6.99 and ?50.00 respectively.

I fear I know which one I can afford.....
:-(

BTW, what are "Cliffnotes"? My dictionaries offer no assistance.






From alexisnguyen at gmail.com  Fri Aug  1 16:10:11 2008
From: alexisnguyen at gmail.com (P. Alexis Nguyen)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 12:10:11 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: New J. K. Rowling Book
In-Reply-To: <g6ubcj+lvkj@eGroups.com>
References: <228732.78465.qm@web56508.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	 <g6ubcj+lvkj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <b6e131bf0808010910l78d98d2cn80237ae17f4b55c@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183942

Geoff:
> Over here, Amazon UK are offering standard and collector's editions at
> RRPs of ?6.99 and ?50.00 respectively.
>
> I fear I know which one I can afford.....
> :-(
>
> BTW, what are "Cliffnotes"? My dictionaries offer no assistance.

Ali:
I fear I also know which one I can afford ... though I've sprung for
those ridiculous deluxe editions in the past, so one never knows if
I'm going to be foolish and insane.  :)

Cliffs Notes:
http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/
Some akin Spark Notes (if you're familiar with that).  Basically,
they're just study guides for various topics/novels.  I've personally
found them useless for the most part, but they're sometimes helpful
with a book that I'm having an especially hard time understanding.
(The joke here, of course, is that many students who make use of
Spark/Cliffs notes use them in lieu of reading the books.)

~Ali



From kaamita at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  1 15:54:44 2008
From: kaamita at yahoo.com (Heather Hadden)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 08:54:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: New J. K. Rowling Book
In-Reply-To: <g6ubcj+lvkj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <891166.19422.qm@web56501.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183943

>> Heather earlier:
>> The book will also contain footnotes and cliffnotes written by
>> Dumbledore. There will be two versions of the book. A standard
>> version and a deluxe version.

> Geoff:
> BTW, what are "Cliffnotes" ? My dictionaries offer no assistance.
?
Basically notes written in the book. Like in the margins, off to the side of the sentence, etc.

Heather



From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  1 19:21:10 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2008 19:21:10 -0000
Subject: New J. K. Rowling Book
In-Reply-To: <g6ubcj+lvkj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g6vnn6+c8nn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183944

Heather wrote:
> > The book will also contain footnotes and cliffnotes written by
Dumbledore. There will be two versions of the book. A standard version
and a deluxe version.
> 
Geoff responded:
> Over here, Amazon UK are offering standard and collector's editions at 
> RRPs of ?6.99 and ?50.00 respectively.
> 
> I fear I know which one I can afford.....
> :-(
> 
> BTW, what are "Cliffnotes"? My dictionaries offer no assistance.

Carol adds:
>From what I read, the book will include commentary, including
footnotes, by Dumbledore. I suspect that, rather than Cliffs Notes (a
brand name for study guides), it will resemble FB and QTA in having
marginal notes (marginalia) only by Dumbledore rather than Ron and
Harry. (Compare the HBP's Potions book, which also included marginal
notes.) I suspect that the marginal notes will be more intellectual
than Ron's and Harry's. I expect the notes to be the best part of the
book, clever and humorous like Dumbledore himself (when he's not
manipulating people behind the scenes). 

As for Cliff's Notes, they're the ugliest and most recognizable books
in creation, carried by students who can't be bothered to read the
complete book or have read the books but don't "get" the themes,
subplots, etc. Britain probably has something similar. Here's a link
to give you a clearer idea:

http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/Section/Literature.id-305321.html?&filter=B&sort=TITLE&sortDirection=ASC

I suspect that Cliff's Notes on the HP books won't be out till
Rowling's copyright expires, which is probably never as I suspect her
descendants will renew it in perpetuity if they can.

Carol, wondering if the Prince's Potions book will be next on her agenda






From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  1 20:40:51 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2008 20:40:51 -0000
Subject: New J. K. Rowling Book
In-Reply-To: <g6vnn6+c8nn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g6vscj+2glj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183945

> Carol, wondering if the Prince's Potions book will be next on her agenda
>
Montavilla47:
Heh.  Probably not.  That seems like an awful lot of work
without much scope for creativity.  I mean, it would be
lots of recipes, right?  With the only fun part being the 
snarky comments.

I think she'd be better off working on something
completely different.  Or taking a few years off 
just to enjoy her prosperity and clear her head.






From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk  Fri Aug  1 21:17:35 2008
From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2008 21:17:35 -0000
Subject: New J. K. Rowling Book
In-Reply-To: <b6e131bf0808010910l78d98d2cn80237ae17f4b55c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <g6vuhf+h38u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183946

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "P. Alexis Nguyen" <alexisnguyen at ...> wrote:
>
> Geoff:
> > Over here, Amazon UK are offering standard and collector's editions at
> > RRPs of ?6.99 and ?50.00 respectively.
> >
> > I fear I know which one I can afford.....
> > :-(
 
Ali:
> I fear I also know which one I can afford ... though I've sprung for
> those ridiculous deluxe editions in the past, so one never knows if
> I'm going to be foolish and insane.  :)

Geoff:
Actually, I've bought all the Bloomsbury De Luxe hardbacks over time. 
They're not as stupidly expensive as this one seems to be threatening 
to be....




From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  2 04:39:55 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 04:39:55 -0000
Subject: Who WAS the True Master of the Elder Wand?
In-Reply-To: <g6tglf+8mkf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g70oer+ij3s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183947

> In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183935
> >
> > Leeann wrote:
> > Just possessing it or holding it does not make one its true 
> > master. It will work to some extent, but not to its 
> > full potential.

Mike:
There was a recent discussion about whether or not the Hallows needed 
to be introduced in DH. Centering on whether anything would have been 
left unresolved without them.

The Resurrection Stone. Eh, not really any need to resolve that plot 
line. It was only introduced in HBP and for all intents and purposes 
it's story seemed over. We did have Dumbledore's blackened hand never 
really explained. I mean, Snape said it was due to slow reflexes; and 
while it turns out that wasn't exactly true, who really expected 
Snape to be telling Bella and Cissy the whole truth? Besides, the 
real story left us just as many questions as the true story answered, 
didn't it?.

Harry's IC. JKR used one of her public statements to tell us that we 
should all be wondering why Dumbledore had James's cloak. Well, we 
had already been speculating about that, and came up with any number 
of possibilities. So other than JKR's intent to introduce *this* 
cloak as one of the Hallows, I don't see how this story line needed 
any more resolution. JMHO

The Elder Wand. Ah, this one is a little different, imo. First, we 
had Dumbledore blasting *through* a door and hitting Crouch!Moody 
with a Stupefy in GoF. Stupefy should not have been able to blast 
through a door, that spell should have been blocked by it. Heck, even 
Avada Kedavra doesn't go through doors. But I thought this was an 
indication of how powerful Dumbledore was. And JKR helped me along 
with that impression by having Harry notice "a sense of power 
radiated from Dumbledore". 

Yet something never jibed in that scene, for me. Now I realize it was 
because it wasn't Dumbledore's power that was on display, it was his 
wand "revealing it's wonders", "performing as legend says it must to 
it's rightful owner"; as Voldemort explained. I mean sure, Dumbledore 
is a powerful wizard. But I'll bet this was one of the few times 
Dumbledore used this wand in anger, used it in a way that it's maker 
intended it to be used. Harry sensed that Dumbledore was "giving off 
heat" in that GoF scene, but I think it was the Elder Wand. I imagine 
using this wand in anger is akin to what happened with Harry's wand 
in the Seven Potters, it gets energized. I s'pose y'all figured this 
out long before this, but it's just now dawned on me.

The second scene, and the one that really needed resolving in my 
mind, was Dumbledore's spell in the MoM that made Harry's hair stand 
on end. Was it some extraordinary spell, and if so, what was that 
spell? Turns out, no, it was the wand. Though this may not be a 
satisfying resolution for some, I think it would have been considered 
a dropped plotline had it not been resolved at all.


> In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183936
> Carol responds:
> 
> However, the master of the wand is in no sense unbeatable, since
> he can lose the wand through trickery or death.
>  ....
> And DD in the MoM, fighting Voldemort, does not definitively 
> beat him (though Voldemort resorts to possessing Harry).
> They appear to be equally matched;

Mike:
Adding on two points to Carol's. No doubt in a fair fight between two 
equally matched wizards, the one with the Elder Wand would prevail. 
But if the wizard without the Elder Wand is either more powerful or 
has better tactics/knowledge of magic, the Elder Wand is not going to 
teach it's master better spells or cause him to use superior tactics. 
On the contrary, having the Elder Wand may give that wizard a false 
sense of superiority. This may have been Grindelwald's Achilles Heel.

If the Elder Wand was all powerful, that shield that Voldemort 
conjured in the MoM battle shouldn't have stopped Dumbledore's spell. 
Though that spell felt powerful to Harry, it was not a killing spell, 
Voldemort and Dumbledore agreed on that. In fact, Voldemort must have 
known that Dumbledore would not cast an AK, otherwise he wouldn't 
have tried to block an unblockable spell. And the Elder Wand does not 
decide what spells are cast. It seems it doesn't display it's 
immense power unless it's used by its master in a deadly fashion.


> Carol responds:
> If the wand were unbeatable, it would have reacted as Harry's
> holly wand did against Voldemort, casting a spell of its own
> volition to protect its master.

Mike:
I do have a quibble here, Carol. Though I think the Elder Wand would 
react within its capabilities when used in anger against a known 
enemy, I think Harry's yew wand was treated to extraordinary 
circumstance. There was the Priori experience it had with Voldemort, 
and that was triggered by an AK from Voldemort. Then there was the 
soul bit link that may have been sensed by the wand as knowledge that 
a known enemy was about to kill its master. 

But most of all, not only was this a one off occurrence as far as 
Ollivander believed, even Dumbledore only had a guess as to how or 
why this happened. Point being, I don't think it would be fair to 
expect the Elder Wand to react like Harry's yew wand did. I don't 
think any wand, in different circumstances would. And that isn't 
where the Elder Wand's strength lies.


-- In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183938
> Carol responds:
> It's quite possible that the Elder Wand, though undoubtedly
> powerful and capable of attracting those who crave power, is
> distorted into something greater than it really is.

> Montavilla47:
> 
> ... the Elder Wand (more myth than reality) ... 
> 
> But they have these reputations as unbeatable.  Well, neither of 
> them was--and we never even saw anybody put up a decent fight
> with Voldemort and lose.

Mike:
I think you've both hit the nail on the head. As Steve has countless 
times pointed out, there was the legend and then there was the 
reality. 

You've brought up another point, Montavilla, that I think was a lost 
oppurtunity. In seven books we didn't see anybody other than 
Dumbledore and Harry himself raise a wand against Voldemort. (I don't 
count those that fought him *after* Harry made his sacrifice that 
invoked the *power of love* protection against LV. There's no way to 
judge Voldemort's power or extraordinary magical abilities by that 
time.) 

We have to accept Voldemort's prowess on spec. If the story was told 
in one or two books, I suppose that would have to suffice. But with 
seven books, don't you think we could have seen one inferior wizard 
fight and lose to LV? Sure, fighting Dumbledore *and* the Elder Wand 
to a virtual stand still was pretty good. But I, like many others, 
think LV lost that fight even if he wasn't captured or incapacitated. 
Plus, it doesn't seem that Dumbledore even brought out a full arsenal 
to get this victory.


> Montavilla47:
> 
> I wonder if that was deliberate--if that was the real reason 
> we see James wandless--to deflate Voldemort as a scary 
> villain.  Wouldn't he be more scary if James had actually
> tried to fight him off?

Mike:
Oh, don't get me started! 

Question: Why would you think JKR would want to portray Voldemort as 
less scary? Wouldn't it help the story if he was scarier?


> Carol, who will be happy to revise these random thoughts based on 
> the arguments and evidence of other posters

Mike, who hopes he bolstered Carol's position rather than suggesting 
a revision, by adding to her points




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sat Aug  2 05:38:16 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 05:38:16 -0000
Subject: New J. K. Rowling Book
In-Reply-To: <g6vnn6+c8nn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g70rs8+6l9o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183948

Carol wrote: 
 
> I suspect that Cliff's Notes on the HP books won't be out till
> Rowling's copyright expires, which is probably never as I suspect 
her
> descendants will renew it in perpetuity if they can.

Potioncat:
Carol, perhaps you should sit down.

I don't know about Cliff's Notes (I thought it was Cliffnotes, but I 
would never argue this point  with a copyeditor--and I never read one 
myself) but there are Spark Notes for HP. Spark Notes are a 
competitor to Cliff. 

I saw one on sale for SS/PS at a book store and looked through it. 
Did you know that the name Severus Snape is supposed to let us know 
the man would snap the bones of his enemies?

Don't recall that ever happening. 

There are character descriptions and chapter summaries. Nothing to 
compare to anything posted here. It's a very thin book. 




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sat Aug  2 15:40:33 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 15:40:33 -0000
Subject: Who WAS the True Master of the Elder Wand?
In-Reply-To: <g70oer+ij3s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g71v5h+vn0n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183949

 
> Mike:
> The Resurrection Stone. Eh, not really any need to resolve that plot 
> line. It was only introduced in HBP and for all intents and purposes 
> it's story seemed over. 

Pippin:
It was needed to explain Dumbledore's lie about what he would see in
the mirror of Erised, and to give him a motive for allying with
Grindelwald. Although we didn't know about the alliance per se, we did
have indications that he'd done something of which he was deeply ashamed. 

IMO, The Hallows themselves symbolize three ways of reacting to
deathly peril: confrontation (the wand), denial (the stone), and
avoidance (the cloak.) All have their place, all can be misused, and
none of them will postpone death forever. The books as a whole deal
with these topics in detail. 

I realize there are people who don't *want* the story to have any
deeper meaning. But do you  think anyone would devote fifteen years of
their life to writing a story if it didn't mean something to them? JKR
obviously had something in mind besides creating a fantasy world to
play in. The last three books are devoted to destroying the illusion,
created by the first four, that the WW is a kind of fairytale place.


> Mike:
> I think you've both hit the nail on the head. As Steve has countless 
> times pointed out, there was the legend and then there was the 
> reality. 
> 
> You've brought up another point, Montavilla, that I think was a lost 
> oppurtunity. In seven books we didn't see anybody other than 
> Dumbledore and Harry himself raise a wand against Voldemort. 

> We have to accept Voldemort's prowess on spec.

Pippin:

 The adults don't speak of fearing Voldemort's prowess in battle.
Fudge  says outright that  it's his followers that make Voldemort
dangerous. What people  fear is Voldemort's obsessive enmity and his
ability to get the seemingly innocent and righteous to do his bidding.
Of that, there are plentiful examples. 

  Voldemort enjoys killing, but he prefers to let others fight for
him, which is only sensible. Although the legend is that Dumbledore is
the only one he ever feared, the text shows that Voldemort is
thoroughly opposed to giving *anyone* a fighting chance against him. I
think, if there had not been witnesses, he would have fled from
Dumbledore at once. But he couldn't afford to lose face. *He* knows
that his followers are the true source of his power.


 It's only when he thinks he's the true master of the unbeatable wand
*and* the only person who could kill him is dead, that Voldemort
deliberately puts himself in harm's way.

Thanks to Mike's brilliant observation about Dumbledore blasting a
spell through a door, I've realized that we did see the Elder Wand
failing Voldemort. If Voldemort had been the wand's true master, could
a simple door have saved Lucius and Bella from his wrath?

I don't think so. The spells should have gone right through it. We do
see the spells of the Elder Wand deflected when Dumbledore is using
it,  but only by magic. They aren't stopped by ordinary obstacles, and
they don't miss. 

Pippin






From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  2 19:38:36 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 19:38:36 -0000
Subject: Who WAS the True Master of the Elder Wand?
In-Reply-To: <g71v5h+vn0n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g72d3s+bevi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183950

Pippin wrote:
<snip>
> Thanks to Mike's brilliant observation about Dumbledore blasting a
spell through a door, I've realized that we did see the Elder Wand
failing Voldemort. If Voldemort had been the wand's true master, could
a simple door have saved Lucius and Bella from his wrath?
> 
> I don't think so. The spells should have gone right through it. We
do see the spells of the Elder Wand deflected when Dumbledore is using
it,  but only by magic. They aren't stopped by ordinary obstacles, and
they don't miss. 
> 
> Pippin
>
Carol responds:

I don't think that counts as the wand failing voldemort. It served its
purpose--killing a lot of people in his wrath--and *he* certainly
never thought (or Harry would have known), "The wand failed me! It
should have killed him through the door!" I doubt that we're supposed
to recall that moment in GoF (Mike did, but only after numerous
discussions, and he's the only one I know of who's thought of it). Not
only do we never see the wand actually failing him (it also, as I
said, creates Nagini's bubble and, as I didn't say because it's too
horrible, draws Snape into that bubble), but Voldemort himself doesn't
start thinking about the wand's supposedly not doing his bidding until
more than a month later (he finds the wand around Easter, which
appears to be in March despite the fact that Easter 1998 was in April,
and the battle occurs in May)--at which point, he attributes the
spectacular magic he's supposedly performed with it, unseen by us
except for the bubble and the killings, to his own superior
powers--but if it's that spectacular, how would he know the difference?

As for Dumbledore's spells not missing, that's probably his own skill
and power. DD defeated Grindelwald, a Dark Wizard at least as powerful
as Voldemort despite Voldemort's reputation (and a great deal more
sophisticated and intelligent than the upstart Voldemort, as indicated
in their conversation in the prison whose name escapes me at the
moment) *before* he acquired and became master of the Elder Wand.

Carol, who still thinks that this part of the storyline is
unconvincing and serves no purpose except to get Snape killed




From wildirishrose at fiber.net  Sat Aug  2 19:31:47 2008
From: wildirishrose at fiber.net (wildirishrose01us)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 19:31:47 -0000
Subject: Wizarding kids and their parents WAS: Draco's Hand of Glory 
In-Reply-To: <43e41d1e0807302230y3fd701b5y602c114adf701470@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <g72cn3+op4s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183951

> Carol responds:
> The difference is that we're *told* what little we know about
> Hermione's parents. (We don't even know their real first names.)
they
> appear in only two scenes, at Diagon Alley in CoS and at King's
Cross
> in OoP, and they don't have even one line in either scene.
>
> Lynda now:
> That's because Hermione's parents aren't part of the WW that
Hermione is
> becoming more and more a part of throughout the series. Yes, its
sad to see
> a girl who loves her parents distancing herself so much from them,
but even
> in real life, this happens.
>
><SNIP>

For a while, I've been thinking about how Hermione had slowly
distanced herself from her parents as the books progressed.

I thought it odd that Hermione's parents didn't object that Hermione
eventually distanced herself away from parents  all year and spent
all her time with the Weasleys or Hogwarts in the WW.  But the WW is
far different than the muggle world.  Perhaps her parents realized
that she was more a part of the WW than muggle world and accepted
it.  They probably knew that when she was with the Weasleys or at
Hogwarts she was safe, well as safe as one could be as the books got
darker and darker, and they would be less worried about her.

I've found it interesting that the kids at Hogwarts seem to have very
little adult supervision, with the exception of classes. There are
rules to follow, yet the kid go running amuck, unless something
drastic happenes.  I've came to the conclusion that the kids
pratically raise themselves from the age of 11 on up.  Maybe I'm
wrong.

And when it comes to the boy/girl relationships it seems like the
kids do their own thing.  Very little interference.  With the
exception of Ginny.  Ron, and I think Fred and George, has a lot to
say about that.  Protective, maybe?  I'm sure the students have the
same feelings about the opposite sex as the kids in the muggle
world.  I wonder if there could have been instances of very young
marriages and having children very young in the WW.

One last observation.  I'd never thought the adult Malfoys,
especially Draco's father, capable of showing affection or love until
Narcissa begged Snape to protect Draco.  It never occurred to me that
they had that side to them.  Altough I'm ashamed to admit it, I
didn't think of them as parents, and love their child as much as any
other parents would.  I'd always had the impression of them as being
cold and cruel.  But Bellatrix fits the cold, non-loving sort of
parent perfectly.  She seems to not have a problem with putting Draco
in LV's service and in harms way.

I've been wondering about these things for a long time.  I've finally
found a list where I can get other's opinions.

Marianne



From kersberg at chello.nl  Sat Aug  2 14:47:28 2008
From: kersberg at chello.nl (kamion53)
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 14:47:28 -0000
Subject: New J. K. Rowling Book
In-Reply-To: <g6vscj+2glj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g71s20+7grp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183952

> Montavilla47:
<SNIP>
> I think she'd be better off working on something
> completely different.  Or taking a few years off
> just to enjoy her prosperity and clear her head.


Kamion:

my thoughts exactly;
Her ambition was to become a professional writer, and to accomplish
that, she has to free herself of Harry Potter.
But to free herself of Harry Potter and all that goes with it, she
probably would retreat to a remote place like Punta Arenas in the
utter south of Chili.
It is very nice that Beadle the Bard will go to print, but like
Fantastic Beasts and Quidditch through the Ages it's spin-off, not
the real work. I certainly will pic it up but never as collectors
item or de luxe edition. Not everything JKR writes is instand gold.




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Sun Aug  3 00:46:08 2008
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 00:46:08 -0000
Subject: Who WAS the True Master of the Elder Wand?
In-Reply-To: <g70oer+ij3s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g72v4g+u6l3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183953

> Mike:
> The Resurrection Stone. Eh, not really any need to resolve that
> plot line. It was only introduced in HBP and for all intents and 
> purposes it's story seemed over. We did have Dumbledore's blackened 
> hand never really explained. I mean, Snape said it was due to slow
> reflexes; and while it turns out that wasn't exactly true, who 
> really expected Snape to be telling Bella and Cissy the whole 
> truth? Besides, the real story left us just as many questions as
> the true story answered, didn't it?.

Jen: The Resurrection Stone had everything to do with the revelations 
about Dumbledore though.  First why, *why* this enormously 
intelligent man, who spent most of his later years trying to bring LV 
down, risked everything by putting on a Horcrux.  That needed some 
serious explanation to me.  Imagine that plot point hanging out there 
after DH if no Resurrection Stone existed, after seeing Snape attempt 
to heal him & question why he would do such a stupid thing.  I'd be 
right behind Snape in line to ask that question!  Without DD putting 
on the ring, Snape would then be in the position of killing a 
Dumbledore who wasn't dying, or the plot would need to be entirely 
different, maybe Snape revealing his loyalty earlier for instance.  
It completely changes Snape's trajectory.  

Mike:
> Harry's IC. JKR used one of her public statements to tell us that
> we should all be wondering why Dumbledore had James's cloak. Well,
> we had already been speculating about that, and came up with any 
> number of possibilities. So other than JKR's intent to introduce
> *this* cloak as one of the Hallows, I don't see how this story line
> needed any more resolution. JMHO

Jen:  This is one I would find difficult to let go of for symbolic 
reasons.  The cloak has everything to do with what makes Harry & 
Voldemort different.  Harry uses his cloak for (mostly) good reasons, 
to hide he & his friends from great danger.  He takes off the cloak 
when it's his time to die.  Voldemort taunts death, attempts to 
overcome it using magical power, believing in the higher authority of 
superior magic over human nature.  

Granted, JKR could have chosen to answer the DD ring question and 
symbolize the relationship between Harry/LV in another way 
besides "The Tale of the Three Brothers" and the Hallows.  I realize 
some of my arguments are circular. <g>  However, she said as far back 
as 1998 that "I know it's unfashionable to use this word, morality, 
and I never set out to preach, but I think the books do explore the 
misuse of power, and there's an attempt to make some sense of death." 
(The Herald).  

The Hallows definitely cover all the bases if the goals were 
exploring the misuse of power & making sense of death.  Whether JKR 
achieved her goals is up to the individual reader.  Harry represents 
the cloak, LV the Elder Wand and Dumbledore the Resurrection Stone in 
my opinion, and they act out the story of the Three Brothers in DH.  
I find the symmetry satisfying. 






From mongwen at gmail.com  Sun Aug  3 02:02:58 2008
From: mongwen at gmail.com (Mongwen)
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 22:02:58 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: New J. K. Rowling Book
References: <228732.78465.qm@web56508.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <g6ubcj+lvkj@eGroups.com> <b6e131bf0808010910l78d98d2cn80237ae17f4b55c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00c801c8f50d$0e579560$6501a8c0@betty9wiwuzem4>

No: HPFGUIDX 183954

Here's hoping the books are put out in braille, too.  I have no expectation 
of audio; it's too small for that.  I've got the seven main ones, FB and 
QTTA.  Got to keep the collection going, ya know...
Betty 




From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  3 02:46:53 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 02:46:53 -0000
Subject: Wizarding kids and their parents WAS: Draco's Hand of Glory
In-Reply-To: <g72cn3+op4s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7366t+sjbj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183955

> Marianne
> 
> I thought it odd that Hermione's parents didn't object that
> Hermione eventually distanced herself away from parents all
> year and spent all her time with the Weasleys or Hogwarts in
> the WW.  But the WW is far different than the muggle world.
> Perhaps her parents realized that she was more a part of the
> WW than muggle world and accepted it.

Mike:
Hi Marianne, and welcome to the list. This was an excellent first 
post. :-)

It is interesting how quickly Hermione acclimated herself to the WW, 
thereby practically giving up her life with her parents. Best as I 
can determine, the last time she spends significant time with her 
parents is the summer between her third and fourth year. And even 
then she spends the last two weeks of her short two month summer at 
the Weasleys and the World Cup. I guess she does spend Christmas of 
her sixth year (HBP) at home, but only because her and Ron were 
feuding. The rest of her vacations seem to be spent with her WW 
friends. If she had had a sister, like Lily, maybe she would have 
spent more time at home. Of course, the summer vacation after HBP 
wasn't much of a holiday, was it?

Lynda noted that this often happens in RL, how kids grow apart from 
their parents. But this is a different case. Hermione seems to really 
love her parents, there is no indication of a rift other than she's a 
witch and they're non-magical. The statue of secrecy can't apply to 
parent child relationships and I wouldn't expect most Muggle-born 
children to abandon their parents or siblings. Dean said his parents 
were Muggles and he doesn't tell them anything. But there's all 
indication that he still spends lots of time with them.

Yeah, I know Hermione has to spend lots of time with Harry for the 
story. Still, I agree with Marianne's assessment, she does seem to 
shrug off her parents rather too easily.


> Marianne
> 
> I've found it interesting that the kids at Hogwarts seem to have
> very little adult supervision, with the exception of classes.
> There are rules to follow, yet the kid go running amuck, unless
> something drastic happens.  I've came to the conclusion that the
> kids pratically raise themselves from the age of 11 on up.  Maybe
> I'm wrong.

Mike:
Perhaps some of our British members can speak to the typical life in 
a British boarding school, I'm certainly no expert. I did go to a 
military college where we had to live in the dorms and had very 
little access to the off-campus for the most part. We had very little 
*adult* supervision, but we were all adults by then. It does seem odd 
that Hogwarts relies on their prefects to keep the order within the 
dorms with little to no help from their HoH.



> Marianne
> 
> One last observation.  I'd never thought the adult Malfoys,
> especially Draco's father, capable of showing affection or love
> until Narcissa begged Snape to protect Draco.  It never occurred
> to me that they had that side to them.  Altough I'm ashamed to
> admit it, I didn't think of them as parents, and love their child
> as much as any other parents would.  I'd always had the impression
> of them as being cold and cruel.

Mike:
I don't think you're alone there, Marianne. Narcissa came across to 
me as the spoiled, rich-girl, trophy wife that probably saw her 
offspring once a day and relied on the nanny to raise the child. I 
was surprised with her in Spinner's End. But then I do wonder how 
much of that was Lucius being thrown in Azkaban. She seemed to take 
over that family from that point on, and she seemed to have much more 
compassion than Lucius did.

As far as Lucius was concerned, umm, well, ... he's a bit of an 
enigma to me. On the one hand, he seems to be a smart, slick, 
politically savvy customer, able to get a lot of what he wants even 
after he's lost his position(s). And certainly he's rich. But then, 
OTOH, he's an avid Voldemort supporter, well he was one before DH 
anyway. 

I think there's a lot of truth in what Dumbledore said about 
Riddle/Voldemort. Much of which his supporters didn't understand. 
They seem to think that performing well for Voldemort will make him 
appreciate them more and raise one to the position of trusted ally 
and confidant. They don't understand that Voldemort will never trust 
anyone, will never have friends or confidants, and being his right-
hand man or woman gains you nothing. 

Lucius seemed to think he was Voldemort's right-hand man, and what 
did he get out of it? He got put in charge of the raid on the MoM, 
something that was certainly *not* his fort?. He got set up for a 
failure, and he failed. And I see this as a regular occurence with 
Voldemort, he wouldn't want any DE to think of himself as special 
and would make sure none of them got too big for his britches. 

Poor Snape, he didn't screw up anything as LV's RHM, so Voldemort 
finds an excuse to kill him instead. Man, being the VP in this 
organization is a bitch of a gig. ;-)


> Marianne
> 
> I've been wondering about these things for a long time.  I've
> finally found a list where I can get other's opinions.

Mike:
Opinions we got! Answers, eh, those aren't as easy to come by. :D




From imamommy at sbcglobal.net  Sun Aug  3 05:06:42 2008
From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (Emily)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 05:06:42 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g7366t+sjbj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g73ed2+e7oo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183956

Mike wrote:> 
> Yeah, I know Hermione has to spend lots of time with Harry for the 
> story. Still, I agree with Marianne's assessment, she does seem to 
> shrug off her parents rather too easily.

Emily here (boy, it's been a loooong time!)
 
I think it's important to consider how increasingly dangerous it
became for Hermione's parents, as well as how much Harry depended upon
her.  She spends breaks from school with her family up until the
beginning of GoF.  She stays for the Yule Ball, like practically all
the upperclassmen.  At the end of the novel, however, comes one of the
major turning points:  LV is back.

Hermione isn't just some Muggle-born witch, she is one of HP's best
friends.  At the start of the summer break, the OoP don't know what LV
is up to.  I think at the same time DD is protecting Harry, the Order
is also sheltering Ron and Hermione.  Ron would be there anyway, but
could they really send Hermione back to her Muggle parents and let
Voldemort just pick her off?  Additionally, there is the matter of
protecting her parents.  Obviously the SoS wouldn't apply to them
knowing about the existence of wizards, but do they really need all
the grisly details about the wizarding war?  What would the DE's do if
they thought the Grangers had information about Harry or the Order?  I
think they are kept at a distance b/c that is where they are safe. 
The fact that we don't see a lot of Hermione fretting about this may
be b/c she's got so much else on her mind, or it could be b/c we see
most of the story from Harry's limited vantage point.  Also, she was
planning to go skiing with them, even though it's not really her
thing, so they could spend some time together, but then Harry has the
vision of Arthur being attacked and she goes to help him.

I think we see some of the great, unselfish love that Hermione has for
her parents when she reveals the measures she has taken to protect
them in DH.  She truly just wants them to be safe, and happy, so much
so that she's willing to remove her memory from them and send them
away so that hopefully they will be out of LV's reach.
> > 
> > One last observation.  I'd never thought the adult Malfoys,
> > especially Draco's father, capable of showing affection or love
> > until Narcissa begged Snape to protect Draco.  It never occurred
> > to me that they had that side to them.  Altough I'm ashamed to
> > admit it, I didn't think of them as parents, and love their child
> > as much as any other parents would.  I'd always had the impression
> > of them as being cold and cruel.
> 
> Mike:
> I don't think you're alone there, Marianne. Narcissa came across to 
> me as the spoiled, rich-girl, trophy wife that probably saw her 
> offspring once a day and relied on the nanny to raise the child. I 
> was surprised with her in Spinner's End. But then I do wonder how 
> much of that was Lucius being thrown in Azkaban. She seemed to take 
> over that family from that point on, and she seemed to have much more 
> compassion than Lucius did.

Emily:

Really?  I mean, yes, I saw Narcissa as a pampered rich girl, but
Draco always seemed to be her pet.  I know we get told at least once
that she is forever sending him packages of sweets and things; she
seems to dote on him.  We know that because of her fondness for him,
her somewhat selfish overprotection, she doesn't allow Lucius to send
him to Durmstrang.  So, I never saw her as the totally hands-off
mother you describe.  I'm sure she let the house elves change the
diapers, though ;)

  Draco had kind of a hero-worship for his father; he seemed to see
his father as a powerful man who could accomplish anything. Lucius, I
think, wanted his son to be just like him, and I think he was forever
disappointed.  Where Lucius was cunning and wily, Draco was mostly
whiny, due probably in large part to his mother's indulgence.  I think
Lucius wanted him to "be a man" in all the worst machismo essence of
the phrase.  Send him to Durmstrang, toughen him up.  While this is
probably misguided, it's still not cold and disinterested; Lucius did
want to see his son succeed, at least according to his definition.

I think it is probably one of the most difficult things ever for Draco
to see his father's downfall between OoP and HBP.  I really think
Draco didn't ever see that his father's power could fail.  I think
that right then the drive to do something, anything, to help his
father regain his position and priviledge became a prime object for
Draco.  I think his fear of LV is so real b/c of what has happened to
his father.  I wonder if perhaps, in DH, he might have tried
resisting, might have even tried joining Harry, if he thought he stood
half a chance against Voldemort, yet what was a teenage boy to the
wizard who could chasten the great Lucius Malfoy?

Emily





From falkeli at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  3 10:42:04 2008
From: falkeli at yahoo.com (hp_fan_2008)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 10:42:04 -0000
Subject: Who WAS the True Master of the Elder Wand?
In-Reply-To: <g6q7r5+fv3d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7421s+g3ka@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183957

Ross L.:

> The Elder wand chose Grindelwald over Grigorovitch. Why? Because
Grindelwald was able 
> to steal the wand from Grigorovitch, snatching it and leaping from a
window.

HP Fan 2008:

I believe that merely stealing it isn't enough - you must beat the
previous owner. Perhaps stunning Grigorovitch was what made the
difference there.

Ross L.:
 
> Does the Elder Wand know that Harry knew where it was, and purposely
chose not to 
> pursue it? Does the Elder Wand know that Harry knew his own choice
not to pursue the 
> Elder Wand meant that Voldemort would obtain physical possession of
the Elder Wand?

My theory: The Elder Wand recognized the wand which removed it from
DD's possession. I believe that Draco (as the person who disarmed DD)
could have claimed the Elder Wand until it discovered that Harry had
mastered Draco's wand  - it would have recognized the PERSON who
removed it from DD's possession. So LV was in a situation where he was
weak against 2 different wizards - and luck had it that one of them
was someone who LV wanted to kill.

Ross L.:
 
> So, given all that, and given the fact that one can be the true
master of the Elder Wand and 
> still lose in battle (see Dumbledore v Grindelwald), who really was,
in the end, the true 
> master of the Elder Wand?

How about this: When Grindelwald faced DD, he decided to taunt him in
stead of killing him immediately. DD was quicker in disarming him,
therefore defeating him. I believe that Grindelwald could have beaten
DD there and then, if only he had decided to make it the battle quick
and to the point. 


             HP Fan 2008




From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Sun Aug  3 14:38:24 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 14:38:24 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g73ed2+e7oo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g74ft0+fhqt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183958

> Emily here (boy, it's been a loooong time!)

 I think at the same time DD is protecting Harry, the Order
> is also sheltering Ron and Hermione.  Ron would be there anyway, but
> could they really send Hermione back to her Muggle parents and let
> Voldemort just pick her off?  Additionally, there is the matter of
> protecting her parents.  

Magpie:
There's no canon to indicate that Hermione's parents are going to 
picked off, and if Voldemort was after them Hermione herself being 
safe at the burrow (not that the burrow is particularly safe if 
Voldemort decided to show up) would not protect them. 

Hermione stays because she wants to be involved with what's going on 
with her friends. And her estrangement from her parents is not just 
physical. She's not telling them things that are going on in her life 
because they "wouldn't understand." (That she's planning to go skiing 
with them means little when she lies to them to blow them off once 
something happens with Harry that she wants to be involved in.) So 
yeah, I think her relationship with her parents just comes naturally 
out of the Muggle/Wizard divide and that her attitude about them 
reflects the attitudes Wizards have towards Muggles in general.

Emily:
> I think we see some of the great, unselfish love that Hermione has 
for
> her parents when she reveals the measures she has taken to protect
> them in DH.  She truly just wants them to be safe, and happy, so 
much
> so that she's willing to remove her memory from them and send them
> away so that hopefully they will be out of LV's reach.

Magpie:
Oh god, that's a bad example if you're trying to win over those of us 
who think she's estranged from them. For a lot of us, that's the 
ultimate example of her attitude. Nobody doubts that Hermione loves 
her parents. She just doesn't respect them as equals or parents. 
They're lucky she didn't turn them into dogs and kennel them for the 
duration. 

-m




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sun Aug  3 15:11:25 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 15:11:25 -0000
Subject: Who WAS the True Master of the Elder Wand?
In-Reply-To: <g72d3s+bevi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g74hqt+37bp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183959

> Carol responds:
> 
> I don't think that counts as the wand failing voldemort. It served
its purpose--killing a lot of people in his wrath--and *he* certainly
> never thought (or Harry would have known), "The wand failed me! It
> should have killed him through the door!" 


Pippin:
Of course he didn't think in the middle of a temper tantrum! But this
is supposed to be the Deathstick, the WW's premier killing machine,
the wand with a long and bloody history, and though it did kill a
number of people, it did so no more efficiently than Voldemort's old
wand. The wand "rose and fell, and rose and fell" (quoting from
memory) -- that's horrific, but  any wand can kill people one at a
time. That's not the stuff of which legends are born. The door's just
the icing on the cake. That Bella and Lucius could escape at all,
without even deflecting a spell to draw them back, is as telling. 

We don't get the  history that Ollivander gave Voldemort, so
Dumbledore's use of the wand is the only demonstration of its true
powers that we have. I don't think we're supposed to recall all of
Dumbledore's magic, I think we're supposed to go back and look at it.
It's quite instructive to re-read Dumbledore's battles. Even Harry can
tell that unusual magic is at work. He can feel it.
 
Carol:
but Voldemort himself doesn't start thinking about the wand's
supposedly not doing his bidding until more than a month later 

Pippin:
Exactly. Not until he kills with it does Voldemort have evidence that
the wand is not doing all it should. But he has to go and check on his
horcruxes first.

Carol:
> Carol, who still thinks that this part of the storyline is
> unconvincing and serves no purpose except to get Snape killed

Pippin:
You mean, JKR was deliberately clumsy? I mean, why bother to give
Voldemort an unconvincing reason to kill Snape? No reason at all would
do as well. But Harry had to have some reason to start thinking that
*he* might be the master of the Elder Wand, without it being so
obvious that the reader would get there first. 

Pippin  







From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sun Aug  3 16:12:27 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 16:12:27 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g74ft0+fhqt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g74ldb+lnkd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183960


> Magpie:
> There's no canon to indicate that Hermione's parents are going to 
> picked off, and if Voldemort was after them Hermione herself being 
> safe at the burrow (not that the burrow is particularly safe if 
> Voldemort decided to show up) would not protect them.  
> Hermione stays because she wants to be involved with what's going on 
> with her friends. And her estrangement from her parents is not just 
> physical. She's not telling them things that are going on in her
life  because they "wouldn't understand." 

Pippin:
It's only magic she doesn't talk to them about. They probably don't
talk to her much about dentistry, either. She does talk to them. She
tells them quite a bit about Harry, enough so that she's concerned for
Harry himself if they're caught.   She knows that Voldemort can do a
great deal with seemingly trivial personal information. 


Hermione has reason enough to be doubtful of the Order's ability to
protect people -- and even if she didn't, if  the Grangers went into
hiding as themselves, they would still have had to give up their jobs,
leave their home, and stop seeing their friends, plus they'd be living
under what amounts to house arrest and in constant fear for a daughter
whom they would be unable to help. I doubt they would enjoy that any
more than Sirius did. It's not a no-brainer, which is why I don't
think it's at all obvious that Hermione couldn't have asked for their
consent.

 Anyway, since she's planning to restore her parents' memories once
the danger is past, it wouldn't make much sense for her to do anything
that would make them loathe her once they found out about it. 

Pippin







From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Sun Aug  3 16:49:39 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 16:49:39 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g74ldb+lnkd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g74nj3+q9t5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183961

> > Magpie:
> > There's no canon to indicate that Hermione's parents are going to 
> > picked off, and if Voldemort was after them Hermione herself 
being 
> > safe at the burrow (not that the burrow is particularly safe if 
> > Voldemort decided to show up) would not protect them.  
> > Hermione stays because she wants to be involved with what's going 
on 
> > with her friends. And her estrangement from her parents is not 
just 
> > physical. She's not telling them things that are going on in her
> life  because they "wouldn't understand." 
> 
> Pippin:
> It's only magic she doesn't talk to them about. They probably don't
> talk to her much about dentistry, either. She does talk to them. 

Magpie:
"Magic" is Hermione's life. I didn't indicate that she never spoke to 
them at all, I said she didn't tell them about this central aspect of 
her life. Having read the books I know how central that is to 
Hermione's life and how central all this magic stuff is to her life. 
She tells them about Harry as a friend, which I've never denied. But 
secretly being on the front lines of the magical war is rather a big 
deal when you're 15 and they're your parents. She's living a secret 
life that her parents aren't.

Regardless, even what you're describing is exactly what's in the 
book, that Hermione's got to protect Harry and the stuff she's doing 
in the story. Her parents are a liability and are taken care of as 
such.

Pippin: 
> Hermione has reason enough to be doubtful of the Order's ability to
> protect people -- and even if she didn't, if  the Grangers went into
> hiding as themselves, they would still have had to give up their 
jobs,
> leave their home, and stop seeing their friends, plus they'd be 
living
> under what amounts to house arrest and in constant fear for a 
daughter
> whom they would be unable to help. I doubt they would enjoy that any
> more than Sirius did. It's not a no-brainer, which is why I don't
> think it's at all obvious that Hermione couldn't have asked for 
their
> consent.

Magpie:
Hermione doubts the Order's ability to protect people but thinks her 
plan is so much better? That's certainly in character for Hermione, 
but not so much because she's shown to be so worried about her 
parents. She has a history of not asking people about stuff like this 
and doesn't say that she and her parents talked about anything and I 
don't at all think it's a "no brainer" that her parents would find 
having their entire identity stolen so that they don't even know who 
they are so much more appealing than having to be under protection. 

Not that any of this is necessary anyway because there is no story 
about the Grangers being in danger. In canon it seems like the only 
point to it is to drum up sympathy for Hermione's "sacrifice" showing 
how hard this war is on her. The Granger's situation is just kind of 
funny--oh, they think they're a random couple with a dream to move to 
Australia! Poor Hermione has to deal with she will never get a chance 
to undo the spell if she dies so they won't mourn her. (But then, 
she'd be dead so it's not like she'd be experiencing that.) 
Hermione's situation is presented as tragic and sacrificial, but they 
themselves become one last Muggle joke. If we are supposed to think 
that her parents agreed to this, it's not important enough to mention 
it. The Grangers' feelings about anything have never been important, 
so why would I think it was important now?

Pippin:
> 
>  Anyway, since she's planning to restore her parents' memories once
> the danger is past, it wouldn't make much sense for her to do 
anything
> that would make them loathe her once they found out about it. 

Magpie:
You're assuming Rowling considers this something they would loathe 
her about anyway, and I wouldn't assume that. If she sees it as 
Hermione making some big sacrifice just the way lots of readers do, 
why think Rowling thought it? The idea that they would be upset about 
it isn't even presented in canon. Ron and Harry don't even think to 
ask about what her parents are dealing with.

The Dursleys, meanwhile, get protected by the Order and do just fine. 
Imo, the Grangers just should have been left out like they usually 
were since their pov isn't being presented anyway. 

-m




From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Sun Aug  3 16:57:02 2008
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 3 Aug 2008 16:57:02 -0000
Subject: Weekly Chat, 8/3/2008, 1:00 pm 
Message-ID: <1217782622.16.70635.m57@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183962

Reminder from: HPforGrownups Yahoo! Group
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal

Weekly Chat
Sunday August 3, 2008
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  2008 
 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: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpforgrownups/attachments/20080803/7dd1c645/attachment.html>

From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  3 18:06:29 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 18:06:29 -0000
Subject: Who WAS the True Master of the Elder Wand?
In-Reply-To: <g74hqt+37bp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g74s35+o9ve@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183963

Carol earlier:
> > 
> > I don't think that counts as the wand failing Voldemort. It served
its purpose--killing a lot of people in his wrath--and *he* certainly
never thought (or Harry would have known), "The wand failed me! It
should have killed him through the door!" 
> 
> 
> Pippin:
> Of course he didn't think in the middle of a temper tantrum! But
this is supposed to be the Deathstick, the WW's premier killing
machine, the wand with a long and bloody history, and though it did
kill a number of people, it did so no more efficiently than
Voldemort's old wand. <snip>

Carol responds:

Dead is dead. And if he killed *all* the people in that room,
including the escapees (how do we know that they closed the door
behind them?) he'd have no servants left. Altogether, a stupid thing
to do. I've heard of killing the messenger, but killing the listeners,
your own loyal followers? Even Voldemort must have been sated after
that kill-fest, and he certainly did not doubt the effectiveness of
his weapon then or later. Nor does it fail him in creating Nagini's
bubble, drawing Snape into it, or turning the green potion clear, the
only feats of magic other than those unimaginative AKs that it's
depicted as performing. Not one shred of a doubt, not one reference to
not killing Bella and Lucius or anyone else who escaped his rage on
that occasion. It's no *more* effective than his old yew wand, but
that wand chose him and performed many feats of spectacular Dark
magic, including creating Horcruxes and Inferi and the protections in
the cave, as well as the spells he cast against DD in the MoM. The
only reason it didn't kill Dumbledore was Fawkes's swallowed AK and
the animated statues from the fountain. And he was fighting the elder
wand at that point. The only failing of the yew wand, so compatible
with Voldemort down to its immortality-related components, yew and
Phoenix feather, relates to its "brother," Harry's holly-and-phoenix-
feather wand, and the Priori Incantatem. So to say that the Elder wand
performed "no more efficiently" than the wand that had performed so
many "great but terrible" things is to say exactly nothing. 

Carol earlier:
> but Voldemort himself doesn't start thinking about the wand's
supposedly not doing his bidding until more than a month later 
> 
> Pippin:
> Exactly. Not until he kills with it does Voldemort have evidence
that the wand is not doing all it should. But he has to go and check
on his horcruxes first.

Carol responds:

What evidence? He neither thinks nor says anything about the wand
having failed him until "The Elder Wand," and he provides no evidence
to support his statement. It's not even clear that he intended to kill
Snape from the moment he sends for him. He questions him first to see
how much he knows. But Snape, desperately seeking Harry and knowing
that time is running out, for once doesn't catch on. (We see his state
of mind earlier, with even Harry noticing, as indicated by the
narrator, that Snape seemed to be acting without conscious awareness
of what he was doing because his mind is elsewhere.) At any rate, IMO,
the fact that some of his followers escaped him is no indication of
the wand's failure, though it does show the limitations of the AK.
Even if Voldemort had been the wand's acknowledged master, he could
kill only one person at a time by that method and those he killed
would be no deader than they already are. Voldemort isn't thinking
about the wand at all. He's thinking, as you said yourself, about his
precious Horcruxes. Nor has the wand given him any reason to think
about it.
> 
Carol earlier:
> > Carol, who still thinks that this part of the storyline is
unconvincing and serves no purpose except to get Snape killed
> 
> Pippin:
> You mean, JKR was deliberately clumsy? I mean, why bother to give
Voldemort an unconvincing reason to kill Snape? No reason at all would
do as well. But Harry had to have some reason to start thinking that
*he* might be the master of the Elder Wand, without it being so
obvious that the reader would get there first. 

Carol responds:

Deliberately clumsy? I doubt it. But inadvertently clumsy and
unconvincing, yes. I see no evidence either of the astounding feats of
magic that Snape says the wand performed and Voldemort attributes to
his own surpassing skill (if the wand performed these unseen
spectacular feats of magic, why would he think that it failed him?) or
of the wand failing him. Nor does Voldemort until he suddenly gets the
idea to question and then kill Snape in case he's the wand's master. 

That incident provides Harry with information that he needs and
enables Snape to provide Harry with crucial memories before dying, as
he could not have done if he'd been AK'd. No doubt Voldemort thought
that the wand wouldn't AK Snape if he was its master since he hadn't
been Disarmed, but Voldemort could have realized, after his
questioning of Snape, that Snape knew nothing about the Elder Wand,
and then handed it to him saying, "Here. Hold this," and Disarmed him
with the yew wand. Snape would say, "What the--?" and then be sent
back to the battle to do whatever he he'd been doing (probably
searching for Harry as there's no indication that he was seen fighting
in the battle pretending to be a loyal DE).

But, nope. We get Voldemort suddenly thinking, for no reason that can
be discerned from canon, that the Death Stick with which he has
already killed so many people isn't working properly for him even
though it also created Nagini's bubble and turned the green potion in
the cave clear.

If we had only seen him attempt and fail some spectacular feat of
magic along the lines of the spells used in the duel with Dumbledore
in the MoM. So the supposed failure of the wand is only an excuse to
kill Snape, after which Voldemort uses it again to "kill" Harry,
casting what would have been a successful AK if it weren't for the
shared drop of blood--nothing to do with the Elder Wand (which does
not at that point recognize Harry as its master. IMO, wands understand
human speech and thought, as they would have to do to recognize a
compatible wizard and understand nonverbal spells, and learns its own
history along with Voldemort and the listeners in the Great Hall).

So, yes, it's clumsy. I have no reason whatever to believe that
Voldemort saw the wand as failing him until after Harry returns from
King's Cross, and even then it's his self-sacrifice, not the Elder
Wand itself, that makes Voldemort's spells impotent. Of course, we're
left to wonder how effective the self-sacrifice would have been if
Voldemort had really been the master of the "Unbeatable" Elder wand.
and, of course, once it learns that Harry is its master, it refuses to
AK him. But it seems to me that, never having been in Draco's
possession, the Elder Wand quite happily served the Dark Wizard who
stole it from the dead Dumbledore's grasp until it learned the
identity of its true master.)

The whole clumsy contrivance is confusing and unconvincing, but it
would have been less so if Voldemort had been given reason, on page
and in Harry's hearing via the scar link, to think that he wasn't the
wand's true master.

You apparently find it convincing. I don't. There was no reason
whatever for Voldemort to kill Snape except that JKR wanted him to die
that way, in Harry's presence, giving him those crucial memories as a
spectacular last bit of magic as Harry sat by in shock (at least
Hermione had the sense to conjure a vial) and allowing Harry to look
into Snape's eyes as Snape died--a great and memorable and horrific
scene, to be sure, but one that need not have happened as far as the
plot was concerned. Killing Snape had no effect on the wand's loyalty
and performance. It only made Voldemort think *what he already
thought*--that he was the wand's master. Why not skip that step and
have Voldemort continue using the wand that has not yet failed him,
thinking that he's its master because his own powers enable him to use
it effectively (and it's no doubt compatible in other ways, having
killed numerous people before he obtained it) and let Snape live?
Maybe JKR couldn't think of any other way for Snape to give Harry
those memories and for Harry to understand and forgive Snape.

Carol, looking for *on-page* evidence of the wand's failure to serve
Voldemort effectively and finding none at all




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  3 18:38:18 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 18:38:18 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g74nj3+q9t5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g74tuq+obkm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183964

Magpie wrote:
> Hermione doubts the Order's ability to protect people but thinks her
plan is so much better? That's certainly in character for Hermione, 
but not so much because she's shown to be so worried about her 
parents. She has a history of not asking people about stuff like this
and doesn't say that she and her parents talked about anything and I 
don't at all think it's a "no brainer" that her parents would find 
having their entire identity stolen so that they don't even know who
they are so much more appealing than having to be under protection. 
> 
> Not that any of this is necessary anyway because there is no story 
about the Grangers being in danger. In canon it seems like the only 
point to it is to drum up sympathy for Hermione's "sacrifice" showing
how hard this war is on her. The Granger's situation is just kind of 
funny--oh, they think they're a random couple with a dream to move to
Australia! Poor Hermione has to deal with she will never get a chance
to undo the spell if she dies so they won't mourn her. <snip>

> The Dursleys, meanwhile, get protected by the Order and do just
fine. <snip>

Carol responds:

I'm not sure that we learn in canon that the Dursleys do just fine,
but since we hear nothing of Dedalus Diggle and Hestia Jones, their
protectors, being killed, we can probably assume it. Certainly, if her
parents were in any danger (and they probably would have been once it
was learned that Hermione was traveling with Harry), it would have
been more sensible to ask the Order to protect them as it did the
Dursleys. 

Instead, we're left to wonder what the Grangers, with their new names
and identities, did for jobs and money. Did Hermione somehow magically
transfer all their assets to their new name? What about their house
and belongings? (The Dursleys' house, BTW, was left unlocked. We can
guess what happened to *their* possessions when the enraged DEs got
hold of them. And with no mortgage payments coming in, the house
probably went into foreclosure. Something similar must have happened
to the Grangers' house if it wasn't protected by a Fidelius Charm.)
And they're just supposed to find new jobs in a land so far from
Britain that it's in two different hemispheres? Let's hope that they
remember that they're dentists and that they brought their equipment
(aside from dentist's chairs) with them. And, assuming that they
establish themselves in their new identitites, what's going to happen
when they find out who they really are and have to uproot themselves
yet again? I suppose they can reestablish their old practice, but
they'll have to recruit a whole new set of patients since the old one
will have found a new dentist by now. And, as I mentioned, they'll
probably have to find a new home as well (with their credit ruined by
the foreclosure unless such things are done differently in Britain
than they are in the U.S.).

We're also left to wonder what sort of charm Hermione performed on
them. It wasn't a Memory Charm since she states in "A Place to Hide"
that she's never performed one before. If it was a Confundus Charm, it
must have been an extraordinarily long-lasting one, and if there's
such a thing as a Confundus Charm that powerful, who needs the
Imperius Curse? They performed Hermione's will just as effectively as
if she had manipulated them like puppets from afar. And all of this
without, apparently, consulting her parents at all, just taking what
she considers to be their well-being into her own hands. 

Don't get me wrong. I'm well aware of Hermione's importance as Harry's
friend. He and Ron would have died without her help, and not just in
DH. But you don't take it upon yourself to control your parents' lives
and fates and rob them of their identity. That's utterly presumptuous
and unnecessary. There has to be a better way.

Carol, hoping that Hermione's parents find it in their hearts to
forgive her when they learn what she's done and that they find a way
to reestablish their lives after all her tampering 




From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  3 20:14:58 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 20:14:58 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g74tuq+obkm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g753k2+imnd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183965

> Carol responds:
> 
> <snip> Certainly, if her parents were in any danger (and they
> probably would have been once it was learned that Hermione was
> traveling with Harry), it would have been more sensible to ask
> the Order to protect them as it did the Dursleys.

Mike:
I do think you're right about the Grangers eventually being thought 
of as targets. We have the Dursleys and the rest of the Weasley clan 
as examples. According to canon, once it became known that Ron was 
hanging with Harry and not a Ghoul in pajamas, the rest of the 
Weasleys were in danger. After Malfoy Manor, surely Hermione's 
parents would have faced the same danger as the Dursleys.



> Carol:
> 
> We're also left to wonder what sort of charm Hermione performed
> on them. It wasn't a Memory Charm since she states in "A Place to
> Hide" that she's never performed one before. <snip>

Mike:
I'm guessing we weren't supposed to ponder to much on this because, 
quite frankly, I don't think Hermione could have performed such a 
charm or charms. I don't think Dumbledore could have either. 

To remove almost 18 years worth of memories of their daughter and 
replace them with something else so there weren't gaps in their 
memories? To make them think that they wanted to move to Australia 
and that they wanted to do it NOW - because Hermione couldn't afford 
to have them dawdle - and do it in a way that still didn't ruin their 
lives? Making sure that they didn't lose anything of their dentistry 
skills so they would be able to be gainfully employed? 

I don't know that a memory charm is able to do any of this 
satisfactorily, even if Hermione had been able to do one. Dumbledore 
*may* have been able to figure out how to do this given enough time 
to perform a series of complicated spells, but I'm not confident that 
he could have. Talented witch that she is, I'm just not buying that 
Hermione could have pulled it off in such a conflict neutral fashion 
that she insinuates happened.


> Carol:
> But you don't take it upon yourself to control your parents' lives
> and fates and rob them of their identity. That's utterly
> presumptuous and unnecessary. There has to be a better way.

Mike:
You do if it's needed for the plot. And I think Magpie said it best:

> > Magpie wrote:
> > 
> > In canon it seems like the only point to it is to drum up
> > sympathy for Hermione's "sacrifice" showing how hard this war
> > is on her. <snip>
> > Poor Hermione has to deal with: she will never get a chance
> > to undo the spell if she dies so they won't mourn her. <snip>

Mike:
I'm sorry to say that I find the treatment of the Grangers convenient 
for the exact plot purposes that Magpie describes. And as she said 
(and I snipped <veg>), the Grangers have always been cardboard cutout 
Muggle parents. We don't need to know what they think, how they fared 
in their new identities, or if they were upset when they discovered 
what their daughter did to them. They are non-entities, only slightly 
more important than all the nameless and faceless because of who 
their daughter is. That's the way I think JKR treated them, not my 
opinion of the Grangers, my opinion of their treatment.

Mike




From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  3 21:36:58 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 21:36:58 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g753k2+imnd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g758dq+hjs6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183966

> Mike:
> I'm sorry to say that I find the treatment of the Grangers convenient 
> for the exact plot purposes that Magpie describes. And as she said 
> (and I snipped <veg>), the Grangers have always been cardboard cutout 
> Muggle parents. We don't need to know what they think, how they fared 
> in their new identities, or if they were upset when they discovered 
> what their daughter did to them. They are non-entities, only slightly 
> more important than all the nameless and faceless because of who 
> their daughter is. That's the way I think JKR treated them, not my 
> opinion of the Grangers, my opinion of their treatment.

Montavilla47:
Which makes me wonder how she could ever have handled that
situation satisfactorily.  I got the feeling (having been in the fandom
since slightly before HBP came out), that she was aware of the 
fan interest in the Grangers (an interest which appears to exceed
her own), and wanted to give *some* kind of answer about them.

But yuck.

I think the only solution would have been to either say that the 
Order was protecting Hermione's parents--come to think of it,
that wouldn't have been hard, would it?--or, you would have to 
build in the leaving the Muggle world from the beginning--and 
just have Hermione leave her family completely at age 11.  That
would really make a lot more sense as a world system, wouldn't 
it?

It would make even more sense, since the wizards know when
magical muggleborn are born, to spirit them away at that point.
But then, that would ruin the whole Harry-must-endure-the-
Dursleys subplot.

Of course, he might still have to return to the muggle world
for that blood protection.  Which would make him just the 
saddest wizard boy in the world, wouldn't it?  He'd be the 
*only* kid at Hogwarts who had to spend time with muggles.

But that's all getting away from the point was I vaguely
heading toward.  Which is that, at a certain point, it simply
became inconvenient for the Trio to have families at all.





From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Aug  3 21:41:00 2008
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 21:41:00 -0000
Subject: ThatLetter/HoG/Portraits/Rookwood/Black/InLaws/Crabbe/ElWand/Stone/Sex/Lucius
Message-ID: <g758lc+dpkq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183967

Carol wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183865>:

<< And the Ministry certainly didn't return his possessions after he
escaped from Azkaban; he was a wanted fugitive. It's *possible* that
they thoughtfully sent all his personal possessions (though the
Minisrty, with the exception of Bob Ogden, doesn't come across as
thoughtful, particularly in Barty Crouch's days), to his parents, >>

Despite Pippin's elegant
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183885>
suggestion that Sirius packed up his own stuff and put it in storage
before going into hiding, I think it was Lupin, and not the Ministry,
who packed up everything from Sirius's home and sent it to his
parents' house. (That does not require my other belief, that despite
JKR Q&A, Lupin lived with Sirius rather than with James and Lily.)

<< would the parents who resented their rebel son have kept his
possessions (a personal letter, a photograph of the Potters, of all
people, and even his confiscated wand) in anticipation of the "little
swine's" return? It defies belief. >>

The mother didn't hate him as much as she said, or she was too
distraught to get around to unpacking the boxes that had been dumped
into Sirius's old bedroom (which she had not, in almost six years,
redecorated into a Sewing Room or Dark Magic Laboratory or whatever). 

The unpacking and putting away could be done by Sirius after he moved
back in. Maybe he and Lupin stood back to back and swooshed their
wands in a way that caused every object to rush back where it
belonged, that is, where it had belonged when Sirius had last seen
that room.

Carol wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183867>:

<< I agree with the suggestion that Draco could have acquired [the
Hand of Glory] by owl order (not in reaction to his father's
treatment of him but out of practical necessity, as part of his scheme
for bringing the DEs into Hogwarts once he fixed the Vanishing Cabin
(long snip) He couldn't have brought it into Hogwarts himself because
the students in HBP were probed with Filch's secrecy sensor (Filch
confiscated a shrunken head from Crabbe or Goyle) and the owls were
being searched, just as they had been in OoP (presumably because DD
and Snape had some idea what Draco was up to). >>

This is a problem you created for yourself. If Draco bought the HoG
during the CoS school year or during the summer holiday between CoS
and PoA, then students and owls were not yet being searched when
entering Hogwarts.

Carol wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183893>:

<< At any rate, it Filch's Dark detector didn't detect the Hand of
Glory, it failed in its purpose, which was to keep the students from
bringing dangerous or sinister objects into the school. If it detected
a shrunken head, more grisly than dangerouse AFAIK, it would surely
have detected a Hand of Glory. >>

Ah, an opportunity for more hand-waving! (and another unintended pun)
Wizarding logic being what it is, the Dark Detector, at least the one
used for searching trunks, had a grandfather clause: anything that
this student had previously possessed at Hogwarts would not be detected.

Mike Crudele wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183894>:

<< I don't think there are wizard painters, at least you don't need
them to create an animated portrait. I think what you do need is a
magical picture frame and canvas. These are made by wizards that are a
cross between wandmakers and the manufacturers of the photograph
processing equipment that makes moving pictures/cards/etc. I like to
think that there is some potion making involved in imbuing the canvas
with the ability to host a bit of a deceased witch/wizard. (snip) I
think the Headmaster frames are magically created by the castle, in a
similar fashion as how the Room of Requirement works. Whenever a
headnaster or former headmaster dies and we need a new portrait, the
charm is activated. It's part of the magic of the castle. (snip) BTW,
this means that Snape's Headmaster portrait was created automatically.
But he had not finished with that whole crossing over process,
whatever his equivalent of Harry's Kings Cross was, so his portrait
was not yet animated when Harry had his final debriefing. Much as
Dumbledore's wasn't yet animated at the end of HBP. >>

Okay, we agree about the Headmaster portraits. 

I'm not ready to give up my idea that the Ministry building, St.
Mungo's, old family homes, and other wizarding institutions (including
a monastery, which could have avoided being confiscated by Henry VIII
by use of Muggle-repelling spells) generate the portraits by magic
same as Hogwarts does. Still your theory, that all the other paintings
have to have their frame and canvas prepared for the specific person
while that person is still alive, would explain why no portrait of
James and Lily Potter appeared in the ancient Potter family home, and
why the drunken monks got a group portrait instead of individual
portraits.

Carol wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183895>:

<< an Unspeakable (as Rookwood possibly was, or else Rookwood was
higher up the bureaucratic ladder) or he'd have known that Bode
couldn't touch the Prophecy. >>

The Pensieve scene of Karkaroff's plea bargain: << "Augustus Rookwood
of the Department of Mysteries?" "I believe he used a network of
well-placed wizards, both inside the Ministry and out, to collect
information ?" >>

Another Pensieve scene, the trial of Bagman, revealed that Bagman was
recruited as a spy for LV by Rookwood.

Old discussion on the list decided that Rookwood being the only name
provided by Karkaroff that was not already known to the Ministry could
be correlated with Sirius's statement that Karkaroff had put a lot of
people into Azkaban in his place, by assuming that interrogating
Rookwood led to arresting all of his spies and informants, including
Bagman.

I classed the idiot Bagman as a spy rather than an informant because
Bagman would not have known anything of interest to anyone (except
maybe Quidditch bettors) unless he acquired that information on
purpose. I figure the way such an idiot could be a spy is that even
important people would have wanted to invite him to their parties and
chat with him because of his celebrity, and they would have said too
much, in hope of impressing him, especially if he used the
conversational techniques recommended in guidebooks for teen girls,
like 'And what did you do then?'. He wouldn't have had to understand
what they told him in order to remember and repeat it.

Actually, before I checked for the quotes, I had the impression that
Rookwood was the Head of the Department of Mysteries, not just "of"
it. I want Rookwood to be an aristocratic old family because their
shield of arms is just so obvious: a big black bird sitting on a black
tower surrounded by trees.

Magpie wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183920>:

<< Remember, Draco is a Black. He might have two maternal grandmothers
who are siblings and under the age of fourteen. It's a crazy family.>>

This is a forbidden "LOL" post.

By the way, I think the Black family arms should be, not what JKR drew
on her 'crazy' Black Family Tree, but a black serpent on a black
background.

Geoff wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183933>:

<< Anyway, in the UK, the suffix "in-law" is only used in conjunction
with "sister' "brother', "son" or "daughter".  >>

No mother-in-law jokes?

Carole wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183934>:

<< (He even mourns Crabbe, probably the only person to care about the
brutal fool.) >>

IIRC Crabbe had parents, including a father as stupid and brutal as he
was. Also, I always assumed that Crabbe, Goyle, and Bulstrode liked
each other, not just put up with each other because they each hung
around Draco.

Leeann wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183935>:

<< One thing has bothered me about the Elder Wand. It is referred to
as "the Unbeatable Wand". If it is truly unbeatable, how did DD beat
Grindelwald? Is "Unbeatable" just a word used in folklore?, or is it
really undefeatable? >>

I really would like to read the story of that amazing duel. I believe
it was amazing and full of mighty spells despite what Skeeter implied,
and I believe that DD won by trickery (maybe even treachery?).

Pippin wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183949>:

<< It was needed to explain Dumbledore's lie about what he would see
in the mirror of Erised, >>

I still suspect it was not a complete lie: he did see himself holding
a pair of woolly socks, that Arianna had just given him as a Christmas
present.

<< and to give him a motive for allying with Grindelwald. >>

How does the Resurrection Stone give him a motive for allying with
Grindelwald? 

Marianne wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183951>:

<< I'm sure the students have the same feelings about the opposite sex
as the kids in the muggle world. I wonder if there could have been
instances of very young marriages and having children very young in
the WW. >>

It seems to be normal for wizards (Weasleys, Potters) to get married
and start their families as soon as they leave Hogwarts, when they are
only 18 years old (still 17 for the ones with summer birthdays).
(Students who left after their OWLs would be 16 rather than 18, but I
don't think canon gives any explicit information about students
leaving after their OWLs. We can guess that Stan Shunpike and
Mundungus Fletcher did so, but there is no evidence that either of
them is married, let alone got married directly upon leaving school.)

There used to be people on this list who complained bitterly about the
bad example James and Lily had set for young readers. Those listies
seemed to believe that in our world no one, not even wizards, is
mature enough to marry until at least age 24, a conflict of opinion
with Rowling who thought it was just fine that her parents had married
when they were 20.

And, of course, marrying people off in their teens, sometimes as young
as 12, was perfectly normal in the Bible and classical Greece and Rome
and Medieval Europe and big parts of 19th century America.

However, I think the above question was whether Hogwarts students ever
get pregnant and 'have to get married' before leaving Hogwarts.

I believe not, because after it happened a few times under the
Founders themselves, they started a policy of providing contraceptive
spells. Maybe they instructed the House Elves to put contraceptive
potions in the food served to students in the Great Hall, altho' that
would ruin a bit in my fanfic where Snape caught Draco and Pansy
making out behind the greenhouses and assigned Pansy the punishment of
handcopying an entire book -- which happened to be titled 'Easy
Contraceptive Spells'.

I am absolutely certain that the wizarding folk have reliable pro- and
anti- fertility magic, because historically in our Muggle world we
know that magicians were working vigorously in that area of magic even
before writing was invented.

<< One last observation. I'd never thought the adult Malfoys,
especially Draco's father, capable of showing affection or love until
Narcissa begged Snape to protect Draco. >>

I always thought Lucius and Narcissa married each other for love as
well as each thinking the other the most eligible partner available
(eligible: pureblood, rich, aristocratic, ambitious, young,
goodlooking, same opinions), but I, too, doubted whether they
particularly loved Draco until that scene you mention; I thought Draco
was probably lying when he said his father thought of sending him to
Durmstrang but his mother didn't want him sent so far from home.

One of my old theories, with no support from Rowling, explains why so
many Death Eater children were born the same academic year as Harry:
well before the Prophecy that Snape overheard and reported to
Voldemort, LV had enountered another prophecy, that said that a boy
conceived in the Autumn of 1979 would have unknown great powers and
bring victory to his father's leader, and therefore LV sought to
maximise the chance of this boy being fathered by one of his own
followers (and bringing victory to him) by ordering all his Death
Eaters to go out and spawn. To me, Lucius and Narcissa, altho' well
aware of their responsibility to provide an heir to the Malfoy name,
had planned to put that off until they were 50 (I took the wizarding
long lifespans and Dumbledore being 150 years old more seriously than
it turns out JKR did), and only did it early because of that command
from the Dark Lord.

Mike Crudele wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183955>:

<< I think there's a lot of truth in what Dumbledore said about
Riddle/Voldemort. Much of which his supporters didn't understand.
They seem to think that performing well for Voldemort will make him
appreciate them more and raise one to the position of trusted ally and
confidant. >>

I think Lucius, before Azkaban, was even more ambitious/deluded than
that. To me, he thought that with his charm, good looks, and high
breeding, he could make Lord Voldemort dote on him as much (altho' not
as blatantly) as Hepzibah Smith had doted on Tom Riddle, and thus
Voldemort, ruler of wizarding Britain, would give any order that dear
Lucius had flatteringly suggested to him, so that Lucius would be the
REAL ruler and LV only the figurehead. I think LV knew perfectly well
that that was Lucius's plan.





From justcorbly at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  3 22:59:43 2008
From: justcorbly at yahoo.com (justcorbly)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 22:59:43 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g74tuq+obkm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g75d8v+8l06@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183968

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
> Carol responds:
> 
> But you don't take it upon yourself to control your parents' lives
> and fates and rob them of their identity. That's utterly presumptuous
> and unnecessary. There has to be a better way.

I dunno. It seems in character for a frightened teenage girl who's aware of her powerful 
skills and talents. I didn't question it when I read that passage. 

Placing her parents in the hands of the Order would have entailed telling her parents 
precisely what was going on and how much she was at risk.  It also might have entailed 
telling her parents of the things she had already done and might be called upon to do in 
the future. (Hermione's, Harry's and Ron's extracurricular adventures were not the things 
most children would be happy to write home about.  Hermione is the only member of the 
trio with parents who are essentially clueless Muggles.)*

In short, I really wouldn't expect Hermione to tell her parents that she and her two friends 
were dropping out of school to go chasing after the World's Most Evil Wizard, someone 
prepared to kill her on sight. Not, I'm sure, what they had in mind when they agreed to 
send her to Hogwarts.

So, Hermione's approach leaves a number of questions unanswered, like how did she 
manage it.  But it did work.


*JKR tells us nothing about how, or if, Hogwarts deals with Muggle parents. Do they offer 
counseling session explaining such things as "Here Is What Your Child Really Is" and "Here 
Is What The World of Wizards and Witches Is All About." 
justcorbly (making a newbie's first post.  Hi all!)




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 00:37:00 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 00:37:00 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g753k2+imnd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g75ivc+dv5l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183969

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mike" <mcrudele78 at ...> wrote:

> I do think you're right about the Grangers eventually being thought 
> of as targets. We have the Dursleys and the rest of the Weasley clan 
> as examples. According to canon, once it became known that Ron was 
> hanging with Harry and not a Ghoul in pajamas, the rest of the 
> Weasleys were in danger. After Malfoy Manor, surely Hermione's 
> parents would have faced the same danger as the Dursleys.


zanooda:

The DEs found out about Hermione being with Harry much earlier than at
 Malfoy Manor. It happened at the Lovegoods, where Travers and Selwyn
caught a glimpse of Hermione and Harry during their escape. That's why
 Hermione was recognized by the Snatchers, who saw her picture in the
"Prophet". That's how I see it, anyway. It's possible that by the time
of Malfoy Manor, the DEs had already made an attempt to find
Hermione's parents, without success.





From imamommy at sbcglobal.net  Mon Aug  4 00:37:49 2008
From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (Emily)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 00:37:49 -0000
Subject: The Grangers  WAS:  The Malfoys
In-Reply-To: <g758dq+hjs6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g75j0t+fo72@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183970

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "montavilla47"
<montavilla47 at ...> wrote:

> I think the only solution would have been to either say that the 
> Order was protecting Hermione's parents--come to think of it,
> that wouldn't have been hard, would it?

Emily:

Well, that could work.  But I think what happens is more in line with
Hermione's personality.  She's one of those kids who (by this point)
often assumes she knows more than the adults--and let's face it, she's
often correct in her assumption.  Suspending disbelief about whether
or not she could perform the magic required, this solution allows her
to think that this situation will not touch her parents' lives in a
significant way unless she survives to explain everything.  If she
were going to let the Order protect them, she would have to give an
accounting of some of the key points of the situation--and then leave
them to worry indefinitely, without being able to contact them.  We
saw how Molly reacted to the trio's trying to leave; she tried to do
whatever was in her (non-magical) power to stop them, despite her
intimate knowledge of the situation and her desire to help.  Not that
I think the Grangers would have been any more effective, but Hermione
may have been trying to avert the situation, to avoid them having to
deal with the stress.  Yes, if she survives, they will be
inconvenienced, but they'll be alive, and that seems to be her
objective.  Since Hermione is used to thinking she knows more than
others, I can see why she would take this into her own hands.  Not
that she's necessarily right to do so, but that it is in character. 
If they fail, if the Order does fall, well, at least the Grangers are
somewhere safe and oblivious.

Emily




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 00:39:09 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 00:39:09 -0000
Subject: HoG/Rookwood
In-Reply-To: <g758lc+dpkq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g75j3d+hm6i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183971

Carol wrote in
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183867>:
> 
> << I agree with the suggestion that Draco could have acquired [the
> Hand of Glory] by owl order (not in reaction to his father's
> treatment of him but out of practical necessity, as part of his scheme
> for bringing the DEs into Hogwarts once he fixed the Vanishing Cabin
> (long snip) He couldn't have brought it into Hogwarts himself because
> the students in HBP were probed with Filch's secrecy sensor (Filch
> confiscated a shrunken head from Crabbe or Goyle) and the owls were
> being searched, just as they had been in OoP (presumably because DD
> and Snape had some idea what Draco was up to). >>

Catlady: 
> This is a problem you created for yourself. If Draco bought the HoG
> during the CoS school year or during the summer holiday between CoS
> and PoA, then students and owls were not yet being searched when
> entering Hogwarts.
> 
Carol responds:
On the contrary. JKR created the problem by not having Lucius buy
Draco the Hand of Glory in CoS. He could not have taken it to Hogwarts
then because he canonically did not have it. Moreover, even if he
acquired it (offpage) in some other year, Ron would not have seen it,
and Draco would have had to take it home each school year. He couldn't
hide it at the school where the House-elves would find it over the
holidays, and he couldn't take it home because his father would have
regarded it as a tool for thieves and plunderers. Draco *must* have
bought it himself at the time he needed it (before or during HBP),
quite possibly hiding it in his trunk to get it past the increased
security measures that he'd be a fool not to anticipate, but Ron talks
about the hand as something Draco had before and that he himself has
apparently seen before the HBP school year.

I stand by my  position that JKR just forgot that Lucius hadn't
sneerinlr refused to buy his son a handy tool for thieves and
plunderers and that neither Ron nor Harry had ever seen him with it.
she also didn't consider how he could get it into the school under the
strict new security measures whether or not it had been there before.
She doesn't reread the books once they're published, and it's easy to
get a wrong idea as to what happened earlier into your head if you
don't go back and check your facts (as most of us on this list have
probably found out the hard way at one time or another).


> Carol wrote in
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183895>:
> 
> << an Unspeakable (as Rookwood possibly was, or else Rookwood was
higher up the bureaucratic ladder) or he'd have known that Bode
couldn't touch the Prophecy. >>

> The Pensieve scene of Karkaroff's plea bargain: << "Augustus
Rookwood of the Department of Mysteries?" <snip>

Carol:
Thanks. I remembered that he was a spy, but I'd forgotten that
particular reference to the Department of Mysteries, which confirms my
suspicion that Rookwood was an Unspeakable like Croaker and Bode.
Wonder whatever happened to Croaker, whose last name, like Bode's,
bodes ill for him if "croak" means "die" in British slang as it does
in American slang. Also, Rookwood must have been indispensable in
planning the DoM raid. Maybe he provided the building plan that Snape
"borrowed" or more likely, magically duplicated (using the same spell
with which Hermione duplicated Slytherin's locket in DH) and presented
in his report to the Order early in OoP.

Carol, wondering irrelevantly whether Muggle men need a magical razor
like Harry's when they could probably do at least as good a job with a
shaving spell




From jlenox2004 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  3 21:15:57 2008
From: jlenox2004 at yahoo.com (jdl3811220)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 21:15:57 -0000
Subject: Who WAS the True Master of the Elder Wand?
In-Reply-To: <g74s35+o9ve@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7576d+q87b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183972

> > Pippin:
> > But Harry had to have some reason to start thinking that
> > *he* might be the master of the Elder Wand, without it
> > being so obvious that the reader would get there first.

> Carol responds:
<SNIP>
> If we had only seen him attempt and fail some spectacular
> feat of magic along the lines of the spells used in the
> duel with Dumbledore in the MoM. So the supposed failure
> of the wand is only an excuse to kill Snape, after which
> Voldemort uses it again to "kill" Harry, casting what
> would have been a successful AK if it weren't for the
> shared drop of blood--nothing to do with the Elder Wand
> (which does not at that point recognize Harry as its master.
<SNIP>

Jenni from Alabama responds:
Now this is just my opinion... but I think that Harry was the
Master of the Elder Wand the entire time. Why? Because Ignotus
Peverell died a natural death! No one defeated him! He was
Master of the Wand. Harry is a descendant of his... a direct
descendant! I think the Wand worked somewhat for Tom because
he was related to the Peverells. But Ignotus was supposedly
Harry's great, great, great (however many greats) grandfather.
The Wand showed its complete loyalty to Harry because of that.
Defeating Draco just solidified it even more.

As to why it worked for Dumbledore... I think that Dumbledore
was also related to the Peverells.

Just my opinion.

Jenni



From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 01:31:42 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 01:31:42 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g75d8v+8l06@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g75m5u+kfsd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183973

Carol earlier:
> > 
> > But you don't take it upon yourself to control your parents' lives
> and fates and rob them of their identity. That's utterly
presumptuous and unnecessary. There has to be a better way.

Justcorbly (Did I get that right? It's an unsigned post) responded: 
> I dunno. It seems in character for a frightened teenage girl who's
aware of her powerful skills and talents. I didn't question it when I
read that passage. 

Carol again:
In character, certainly. Hermione is always taking things into her own
hands: Hats for House-Elves, blackmailing Rita Skeeter and putting her
(in bug form) in a jar, hexing the parchment at the introductory DA
meeting, "borrowing" the dead Dumbledore's books on Dark magic, to
name a few instances). Now the beaded bag (aside from forgetting about
food) was an example of thinking ahead and planning for emergencies,
but even then, she didn't consult anybody. she just took matters into
her own hands. So, absolutely it's in character for Hermione to deal
with things herself. But "frightened teenage girl"? She has no cause
at *that* point to fear for her parents, and if she did, she should
have consulted with someone older and more experienced. Someone who
knew how to cast a Fidelius Charm, for instance. 

And why could she not tell her parents that Voldemort might endanger
them and let them decide for themselves how to deal with it? Harry,
after all, told the Dursleys, whom he didn't love at all. But Hermione
takes charge of the parents without whom she would not even exist, who
have loved her and given her everything she needed and wanted even
though it meant doing without her company for at least ten months
every year. Maybe in your view it's all right for a child to control
the lives of her capable acult parents. It's not all right in mine.
(Granted, kids don't have magical powers in our world, so it's hard to
think of a comparable real-life example. I suppose it would be
comparable to deciding that your parents needed a new home and buying
them one with their money without telling them, at the same time
selling the very house they lived in. Difficult but perhaps not
impossible for a Muggle Hermione who thinks she knows best for
everyone, including her own parents.)

Corbly: 
> Placing her parents in the hands of the Order would have entailed
telling her parents precisely what was going on and how much she was
at risk.  It also might have entailed telling her parents of the
things she had already done and might be called upon to do in the
future. (Hermione's, Harry's and Ron's extracurricular adventures were
not the things most children would be happy to write home about. 
Hermione is the only member of the trio with parents who are
essentially clueless Muggles.)*

Carol:
And why shouldn't she tell them at least as much as Harry tells the
Dursleys or Fudge tell the Muggle PM back in HBP--by no means
everything, but at least enough to let them know what's going on and
why they're in danger? They can't permit Hermione from endangering
*herself*; she's eighteen, and "of age" even from the Muggle
perspective. They're "clueless" only because Hermione has kept them in
the dark all these years. They'd never have sent her to Hogwarts if
they knew she'd been Petrified in her second year or that she'd been
nearly killed by Dolohov's spell in her fifth. But she could have
given them *some* indication of what she was learning instead of
thinking that "they wouldn't understand." And now, if she's going to
"protect" them, they have every right to know why and how and to
propose alternate measures instead of doing what their daughter wants
them to do with no choice in the matter. They are no longer
themselves; they have a fictional identity and don't even know that
it's fictional! and we're supposed to feel sorry for poor Hermione who
may die without their even knowing that they ever had a daughter. My
sympathies in this particular matter are with her parents. she has
every right to go with Harry and Ron now that she's eighteen, but she
has no right to high-handedly take control of her parents' lives.

Corbly: 
> In short, I really wouldn't expect Hermione to tell her parents that
she and her two friends were dropping out of school to go chasing
after the World's Most Evil Wizard, someone prepared to kill her on
sight. Not, I'm sure, what they had in mind when they agreed to send
her to Hogwarts.

Carol:
I quite agree that chasing after the world's most evil wizard isn't
what they expected her to do when they sent her to Hogwarts, but
that's not what's under discussion here. She could easily have told
them that she's going back to Hogwarts to finish her education but
that because she's a friend of Harry Potter, who is being targeted by
an evil wizard, her parents will be in danger. A little half truth
like those we're accustomed to hearing from Snape and Dumbledore would
be better than telling them nothing at all. Essentially, she can't
stay with them so they need magical protection before she leaves.
(they can't stop her from doing what she wants, and they wouldn't try
to stop her from attending Hogwarts, anyway, not knowing that
Dumbledore is dead, but she needs to give them an indication of *their
own* danger and let *them* decide what to do about it. (Why not an
extende trip to Australia of their own volition if they have that sort
of money? Or, failing that, an offer to take them to a magically
protected safe house where the bad wizard's followers can't find them?)

Corbly: 
> So, Hermione's approach leaves a number of questions unanswered,
like how did she manage it.  But it did work.

Carol:
We don't know that it worked. All we know is that it got them out of
England and Hermione, unlike Ron, didn't need to spend time worrying
about her family. It's a plot device, pure and simple, for disposing
of the Grangers who have never been presented as real characters and
now have lost all dignity and all believability by being sent off to
Australia by means of some complicated and unidentified spell because
they're an inconvenience for JKR. Why didn't she just wave her wand
and Vanish them, to be reconjured at her convenience? It would have
been as respectful of their dignity as human beings (but probably
contrary to whatever those laws are that limit magical powers).
> 
corbly:
> *JKR tells us nothing about how, or if, Hogwarts deals with Muggle
parents. Do they offer counseling session explaining such things as
"Here Is What Your Child Really Is" and "Here Is What The World of
Wizards and Witches Is All About." 

Carol:
You're right about that. In one of her interviews, she mentioned that
Muggle parents are normally approached in person by a representative
of the school rather than having their child sent a mysterious letter
by an owl, but it's one of those matters that she doesn't really care
much about. Muggles are either victims of Wizard pranks or abusers
like the Dursleys and Tobias Snape or objects of misguided sympathey
and admiration by Mr. Weasley, whose fascination with Muggles is
limited to mundane objects like plugs and toasters and turnstiles. I
imagine that the Muggle parents are given some sort of introduction to
the exciting new world that their children will be entering, but
that's the end of it. Maybe a grade report or a mention of
disciplinary action in a letter, but if they're told about their
children's injuries, it's not mentioned in the books. (Montague's
parents belatedly visit him, but he's probably a Pure-Blood given that
he's a Slytherin and the parents can both enter Hogwarts.)

Carol, hoping that I didn't scare off our newbie by responding just as
I would to a long-time member of the group




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 01:57:29 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 01:57:29 -0000
Subject: Who WAS the True Master of the Elder Wand?
In-Reply-To: <g7576d+q87b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g75nm9+ehph@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183974

 Jenni from Alabama responds:
> Now this is just my opinion... but I think that Harry was the
> Master of the Elder Wand the entire time. Why? Because Ignotus
> Peverell died a natural death! No one defeated him! He was
> Master of the Wand. Harry is a descendant of his... a direct
> descendant! I think the Wand worked somewhat for Tom because
> he was related to the Peverells. But Ignotus was supposedly
> Harry's great, great, great (however many greats) grandfather.
> The Wand showed its complete loyalty to Harry because of that.
> Defeating Draco just solidified it even more.
> 
> As to why it worked for Dumbledore... I think that Dumbledore
> was also related to the Peverells.
> 
> Just my opinion.

Carol responds:
That's an interesting idea, but Voldemort was descended from Cadmus
Peverell, who created the Resurrection Stone, and Harry from Ignotus,
who created the Invisibility Cloak. Antioch, who created the Elder
Wand, apparently had no descendants, having been murdered by someone
who wanted it. Ignotus was never the master or the Elder Wand.
(Ironically, Tom Riddle would have been the rightful heir to the
Resurrection Stone once Morfin died had he not stolen it and turned it
into a Horcrux after murdering his own father and grandparents.) So
the only Hallow that was Harry's by right of descent was the
Invisibility Cloak.

As for Dumbledore, who lived in Godric's Hollow only because his
mother moved there after his father was arrested, I don't think he had
any relationship to the Peverells. The Elder Wand was his because he
won it (though he was apparently careful not to kill with it), but the
borrowed Invisibility Cloak was never his, nor was the Resurrection
Stone that indirectly caused his death. The Resurrection Stone
*becomes* Harry's when it's no longer a Horcrux because Dumbledore
willed it to him--perhaps he's its rightful possessor, as Dumbledore
was not, because he doesn't want to bring people back from the dead,
only to have them with him as he joins their ranks. He casts it away
at the end and doesn't go back to look for it once he's defeated
Voldemort, apparently knowing and rejecting its temptations as he
knows and rejects the temptations of the Elder Wand.

Because Harry is descended from Ignotus rather than Antioch, JKR is
forced to construe an elaborate subplot that enables Voldemort to
obtain the wand but Harry to be its true master. At any rate, it would
have simplified matters considerably if the childless Antioch had
willed the wand to one of his brothers, but apparently he was as much
a quarrelsome braggart as his counterpart in "The Tale of the Three
Brothers," and so the wand passed from hand to hand through murder and
treachery (or sheer accident in DH) until Harry finally put an end to
that story.

Carol, who would have preferred a simpler, less bloody solution herself





From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 03:41:33 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 03:41:33 -0000
Subject: HoG/Rookwood
In-Reply-To: <g75j3d+hm6i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g75tpd+sd29@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183975

Carol:
<SNIP>
I stand by my position that JKR just forgot that Lucius hadn't
sneerinlr refused to buy his son a handy tool for thieves and
plunderers and that neither Ron nor Harry had ever seen him with it.
she also didn't consider how he could get it into the school under the
strict new security measures whether or not it had been there before.
She doesn't reread the books once they're published, and it's easy to
get a wrong idea as to what happened earlier into your head if you
don't go back and check your facts (as most of us on this list have
probably found out the hard way at one time or another). <SNIP>


Alla:

Sure, it is possible that she forgot that and she forgot that James 
was 
supposed to be with wand at first and that she forgot many other 
things.

Or it is possible that she did not and what Pippin came up with Hand 
was what she had in mind or maybe she just did not care that much 
about 
Draco Malfoy story and in her mind it was all clear that he gets the 
item later on, maybe Lucius buys it, but she thought it is 
insignificant enough to mention.

I mean, she flat out admitted that she is bad with maths. I guess I 
just give her more credit than just to say that she forgot staff that 
we readers think she should have mention or what sounds inconsistent 
to 
us.

She spent fifteen years with those books and sure she could have 
forgotten many things, but I happen to believe that when she says 
that 
she had notebooks and outlines, she meant it and I just I guess 
refuse 
to believe that she forgot it.

JMO,

Alla




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon Aug  4 03:57:15 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 03:57:15 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g74nj3+q9t5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g75umr+f7k7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183976

> Magpie:
> "Magic" is Hermione's life.

Pippin:
Friendship and bravery are much more important to her.

In any case, she's eighteen in DH,  and old enough to enlist in the
British army if she wanted to whether her parents consented or not.
According to a website I just checked, with consent she could have
joined at sixteen. So it's hardly unheard of for a girl of her age to
be a soldier, and she is fighting for Britain, even if it's a part of
Britain most Muggles don't know about. 

Magpie:
> Not that any of this is necessary anyway because there is no story 
> about the Grangers being in danger.

Pippin:
Um, it's a bit late to take precautions after you've been attacked.
Neville's Gran is threatened and so is Xenophilius. The Weasleys and
the Dursleys have to go into hiding. I think it's well established
that the families and friends of people Voldemort is looking for are
in danger.

I thought the point was not so much to drum up sympathy for Hermione
but to show just how determined she was to accompany Harry. He wasn't
going to be able to put her off by pointing out that her parents would
be in danger if she went with him. 

Magpie:
(But then,  she'd be dead so it's not like she'd be experiencing that.) 

Pippin:
But she would, or at least she thinks so.  She believes in the
survival of the soul. She tells Ron it would be quite unhurt if he
died, and he should find that comforting. The souls we see all seem to
be up on current events, and deeply anguished about those whom  they
think they wronged in life. 

Magpie:
> Hermione's situation is presented as tragic and sacrificial, but
they  themselves become one last Muggle joke. If we are supposed to
think  that her parents agreed to this, it's not important enough to
mention it. 

Pippin:

Joke? Who's laughing? You think it's supposed to be comic relief how
far Hermione went to protect her parents?

I would think if they disagreed, that would be important enough to
mention. If they agreed, why waste the ink? It's all about the conflict. 

The Grangers' feelings are important to Hermione, who was wearing
braces on her teeth rather than flout their wishes. Take it from me,
if you've never had braces, I can tell you it's no picnic. 


> Magpie:
> You're assuming Rowling considers this something they would loathe 
> her about anyway, and I wouldn't assume that. If she sees it as 
> Hermione making some big sacrifice just the way lots of readers do, 
> why think Rowling thought it? 

Pippin:
Now I'm confused. If we're positing that Hermione's parents wouldn't
find it objectionable, then who are we to say they should?

Magpie:
> Imo, the Grangers just should have been left out like they usually 
> were since their pov isn't being presented anyway. 

Pippin:
I think they're important earlier in the story as a contrast to show
what role the Dursleys could have played if they'd been supportive.
Later Molly and Arthur can do that, but in CoS Harry still thinks of
Molly as his friend's mom, not a personal friend (and a sometimes too
eager protector.)  I suppose JKR could have just killed the Grangers
off. Would you have liked that better?

Pippin






From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 05:01:53 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 05:01:53 -0000
Subject: HoG - Alternate Theory
In-Reply-To: <g75j3d+hm6i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g762g1+jmp9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183977

I've only been casually following the Hand of Glory (HoG) thread,
but some thing occurred to me. How did Draco know that the 
Vanishing Cabinet was actually working? Who would want to step
into it without some proof that it was safe?

So, how about DE enter B&B's shop and send something through,
something useful like the Hand of Glory? 

It goes through the cabinet proving its function, Draco finds it,
it by-passes security, it resolves everything except how Ron 
knew about Draco having it. Unless, Ron simply remembered Draco's
/interest/ in the HoG and assumed that he must have had it to evade
the Peruvian Darkness Powder. 

Hey...it was just a thought.

Steve/bluewizard






From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 05:11:19 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 05:11:19 -0000
Subject: Who WAS the True Master of the Elder Wand?
In-Reply-To: <g74s35+o9ve@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7631n+2ju9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183978

> Carol:
> 
> Dead is dead. And if he killed *all* the people in that room,
> including the escapees (how do we know that they closed the door
> behind them?) he'd have no servants left. Altogether, a stupid
> thing to do. I've heard of killing the messenger, but killing the
> listeners, your own loyal followers? 

Mike:
But Carol, it's not a matter of what Voldemort did or didn't do, 
should or shouldn't do. It's a matter of what the wand should do, in 
the hands of it's true master.


> Carol:
> 
> Even Voldemort must have been sated after that kill-fest, and he
> certainly did not doubt the effectiveness of his weapon then or
> later. Nor does it fail him in creating Nagini's bubble, drawing
> Snape into it, or turning the green potion clear, the only feats
> of magic other than those unimaginative AKs that it's depicted as
> performing. 
> <snip and added from below>
>
> If we had only seen him attempt and fail some spectacular feat of
> magic along the lines of the spells used in the duel with
> Dumbledore in the MoM. 

Mike:
As you've acknowledged, Voldemort wasn't thinking about what the wand 
was doing for him on this occasion. He was more concerned about his 
Horcruxes, understandably. And he certainly did doubt the 
effectiveness of the wand later, that was the whole point of killing 
Snape.

It's not a matter of the wand "failing" him, as in not performing the 
spells. Ollivander said, "if you are any wizard at all you will be 
able to channel your magic through almost any instrument." <DH, The 
Wandmaker> Voldemort isn't just "any wizard". He's probably the most 
powerful and accomplished wizard of his age, with the possible 
exception of Dumbledore. Voldemort could have performed all those 
spells with Hagrid's umbrella/wand, IMO. So of course the Elder Wand 
had no problem doing those spells, because it was Voldemort's magic 
that was spectacular. Voldemort didn't have to be the wand's master 
to accomplish what was usual magic for him.

But the true master of the Elder Wand will get an extra boost to his 
magic. We've seen it on page. Twice. Dumbledore's Stupefy blasted a 
door out of the way and continued on to strike Crouch. Stupefy isn't 
a spell that should be able to blast through solid objects. Then we 
saw Harry repair his Phoenix and Holly wand with the Elder Wand after 
Ollivander told him there was no way to repair it.



> Carol:
> It's no *more* effective than his old yew wand, but that wand
> chose him and performed many feats of spectacular Dark magic,
> including creating Horcruxes and Inferi and the protections in
> the cave, as well as the spells he cast against DD in the MoM.

Mike:
And that's exactly the point! The Elder Wand was no more effective 
than his Yew wand and it should have been. Voldemort could see and I 
daresay sense that the wand wasn't living up to it's potential. 
Wizards were shown to sense an affinity or lack thereof for the wands 
they're using, Harry certainly does throughout DH. Voldemort would 
have come to realize that the Elder Wand was not performing according 
to legend. Legends can of course exaggerate, but there was some truth 
to this legend. We saw it.

Ollivander also told us that the manner of taking a wand mattered. 
Both he and Xeno understood that one had to "win" the Elder Wand. 
Voldemort thought that stealing the wand from Dumbledore in the grave 
was enough. He came to realize that it wasn't. 


> Carol:
> At any rate, IMO, the fact that some of his followers escaped him
> is no indication of the wand's failure, though it does show the
> limitations of the AK.

Mike:
But if he was the master of the wand, they shouldn't have escaped. 
They should have been blasted through the door just as Crouch was 
blasted through the door by Dumbledore, while using a less powerful 
spell than an AK.

I'll bet that Voldemort couldn't have pointed to a specific event or 
spell where the wand didn't meet his expectations. It was probably a 
cummulative effect and an overall sensing that the wand wasn't any 
better than his Yew wand, and maybe even a little less effective in 
his hands.


> Carol:
> No doubt Voldemort thought that the wand wouldn't AK Snape if he
> was its master since he hadn't been Disarmed, but Voldemort could
> have realized, after his questioning of Snape, that Snape knew
> nothing about the Elder Wand, and then handed it to him saying,
> "Here. Hold this," and Disarmed him with the yew wand. Snape
> would say, "What the--?" and then be sent back to the battle

Mike:
Oh yeah, and that wouldn't have been at all OOC for Voldemort! You 
don't suppose you might be a bit biased against this story line 
because it was used to kill Snape, do you? ;-)


> Carol:
> 
> You apparently find it convincing. I don't. There was no reason
> whatever for Voldemort to kill Snape except that JKR wanted him
> to die that way,

Mike:
Honestly, whatever method JKR used to kill off Snape was fine by me, 
just as long as he was killed off. ;-) 

I agree with Pippin's assessment that this method allowed Harry to 
get there (realize Voldemort wasn't the master of the wand) before 
the reader did. Which set him to thinking of *who* was the master, 
because he knew Snape wasn't it.



> Carol, looking for *on-page* evidence of the wand's failure to
> serve Voldemort effectively and finding none at all

Mike, seeing at least one on-page scene where the wand didn't perform 
to spec and deciding that if Voldemort was convinced, he should be 
convinced




From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk  Mon Aug  4 06:30:30 2008
From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 06:30:30 -0000
Subject: ThatLetter/HoG/Portraits/Rookwood/Black/InLaws/Crabbe/ElWand/Stone/Sex/Lu
In-Reply-To: <g758lc+dpkq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g767m6+ri0b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183979

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" <catlady at ...> 
wrote:
 
Geoff:
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183933>:
> 
> << Anyway, in the UK, the suffix "in-law" is only used in conjunction
> with "sister' "brother', "son" or "daughter".  >>

Catlady: 
> No mother-in-law jokes?

Geoff:
Whoops....

Please add "father" and "mother" to the list. I was trying to make the 
point that such peculiarities as "grandmother-in-law" or "aunt-in-law" 
just don't exist, at least in UK English .

That was the mother of all omissions that I made.
:-)




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Mon Aug  4 11:38:49 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 11:38:49 -0000
Subject: re /InLaws/
In-Reply-To: <g767m6+ri0b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g76po9+67qc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183980

 
> Geoff:
> Whoops....
> 
> Please add "father" and "mother" to the list. I was trying to make 
the 
> point that such peculiarities as "grandmother-in-law" or "aunt-in-
law" 
> just don't exist, at least in UK English .
> 
> That was the mother of all omissions that I made.
> :-)
>

Potioncat:
You know, Kneasy used to say a post often revealed more about the 
poster than it did about HP...  ;-)

US-English uses the same in-law connections. Although sometimes when a 
speaker is trying to completely identify the relationship, he may add 
an -in-law to the word (cousin-in-law). More often it's cousin by 
marriage.

You know, I can't think of a good reason for getting that specific in a 
conversation. Well, maybe if someone said, "Isn't Voldmort  your 
cousin?" and you wanted to distance yourself from the relationship.





From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 14:19:04 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:19:04 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g75umr+f7k7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7734o+8jjf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183981

> Pippin:
> The Grangers' feelings are important to Hermione, who was wearing
> braces on her teeth rather than flout their wishes. Take it from me,
> if you've never had braces, I can tell you it's no picnic. 

Montavilla47:
I don't remember Hermione wearing braces during any part
of the series.  I think you confusing that with Hermione 
not magically shrinking her large front teeth--which she
does anyway--just in time to make herself pretty for 
the Yule Ball (although, that is not her intention).




From sweenlit at gmail.com  Mon Aug  4 15:12:35 2008
From: sweenlit at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 08:12:35 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:HoG/Rookwood
In-Reply-To: <g75j3d+hm6i@eGroups.com>
References: <g758lc+dpkq@eGroups.com> <g75j3d+hm6i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <43e41d1e0808040812v5db9fad0k70f7023bd468ea52@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183982

Carol:

I stand by my position that JKR just forgot that Lucius hadn't
sneerinlr refused to buy his son a handy tool for thieves and
plunderers and that neither Ron nor Harry had ever seen him with it.

Lynda:

Having known an awful lot of real kids who manage to both buy things without
their parents
knowledge and successfully hide them from the same parents, and who sneak
them into
their schools and show them off to other students successfully--sometimes
for several days
and also having lived in a number of dormitories in my life (school,
military barracks) and realizing
that it's not really all that difficult to hide something if you really have
to, I'll continue to take the
position that Draco simply bought the HoG at a later time or had someone buy
it for him.

Lynda


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon Aug  4 15:14:25 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:14:25 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g74tuq+obkm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g776ch+8utd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183983

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:

> Instead, we're left to wonder what the Grangers, with their new
names and identities, did for jobs and money. 

Pippin:
Ah, but you don't like wondering, and I do. I'm selfishly glad that
JKR catered to my taste and not yours.

The Grangers would have a retirement fund, and cash set aside for a
rainy day. Well, it rained -- and retirement money wouldn't do them
any good if they didn't live to spend it. They have national health in
Britain and Australia, so they wouldn't have to build or rebuild a
private practice.

 As for credentials, Hermione could have given them the same sort of
magical "this will explain everything" paper that Dumbledore gave to
Mrs. Cole. 

It would be too bad if the DE's trashed their house -- and yet that
would cover their disappearance nicely, what with all the other
mysterious deaths and disappearances going on.

Possessions are a small price to pay if you escape with your life, I
think. But then I'm descended from a woman who fled from Tsarist
Russia hiding in the bottom of a wagon, with her money sewn into her
dress and my infant uncle in her arms. That wasn't safe or dignified,
and it sounds  incredible. But in times like those, you either have an
incredible story, or you're dead. 


Carol:
If it was a Confundus Charm, it
> must have been an extraordinarily long-lasting one, and if there's
> such a thing as a Confundus Charm that powerful, who needs the
> Imperius Curse?

Pippin:
We know there's a confundus charm that powerful, since Snape obviously
wasn't expecting the confundus charm he put on Mundungus to wear off
or be detected.  

 Imperius evidently takes far less skill to master, has a more
damaging effect on the mind of its victim, and  produces a tingling
sense of power and control in its caster -- all reasons for the
Ministry to take a dimmer view of its use, IMO. 
 

Carol:
There has to be a better way.

Pippin:

Some people thought there had to be a better way to escape the Tsar,
too.  They died.

Pippin




From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Mon Aug  4 15:15:12 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:15:12 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g7734o+8jjf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g776e0+25l5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183984

> > Pippin:
> > The Grangers' feelings are important to Hermione, who was wearing
> > braces on her teeth rather than flout their wishes. Take it from me,
> > if you've never had braces, I can tell you it's no picnic. 
> 
> Montavilla47:
> I don't remember Hermione wearing braces during any part
> of the series.  I think you confusing that with Hermione 
> not magically shrinking her large front teeth--which she
> does anyway--just in time to make herself pretty for 
> the Yule Ball (although, that is not her intention).

Magpie:
Yes, Hermione says she's been trying to persuade her parents to let her 
shrink her teeth for ages but they told her to "carry on with her 
brace," which would presumably mean she's got a night brace or 
something. Not braces. And of course, she does flout their wishes when 
she gets the chance. She only brings up the brace while she's saying 
she's had it done magically now. (One of the only characteristics the 
Grangers have is that they're dentists, and that's where they get the 
limited authority they have.)

-m





From foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon Aug  4 15:27:54 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:27:54 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g7734o+8jjf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7775q+nc01@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183985


> > Pippin:
> > The Grangers' feelings are important to Hermione, who was wearing
> > braces on her teeth rather than flout their wishes. Take it from me,
> > if you've never had braces, I can tell you it's no picnic. 
> 
> Montavilla47:
> I don't remember Hermione wearing braces during any part
> of the series.  

Pippin:
"Mum and Dad won't be too pleased. I've been trying to persuade them
to let me shrink them for ages, but they wanted me to carry on with my
braces. You know, they're dentists, they don't think teeth and magic
should--" --GoF ch 23

IIRC, that's the first and only time Hermione's braces are mentioned.
But it's canon that Hermione didn't want to go directly against her
parents' wishes, though she was happy to use Madame Pomfrey to evade
them. 

Pippin




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon Aug  4 15:32:52 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:32:52 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g776e0+25l5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g777f4+gjb3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183986

> 
> Magpie:
> Yes, Hermione says she's been trying to persuade her parents to let
her  shrink her teeth for ages but they told her to "carry on with her 
> brace," which would presumably mean she's got a night brace or 
> something. Not braces.


Pippin:
Double checking, my Scholastic First American Edition says "braces." 
My Raincoast (Canadian) edition says, "brace." Any Brits care to weigh
in on this?

Pippin






From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Mon Aug  4 17:12:51 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 17:12:51 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g777f4+gjb3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g77daj+im0k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183987

> > Magpie:
> > Yes, Hermione says she's been trying to persuade her parents to let
> her  shrink her teeth for ages but they told her to "carry on with 
her 
> > brace," which would presumably mean she's got a night brace or 
> > something. Not braces.
> 
> 
> Pippin:
> Double checking, my Scholastic First American Edition says "braces." 
> My Raincoast (Canadian) edition says, "brace." Any Brits care to weigh
> in on this?

Magpie:
Seems like a silly change in the US version. I've seen "braces" used 
exactly the same in British writing/speech as US writing/speech. 
Hermione's never described as having braces, which I'd think she would 
be, particularly in the scene where her teeth grow incredibly large not 
long before this scene. (Wouldn't Pansy be making fun of them too?)

Regardless, this scene shows Hermione taking matters into her own hands 
and overriding her parents rather silly preference for expensive manual 
treatments for her teeth in favor of the magical solution. For me it's 
not so much about imagining Hermione as a real girl interacting with 
her parents when I don't see her (though she's certainly never 
portrayed as dealing with much parental control at all), but more part 
of the very consistent pattern of Wizard/Muggle interaction.

-m




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 19:25:16 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 19:25:16 -0000
Subject: Who WAS the True Master of the Elder Wand?
In-Reply-To: <g7631n+2ju9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g77l2s+1mqb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183988

Carol earlier:
> > 
> > Dead is dead. And if he killed *all* the people in that room,
including the escapees (how do we know that they closed the door
behind them?) he'd have no servants left. Altogether, a stupid thing
to do. I've heard of killing the messenger, but killing the listeners,
your own loyal followers? 
> 
> Mike:
> But Carol, it's not a matter of what Voldemort did or didn't do, 
should or shouldn't do. It's a matter of what the wand should do, in 
the hands of it's true master.

Carol responds:
I understand your point. My point is that we're never shown that the
wand fails him. He's had it for more than a month before he kills all
those people in Malfoy Manor without a thought of its failing him. Nor
does that thought occur to him at the time. All he thinks about is the
Horcruxes:

"The scream of rage, of denial [that the cup has been stolen] left him
as if it were a stranger's. He was crazed, frenzied, it could not be
tru, it was impossible, nobody had even known: How was it possible
that the boy could have discovered his secret?"

Every AK he aims finds its mark. Had he cast a different spell, one
that should have killed everyone in the room except himself, and it
had failed, it would be different. Instead, we get:

"The elder Wand slashed through the air and green light light erupted
through the room; the kneeling goblin rolled over, dead; the watching
wizards scattered before him, terrified. Bellatrix and Lucius Malfoy
threw others behind them in their race for the door, and again and
again his wand fell, and those who were left were slain, all of them,
for bringing him this news, for hearing about the golden cup" (549).

Even the Elder Wand, whether wielded by its master or by a powerful
wizard like Voldemort who can wield it effectively without being its
master, can kill only one person at a time with an AK. Everyone who
doesn't flee is dead. had he aimed specifically at Bella or Lucius,
assuming that the path to them wasn't blocked by other living bodies,
they would have died, too. But a wand firing an AK is like a revolver,
not a machine gun. A bullet can (normally) only kill one person at a
time. the most powerful AK in the world does the same. (And wouldn't
this be the time for Voldemort to attempt the spectacular magic that
snape and Voldemort mention but we never see?)

> Mike:
<snip>
> It's not a matter of the wand "failing" him, as in not performing
the spells. Ollivander said, "if you are any wizard at all you will be 
> able to channel your magic through almost any instrument." <DH, The 
> Wandmaker> Voldemort isn't just "any wizard". He's probably the most 
> powerful and accomplished wizard of his age, with the possible 
> exception of Dumbledore. Voldemort could have performed all those 
> spells with Hagrid's umbrella/wand, IMO. So of course the Elder Wand 
> had no problem doing those spells, because it was Voldemort's magic 
> that was spectacular. Voldemort didn't have to be the wand's master 
> to accomplish what was usual magic for him.

Carol:
A) We don't see any of those spectacular spells. B) How would he know
the difference? If the spells worked, how would he know that they
worked because of his own magic and not the wand's? C) He expresses no
doubts until it's time to kill Snape, yet he's had the wand for more
than a month. He gives no specifics, and we see none. To repeat, the
Elder Wand kills effectively, it clears the potion effectively, it
creates Nagini's bubble effectively, and it sucks Snape into that
bubble effectively. No other magic performed by Voldemort using the
Elder Wand is mentioned. He has no grounds to doubt its effectiveness
for him. It works just as well as his own yew wand, which also worked
spectacularly, creating all those Horcruxes and whatever other "great
and terrible things" Voldemort did in VW1. And both Snape and
Voldemort say that he performed other, unnamed, spectacular feats with
that wand. And yet he doubts, suddenly and with no clear reason, that
he's its master. Why? Because JKR needed a reason for Voldemort to
kill snape without AKing him.

Mike: 
> But the true master of the Elder Wand will get an extra boost to his
magic. We've seen it on page. Twice. Dumbledore's Stupefy blasted a
door out of the way and continued on to strike Crouch. Stupefy isn't a
spell that should be able to blast through solid objects.  Then we saw
Harry repair his Phoenix and Holly wand with the Elder Wand after 
Ollivander told him there was no way to repair it.

Carol:
But there's no door to blast through in the scene we're discussing.
The door is apparently open. Bellatrix and Lucius run through it,
along with anyone else who wasn't quick enough to escape the barrage
of AKs (which apparently require a lowered and raised wand between
them, as well as the nonverbal spell, so there's at least a split
second between them). There's no indication that he attempts to aim
any AKs through a closed door or even that the fleeing DEs close it
behind them (which would block the escape of anyone else who was
fleeing and would surely have been mentioned). As for Harry's
repairing his broken wand with the Elder Wand, voldemort's yew wand is
not broken and he has no need to perform such a spell. (Lucius's "poor
stick" wasn't worth keeping, much less repairing.)

If we had seen Voldemort trying to blast through a door with a
Stunning Spell (normally, he would use the spell designed for that
purpose, Reducto) and failing, or trying to repair a wand and failing,
or doing anything else with the Elder Wand and failing, he would have
grounds to suspect that he's not its master. But it works perfectly
well in doing everything he asks it to do, including surrounding him
with a sea of dead bodies. But instead of thinking, "They all deserved
to die! Why did my wand fail me?" he thinks about the Horcruxes and
goes after them. And he should still be worrying about the Horcruxes,
and about Harry, when he reaches the Shrieking Shack. Instead, he asks
Lucius to summon Snape (whom he has thought of as his loyal lieutenant
earlier that same day and informed that he is coming and that Harry
will be going to the Ravenclaw common room) for no apparent reason No
new spells have been cast (except for the cleared potion and Nagini's
bubble, both of which worked fine). No new doubt has been cast on the
effectiveness of the wand. It's nothing but a clumsily handled plot
device, an excuse for Voldemort to kill Snape and discuss the Elder
Wand in Harry's hearing.

Carol earlier:
> > It's no *more* effective than his old yew wand, but that wand
chose him and performed many feats of spectacular Dark magic,
including creating Horcruxes and Inferi and the protections in the
cave, as well as the spells he cast against DD in the MoM.
> 
> Mike:
> And that's exactly the point! The Elder Wand was no more effective 
> than his Yew wand and it should have been. Voldemort could see and I 
> daresay sense that the wand wasn't living up to it's potential. 

Carol:
How? where? When? the wand never fails him, and if it performs as well
as his yew wand, the wand that chose him and is perfectly suitable to
him, then it must have performed perfectly. It's unreasonable to
expect anything better than perfection, and not even Voldemort would
expect that. Now if he said that it didn't perform *as well* as his
old wand (which performed perfectly) and if we saw evidence of its not
performing as well, it would be different. But that's not what he says
and it's not what we see. The doubts, which come suddenly and for no
reason after he's been using the wand for more than a month, have no
foundation in canon.

If JKR wanted Voldemort to doubt that he was the master of the Elder
Wand, she should have given him reason to doubt it--on page, with no
speculation required by the reader. She failed to do that.

Carol, who understands exactly what you're saying but does not agree
with your position





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 19:48:34 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 19:48:34 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g776e0+25l5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g77mei+30d9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183989

Montavilla47:
> > I don't remember Hermione wearing braces during any part of the
series.  I think you confusing that with Hermione not magically
shrinking her large front teeth--which she does anyway--just in time
to make herself pretty for the Yule Ball (although, that is not her
intention).
> 
> Magpie:
> Yes, Hermione says she's been trying to persuade her parents to let
her shrink her teeth for ages but they told her to "carry on with her
brace," which would presumably mean she's got a night brace or 
something. Not braces. And of course, she does flout their wishes when
she gets the chance. She only brings up the brace while she's saying
she's had it done magically now. (One of the only characteristics the
 Grangers have is that they're dentists, and that's where they get the
limited authority they have.)

Carol responds:

Setting aside the question of whether "brace" means "braces" or what
Magpie is calling a "night brace" (my orthodontist always referred to
mine as "headgear"; no doubt that particular instrument of torture has
other, more descriptive, names that we can discuss on OT Chatter),
that quotation is the only reference in the books to Hermione's having
or wearing a brace or braces. It always struck me as odd that her
dentist (orthodontist?) parents would want her to wear braces (or any
means or *straightening* teeth) when the problem is actually the
*size* of her front teeth, easily solved with a shrinking spell.
Plenty of kids (I was one) have normal-sized teeth that need to be
straightened (my lower teeth are still crooked because the retainer
was taken off too soon!). Hermione seems to have had the opposite
problem--her front teeth weren't crooked, they were just too large.
Had they been crooked as well (an overbite), they would still have
protruded even after they were shrunk.

So, IMO, it's not the poster Montavilla was responding to (Magpie?)
who was confusing shrunken teeth with braces. It was JKR confusing the
effects of those two procedures.

Carol, who thinks that the Wizards, so many of whom have yellow or
crooked teeth, would benefit from regular visits to a Muggle dentist
if they can't invent spells to solve those problems




From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Mon Aug  4 20:55:51 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 20:55:51 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g77mei+30d9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g77qcn+uvpv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183990

> Carol responds:


> So, IMO, it's not the poster Montavilla was responding to (Magpie?)
> who was confusing shrunken teeth with braces. It was JKR confusing the
> effects of those two procedures.

Magpie:
Heh. It wasn't me she was responding to, but I almost added this very 
same tangent: why would braces or headgear shrink your teeth? The most 
I could figure was that maybe the real trouble was that they were 
protruding and just looked large so shrinking them created the illusion 
the problem was fixed, or that perhaps they were overly large and that 
caused Hermione's teeth to be badly aligned and that's what her parents 
were trying to fix with orthodontics. (Your teeth don't always have to 
look crooked to need braces, after all--iirc, mine were a lot about 
aligning the jaw.) 

Fun fact: I was watching a behind the scenes of the movie Tootsie once 
and Dustin Hoffman was talking about some of the stuff they had to do 
to make him a woman that was surprising. He wears fake teeth in the 
movie and I'd thought maybe it was to make his teeth look smaller, but 
it turns out women tend to have longer teeth.

-m





From k12listmomma at comcast.net  Mon Aug  4 21:40:58 2008
From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 15:40:58 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
References: <g77qcn+uvpv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <035801c8f67a$c8b669e0$6401a8c0@homemain>

No: HPFGUIDX 183991

>> Carol responds:
>
>
>> So, IMO, it's not the poster Montavilla was responding to (Magpie?)
>> who was confusing shrunken teeth with braces. It was JKR confusing the
>> effects of those two procedures.
>
> Magpie:
> Heh. It wasn't me she was responding to, but I almost added this very
> same tangent: why would braces or headgear shrink your teeth? The most
> I could figure was that maybe the real trouble was that they were
> protruding and just looked large so shrinking them created the illusion
> the problem was fixed, or that perhaps they were overly large and that
> caused Hermione's teeth to be badly aligned and that's what her parents
> were trying to fix with orthodontics. (Your teeth don't always have to
> look crooked to need braces, after all--iirc, mine were a lot about
> aligning the jaw.)
>
> Fun fact: I was watching a behind the scenes of the movie Tootsie once
> and Dustin Hoffman was talking about some of the stuff they had to do
> to make him a woman that was surprising. He wears fake teeth in the
> movie and I'd thought maybe it was to make his teeth look smaller, but
> it turns out women tend to have longer teeth.

Shelley:
Ah, the effects of braces versus a shrinking spell. I admit that when I 
first read the book with the part where Madame Pomfrey shrinks Hermione's 
teeth, I thought to myself that wouldn't fix the reason that Hermione needed 
braces. If they were pointing outward (usually the problem called "buck 
teeth", then shrinking those front two wouldn't change the outward angle. 
And, it wouldn't move the other crooked teeth into place, but would only 
speed up the process by allowing more room for the teeth to move under 
pressure (of the braces and wires). Only her front two teeth were hit 
anyway. FWIW, the dentist did "shrink" my teeth afterward- after all my 
braces were done- by using a drill to grind off the top edges so they formed 
a nice, even edge when I smiled. In reality, he didn't shrink them, but 
shortened them and make the edges nicer (rounded instead of jagged). 




From jkoney65 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 22:55:03 2008
From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 22:55:03 -0000
Subject: HoG - Alternate Theory
In-Reply-To: <g762g1+jmp9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g781c7+d13e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183992

I've also been following this thread and it confuses me a bit. I tend 
to go for the simplest answers (or what seems to be the simplest to 
me.)

At some point after Harry sees the activities at B&B, he lets Ron and 
Hermione know about it. Ron, who is raised in a wizarding family 
understands exactly what Harry is talking about.

He may have actually seen pictures of a Hand of Glory. We are told 
that it's a dark artifact, not that it's a one of a kind artifact. If 
it's not one of a kind (there may not be hundreds, but more than a 
few), then it's probable that wizarding families, especially ones 
with lots of mischevious boys are going to find out about these types 
of items. 

So having Ron know what the HoG is, doesn't seem like a stretch to me.

The easiest way to have gotten it into the castle would have been 
through the cabinets. After all if the HoG was still at B&B it would 
have been no effort to bring it through. That's probably how the 
darkness powder also got into the castle.

Jack-A-Roe

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at ...> wrote:
>
> I've only been casually following the Hand of Glory (HoG) thread,
> but some thing occurred to me. How did Draco know that the 
> Vanishing Cabinet was actually working? Who would want to step
> into it without some proof that it was safe?
> 
> So, how about DE enter B&B's shop and send something through,
> something useful like the Hand of Glory? 
> 
> It goes through the cabinet proving its function, Draco finds it,
> it by-passes security, it resolves everything except how Ron 
> knew about Draco having it. Unless, Ron simply remembered Draco's
> /interest/ in the HoG and assumed that he must have had it to evade
> the Peruvian Darkness Powder. 
> 
> Hey...it was just a thought.
> 
> Steve/bluewizard
>





From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  4 23:18:56 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 23:18:56 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g776e0+25l5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g782p0+fkph@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183993

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" <sistermagpie at ...> wrote:
>
> > > Pippin:
> > > The Grangers' feelings are important to Hermione, who was wearing
> > > braces on her teeth rather than flout their wishes. Take it from me,
> > > if you've never had braces, I can tell you it's no picnic. 
> > 
> > Montavilla47:
> > I don't remember Hermione wearing braces during any part
> > of the series.  I think you confusing that with Hermione 
> > not magically shrinking her large front teeth--which she
> > does anyway--just in time to make herself pretty for 
> > the Yule Ball (although, that is not her intention).
> 
> Magpie:
> Yes, Hermione says she's been trying to persuade her parents to let her 
> shrink her teeth for ages but they told her to "carry on with her 
> brace," which would presumably mean she's got a night brace or 
> something. Not braces. And of course, she does flout their wishes when 
> she gets the chance. She only brings up the brace while she's saying 
> she's had it done magically now. (One of the only characteristics the 
> Grangers have is that they're dentists, and that's where they get the 
> limited authority they have.)
> 
> -m
>

Montavilla47:
Not that there's any kind of brace in the world that will make your
teeth *smaller.*  What braces do is to pull your teeth into position
when they've been knocked out of it by other, larger teeth--or so that
smaller teeth can have the space to grow into.





From justcorbly at yahoo.com  Tue Aug  5 00:10:43 2008
From: justcorbly at yahoo.com (justcorbly)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 00:10:43 -0000
Subject: The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their parents
In-Reply-To: <g75m5u+kfsd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g785q3+8e6n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183994

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
>
> Carol again:
> In character, certainly. Hermione is always taking things into her own
> hands...  Hermione takes charge of the parents without whom she would not even
exist...  Maybe in your view it's all right for a child to control the lives of her capable adult
>parents.

The "in character" thing takes precedence for me since we are talking about a novel.  As
with any student away from home at a boarding school or college, the student determines
what his or her parents learn about their experiences.  Certainly, Dumbledore or any of the
other teachers could have told the Grangers what their daughter had got herself into. I
doubt, though, that they were oblivious to her petrified stage, since that occupied a
significant period of time during which they'd likely have written her. And, if they weren't
in the habit of communicating with Hermione, that helps to explain her decision.

 Whether or not Hermione was right, in a novel or in reality, seems to me a moot point.
Parents and children do all kinds of inexplicable things to each other.

Hermione also had good reason to think her parents were at risk.  She know Voldemort
was out and about.  She knew that he knew she was one of Harry's two closest allies.  That
Voldemort might threaten her parents to thwart her efforts was an easy and logical
assumption.

> Carol:

> And why shouldn't she tell them at least as much as Harry tells the
> Dursleys...

Every child knows his or her parents best. Presumably, Hermione had good reason for her
actions.  We certainly know next to nothing about her parents' emotional makeup. As for
Harry and his aunt and uncle... well, he certainly didn't want them to be killed, but I doubt
he really cared much if they got upset about events.

> Carol:
> We don't know that it worked. All we know is that it got them out of
> England and Hermione, unlike Ron, didn't need to spend time worrying
> about her family. It's a plot device, pure and simple, for disposing
> of the Grangers...

Well, I believe we get an indication that Hermione brought her parents back from Oz and
more or less fixed things.  But, that may have come from JKR after the publication of DH
(I'm too lazy to go check).

JKR might just as well have ignored the Granger's, as she otherwise did throughout. I
believe it would have been difficult for her to introduce Mom and Pop Granger as real
characters without altering the story.  I.e., we readers, having met the Grangers, would
want to know what is happening with them, and JKR would have been forced to include a
thread of exposition about them, a thread that contributed nothing to the story. Muggles,
in a story of conflict between witches and wizards, are essentially powerless creatures
whose protection draws upon scarce resources and whose weakness threatens all.


justcorbly (Are there two linespaces above this signoff?)




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Tue Aug  5 03:16:26 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 03:16:26 -0000
Subject: Wizarding kids and their parents WAS: Draco's Hand of Glory
In-Reply-To: <g72cn3+op4s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g78gma+bdju@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183995

 "wildirishrose01us"  Marianne:
 
> I thought it odd that Hermione's parents didn't object that Hermione
> eventually distanced herself away from parents  all year and spent
> all her time with the Weasleys or Hogwarts in the WW.  But the WW is
> far different than the muggle world.  Perhaps her parents realized
> that she was more a part of the WW than muggle world and accepted
> it.  They probably knew that when she was with the Weasleys or at
> Hogwarts she was safe, well as safe as one could be as the books got
> darker and darker, and they would be less worried about her.

Potioncat:
I think we need to keep the plot requirements in mind as we evaluate 
the Granger family. The thing is, JKR needs Hermione to be there for 
Harry, so her presence doesn't reflect on her relationship with her 
parents. Hermione needs to be there at that time and she is. 

JKR has "killed off" parents before because they would interfere with 
the story. I'm thinking of James's and Lily's parents--who all have 
to have died so that Harry will be an orphan. In most other  books we 
wouldn't question it. We are however, a picky bunch, and JKR is a 
character-detailed writer.
 
In SS/PS the Weasley kids are left at Hogwarts over Christmas while 
Molly, Arthur and Ginny (I guess) all go off to Romania to visit 
Charlie. Ron is only 11! Does that really fit with Molly's style of 
parenting? Not in my mind, but it gave Ron a reason to be with Harry 
over the holidays.

> Marianne
> I've found it interesting that the kids at Hogwarts seem to have 
very
> little adult supervision, with the exception of classes. There are
> rules to follow, yet the kid go running amuck, unless something
> drastic happenes.  I've came to the conclusion that the kids
> pratically raise themselves from the age of 11 on up.  Maybe I'm
> wrong.
> 
Potioncat:
JKR didn't attend boarding school, and I don't think her children do. 
She needed her child-characters to be free of parental supervision so 
set the story in a boarding school. I'm basing this on interviews. 
She's made the circumstances of the school to fit her needs as well. 
I think she's done a very nice job of writing interesting adult 
characters, but her younger characters have to be the heroes and have 
to have certain liberties.


Potioncat, once again posting late at night after a long day of work, 
and hoping this is coherent.





From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Tue Aug  5 14:41:54 2008
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (norbertsmummy)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 14:41:54 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
Message-ID: <g79ori+6nco@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183996

This message is a Special Notice for all members of
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups

In addition to being published onlist (available in webview),
this post is also being delivered offlist (to email in boxes)
to those whose "Message Delivery" is set to "Special Notices."
If this is problematic or if you have any questions, contact
the List Elves at (minus that extra space)
HPforGrownups-owner @yahoogroups.com

----------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
Chapter 25, Shell Cottage

The Trio are staying at Bill and Fleur's cottage with Ollivander (the
wandmaker), Luna, Dean and Griphook (a goblin). It is a lonely and
beautiful place overlooking the sea. Harry spent the first few days
alone on the cliff-top thinking over his decision not to race
Voldemort to the Elder Wand. Torn between Ron's support for seeking
the wand ("if that's the Elder Wand, how the hell are we supposed to
finish off You-Know-Who?") and Hermione's opposing conviction that
the Elder Wand is an evil object he should not touch, Harry wondered
whether he had made the right decision.

On the third day, Fleur came out of the cottage to tell Harry that
Griphook wanted to speak with him. Fleur showed evident distaste that
the goblin was using her as a messenger. Griphook had been debating a
problem too. Griphook had decided to help Harry, but wanted Godric
Gryffindor's sword in exchange. Ron gave an alternative ("the
Lestranges have got loads of stuff") but Griphook took offense at the
suggestion, stating that he was not a thief. He asserted that the
sword was a lost Goblin masterpiece of goblinwork, taken from its
owner by Godric Gryffindor. "It belongs with the goblins!"

The trio moved downstairs to discuss the sword. Harry found the idea
that Godric Gryffindor had stolen the sword unpleasant. Hermione told
them that she knew of no such story, but that wizarding history often
glosses over wizards' ill treatment of other races. Ron noted that
goblins were not "fluffy little bunnies" either, and had killed
plenty of wizards.

While they tried to think of a way around the problem, Harry watched
Luna arranging flowers beside Dobby's grave. Ron proposed double-
crossing Griphook by giving the fake sword in the Lestranges' vault
to the goblin. Hermione suggested offering Griphook something just as
valuable. Harry was sure the goblin would accept nothing but the
sword, but they could not give up their one, indispensable weapon
against the Horcruxes. Harry decided to tell Griphook he could have
the sword after helping them get into the Lestranges' vault, but not
to tell him that it might be years. Neither Harry nor Hermione liked
the proposal, but they felt they had no choice. Griphook accepted
Harry's offer, insisting that they shake to seal their bargain.

Then the planning began; the trio began spending hours at a time shut
up with Griphook in a small bedroom . Nobody asked questions,
although Bill watched them with concern. As the planning continued
into April, Harry realised he did not like the bloodthirsty Griphook
much. Griphook did not join the others at mealtimes, instead
requesting food in his room until Bill (inspired by an angry Fleur)
told him to join them at the table. Harry, who felt responsible for
Griphook's presence, and also for driving the whole Weasley family
into hiding, apologized to Fleur. However, Fleur reminded him that
(at least in her eyes) he had saved Fleur's sister's life. Fleur
proposed to rearrange the sleeping arrangements (to Griphook's
disadvantage), but knowing that keeping Griphook happy was essential
to their plans, Harry said not to bother because the trio would soon
be leaving. Fleur begged them not to leave cottage, where they were
safe.

Luna and Dean came in from outside with driftwood while Luna rambled
on about the Crumple-Horned Snorkack horn at home. Revealing the tip
of the suffering Luna has experienced, Luna said, "but I haven't seen
it yet, because the Death Eaters took me from the Hogwarts
Express . . . . " At that point a frail Ollivander came downstairs
ready for Bill to escort him to Auntie Muriel's. Fleur asked Mr
Ollivander to deliver the tiara back to Auntie Muriel. Griphook was
very interested in it, recognizing it as goblin-made. "And paid for
by wizards," Bill reminded him.

Upon Bill's return, he reported that Auntie Muriel was pleased to see
the tiara because she had thought Bill and Fleur had stolen it. Fleur
responded crossly and marched out of the room, whereupon Luna piped
up that her father had made a tiara in an attempt to recreate the
lost diadem of Ravenclaw.

There was a bang on the front door. Wands emerged, and Griphook
slipped under the table. But it was only Lupin, who had arrived to
report the arrival of his and Tonks' son, who they had named after
Tonks' father. Lupin asked Harry to be godfather. Harry was
astonished and delighted.

Bill fetched some wine and they all toasted little Teddy, as Lupin
reported how Teddy ? clearly a metamorphmagus ? had already changed
his hair color from black to ginger. Lupin left another bottle later.
Griphook, however, had slunk out to his bedroom, noticed only by
Harry and Bill. While clearing the table, Bill stopped Harry in the
kitchen for a private word. "You're planning something with
Griphook," he observed. Stating "I know goblins," Bill asked point-
blank, "what do you want from Griphook, and what have you promised
him in return?" When Harry said he could not answer, Bill warned him
to be careful if the bargain involved treasure. Bill explained
that "[t]o a goblin, the rightful and true master of any object is the
maker, not the purchaser" and that they considered the concept of
passing on ownership among wizards after the purchaser had died to be
theft.

Bill closed with the warning that "[i]t would be less dangerous to
break into Gringotts than to renege on a promise to a goblin,"
prompting Harry to reflect that he was about to become as reckless a
godfather to Teddy as Sirius had been to him.

----------------------------------------------------------
Questions:

1) Any suggestions why JKR had these characters (Trio, Bill, Fleur,
Mr Ollivander, Griphook, Luna, Dean) in a small house for weeks,
maybe months?

2) There is a relaxed mood in this chapter, with no spells used in
anger. Some (adrenaline junkie) readers may have been tempted to skip
this chapter to get on with the fighting, and filling of body bags.
This chapter filled a few holes in what goes on with families in
other parts of the Wizarding World. What tidbit did you enjoy, hidden
in this chapter?

3) Fleur seemed to react worse to Griphook than the others. Were
Wizard - Goblin relations worse in France?

4) There is a saying, "History was written by the winners". The Daily
Prophet has been doing it in most of the books. So are wizards
the "lesser evil" compared to the "not fluffy bunnies", or just as
bad, or worse?

5) We see many heroes in the Harry Potter books have bad qualities.
Is the possibility of Godric Gryffindor's stealing the sword ("For
the greater good") the thing Harry has to come to terms with about
his house hero?

6) To seal the bargain, Griphook shook hands with Harry Potter. That
sounded ominously like "Just sign here for Dumbledore's Army" to me.
How did you feel about it?

7) Luna deserves her own question. Flowers on Dobby's grave: loyalty
to her father; the only one who Mr Ollivander gave a personal
compliment to as he left; and never complained despite her account of
missing Christmas in a cellar jail. Why do you think she is such an
important presence in Harry Potter's life?

8) We see Fleur in her own environment here. She quickly changes from
(ze goblin) fury; to (you are safe 'ere) over-protectiveness; to
getting Mr Ollivander to deliver the tiara (when Bill was going there
too); to (glancing at the window) worry about Bill outside; to anger
at Muriel; to baby hugger; to humble wife ("Wait" said Bill) within
one meal time. What do you think of her?

9) Did you pick up that subtle reminder of the "Lost Diadem of
Ravenclaw" in your first reading? Were there enough clues to identify
this as the last Horcrux?

10) Every culture has differences with Births, Marriages and Deaths
(Hatch, Match and Dispatch). Lupin offers us our only insight into
Wizard Births. Especially a new born Metamorphmagus. Anything special
you see here?

11) Goblin ownership laws: "the true owner of an object is the maker,
not the purchaser". This sounds like our copyright and patent laws. I
can't buy a CD and copy a song onto my I-Pod. Are arguments against
the goblin law grounds for authors to re-think copyright laws?

12) Is Harry getting reckless, like his thoughts on Sirius? Any other
thoughts about Harry being a godfather?

13) Any other question you would like to bring up?

~ Aussie
(with an assist from Speedy Elf's magic red pencil)

----------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: For more information on HPfGU's chapter discussions, please
see "HPfGU DH Chapter Discussions" at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database

Next Chapter Discussion, Chapter 26, Gringotts, August 11






From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug  5 23:06:59 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 23:06:59 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g79ori+6nco@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7amej+lbks@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183997

----------------------------------------------------------
> CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
> Chapter 25, Shell Cottage

<snip summary>

> 1) Any suggestions why JKR had these characters (Trio, Bill, Fleur,
Mr Ollivander, Griphook, Luna, Dean) in a small house for weeks, maybe
months?

Carol responds:

First, I think we can establish the time frame a little more clearly
than "weeks, maybe months." The "Malfoy Manor" chapter occurs during
Easter break, which seems to occur (wrongly for 1998) in March, or at
least to begin in March, and the Gringotts break-in and the rush of
succeeding events, including the Battle of Hogwarts, occur some time
in (early?) May. It seems, then, that the stay at Shell Cottage lasts
at least a month, pretty much all of April with perhaps a bit of March
and May in there, too.

That aside, why *would* JKR put this extraordinary grouping of
characters together for a month or more? Your summary makes the
chapter seem eventful, and yet, in retrospect, it isn't. The
conversations with Griphook and Ollivander occurred in the previous
chapter; the planning is mostly off-page. The only really memorable
event in the chapter is Lupin's visit. On the other hand, we get some
interesting glimpses of the psychology of minor characters, including
Lupin, with perhaps an intentional contrasting of Luna and Griphook.
In some respects, it feels like a camping chapter, a respite and a
waiting, but the tension is mounting.

Still, why should the planning take a full month (at least) when
Griphook recovers fairly quickly and makes up his mind to elp HRH
early in the chapter? My answer is bound to be unpopular, but I think
it's because JKR was trying to stretch out the action as long as
possible to make the timeframe of DH match that of the other books, or
near it--almost but not quite a school year. (It would have helped a
little, IMO, if she had realized that Easter fell on April 12 that
year, so the same amount of time in Shell Cottage would have taken
them to mid- rather than early May. I think she mistakenly thought
that the year was 1997, forgetting that year seven is not January 1
through December 31, 1997, but September 1, 1997 through August 31,
1998. Why do I think so? Because of JKR's maths and because Eater 1997
was March 30. Oh, well. Probably no one cares about these details
except me.)
> 
> 2) There is a relaxed mood in this chapter, with no spells used in
anger. Some (adrenaline junkie) readers may have been tempted to skip
this chapter to get on with the fighting, and filling of body bags.
This chapter filled a few holes in what goes on with families in other
parts of the Wizarding World. What tidbit did you enjoy, hidden in
this chapter?

Carol:
As I think I indicated in my previous response, I liked this lull
before the storm, with its glimpses into the psychology of minor
characters. If I have to choose one tidbit, it would be Ollivander's
making Luna a new wand, which hints at his gratitude for her
companionship, which must have made his ordeal in the Malfoys' secret
room much more endurable than it had been before her arrival.
> 
> 3) Fleur seemed to react worse to Griphook than the others. Were
Wizard - Goblin relations worse in France?

Carol responds;
I can't answer that because we have no canon on the matter except that
that the Goblin Rebellions that HRH are forced to hear about in
Professor Binns's classes seem to involve the European WW in general
rather than being confined to Britain. That aside, I think it's simply
Fleur herself, who can't endure the ugly, demanding, arrogant little
Goblin, with his repulsive eating habits (even eef 'e doesn't like 'is
food overcooked like ze Engleesh!) It don't think it's prejudice
against nonhuman creatures per se as Fleur herself is part Veela.
> 
> 4) There is a saying, "History was written by the winners". The
Daily Prophet has been doing it in most of the books. So are wizards
the "lesser evil" compared to the "not fluffy bunnies", or just as
bad, or worse?

Carol:
Oh, my. Don't get me started on history being written by the winners,
especially if the winner's last name is spelled T-u-d-o-r. But, no. I
don't think we're seeing any such thing in the history books Harry
would be reading if Professor Binns hadn't ruined the subject for him.
Bathilda Bagshot, author of "A History of Magic," seems to be an
objective chronicler who fairly presents the Goblins' point of view,
if the few glimpses we get of Binns' classes and exams are any
indication (perhaps not so objective regarding Muggles and witch
burnings and Wendolyn the Weird).

Griphook himself is certainly no "fluffy bunny." He's tricky and
treacherous, and his view that Goblinmade works, paid for by Wizards,
belong to the Goblin who made them is preposterous. If I paint your
portrait (pretencding that I can do so) and you pay me for it, you own
the portrait. I *might* own the reproduction rights, depending on what
society I live in, but not the portrait itself. Goblins clearly own
the reproduction rights--the Wizard-made fake Sword of Gryffindor has
none of the powers of the original. Goblins don't share their secrets
with Wizards or any other creatures. But they don't own the Sword of
Gryffindor itself, as shown by the Sword's coming to Neville in
conditions of need and valor and peril.

I don't think we can generalize about one group or the other being the
lesser evil. Clearly, Griphook is a much lesser evil than Voldemort
and the Death Eaters, but if the likes of Griphook took over the WW, I
doubt that they'd show mercy to any captured wizards. In general, I
think we can take Bill at his word about the danger of striking a
bargain with a Goblin. The Wizard, unless he's a ruthless murderer
with a band of followers at his back, is not likely to come out the
winner. (Snape and his fake Sword of Gryffindor are a kind of
exception: The Goblins mistakenly think that they tricked him.)
 
> 5) We see many heroes in the Harry Potter books have bad qualities.
Is the possibility of Godric Gryffindor's stealing the sword ("For the
greater good") the thing Harry has to come to terms with about his
house hero?

Carol:
I don't think that Godric Gryffindor stole the sword that bears his
name. It clearly was made for him to his specifications. As stated
earlier, the fact that it comes to worthy Gryffindors under conditions
of need and valor shows that it does *not* belong to the Goblins.
nevertheless, we see Harry forced by circumstances into making a
somewhat ethically iffy bargain--he intends to keep his promise to
give Griphook the Sword of Gryffindor as his reward, but only when
he's through with it. If Harry had named that condition, he'd have
been more honest, but Griphook might not have agreed to that
condition, and Harry couldn't take that chance. (As for what right
Griphook had to claim that particular reward, I'd say he had none, but
he didn't want anything else and they had nothing else to give.) At
any rate, this incident nicely places our hero in a moral dilemma and
shows his human frailty much better, IMO, than that accursed Crucio in
a later chapter.
> 
> 6) To seal the bargain, Griphook shook hands with Harry Potter. That
sounded ominously like "Just sign here for Dumbledore's Army" to me.
How did you feel about it?

Carol:
The same way you did. The handshake seems to me like a "binding
magical contract" holding Harry to his word.
 
> 7) Luna deserves her own question. Flowers on Dobby's grave: loyalty
to her father; the only one who Mr Ollivander gave a personal
compliment to as he left; and never complained despite her account of
missing Christmas in a cellar jail. Why do you think she is such an
important presence in Harry Potter's life?

Carol:
I could write a whole essay about Luna and yet I'm having trouble
answering this question. I'm not sure that Harry himself ever fully
appreciates her presence in his life. It isn't so much what she does
as who she is that matters. I can't think of any character in all of
literature who so intriguingly blends eccentricity and empathy, humor
and pathos, intuition and absurdity. I don't think that, until "King's
Cross," Harry fully understands what Luna senses instinctively about
death and tried to tell him in OoP, that it isn't the end of all
things but a new beginning. Her patient endurance of suffering is a
very different kind of courage from Harry's eager desire to right
wrongs through action, yet, in its way, it's just as admirable. She
would have understood his self-sacrifice and have done the same thing
herself, in his place, without hesitation. Luna is one of JKR's more
brilliant creations. I find myself imagining as I write how different
DH would have been if Luna had come along on the camping trip with the
Trio!
> 
> 8) We see Fleur in her own environment here. She quickly changes
from (ze goblin) fury; to (you are safe 'ere) over-protectiveness; to
getting Mr Ollivander to deliver the tiara (when Bill was going there
too); to (glancing at the window) worry about Bill outside; to anger
at Muriel; to baby hugger; to humble wife ("Wait" said Bill) within
one meal time. What do you think of her?

Carol:
Take away her beauty and her French accent and you have Molly Weasley.
I think they understood each other and each found, belatedly, a
kindred spirit, in the moment in HBP when Molly offers Fleur the
tiara. I can imagine her as the mother of a family of beautiful
daughters like herself and Gabrielle, breaking the Weasley tradition
of having mostly sons. Do I like her? Yes, oddly. I've liked her ever
since she kissed 'arry and Ron ("You 'elped) after the second task in
GoF, and I loved the shared moment with Molly in HBP. But I don't
think I could stand to be with her for more than a short time if she
were a real person, especially given her possessiveness and awareness
of her own beauty. She blends fierce loyalty and feminity, beauty and
domesticity. I suspect that Bill is quite happy with her and she with
him. Ginny, OTOH, probably continues to loathe her.
> 
> 9) Did you pick up that subtle reminder of the "Lost Diadem of
Ravenclaw" in your first reading? Were there enough clues to identify
this as the last Horcrux?

Carol:
Since I had noticed the two different tiaras in HBP and had long
suspected that the one in the RoR was the Ravenclaw Horcrux, Luna's
remark about the "tiara" that "Daddy" was making (not to mention that
we'd already seen the bust of Rowena Ravenclaw wearing it!) in the
context of discussion about this tiara seemed like an obvious hint,
and yet not even Hermione picked up on it, apparently dismissing it as
just another of Luna's tangents and non sequiturs. To answer your
question more directly, yes, there were enough clues. More than
enough, if only Harry weren't so dense. (Quick, Harry. If Slytheiin is
associated with a locket, Hufflepuff with a cup, and Gryffindor with a
sword, what object is associated with Ravenclaw?)
> 
> 10) Every culture has differences with Births, Marriages and Deaths
(Hatch, Match and Dispatch). Lupin offers us our only insight into
Wizard Births. Especially a new born Metamorphmagus. Anything special
you see here?

Carol:
I don't understand the question. Of course, we see that Teddy is a
baby Metamorphmagus. We also see that Harry was right; Lupin belongs
with his wife and son at this critical time (family is more important
than anything else in the Potterverse). We see that becoming a
godfather involves no religious ceremony; its merely an honor bestowed
through the naming of someone to that position by the parents. (We're
still at a loss as to the rights and obligations of godfathers and
godmothers in the WW.) I don't know what else to say except that the
business of congratulating the father and drinking to celebrate a
birth seems very similar to Muggle customs on similar occasions.
 
> 11) Goblin ownership laws: "the true owner of an object is the
maker, not the purchaser". This sounds like our copyright and patent
laws. I can't buy a CD and copy a song onto my I-Pod. Are arguments
against the goblin law grounds for authors to re-think copyright laws?

Carol:
Oh, dear. I don't want to go here! For my views on copyright laws and
the Fair Use doctrine, anyone interested can search OT Chatter. For my
views on Goblin ownership of the Sword of Gryffindor, see upthread.
> 
> 12) Is Harry getting reckless, like his thoughts on Sirius? Any
other thoughts about Harry being a godfather?

Carol:
*Getting* reckless? I'd say that he's been reckless since SS/PS. :-)
Seriously, though, I don't think he was ever as reckless as Sirius
Black was--he never takes chances with his own life or the lives of
others for the fun of it--and he has no choice but to do both the
things Bill lists as dangerous, make a bargain with a Goblin and break
into Gringotts. (Does Bill know or guess that that's what Harry was
planning to do? He surely knows that Griphook is a former Gringotts
Goblin and he may know where the fake Sword of Gryffindor is hidden.)
However, since Harry survives and doesn't go to Azkaban and since
Teddy in the Epilogue is mentioned as spending a lot of time at the
Potters' house, it appears that once Voldemort is dispensed with,
Harry becomes the sort of godfather that he wishes Sirius could have
been to him.
> 
> 13) Any other question you would like to bring up?

Carol:
Not at the moment. You seem to have done a thorough job with a tricky
chapter. Thanks, Aussie!

Carol, happy as always to see another chapter discussion posted




From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  6 02:00:22 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 02:00:22 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7amej+lbks@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7b0jm+ofo4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183998

> Carol:
> Griphook himself is certainly no "fluffy bunny." He's tricky and
> treacherous, and his view that Goblinmade works, paid for by Wizards,
> belong to the Goblin who made them is preposterous. If I paint your
> portrait (pretencding that I can do so) and you pay me for it, you own
> the portrait. I *might* own the reproduction rights, depending on what
> society I live in, but not the portrait itself. 

Montavilla47:
I think this would depend on the original contract.  I mean, I can buy a car 
or I can lease it (or rent) it.  If I buy it, it's mine.  If I rent or lease, it remains 
the property of the owner, but I have the  rights to it for certain amount of 
time.  Maybe it was only for life that Godric Gryffindor leased the sword.  
We don't really know, do we?

I wonder why there is this question given about the sword.  It's not only
Griphook that Harry has a conflict with.  Scrimgeour refuses to hand the
sword over to Harry when Dumbledore wills it to him, on the principle
that the sword belongs to the *school* and that Dumbledore had no
 right to it after his death.

Was that just to bring it up so that we'd remember it when Harry needs
it?  That's not really necessary, since we have that gossip about the 
D.A. failing to steal the sword.  So, why the question of ownership?

Plus, the argument about the ownership of the sword is somewhat
unnecessary (as Mike Smith's brother, Jim, pointed out in sporking
the chapter).  It doesn't actually matter who owns the sword, because
Griphook wants Voldemort gone as much as anybody.  All Harry 
needs to tell him is that he needs the sword to accomplish that, and 
Griphook would probably lend it to him for the duration of the war.

So, I'm thinking there must be some hidden point to this question
of ownership.  What, I couldn't tell you.  The only thing I can add
(and I'm not sure it pertains) is that it sort of reminds me of stories
where people argue about who "owns" a dog.  Then, they always
settle it by putting the dog on the ground and having the disputed
owners call it.  Whoever the dog goes to is the owner.

Which works if the sword is a dog (i.e., a sentient being).  Maybe 
that's the point?

> > 5) We see many heroes in the Harry Potter books have bad qualities.
> Is the possibility of Godric Gryffindor's stealing the sword ("For the
> greater good") the thing Harry has to come to terms with about his
> house hero?
> 
> Carol:
> I don't think that Godric Gryffindor stole the sword that bears his
> name. It clearly was made for him to his specifications. As stated
> earlier, the fact that it comes to worthy Gryffindors under conditions
> of need and valor shows that it does *not* belong to the Goblins.

Montavilla47:
I really don't understand why the coming of the sword proves that
it belongs to anyone.  Hermione was able to summon the books
about Horcruxes, but they didn't belong to her.  It seemed to me
 that it wasn't the sword doing the coming, but the Sorting Hat
 that was fetching it in the CoS and with Neville.

Which makes me wonder.  Why did the Hat only produce the 
Sword?  Would it have summoned the Locket, if a Slytherin had
needed it?  Would it have brought the Cup for a Hufflepuff and
the Tiara for a Ravenclaw?

Heh.  If so, Dumbledore could have saved himself (and Harry)
a lot of bother.

Carol:
> nevertheless, we see Harry forced by circumstances into making a
> somewhat ethically iffy bargain--he intends to keep his promise to
> give Griphook the Sword of Gryffindor as his reward, but only when
> he's through with it. If Harry had named that condition, he'd have
> been more honest, but Griphook might not have agreed to that
> condition, and Harry couldn't take that chance. 

Montavilla47:
But why not?  Why would Griphook want to keep from Harry 
something that would help destroy Voldemort?  All Harry has
to say to Griphook is that he needs the sword to help defeat
Voldemort and that he'll give it to Griphook when Voldemort
is gone.  

The only way that doesn't work is if:  
a) Griphook doesn't believe Voldemort will ever be gone, or
b) Griphook doesn't believe that Harry will survive Voldemort, or
c) Griphook doesn't trust Harry to keep his word.

Well, there's no indication that Griphook sees this Voldemort
thing as eternal.  He obviously feels that there's going to be
life beyond LV, and thus he behaves in what he considers 
an ethical Goblin manner--rather than buckling down to the 
current regime.  (Also, what little know about the Goblin
wars shows that they keep coming back and never really give
up).

I suppose Griphook has no reason to think that Harry will
survive Voldemort, but there are plenty of witnesses around
who can testify about Harry's promise if that becomes an 
issue.  He could also ask for a written contract.

As for c), Griphook says that Harry is a very different wizard
(meaning that he's better than the other wizards who Griphook
doesn't trust), and Bill shows that wizards and Goblins can 
handle ethical working relationships, which involve some kind
of trust.  Also, as above, Griphook could demand a written
promise, which ought to be honored (unless Scrimgeour--
who is dead--pulls that "belongs to the School" business.)  

But if Griphook is that afraid of losing the sword, then he 
might as well just go ahead and steal it from the cottage 
and run off before the bank heist.  







From willsonkmom at msn.com  Wed Aug  6 02:55:40 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 02:55:40 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7b0jm+ofo4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7b3rc+r6f9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183999

> > Carol:
 If I paint your
> > portrait (pretencding that I can do so) and you pay me for it, 
you own
> > the portrait. I *might* own the reproduction rights, depending on 
what
> > society I live in, but not the portrait itself. 

Potioncat:
Or if a person, let's call her Jo, writes a book and someone else, 
let's call him Steve, creates a companion book---who gets say whether 
it can be published?
 
> 
> Montavilla47:
> I think this would depend on the original contract. snip
  Maybe it was only for life that Godric Gryffindor leased the sword. 
> We don't really know, do we?

Potioncat:
Contracts in the WW are tricky. Sign your name on a parchment and one 
slip of the tongue gets you a nasty scar. Someone puts your name in a 
goblet and you have to risk your life in a contest.
> 

I don't know if the British ran into this, but on this continent--
(oh, yeah, we were the British) the Native Americans had a very 
different slant on land ownership than the Europeans did. Certainly 
in the beginning sharing the land meant something very different to 
them than to the Europeans. 

I had the feeling that Goblins truly have a different slant on 
ownership than wizards do; and honestly felt cheated. (Although you'd 
think by now they'd have caught on.)








From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  6 03:02:27 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 03:02:27 -0000
Subject: Wizarding kids, their parents, and their choices
In-Reply-To: <g78gma+bdju@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7b483+t7bc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184000

> > Marianne:
> > But the WW is far different than the muggle world. Perhaps 
> > her parents realized that she was more a part of the WW 
> > than muggle world and accepted it.  

Mike:
Let us not forget that in this alternate universe witches, wizards 
and magic exists and has existed for a long time. There were likely 
records of magical world that still remained in the Muggle world. If 
nothing else, the stories would have been passed down through the 
ages. 

Many Muggles would probably considered them fanciful exaggerations 
and have come up with logical explanations (in their minds) for 
magical occurences, like a sudden, unforseen and untracked hurricane 
popping up in the north country. Damn weathermen can't ever get it 
right, can they?

But with Muggleborns seemingly born every year, the existance of the 
WW stays alive in the Muggle world. Wizards don't memory charm away 
this knowledge from family or even guardians. And don't you suppose 
that not all of those Muggle family members are exactly discreet with 
this knowledge? So other Muggles without magical family members could 
know that magical people exist, even if they don't know any 
personally. Lily's parents were happy and proud to have a witch in 
the family and it doesn't appear to have come as a complete shock to 
them. Is that because they had other magical family members (a great 
uncle, a distant cousin) or that they had heard about wizards and 
weren't as skeptical as Hermione about this hidden society? Ironic 
for Hermione, isn't it? ;-)

What I'm trying to say is that Muggle parents that have wizarding 
children must know that those children are not going to be staying in 
their Muggle world. All they have to do is look around them and 
realize that the WW does not have a presence in their Muggle world. 
So Hermione's parents had to know that their daughter was sooner or 
later going to distance herself from them and become a member of that 
other hidden world. Knowing what a precocious daughter they'd begat, 
they had to know it would happen sooner rather than later.



> Potioncat:
> I think we need to keep the plot requirements in mind as we 
> evaluate the Granger family. The thing is, JKR needs Hermione
> to be there for Harry, so her presence doesn't reflect on her
> relationship with her parents. Hermione needs to be there at
> that time and she is.

Mike:
I don't really have a problem with Hermione hanging with the wizards 
instead of the Muggles, after all she's one of them. 

Think about it, you're a 16-year-old witch who helped form and is 
currently training in an underground magical fighting club. How do 
you want to spend your Christmas vacation? Going skiing with your 
parents or spending it at the magically hidden HQ of a serious 
organization with your soon-to-be wizard boyfriend (hopefully) and 
his magical family that's just had a traumatic event happen to them? 
Oh yeah, throw in the most famous wizard boy, your good friend, and a 
pretty cool, on-the-run godfather to that boy. Kind of looks like a 
no-brainer to me. So you tell your parents a little white lie and 
head off on the magic bus to 12 Grimmauld Place.


> Potioncat:
> I think she's done a very nice job of writing interesting adult 
> characters, but her younger characters have to be the heroes and 
> have to have certain liberties.

Mike:
Which brings up another point. I think we sometimes forget that these 
younger characters are just kids in near adult bodies with near adult 
magical abilities. So they don't always make the most logical or 
mature decisions.

So Hermione does the best thing she can think of to protect her 
essentially helpless parents. And in typical Hermione fashion, she 
relies on her prodigious magical talents without taking too much else 
into account.

The same thing happens to Harry in the Ravenclaw tower. If you're a 
17-year-old boy who gets a free shot at a sadistic adult that's been 
torturing your friends all year (and you've just seen the beat up 
face of one of them and was shocked), tell me you wouldn't take the 
oppurtunity to clobber him with a baseball/cricket bat? I know all 
the arguments against Harry's Crucio, and I agree with some of them. 
But I can tell you that if you were to put my 17-y.o. self in that 
situation, I'm swinging that bat into Carrow's private parts. Kids 
that age are not that much in control of their emotions.

Really, other than in some fictional world, who would put the fate of 
their world on the shoulders of three 17-18 year olds? Oh yeah, 
Dumbledore!


> Potioncat, once again posting late at night after a long day of 
> work, and hoping this is coherent.

Mike; huh,... what'd you say PC? I don't get it ;-))




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  6 03:13:38 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 03:13:38 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g79ori+6nco@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7b4t3+l7so@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184001

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "norbertsmummy" 
<aussie_lol at ...> wrote:
>
><SNIP summary>

Questions:

1) Any suggestions why JKR had these characters (Trio, Bill, Fleur,
Mr Ollivander, Griphook, Luna, Dean) in a small house for weeks,
maybe months?


Alla:

I think in the closed space it is easier to see character 
interactions and while it may not be super exciting plot wise, I for 
example quite enjoyed the camping trip simply because we could see 
more trio's interactions and it was interesting for me. So my short 
answer will be because she wanted to develop some relationships more 
and of course some of it was more plot needed.

2) There is a relaxed mood in this chapter, with no spells used in
anger. Some (adrenaline junkie) readers may have been tempted to skip
this chapter to get on with the fighting, and filling of body bags.
This chapter filled a few holes in what goes on with families in
other parts of the Wizarding World. What tidbit did you enjoy, hidden
in this chapter?

Alla:

I actually enjoyed the chapter a lot, but I think I enjoyed them at 
the dining table the most and Bill giving Harry advise, not sure why.


4) There is a saying, "History was written by the winners". The Daily
Prophet has been doing it in most of the books. So are wizards
the "lesser evil" compared to the "not fluffy bunnies", or just as
bad, or worse?

Alla:

I am not sure how the comparison will work here, you know? You mean 
they are lesser evil if Goblins will be in charge of WW? They I 
believe pretty powerful since controlling money to me means pretty 
much being in charge of the world, yes despite h

5) We see many heroes in the Harry Potter books have bad qualities.
Is the possibility of Godric Gryffindor's stealing the sword ("For
the greater good") the thing Harry has to come to terms with about
his house hero?

Alla:

Well, quite frankly I do not believe that he stole the sword; I 
believe Goblins' definition of possession is drastically different 
from ours and yeah, I wish they would have been more honest with 
wizards about it. So, I guess my answer is I do not think there was 
something to come to terms with in the first place here

6) To seal the bargain, Griphook shook hands with Harry Potter. That
sounded ominously like "Just sign here for Dumbledore's Army" to me.
How did you feel about it?

Alla:

Well, no not really. Both sides here I felt were not completely 
honest with each other (Harry and Griphook), so to me comparison with 
DA was not working.


7) Luna deserves her own question. Flowers on Dobby's grave: loyalty
to her father; the only one who Mr Ollivander gave a personal
compliment to as he left; and never complained despite her account of
missing Christmas in a cellar jail. Why do you think she is such an
important presence in Harry Potter's life?

Alla:

I get (I think) what JKR wanted to show with Luna, importance of 
faith, of spirituality,  of if you truly believe the most incredible 
things can come true, even if nobody else believes you.

And of course Luna is incredibly loyal. Having said that, I cannot 
help it, she irritates me and she does that  *a lot*.

8) We see Fleur in her own environment here. She quickly changes from
(ze goblin) fury; to (you are safe 'ere) over-protectiveness; to
getting Mr Ollivander to deliver the tiara (when Bill was going there
too); to (glancing at the window) worry about Bill outside; to anger
at Muriel; to baby hugger; to humble wife ("Wait" said Bill) within
one meal time. What do you think of her?

Alla:

I think Fleur is very cool, another interesting character that could 
be developed further if JKR was telling her story. I do like her and 
yes, I do like her much better than I did in HBP. I mean, I did not 
hate her or anything, but I thought her behavior in Molly's house was 
well, rude. And no, I did not think that Molly and girls behaved 
greatly either.


10) Every culture has differences with Births, Marriages and Deaths
(Hatch, Match and Dispatch). Lupin offers us our only insight into
Wizard Births. Especially a new born Metamorphmagus. Anything special
you see here?


Alla:

No not really. He just said that the baby was born, right? He does 
not give any specifics about the birth or the rituals surrounding it. 
I guess we learned that the hair start changing the day kid is born. 
Oh oh I suppose it is possible to deduce that birth took place at 
home, since he does not say anything about being in St. Mungo, but 
that can be argued either way. And I also think that even if she did 
not go to St. Mungo,  we still cannot say with certainty that home 
birth is the prevailing custom among wizards, since this is war and 
maybe she just did not want to go because she was afraid that DE are 
on staff of St. Mungo.


Thank you for the questions!





From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  6 03:24:06 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 03:24:06 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7b0jm+ofo4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7b5gm+2svg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184002

Montavilla47:
<SNIP>
But why not? Why would Griphook want to keep from Harry
something that would help destroy Voldemort? All Harry has
to say to Griphook is that he needs the sword to help defeat
Voldemort and that he'll give it to Griphook when Voldemort
is gone.


Alla:

Because Griphook wants the sword really really badly? Seriously I do 
not get where you see the possibility that if only Harry would have 
told him that the sword will help get rid of Voldemort, Griphook will 
be fine with it. Griphook says flat out "It belongs with the 
Goblins!". I am not sure why you think that for Voldemort's demise 
Griphook will suddenly change his feisty mood and will decide that oh 
yes, now Harry can have that masterpiece for as long as they need it.


Montavilla:
The only way that doesn't work is if:
a) Griphook doesn't believe Voldemort will ever be gone, or
b) Griphook doesn't believe that Harry will survive Voldemort, or
c) Griphook doesn't trust Harry to keep his word. <SNIP>

Alla:

Or d) Griphook does want Voldemort gone, but believes that sword is 
so valuable that nothing is worth handing it over to wizards again.

After all, we have the examples of things in the series which people 
believed are worth owning more than anything, no? Philosopher's 
stone, resurrection stone, etc, of course not the same thing, but I 
am just bringing up material things that people were ready to give up 
anything just to own them, yes?


Montavilla:
<SNIP>
But if Griphook is that afraid of losing the sword, then he
might as well just go ahead and steal it from the cottage
and run off before the bank heist.

Alla:

IMO only if he is stupid and even though I dislike him, I do not 
think he is. Run from so many wizards who have the wands and he does 
not? Run from Harry Potter himself? I doubt that he would choose to 
do that, much better to rely on Harry's word, which he decided to 
break unfortunately.

JMO,

Alla





From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Wed Aug  6 04:47:58 2008
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 04:47:58 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7b5gm+2svg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7badu+beoo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184003

--- "dumbledore11214" wrote:
>
> Montavilla47:
> <SNIP>
> All Harry has to say to Griphook is that he needs the sword 
> to help defeat Voldemort 
> 
Aussie:
But how could Harry convince Griphook without saying the 
word "Horcrux"? Harry had to go through a lot to get the memory from 
Slughorn. No word of Horcrux hunting was allowed to get to Voldemort 
or the last ones would be wrapped up so securely, Voldemort would 
live forever.

I also like the points Alla came up with
Aussie

> 
> Alla:
> 
> Griphook says flat out "It belongs with the Goblins!". I am not 
> sure why you think that for Voldemort's demise Griphook will 
> suddenly change 
> 
> 
> Montavilla:
> The only way that doesn't work is if:
> a) Griphook doesn't believe Voldemort will ever be gone, or
> b) Griphook doesn't believe that Harry will survive Voldemort, or
> c) Griphook doesn't trust Harry to keep his word. <SNIP>
> 
> Alla:
> 
> d) Griphook does want Voldemort gone, but believes that sword is 
> so valuable that nothing is worth handing it over to wizards again.
> 
> ...we have the examples of things in the series which people 
> believed are worth owning more than anything, no? Philosopher's 
> stone, resurrection stone, etc, ...things that people were ready 
> to give up anything just to own them, yes?
> 
> 




From elfundeb at gmail.com  Wed Aug  6 14:28:17 2008
From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb)
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 10:28:17 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHAPDISC: DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g79ori+6nco@eGroups.com>
References: <g79ori+6nco@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <80f25c3a0808060728r25a69613k863ea9bb59cba18f@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184004

Questions:
1) Any suggestions why JKR had these characters (Trio, Bill, Fleur,
Mr Ollivander, Griphook, Luna, Dean) in a small house for weeks,
maybe months?

In my mind, this fact (and the reference to the crowd at Auntie Muriel's)
paints a picture of the faithful driven into hiding.  What's odd is that
other then the Trio, who are planning the Gringotts break-in, no one seems
to be engaged in any active resistance operations.  If Lupin can make a
visit just to announce Teddy's birth, I found it surprising that we see
nothing of an active underground network.

2) There is a relaxed mood in this chapter, with no spells used in
anger. Some (adrenaline junkie) readers may have been tempted to skip
this chapter to get on with the fighting, and filling of body bags.
This chapter filled a few holes in what goes on with families in
other parts of the Wizarding World. What tidbit did you enjoy, hidden
in this chapter?

The name of the cottage and its association with the soothing sounds of the
sea do a great deal toward setting a mood that is sustained throught the
chapter.

However, other than sealing the deal with Griphook and the tiara reminder,
this chapter seemed like a lot of nothing (though if you're into alchemy,
Teddy's birth was also important).  I had the sense that JKR was filling in
the time until it was light enough at night in Scotland for the battle of
Hogwarts.  (This short chapter covered more than a month, while the entire
rest of the book took place in a day.)   Portions of it seem like a
candidate for the G.A.R.B.A.G.E. S.C.O.W. (
http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/hypotheticalley.html#scow). For example, did we
really need a discussion of whether Dumbledore was dead?

I've always been curious about the goblins, and the details in this chapter
did much to satisfy my curiosity, but I don't think what we learned was
essential to prepare us for Griphook bailing out of the Lestranges' vault
with the sword.

3) Fleur seemed to react worse to Griphook than the others. Were
Wizard - Goblin relations worse in France?

Fleur is Fleur.  I think JKR is incorporating some French stereotypes into
Fleur, so that she can be expected to be offended by having to cater to the
whims of an alien being in her home who refuses to adapt to local norms
(particularly reflected in Griphook's initial refusal to eat with the
others).

4) There is a saying, "History was written by the winners". The Daily
Prophet has been doing it in most of the books. So are wizards
the "lesser evil" compared to the "not fluffy bunnies", or just as
bad, or worse?

Certainly WW property laws don't reflect the goblin POV. ;-]

We simply don't have enough information to compare wizards to goblins.  For
one thing, the books don't provide much of a glimpse of the goblins at all.
Harry doesn't like Griphook much, but we have no idea whether his
bloodthirstiness is an innate goblin trait, a goblin response to centuries
of abuse at the hands of wizards (hinted at in the endless goblin
rebellions), or just a peculiarity of Griphook himself.

The destruction of the Fountain of Magical Brethren back in OOP, I think,
served notice that whatever the goblins' contributions to the centuries of
conflict, wizards must be faulted for the restrictions they have imposed on
them.  Unfortunately, there's no hint in DH that this is going to happen,
and one could argue that the portrait of Griphook that emerges from this
chapter is intended to lessen our sympathies for goblins as a race.  I'd
like to think that Hermione would make this a priority at some point, but .
. . .

5) We see many heroes in the Harry Potter books have bad qualities.
Is the possibility of Godric Gryffindor's stealing the sword ("For
the greater good") the thing Harry has to come to terms with about
his house hero?

Given goblin notions of ownership, I am unwilling to speculate whether
Gryffindor stole the sword, and I think his conversation with Bill, wherein
Bill lays out goblin ownership beliefs in a relatively non-judgmental
manner, was intended to lay Harry's concerns to rest.  I, for one, do not
believe goblin notions of ownership are wrong; they are different,
reflecting cultural norms in goblin society -- in which craftsmanship may
have been honored and revered above all else -- before they were subjugated
and marginalized by the dominant wizard culture and shunted aside into
professions for which wizards have no taste or aptitude.

7) Luna deserves her own question. Flowers on Dobby's grave: loyalty
to her father; the only one who Mr Ollivander gave a personal
compliment to as he left; and never complained despite her account of
missing Christmas in a cellar jail. Why do you think she is such an
important presence in Harry Potter's life?

Luna's general importance, I think, relates to her acceptance of being
different.  However, in this chapter she serves only one purpose:  she is
there to mention the tiara, and the rest of her actions and statements
(which are patently ludicrous) are there to obscure the tiara clue.

8) We see Fleur in her own environment here. She quickly changes from
(ze goblin) fury; to (you are safe 'ere) over-protectiveness; to
getting Mr Ollivander to deliver the tiara (when Bill was going there
too); to (glancing at the window) worry about Bill outside; to anger
at Muriel; to baby hugger; to humble wife ("Wait" said Bill) within
one meal time. What do you think of her?

I liked this vignette, partly because Bill is one of my favorite peripheral
characters.  Beneath the ponytail and earring, he seems to be the most
level-headed of all the Weasleys, and wondered why he picked such a
high-maintenance wife.  Mostly we see her arrogance, but she is an outsider
in Britain, among the Weasleys, and everywhere she goes due to her
part-veela ancestry.  No wonder she has such a reserve.  Here we see her
loyalty, her caring, and her sense of obligation, but she never steps out of
character.

9) Did you pick up that subtle reminder of the "Lost Diadem of
Ravenclaw" in your first reading? Were there enough clues to identify
this as the last Horcrux?

No, but I was very impressed that Carol identified it after HBP!
11) Goblin ownership laws: "the true owner of an object is the maker,
not the purchaser". This sounds like our copyright and patent laws. I
can't buy a CD and copy a song onto my I-Pod. Are arguments against
the goblin law grounds for authors to re-think copyright laws?

In a word, no. Copyright laws reflect the value we place on the creative
process.  Goblin notions of ownership acscribe the same value to the process
of creating physical objects.  (Note that copyright does expire at some
point under most, if not all copyright laws, so it's not exactly like goblin
notions of ownership.)

12) Is Harry getting reckless, like his thoughts on Sirius? Any other
thoughts about Harry being a godfather?

Harry isn't reckless at all!  He's taking a calculated gamble to save the
WW.  The statement that preceded it was priceless, though.
Bill's assessment that breaking a deal with a goblin is riskier than
breaking into Gringotts -- highlighting exactly how incredibly dangerous
their plan was, was the perfect lead-in to the next chapter, which begins on
a much more serious note.

Debbie


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  6 16:28:38 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 16:28:38 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7badu+beoo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7cjfm+o48j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184005

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hagrid" <aussie_lol at ...> wrote:
>
> --- "dumbledore11214" wrote:
> >
> > Montavilla47:
> > <SNIP>
> > All Harry has to say to Griphook is that he needs the sword 
> > to help defeat Voldemort 
> > 
> Aussie:
> But how could Harry convince Griphook without saying the 
> word "Horcrux"? Harry had to go through a lot to get the memory from 
> Slughorn. No word of Horcrux hunting was allowed to get to Voldemort 
> or the last ones would be wrapped up so securely, Voldemort would 
> live forever.

Montavilla47:
How about this?

"I really need to use that sword right now.  It's important to help 
defeat Voldemort.  I can't tell you why, because it's something
I need to keep secret, but I promise you that I will give you back
the sword as soon as I'm done.  I'll work as fast as I can, but 
it still might take a few years.  I'll sign any paper you like,
showing that the sword belongs to Goblins.  And I'll put up
any kind of collateral you want--including the contents of my
vault--for security."

Even if Voldemort then captured Griphook and questioned 
him, all the goblin would be able to tell him was that Harry
wanted the sword for "something."  It wouldn't tell Voldemort
anything about the Horcruxes, because, as far as anyone 
knows, the sword is just a sword.  They don't know that it 
was soaked in baslisk poison.  

And, even if Voldemort wanted to get the sword from Harry,
that doesn't give him any more incentive to find and kill 
Harry than he already has.






From beatrice23 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  6 16:30:25 2008
From: beatrice23 at yahoo.com (Beatrice23)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 16:30:25 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g79ori+6nco@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7cjj1+lttb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184006

Beatrice:  Aussie, Thanks for the nice summary and questions!
---------------------------------------------------------
> Questions:
> 
> 1) Any suggestions why JKR had these characters (Trio, Bill, Fleur,
> Mr Ollivander, Griphook, Luna, Dean) in a small house for weeks,
> maybe months?

Beatrice:  First, the trio get important information from Ollivander
(the learn what LV is after and about wand lore), Luna (she tells them
about the diadem -although they don't realize the importance at the
time), Griphook (tells them about the workings of Gringotts), Bill
(tells them about goblins and about some of the changes in the WW as
well as telling them that the other Weasley's are safe), and Dean
(gives us some insight into the dangers faced by muggleborn wizards /
witches).  It is also a break in the action and gives readers a pause
before JKR's mad dash for the end of the novel.    
> 
> 2) There is a relaxed mood in this chapter, with no spells used in
> anger. Some (adrenaline junkie) readers may have been tempted to skip
> this chapter to get on with the fighting, and filling of body bags.
> This chapter filled a few holes in what goes on with families in
> other parts of the Wizarding World. What tidbit did you enjoy, hidden
> in this chapter?

Beatrice: I enjoyed the references to the diadem and the fact that the
trio rescued Luna, Dean, Ollivander, and Griphook from the Death
Eaters.  I was also glad to hear that many of the trio's friends were
safely in hiding (the Weasleys, Lupin, etc).  
> 
> 3) Fleur seemed to react worse to Griphook than the others. Were
> Wizard - Goblin relations worse in France?

Beatrice:  I doubt it.  I think that Fleur may have more difficulty
hiding her distaste for Griphook, but that this is shared by many of
the others.  Fleur, after all, is forced to serve Griphook - nursing
him, and then serving his meals as indicated in the chapter.  It can't
be easy to wait on someone who is so ungrateful and demanding.
> 
> 4) There is a saying, "History was written by the winners". The Daily
> Prophet has been doing it in most of the books. So are wizards
> the "lesser evil" compared to the "not fluffy bunnies", or just as
> bad, or worse?

Beatrice: I am not sure that I understand this question.  I think you
are asking if history has been colored against goblins and therefore
if wizards are better or the same as goblins.  I would certainly agree
with the quote above.  I don't know if I agree that the Daily Prophet
has been writing history throughout the novels.  I suspect that after
LV is defeated there will be significant changes in the Daily Prophet
and I would argue that history will be written by other writers,
contemporary versions of Bathilida Bagshot for example.  

But back to your question: I don't think that either race is fairly
represented.  Goblins certainly have reasons to distrust wizards and I
might even argue that the goblin views about ownership aren't
necessarily incorrect.  They simply aren't accepted by wizards.  Thus
goblins can't enforce their own concepts of ownership.  If goblins
were the dominant culture, there might be a different way to look at
property and the way it is passed down.  
> 
> 5) We see many heroes in the Harry Potter books have bad qualities.
> Is the possibility of Godric Gryffindor's stealing the sword ("For
> the greater good") the thing Harry has to come to terms with about
> his house hero?

Beatrice: I think that there is certainly a question of whether this
is true or not.  But I think that it maybe about Harry and the READER.
 First, Harry has to accept and embrace the flaws of his heroes -
their humanity if you will.  A person can still be a hero, one can
still admire them even if they are flawed.  And Harry has to learn to
forgive himself for his own mistakes.

As readers, perhaps we also have to forgive these characters for their
mistakes.  (Although, I would argue that if they were perfect they
would be much less interesting.)   Dumbledore, for instance is an
interesting character, but the more we learn about him the more depth
his character has and the more interesting and compelling he becomes.
> 
> 6) To seal the bargain, Griphook shook hands with Harry Potter. That
> sounded ominously like "Just sign here for Dumbledore's Army" to me.
> How did you feel about it?

Beatrice: Well, I didn't really think about it at the time.  I guess
it was possible, but a handshake seems more like Griphook is
attempting to use a human form of formalizing a bargain more than
creating an unbreakable vow or anything.
> 
> 7) Luna deserves her own question. Flowers on Dobby's grave: loyalty
> to her father; the only one who Mr Ollivander gave a personal
> compliment to as he left; and never complained despite her account of
> missing Christmas in a cellar jail. Why do you think she is such an
> important presence in Harry Potter's life?

Beatrice: Well, there is a purity and an innocence to her character
that is missing in well, everyone.  Despite everything she endures,
there is such a beautiful and childlike spirit in her that she is
wonderfully compelling.  I also think that she humbles Harry. 

> 9) Did you pick up that subtle reminder of the "Lost Diadem of
> Ravenclaw" in your first reading? Were there enough clues to identify
> this as the last Horcrux?

Beatrice:  I did think it was interesting that it was mentioned a
couple of times.  I actually thought after read HBP that the tiara in
the RoR was a Horcrux, so I had my antenna up looking for references.
> 
> 10) Every culture has differences with Births, Marriages and Deaths
> (Hatch, Match and Dispatch). Lupin offers us our only insight into
> Wizard Births. Especially a new born Metamorphmagus. Anything special
> you see here?

Beatrice: I thought that it was pretty standard actually.  The
metamorphmagus is different certainly, but the celebration and the
good wishes and the sharing of the news is certainly similar to our
culture anyway.  I was a little surprised that Lupin asked Harry to be
 godfather right away.  I don't know if this is standard, or if we are
just slow in our family, but we didn't ask until later.  Although,
Lupin may have felt some urgency as Harry has been out of touch for
much of the year.   
> 
> 11) Goblin ownership laws: "the true owner of an object is the maker,
> not the purchaser". This sounds like our copyright and patent laws. I
> can't buy a CD and copy a song onto my I-Pod. Are arguments against
> the goblin law grounds for authors to re-think copyright laws?

Beatrice:  Not really, as this seems to reinforce our understanding of
copyright.  When we purchase a song or a book we obtain it for
personal use, but ultimately ownership of the material stays with the
creator (author or performer). Actually, you can buy a CD and copy it
to your I-Pod (unless copyright laws are different for you)  what you
can't do in the US is put a copy of the song on the I-Pods of everyone
you know.  Or sell copies for your own personal gain.  Perhaps, it
does bring up the question of different types and standards governing
ownership.  But, I guess we could argue that Grandma Edna's Ming Vase
can't be circulated for profit in the way a photocopy of a HP novel or
a 1,000 pirated CD's can be.  
> 
> 12) Is Harry getting reckless, like his thoughts on Sirius? Any other
> thoughts about Harry being a godfather?

Beatrice: Bold, yes.  Reckless, no.  Sirus seemed to like the thrill
of breaking the rules.  Harry breaks the rules, but he isn't a thrill
seeker.  





From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  6 20:37:42 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 20:37:42 -0000
Subject: Griphook and Harry's deal WAS :Re: CHAPDISC: DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0808060728r25a69613k863ea9bb59cba18f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <g7d22m+h5vi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184007

Debbie:
<SNIP>
I, for one, do not
believe goblin notions of ownership are wrong; they are different,
reflecting cultural norms in goblin society -- in which craftsmanship 
may
have been honored and revered above all else -- before they were 
subjugated
and marginalized by the dominant wizard culture and shunted aside into
professions for which wizards have no taste or aptitude.<SNIP>


Alla:

Definitely. I do not believe that they are wrong in itself either in 
any sense, shape or form. What I do believe is wrong is that I think 
goblins are not being honest with the wizards when they trade and do 
not give them the full explanation, you know? Or at least that is the 
sense I got from the tidbits of info we received about goblins. If 
goblins will tell the wizards when sell them their products that in a 
sense they are just renting the products, and if wizards are okay 
with it, sure, I have no problem with it.

Now if you ask me, I would **never** ever, ever agreed to such a 
deal. It just seems so incredibly unfair to me that I will pay my 
hard earned money for something that I expect to own forever and pass 
to somebody in my family and instead when I die somebody will show up 
and say Ooops, now give it to me. 

Again, I know that if we for example rent an apartment, that is in a 
sense a similar thing, but the key difference I see is that when I 
rent an apartment, I do not go into this apartment with the 
expectation that I own this apartment and if I own it, I do not 
expect somebody to take it away from me when I die and my mortgage is 
paid off and I am leaving it to somebody else.

So, anyways back to Potterland, yes what Goblins do, just seems 
incredibly unfair to me and that is why, it is actually quite funny, 
Harry's deal with Griphook was the situation that I was mostly mad at 
Harry in this book. I am quite okay with him doing all other stuff 
people are mad at him, but this just seems so unfair and dishonest 
that I am ready to shake Harry when he so easily plans to take 
advantage of Griphook. Now if Harry knew that Griphook is planning to 
take advantage of him as well, that would be different story. I would 
say Go Harry Go and cheer him up. But he does not and for that I want 
to slap him, a lot.

If you ask me what I would suggest he should have done, I would say 
he just should have been honest. I mean not honest in a sense that I 
believe that Griphook would have given up the sword, if only Harry 
would have told him that it will help in Voldemort's demise. Oh no, I 
am not buying for a second that Griphook would have agreed to that. I 
think instead of bargaining Harry should have given Griphook this as 
a fact. That he **is** taking the sword till he needs it to fight 
Voldemort, that he is NOT making any promises whatsoever as to when 
he will give him the sword back. That he believes that this is the 
rare situation when the ends indeed justify the means and IF Griphook 
wants, he can take Harry word that when and only when Harry's job is 
done, he will get the sword back.

The difference between mine and Montavilla's suggestions seems to be 
that I am not suggesting the negotiations with Griphook, more like 
take it or leave it kind of thing. And yes, I think if Griphook 
refused Harry should have continued looking for another Goblin. I 
mean, come now, Bill at least has courteous relationship with them, I 
think it is not out of realm of possibility to imagine that he could 
have find a goblin who would have helped Harry without demanding a 
sword back right now.

Having said all that,  I am not saying that story suffers because it 
was not told as I so desire, I think when I get so involved, it is 
when story is in its best. I think Harry was not on his best behavior 
here, that's all. But I totally understand why JKR wanted it to be 
that way IMO.

I wonder again as to how easily JKR can change my thoughts of the 
characters so very easily, with just few brushes of her pen. Before 
this book came out, I considered Goblins to be so very cool, 
oppressed and marginalized by wizards and I so wanted to learn more 
about them, just as you said.

Do you know that now when I think about them, I think about them as 
liars first and foremost? I mean based on the goblin of course. No I 
do not like them anymore, I still think that wizards should leave 
them alone, but stop trading with them if they do not explain what 
the deal is and see what they say then.

JMO,
Alla





From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Wed Aug  6 20:43:26 2008
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 20:43:26 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g79ori+6nco@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7d2de+9emo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184008

All questions Aussie and Speedy:
> 1) Any suggestions why JKR had these characters (Trio, Bill, Fleur,
> Mr Ollivander, Griphook, Luna, Dean) in a small house for weeks,
> maybe months?

Jen: It's two things: 1) A hint about different factions in the WW 
needing to come together to defeat LV at the end; and 2) Harry 
learning the lesson Dumbledore hoped to teach him: You don't have to 
like people/beings in order to work with them.
 
> 2) There is a relaxed mood in this chapter, with no spells used in
> anger. Some (adrenaline junkie) readers may have been tempted to 
> skip this chapter to get on with the fighting, and filling of body
> bags.  This chapter filled a few holes in what goes on with 
> families in other parts of the Wizarding World. What tidbit did you
> enjoy, hidden in this chapter?

Jen: Plans move forward, the injured heal, babies are born, new 
godfathers replace the old...life goes on.  That's what I took from 
the chapter.


> 4) There is a saying, "History was written by the winners". The
> Daily Prophet has been doing it in most of the books. So are wizards
> the "lesser evil" compared to the "not fluffy bunnies", or just as
> bad, or worse?

Jen: Griphook mainly represents the faction of goblins who work at 
Gringotts according to Bill.  It's not clear he represents the 
majority view.  Still, the bits & pieces of history throughout the 
series point to oppression of all non-human groups.  Fear is one 
reason for that with the goblins, and frankly I think wizards are 
prudent to consider the advisability of wands for a disgruntled group 
with sole power over the money supply!  Separation of powers and all 
that. Especially since the goblins in charge of the money supply & 
treasures believe at least some of the treasures belong to them.  
Maybe humans could offer wands in exchange for some oversight of 
Gringotts.  

> 5) We see many heroes in the Harry Potter books have bad qualities.
> Is the possibility of Godric Gryffindor's stealing the sword ("For
> the greater good") the thing Harry has to come to terms with about
> his house hero?

Jen: The incident is one of many in DH showing Harry considering what 
truth is: truth is murky sometimes and depends on the person telling 
the story.  Mainly the story foreshadows Griphook taking the sword 
though, gives a rationale for why he takes it even though he knows 
Harry needs it to defeat LV.

> 6) To seal the bargain, Griphook shook hands with Harry Potter. That
> sounded ominously like "Just sign here for Dumbledore's Army" to me.
> How did you feel about it?

Jen: The handshake was a human gesture. I wondered why Griphook 
requested it.  Griphook's group of goblins believe 'wizards cannot be 
trusted in matters of gold and treasure,' so Griphook might trust 
Harry more than the average wizard but he doesn't *really* trust 
him.  So I'm not sure what the handshake was about.  A handshake to 
agree they were both lying? ;)


> 7) Luna deserves her own question. Flowers on Dobby's grave: loyalty
> to her father; the only one who Mr Ollivander gave a personal
> compliment to as he left; and never complained despite her account
> of missing Christmas in a cellar jail. Why do you think she is such
> an important presence in Harry Potter's life?

Jen: I can't say it any better than Carol did.  Ditto to what she 
wrote. The only thing to add is Luna is a truly compassionate person 
who turns the other check.  That characteristic isn't exactly common 
in Potterverse. 


> 9) Did you pick up that subtle reminder of the "Lost Diadem of
> Ravenclaw" in your first reading? Were there enough clues to 
identify
> this as the last Horcrux?

Jen: No, I don't think so.  I still thought Harry would be the 
surprise Horcrux IIRC.  Then JKR added that extra twist that Harry 
was the 7th Horcrux instead of the 6th.  


> 12) Is Harry getting reckless, like his thoughts on Sirius? Any 
other thoughts about Harry being a godfather?

Jen: Harry was already different because he actually wondered if his 
actions might make him an unacceptable godfather.  Sirius didn't 
think about such things:  "The risk is what makes it fun."  

Thanks Aussie & Speedy!!




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Wed Aug  6 21:15:59 2008
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:15:59 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7cjfm+o48j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7d4af+gbdd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184009

> Montavilla47:
> How about this?
> 
> "I really need to use that sword right now.  It's important to help 
> defeat Voldemort.  I can't tell you why, because it's something
> I need to keep secret, but I promise you that I will give you back
> the sword as soon as I'm done.  I'll work as fast as I can, but 
> it still might take a few years.  I'll sign any paper you like,
> showing that the sword belongs to Goblins.  And I'll put up
> any kind of collateral you want--including the contents of my
> vault--for security."

Jen: Griphook already knows Harry needs the sword.  The goblins knew 
a fake sword was sent to the Lestrange vault, then Griphook hears 
Bella freaking out in Malfoy Manor about whether the sword in Harry's 
possession is real or a fake.  Harry begs Griphook to lie to Bella. 
Griphook's a smart guy, he knows both sides want that sword in 
this 'wizards' war'. To top it all off, the Trio even tell Griphook 
they are wand-carriers who protest what's happening as LV takes over, 
that no one could possibly want LV defeated more than they do 
(paraphrase).  Griphook may not know exactly why they need the sword  
but he knows it gives Harry an advantage. 




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  6 22:53:38 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 22:53:38 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7b0jm+ofo4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7da1i+kq4q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184010

Carol earlier:
> > Griphook himself is certainly no "fluffy bunny." He's tricky and
treacherous, and his view that Goblinmade works, paid for by Wizards,
belong to the Goblin who made them is preposterous. If I paint your
portrait (pretending that I can do so) and you pay me for it, you own
the portrait. I *might* own the reproduction rights, depending on what
society I live in, but not the portrait itself. 
> 
Montavilla47:
> I think this would depend on the original contract.  I mean, I can
buy a car or I can lease it (or rent) it.  If I buy it, it's mine.  If
I rent or lease, it remains the property of the owner, but I have the
 rights to it for certain amount of time.  Maybe it was only for life
that Godric Gryffindor leased the sword.  We don't really know, do we?

Carol again:
True. We don't. However, we don't see any leases in the HP books and
we do see items bought and sold. We also have Bill's pointed remark to
Griphook when Griphook says that the tiara was made by Goblins: "And
paid for by Wizards." Since the sword of Gryffindor was clearly made
for him to his specifications, it's a safe bet that he didn't steal
it. Since the possibility of his having leased the sword for life
isn't raised, even by Griphook, who wants his claim as a goblin to be
accepted, I'd say that leasing is almost as unlikely as stealing.

Also, of course, who is Griphook to claim it for the Goblins in
general? He doesn't claim to be a descendant of the original maker.
Why does he think that *he* has any more right to it than any other
Goblin (or whichever Wizard owns the sword)? We don't see Gyrffindor's
will. If he was childless, he probably willed it to the school, for
the use of Gryffindors in peril. (Was the Sorting Hat arrangement his
or Dumbledore's? we're never told.)

Montavilla47: 
> I wonder why there is this question given about the sword.  It's not
only Griphook that Harry has a conflict with.  Scrimgeour refuses to
hand the sword over to Harry when Dumbledore wills it to him, on the
principle that the sword belongs to the *school* and that Dumbledore
had no  right to it after his death. <snip>

Carol:
I'd say that Scrimgeour, who seems to be quite familiar with WW law,
is probably right. 

Montavilla47:
> All Harry needs to tell him is that he needs the sword to accomplish
that, and Griphook would probably lend it to him for the duration of
the war. <snip>

Carol:
But would he trust Harry? I doubt it, myself. (Besides, that
reasonable compromise would make things too easy for Harry! <smile>)

Carol earlier:
> > I don't think that Godric Gryffindor stole the sword that bears
his name. It clearly was made for him to his specifications. As stated
earlier, the fact that it comes to worthy Gryffindors under conditions
of need and valor shows that it does *not* belong to the Goblins.
> 
> Montavilla47:
> I really don't understand why the coming of the sword proves that it
belongs to anyone.  Hermione was able to summon the books about
Horcruxes, but they didn't belong to her.  It seemed to me  that it
wasn't the sword doing the coming, but the Sorting Hat that was
fetching it in the CoS and with Neville.

Carol responds:
But you can't Summon the Sword of Gryffindor, as Harry finds out when
he tries to retrieve it from the bottom of the pool (no Sorting Hat
involved). Portrait!DD tells Snape that it "can only be taken under
conditions of need and valor" (DH am. ed. 680), and Snape sets up his
test to meet those conditions (which are actually better met by Ron,
chivalrously saving Harry, than by Harry himself). 

Moreover, we don't know that the Sorting Hat necessarily Summoned the
Sword, which had been taken by Griphook and must have been in his
possession. The Sword itself may have sensed Neville's need and come
to him through the hat when *it* was summoned. (Of course, *Voldemort*
could not have pulled it out of the Hat. Only a worthy Gryffindor
could have done so.)

Scrimgeour, who describes the way the Sword works and explains why it
didn't belong to Dumbledore, says nothing about the Sorting Hat:

"According to reliable historical sources, the sword may *present
itself* to any worthy Gryffindor. That does not make it the exclusive
property of Mr. Potter, whatever Dumbledore may have decided" ( 129,
my italics).

It sounds to me as if the magic is in the sword itself, not in the
Sorting Hat. And it sounds exactly like the sort of magic that Godric
Gryffindor, original owner of the sword, would have specified as one
of its properties. (Alternatively, he could have placed the spell on
it himself when he knew that he was dying and willed it to the school,
to be kept in the headmaster's office, or perhaps in the office of the
HoH of Gryffindor if the headmaster belonged to some other house. Just
speculating, of course.)

Montavilla47: 
> Which makes me wonder.  Why did the Hat only produce the Sword? 
Would it have summoned the Locket, if a Slytherin had needed it? 
Would it have brought the Cup for a Hufflepuff and the Tiara for a
Ravenclaw? <snip>

Carol:
I don't think that those items had any such spells on them. We don't
know what the locket and cup were originally used for, but the tiara
was used for enhancing intelligence, and it was *stolen* by
Ravenclaw's daughter. If it could come to any worthy Ravenclaw, via
the Sorting Hat or any other means, it would not have been missing for
a thousand years, hidden in a hollow tree in Albania. (That must have
been some sturdy, long-lived tree!) To state the obvious, the sword is
a weapon and the Gryffindor House virtue is courage, so it makes sense
that Gryffindor would have placed, or had the Goblin maker place, a
spell on it so that it would come to a courageous Gryffindor in need
of a weapon. I doubt if Helga Hufflepuff, for example, would have
thought to have her cup, whatever its magical properties, come to a
loyal Hufflepuff in need of a drink! Certainly, none of the artifacts
other than the sword would be much use in facing an enemy. The locket,
we know, was handed down through the family, as was the cup. I can
only guess that Gryffindor, unlike his three colleagues, didn't marry
and have children. (BTW, why couldn't Helena wait till her mother died
and willed her the tiara, assuming that she was an only child? Maybe
she thought she'd be disinherited?)

> Carol:
> > nevertheless, we see Harry forced by circumstances into making a
somewhat ethically iffy bargain--he intends to keep his promise to
give Griphook the Sword of Gryffindor as his reward, but only when
he's through with it. If Harry had named that condition, he'd have
been more honest, but Griphook might not have agreed to that
condition, and Harry couldn't take that chance. 
> 
> Montavilla47:
> But why not?  Why would Griphook want to keep from Harry something
that would help destroy Voldemort?  All Harry has to say to Griphook
is that he needs the sword to help defeat Voldemort and that he'll
give it to Griphook when Voldemort is gone.  
> 
> The only way that doesn't work is if:  
> a) Griphook doesn't believe Voldemort will ever be gone, or
> b) Griphook doesn't believe that Harry will survive Voldemort, or
> c) Griphook doesn't trust Harry to keep his word. <snip>

Carol responds:
You've answered your own question. I think, though, that it's
primarily c. Griphook doesn't trust any wizard, including Harry, as
indicated by his behavior once they've found the cup Horcrux. He grabs
the sword and runs away. What he doesn't realize is that neither he
nor the Goblins in general is the sword's true owner, as evidenced by
its coming to Neville, a "worthy Gryffindor" (to quote Scrimgeour)
"under conditions of need and valor" (to quote Portrait!DD).

Montavilla47:
> I suppose Griphook has no reason to think that Harry will survive
Voldemort, but there are plenty of witnesses around who can testify
about Harry's promise if that becomes an issue.  He could also ask for
a written contract. <snip>

Carol:
As I said before, I think the reason is primarily that Griphook
doesn't trust wizards. Also, I think that Aussie may be right in
thinking that the handshake creates a magically binding contract,
making it impossible for Harry to keep the sword. No need for a
written contract in those circumstances, whether Harry survives or
not. But even that sneaky tactic, if we're correct, can't do more than
take the sword from Harry and place it in Griphook's possession. It
can't make Griphook the sword's rightful owner or undo the magic that
binds it to come to a worthy Gryffindor at need. (Of course, as
Scrimgeour has already pointed out, Harry isn't the sword's owner,
either. And neither is Neville, who will probably return it to the
school at some point.

Carol, quite happy that Griphook was outmanouvered by a powerful
magical object, whether through its own will or that of Godric Gryffindor





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  7 00:09:21 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2008 00:09:21 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0808060728r25a69613k863ea9bb59cba18f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <g7defh+247h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184011

Elfundeb wrote:
<snip> I, for one, do not believe goblin notions of ownership are
wrong; they are different, reflecting cultural norms in goblin society
-- in which craftsmanship may have been honored and revered above all
else -- before they were subjugated and marginalized by the dominant
wizard culture and shunted aside into professions for which wizards
have no taste or aptitude.

Carol responds:

I don't want to get into discussions of "marginalized cultures" and
whether the Goblins were "shunted" into those professions or chose the
ones they were good at (like Tolkien's dwarves). Nor am I going to
repeat my views on Goblin ownership, which I see as, shall we say,
mistaken. Instead, I'll accept Deb's statement that they're
"different," which I think we can all agree on, and just point out
that Griphook's "different" notions of property and ownership did not
prompt him to offer payment or even a thank you to Bill and Fleur for
his use of their house, his consumption of their food, his acceptance
of Fleur's services in waiting on and healing him. A Goblin is
supposed to be paid in gold coins (made by Goblins) for his services
and materials in creating a tiara or sword or armor, which he
nevertheless biews as still belonging to him, but the Wizards are not
supposed to be paid or even thanked for the services they rendered and
the food and medicine that were theirs but which they can never get
back because he consumed them?

How does the Goblin economy work among Goblins themselves, I wonder?
If one Goblin makes another a sword and the second Goblin pays for it,
does the first Goblin still consider it his, or does one Goblinmade
product, a set of gold coins in an amount that the first Goblin sets,
compensate him for another Golinmade product, the sword, which can
still be said to belong to "the goblins," just not to the Goblin who
made it?

What about houses? Surely Goblins. at ;east those with families, live
in houses, not caves. Do Goblins build their own houses? Surely, the
Goblin builder of a house wouldnt still consider it his after another
Goblin paid for it. Or would he? Do they only lease, not sell, houses?
What if Goblins can't build houses, either by law (let's say that
they're restricted to banking and metalcrafts) or because they have no
interest in/aptitude for house-building and must buy houses from the
Wizards who build them. Would they see the Wizard-built house as
belonging to the Wizard who built it and theirs only as long as they
keep paying rent, or theirs only for the lifetime of the Goblin couple?

If one Goblin makes a cake and another buys it, surely the baker
retains no claim on the cake, whether the cake is eaten or thrown
away. If one Goblin makes and sells clothes (I won't say shoes because
the Goblins seem to go barefoot), would the tailor-Goblin consider the
clothes to belong to himself?

It seems to me that these, erm, *different* views of Goblin ownership
apply mostly if not solely to metalcraft, to valuable objects made
from precious metals and precious stones, especially if they also have
magical powers. It also seems to me that this view is selfish and
impractical and could cause disputes between Goblin craftsmen and
Goblin owners if applied within their culture.

A Goblin selling to a Wizard should, perhaps, require a written
contract. If the Goblin craftsman insists that the object is still his
despite payment in Goblin-made coins for a Goblin-made artifact, the
Wizard should have the right to refuse to pay. If the Goblin agrees
that selling amounts to a change of ownership, the Goblin should honor
that bargain, just as he would if he were selling a cake rather than a
sword.

What the Goblin retains when he makes a sword or a tiara or a piece of
armor for a Wizard is the secret of his craftsmanship. The Wizard can
duplicate its appearance, but never its powers or its worth. (The
duplicate cups in the Lestrange vault are worthless, as is the Fake
Sword of Gryffindor.) The Goblins have been paid for their materials
and their highly specialized services, just as Mr. Ollivander is paid
for his when he makes a wand. They retain the secrets of their
craftsmanship? What more do the Goblins need, other than the right to
carry wands? (If they want to make their own wands, let them share
their own secrets in exchange.)

But to return to my point. Suppose that Goblins had the right to carry
wands but depended on Wizards to make them because they didn't have
the secret to wand-making. Would they believe that even though they
had paid for the wand, it still belonged to its maker, or to the
Wizards in general? I don't think that they would. And yet such a view
of property must extend both ways or it has no validity at all.

Carol, wondering how "the Goblins" could own a sword or a tiara unless
they have communal ownership, which seems unlikely for such a
quarrelsome species of creatures




From jkoney65 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  7 22:20:50 2008
From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2008 22:20:50 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7b3rc+r6f9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7fsg2+noo0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184012

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" <willsonkmom at ...> 
wrote:
> > Montavilla47:
> > I think this would depend on the original contract. snip
>   Maybe it was only for life that Godric Gryffindor leased the 
sword. 
> > We don't really know, do we?
> 
> Potioncat:
> I don't know if the British ran into this, but on this continent--
> (oh, yeah, we were the British) the Native Americans had a very 
> different slant on land ownership than the Europeans did. Certainly 
> in the beginning sharing the land meant something very different to 
> them than to the Europeans. 
> 
> I had the feeling that Goblins truly have a different slant on 
> ownership than wizards do; and honestly felt cheated. (Although 
you'd 
> think by now they'd have caught on.)
>

Jack-A-Roe:
I think the goblins system is closest to the sale of land. Did you 
buy all of it? Or did you not get the mineral or water rights. Do you 
own the airspace above it.

It seems like the goblins believe that they haven't given up the 
entire object and expect to get it back. Kind of like selling the 
mineral rights to your land and after who you sell it to is done 
mining, the land is completely yours again.







From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  8 00:08:36 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:08:36 -0000
Subject: Who WAS the True Master of the Elder Wand?
In-Reply-To: <g77l2s+1mqb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7g2q4+rlor@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184013

> Carol:
> -<snip basically whole post>-
> 
> If JKR wanted Voldemort to doubt that he was the master of the
> Elder Wand, she should have given him reason to doubt it--on page,
> with no speculation required by the reader. She failed to do that.
> 
> Carol, who understands exactly what you're saying but does not
> agree with your position

Mike:
OK, I can see that. Another case, for you, of not getting the story on 
page, instead being told to accept the story without proof. We saw 
proof of what the Elder Wand *could* do, but never really saw what the 
Elder Wand *wasn't* doing that convinced Voldemort the thing ain't 
happening for him.

I'm willing to accept that Voldemort could sense the connection wasn't 
there, you are not. That's fair.





From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  8 05:26:22 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 05:26:22 -0000
Subject: Portraits again/ Lucius's talents
In-Reply-To: <g758lc+dpkq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7gldu+9hnl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184014

> Catlady:
> 
> Okay, we agree about the Headmaster portraits. 
> 
> I'm not ready to give up my idea that the Ministry building, St.
> Mungo's, old family homes, and other wizarding institutions 
> (including a monastery, which could have avoided being confiscated 
> by Henry VIII by use of Muggle-repelling spells) generate the 
> portraits by magic same as Hogwarts does.

Mike:
I'll give you St. Mungo's. I wasn't intending to exclude other 
prominant wizarding institutions. I was just using Hogwarts and their 
Headmaster portraits as an example. The monastary, possibly, but 
would such an august institution be charmed to produce a portrait of 
their friars engaging in such frivolity?

The Ministry, sorry, I can't see that one. First off, what would the 
charm be aimed at? If every Minister of Magic, the place would be 
overflowing with portraits. I daresay there are many more MoMs than 
there are Headmasters/mistresses of Hogwarts. And what about other 
prominent witches or wizards that served long careers there but never 
rose to become the MoM? 

Also, I would think the politics of that place would prevent any  
charm from ever being allowed to be cast. There had to have been more 
than a few really bad Ministers for anyone to want all of them to be 
thusly enshrined. 

For my money, I think the various departments would be allowed to 
choose who would decorate their departmental walls. I suppose that 
the choice of which MoMs would be put to a vote of the Wizengamut or 
some such, as to which MoM had acquited himself in an honor-worthy 
fashion. These votes probably taking place every ten to twenty years. 
Of course, a less confident former MoM, :cough, Fudge, cough:, could 
go ahead and buy himself a frame and ask if his portrait could be 
hung in the janitor's closet. ;-)



> Catlady:
> 
> Still your theory, that all the other paintings have to have
> their frame and canvas prepared for the specific person while
> that person is still alive, would explain why no portrait of
> James and Lily Potter appeared in the ancient Potter family
> home, and why the drunken monks got a group portrait instead
> of individual portraits.

Mike:
The problem with having any ancient/old family homes capable of being 
likewise charmed is who decides? IOW, if we're only talking about 
setting up a charm, well, any family could choose to do that, 
couldn't they? Where would you draw the line? And would the less 
affluent have accepted that line? I think not.




> Catlady:
> 
> I think Lucius, before Azkaban, was even more ambitious/deluded
> than that. To me, he thought that with his charm, good looks,
> and high breeding, he could make Lord Voldemort dote on him as
> much (altho' not as blatantly) as Hepzibah Smith had doted on
> Tom Riddle, and thus Voldemort, ruler of wizarding Britain, would
> give any order that dear Lucius had flatteringly suggested to him,
> so that Lucius would be the REAL ruler and LV only the figurehead.
> I think LV knew perfectly well that that was Lucius's plan.

Mike:
Interesting. I've always wondered how Lucius would have gotten 
involved with Voldemort in the first place. Stock answers don't do
it for me with him. He seems more capable of independent thought than 
your standard type I DE. I wanted him to be the reluctant follower, 
obsequisce in his praise to LV's face, but with the hint that he 
always thought himself much better than this half crazed half-blood.

After playing such a prominent part in the earlier books, did he even 
get one line of dialogue in the last two? I think he might have given 
a couple one word or one-line answers in DH, CH1. Hell, we wouldn't 
have accepted them as posts on this list if that was all the further 
he advanced the discussion. ;-)

Mike




From wildirishrose at fiber.net  Fri Aug  8 04:30:04 2008
From: wildirishrose at fiber.net (wildirishrose01us)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 04:30:04 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g79ori+6nco@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7gi4c+4nbj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184015

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "norbertsmummy" 
<aussie_lol at ...> wrote:
>
>> 7) Luna deserves her own question. Flowers on Dobby's grave: 
loyalty
> to her father; the only one who Mr Ollivander gave a personal
> compliment to as he left; and never complained despite her account 
of
> missing Christmas in a cellar jail. Why do you think she is such an
> important presence in Harry Potter's life?

Marianne:
Perhaps my opinion might be too simple.
Luna is a gentle person.  She's serene.  She's a calming presence 
during a time when all hell is breaking loose.  I saw a caring person 
when she closed Dobby's eyes and thanked him for rescuing her/them 
from the cellar.  She knew what to say when the others didn't.  She 
is a devoted friend that will stick by a person until the end.  I 
think Harry sees all the qualities just as admirable and important 
then all the magic in the world.

Given that Luna's father raised her pretty much alone, and granted 
his methods of child raising was different, even by the WW standards, 
I think it's natural to be devoted/loyal to her father.  They love 
and understand each other.

 
> 8) We see Fleur in her own environment here. She quickly changes 
from
> (ze goblin) fury; to (you are safe 'ere) over-protectiveness; to
> getting Mr Ollivander to deliver the tiara (when Bill was going 
there
> too); to (glancing at the window) worry about Bill outside; to anger
> at Muriel; to baby hugger; to humble wife ("Wait" said Bill) within
> one meal time. What do you think of her?

Marianne: 
I think of fury.  Fleur loves Bill very much.  Yet, I wouldn't see 
Fluer backing down from any argument with Bill.  I'm sure their 
arguments are ones that would go down in family history.

Marianne




From beatrice23 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  8 12:07:42 2008
From: beatrice23 at yahoo.com (Beatrice23)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 12:07:42 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7da1i+kq4q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7hcue+u57e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184016

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
>
> Carol earlier:
> > > Griphook himself is certainly no "fluffy bunny." He's tricky and
> treacherous, and his view that Goblinmade works, paid for by Wizards,
> belong to the Goblin who made them is preposterous. If I paint your
> portrait (pretending that I can do so) and you pay me for it, you own
> the portrait. I *might* own the reproduction rights, depending on what
> society I live in, but not the portrait itself. 
> > 
> Montavilla47:
> > I think this would depend on the original contract.  I mean, I can
> buy a car or I can lease it (or rent) it.  If I buy it, it's mine.  If
> I rent or lease, it remains the property of the owner, but I have the
>  rights to it for certain amount of time.  Maybe it was only for life
> that Godric Gryffindor leased the sword.  We don't really know, do we?
> 
> Carol again:
> True. We don't. However, we don't see any leases in the HP books and
> we do see items bought and sold. We also have Bill's pointed remark to
> Griphook when Griphook says that the tiara was made by Goblins: "And
> paid for by Wizards." Since the sword of Gryffindor was clearly made
> for him to his specifications, it's a safe bet that he didn't steal
> it. Since the possibility of his having leased the sword for life
> isn't raised, even by Griphook, who wants his claim as a goblin to be
> accepted, I'd say that leasing is almost as unlikely as stealing.
> 
> Also, of course, who is Griphook to claim it for the Goblins in
> general? He doesn't claim to be a descendant of the original maker.
> Why does he think that *he* has any more right to it than any other
> Goblin (or whichever Wizard owns the sword)? We don't see Gyrffindor's
> will. If he was childless, he probably willed it to the school, for
> the use of Gryffindors in peril. (Was the Sorting Hat arrangement his
> or Dumbledore's? we're never told.)
 

Beatrice: I just wanted to make a quick point.  I think that the
connection between the sorting hat and the sword is one that
Griffindor devised.  We are told in the GoF page 177 (the Sorting
Hat's song) that the Sorting Hat also belonged to Griffindor - I am
parphrasing but essentially that Griffindor whipped the hat off his
own head and bewitched it to sort students according to the traits
each founder prized the most.  Although it is not explicitly stated,
it would seem to me that the link between the two objects both owned
by the same wizard would be one that was devised by Griffindor himself.  

My theory is that the sword resides in the headmasters office unless a
Griffindor needs it.  It can come to them in two ways:  First, the
Sorting Hat can transport it to them (of course this is a bit
convoluted as it means that the Griffindor must have the hat on
his/her head at the moment of extreme need-although we do see two
situations in which this occurs).  As a side note here, I suspect that
the only hand Dumbledore has in at least the first incident is leaving
Falkes behind knowing that a student can summon him through an act of
supreme loyalty and that Falkes knows enough to bring that student the
sorting hat - sure it is involved and really contrived but a lot of
JKR's plot points are. Or second, a person can happen upon the sword
and earn the right to wield it if they take it "under conditions of
need and valor" (DH 689).  The conditions parallel Griffindor's
personal values.




From beatrice23 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  8 12:45:39 2008
From: beatrice23 at yahoo.com (Beatrice23)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 12:45:39 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7defh+247h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7hf5j+to8o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184017

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
>
> Elfundeb wrote:
> <snip> I, for one, do not believe goblin notions of ownership are
> wrong; they are different, reflecting cultural norms in goblin society
> -- in which craftsmanship may have been honored and revered above all
> else -- before they were subjugated and marginalized by the dominant
> wizard culture and shunted aside into professions for which wizards
> have no taste or aptitude.
> 
> Carol responds:
> 
> I don't want to get into discussions of "marginalized cultures" and
> whether the Goblins were "shunted" into those professions or chose the
> ones they were good at (like Tolkien's dwarves). Nor am I going to
> repeat my views on Goblin ownership, which I see as, shall we say,
> mistaken. Instead, I'll accept Deb's statement that they're
> "different," which I think we can all agree on, and just point out
> that Griphook's "different" notions of property and ownership did not
> prompt him to offer payment or even a thank you to Bill and Fleur for
> his use of their house, his consumption of their food, his acceptance
> of Fleur's services in waiting on and healing him. A Goblin is
> supposed to be paid in gold coins (made by Goblins) for his services
> and materials in creating a tiara or sword or armor, which he
> nevertheless biews as still belonging to him, but the Wizards are not
> supposed to be paid or even thanked for the services they rendered and
> the food and medicine that were theirs but which they can never get
> back because he consumed them?

Beatrice:  But your assumptions are based on human understanding of
service and gratitude.  First, we don't know that Griphook didn't pay
them or leave Bill and Fleur anything behind.  I know that you hate
this but, it is possible that this occurs even if we are not told
about this.  Although I suspect that my next two theories or a
combination therein are probably closer to the point. First, many
cultures have very specific rules governing guests.  If one claims
guest status in a household or the head of household declares that
person a guest, the host is expected to care for that person and would
be highly affronted by any payment or any thanks.  It is considered
the host's duty and honor to care for that person and any reciprocity
is considered an insult.  Second, and perhaps closer to the point,
Griphook may consider Bill and Fleur's care his just due for two
reasons.  He has become a victim in a war between factions of wizards,
a war that has nothing to do with him and his kind, therefore as
wizards it is Bill and Fleur's duty to care for him as a victim of
their "kind."  Also, he may see the lie he told Bellatrix as a
contract between himself and those who fight with Harry Potter.  He
has done Harry a service and as such he is owed certain considerations
and care.   
> 
> How does the Goblin economy work among Goblins themselves, I wonder?
> If one Goblin makes another a sword and the second Goblin pays for it,
> does the first Goblin still consider it his, or does one Goblinmade
> product, a set of gold coins in an amount that the first Goblin sets,
> compensate him for another Golinmade product, the sword, which can
> still be said to belong to "the goblins," just not to the Goblin who
> made it?

Well, we don't really know enough about their ideology to plot any
theories here.  Perhaps, goblins would consider ownership transfered
because it is a contract between two goblins who trade commodities
that in their view rightfully belong to their kind and their kind
alone.  Or their may be an assumption that the item can be passed down
along goblin lines and thus the item never goes out of goblin
ownership, therefore there is no question.  If for example, the line
of a particular goblin dies out then all of his possessions belong to
the goblin community in general and it is up to the most worthy goblin
to attain those items.

> 
> What about houses? Surely Goblins. at ;east those with families, live
> in houses, not caves. Do Goblins build their own houses? Surely, the
> Goblin builder of a house wouldnt still consider it his after another
> Goblin paid for it. Or would he? Do they only lease, not sell, houses?
> What if Goblins can't build houses, either by law (let's say that
> they're restricted to banking and metalcrafts) or because they have no
> interest in/aptitude for house-building and must buy houses from the
> Wizards who build them. Would they see the Wizard-built house as
> belonging to the Wizard who built it and theirs only as long as they
> keep paying rent, or theirs only for the lifetime of the Goblin couple?

Oddly, there might be an answer in English property history here.  In
English history land / house were often leased by the wealthy class
from landowners with interesting contracts.  EG. As a wealthy merchant
, I lease an estate from Lord so and so, rather than leasing the
property for a year or two the contracts often indicated that the
lessee had the right to renew the contract for 500 years.  This way
leases and leased property could stay within generations of the same
family, if they desired, but the actual ownership stayed with the deed
holder.  Maybe it doesn't work this way, but this was my thought when
I read your argument...
> 
> If one Goblin makes a cake and another buys it, surely the baker
> retains no claim on the cake, whether the cake is eaten or thrown
> away. If one Goblin makes and sells clothes (I won't say shoes because
> the Goblins seem to go barefoot), would the tailor-Goblin consider the
> clothes to belong to himself?

Well, there are always different rules governing consumable /
disposable items than more substantial items.  
 
> 
> It seems to me that these, erm, *different* views of Goblin ownership
> apply mostly if not solely to metalcraft, to valuable objects made
> from precious metals and precious stones, especially if they also have
> magical powers. It also seems to me that this view is selfish and
> impractical and could cause disputes between Goblin craftsmen and
> Goblin owners if applied within their culture.
> 
> A Goblin selling to a Wizard should, perhaps, require a written
> contract. If the Goblin craftsman insists that the object is still his
> despite payment in Goblin-made coins for a Goblin-made artifact, the
> Wizard should have the right to refuse to pay. If the Goblin agrees
> that selling amounts to a change of ownership, the Goblin should honor
> that bargain, just as he would if he were selling a cake rather than a
> sword.  
> 
> What the Goblin retains when he makes a sword or a tiara or a piece of
> armor for a Wizard is the secret of his craftsmanship. The Wizard can
> duplicate its appearance, but never its powers or its worth. (The
> duplicate cups in the Lestrange vault are worthless, as is the Fake
> Sword of Gryffindor.) The Goblins have been paid for their materials
> and their highly specialized services, just as Mr. Ollivander is paid
> for his when he makes a wand. They retain the secrets of their
> craftsmanship? What more do the Goblins need, other than the right to
> carry wands? (If they want to make their own wands, let them share
> their own secrets in exchange.)
> 
> But to return to my point. Suppose that Goblins had the right to carry
> wands but depended on Wizards to make them because they didn't have
> the secret to wand-making. Would they believe that even though they
> had paid for the wand, it still belonged to its maker, or to the
> Wizards in general? I don't think that they would. And yet such a view
> of property must extend both ways or it has no validity at all.


Okay, but we have already seen that in the wizarding world the
races/cultures don't find it necessary to treat others under the same
rules that they treat their own kind.  Wizards don't treat house
elves, goblins, centaurs, merpeople, giants, etc. with the same rules
and or conditions that they treat other wizards, so why should goblins
or any other "race" be any different?  This is after all one of the
things that Griphook remarks upon about Harry.  That he is not like
other wizards: he buries Dobby, he rescues Griphook, etc.  Griphook
obviously does not expect this kind of behavior from wizards and
doesn't seem to know what to make of this treatment.  





From elfundeb at gmail.com  Fri Aug  8 13:49:50 2008
From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb)
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2008 09:49:50 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CHAPDISC: DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7defh+247h@eGroups.com>
References: <80f25c3a0808060728r25a69613k863ea9bb59cba18f@mail.gmail.com>
	 <g7defh+247h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <80f25c3a0808080649r75aa73e5rb22fe1cf3a618a2b@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184018

Carol:
Griphook's "different" notions of property and ownership did not
prompt him to offer payment or even a thank you to Bill and Fleur for
his use of their house, his consumption of their food, his acceptance
of Fleur's services in waiting on and healing him. A Goblin is
supposed to be paid in gold coins (made by Goblins) for his services
and materials in creating a tiara or sword or armor, which he
nevertheless biews as still belonging to him, but the Wizards are not
supposed to be paid or even thanked for the services they rendered and
the food and medicine that were theirs but which they can never get
back because he consumed them?

Debbie:
We have no idea if Griphook thanked Bill and Fleur.  The narrator doesn't
report that Harry thanked them, either, only that Bill and Fleur had been
informed of their departure, although I would infer that Harry thanked
them.  Also, as Griphook would not have remained at Shell Cottage for more
than an hour but for Harry's insistence that he stay, and considering what
Harry has asked him to do I think it would be acceptable for Harry to thank
Bill and Fleur on his behalf and keep Griphook out of sight.

Carol:
How does the Goblin economy work among Goblins themselves, I wonder?
If one Goblin makes another a sword and the second Goblin pays for it,
does the first Goblin still consider it his, or does one Goblinmade
product, a set of gold coins in an amount that the first Goblin sets,
compensate him for another Golinmade product, the sword, which can
still be said to belong to "the goblins," just not to the Goblin who
made it?

Debbie:
The question here is what is the second goblin paying for?  If among goblins
ownership remains with the creator, then the second goblin would understand
that he is only paying for the use of the sword.  In a transaction between
goblins and wizards, however, there is a mutual misunderstanding of the
bargain being made.  It's also possible, as you point out, that goblin law
or tradition places ownership of goblin-made items with the goblins as a
species.

I'll bet that goblins keep goblin-made coins to themselves, and that the
gold at Gringotts is wizard-made. I'd further speculate that goblins accept
wizard gold as payment for goblin-made items, because goblins have uses for
wizard gold.

Carol:
What about houses? Surely Goblins. at ;east those with families, live
in houses, not caves. Do Goblins build their own houses? Surely, the
Goblin builder of a house wouldnt still consider it his after another
Goblin paid for it. Or would he? Do they only lease, not sell, houses?
What if Goblins can't build houses, either by law (let's say that
they're restricted to banking and metalcrafts) or because they have no
interest in/aptitude for house-building and must buy houses from the
Wizards who build them. Would they see the Wizard-built house as
belonging to the Wizard who built it and theirs only as long as they
keep paying rent, or theirs only for the lifetime of the Goblin couple?

Debbie:
I don't want to get into the minutiae of property law (which I'm not an
expert in, anyway), but land as a commodity that can be bought or sold,
while fundamental to our culture, is not universal.  In any event, there's a
question regarding who would own a structure built on someone else's land
(here, unless otherwise specified by agreement among the parties, IIRC the
structure becomes a component of the land and generally conveys with the
land).  In the goblin universe, rental of housing from a hereditary
landowner who cannot convey the property or improvements to the property to
another might be the norm.  Or maybe goblins have communal living
arragements.

I do think it's possible that goblin ownership rules only govern ownership
of property that is unique to the goblins.  If an item, such as a sword or
tiara, is produced using goblin magic that no other creatur can duplicate,
then in goblin culture, only a goblin may "own" it.  But this rule would not
apply to something anyone can make, like a cake.

Of course, I'm speculating wildly; the books simply don't answer these
questions.

Carol:
But to return to my point. Suppose that Goblins had the right to carry
wands but depended on Wizards to make them because they didn't have
the secret to wand-making. Would they believe that even though they
had paid for the wand, it still belonged to its maker, or to the
Wizards in general? I don't think that they would. And yet such a view
of property must extend both ways or it has no validity at all.

Debbie:
I think goblins would depend on wizards to make the wands (otherwise, I have
no doubt that they would make their own and use them secretly).  But as
wands perform differently for different persons, I'm not sure a goblin would
care what happened to his wand after he died.  Why not give it back to the
wizards?

Debbie
proud member of S.P.U.G.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  8 18:29:38 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 18:29:38 -0000
Subject: Portraits
In-Reply-To: <g758lc+dpkq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7i3ai+lceg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184019

Catlady (Rita Prince Winston) wrote:
<big snip>

> I'm not ready to give up my idea that the Ministry building, St.
Mungo's, old family homes, and other wizarding institutions (including
a monastery, which could have avoided being confiscated by Henry VIII
by use of Muggle-repelling spells) generate the portraits by magic
same as Hogwarts does. Still your theory, that all the other paintings
have to have their frame and canvas prepared for the specific person
while that person is still alive, would explain why no portrait of
James and Lily Potter appeared in the ancient Potter family home, and
why the drunken monks got a group portrait instead of individual
portraits. <snip>

Carol responds:

It would be nice to think that *some* monasteries escaped dissolution,
but I suspect that the monks in the painting (and the Fat Friar's
ghost) predate Henry VIII.

As for the Potters' "ancient family home,' how do we know that the
cottage in Godric's Hollow belonged to the Potters (James's parents),
who were quite wealthy and probably owned a much larger home
commensurate with their wealth? Surely, James and Lily wouldn't have
hidden in his family's home, where they could easily have been
discovered by DEs before the Fidelius Charm was cast. I suspect that
the cottage where they were hiding was Dumbledore's, either his family
home after his father's imprisonment or a second home that he bought
for his own use over the summer holidays when no one but Filch, Hagrid
and the various ghosts and House-Elves stayed at Hogwarts.

We can't know, of course, but neither can we assume that the cottage
at Godric's Hollow was the Potters' "ancient family home." For one
thing, neither Harry nor Hermione saw any other gravestones with the
name Potter engraved on them. (Peverell, yes, but it seems that the
Peverells, Harry's ancestors on the Potter side, were extinct in the
male line.  I doubt that James's father was born in Godric's Hollow as
the result of some female ancestor having inherited Ignatius
Peverell's "ancient family home," with her descendants remaining in GH
after one of them married into the Potter family, at which time it
became the Potters'"ancient family home. It was just a cottage, in any
case.) 

Carol, trying to remember exactly the word "cottage" occurs





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  8 18:43:39 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 18:43:39 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0808080649r75aa73e5rb22fe1cf3a618a2b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <g7i44r+16np@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184020

Debbie wrote:
<snip>

> I'll bet that goblins keep goblin-made coins to themselves, and that
the gold at Gringotts is wizard-made. I'd further speculate that
goblins accept wizard gold as payment for goblin-made items, because
goblins have uses for wizard gold. <snip>

Carol responds:

This much, at least, is covered in the books. Hermione describes her
fake galleons as having the date and time of the next DA meeting in
place of the serial number of the Goblin who made the galleon. I don't
know the exact page reference, but the conversation must have occurred
in OoP.

Carol, enjoying everyone's speculations but doubting very much that
Griphook showed any gratitude to the Wizard hosts who fed, sheltered,
and healed him





From irenem316 at comcast.net  Fri Aug  8 19:09:28 2008
From: irenem316 at comcast.net (irenematt02176)
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 19:09:28 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7da1i+kq4q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7i5l8+f81f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184021

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
>
>> Carol:
>  Also, I think that Aussie may be right in
> thinking that the handshake creates a magically binding contract,
> making it impossible for Harry to keep the sword. No need for a
> written contract in those circumstances, whether Harry survives or
> not. But even that sneaky tactic, if we're correct, can't do more than
> take the sword from Harry and place it in Griphook's possession. It
> can't make Griphook the sword's rightful owner or undo the magic that
> binds it to come to a worthy Gryffindor at need. 

I wonder how Griphook reacted when the sword disappeared from his side 
(or house or cave or vault) and went to Neville's aide. That would have 
been something to see!

Irene




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Sat Aug  9 14:17:54 2008
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2008 14:17:54 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7i5l8+f81f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7k8ui+ibdk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184022

Carol:
> Also, I think that Aussie may be right in thinking that the 
> handshake creates a magically binding contract, making it 
> impossible for Harry to keep the sword. No need for a written
> contract in those circumstances, whether Harry survives or not. But
> even that sneaky tactic, if we're correct, can't do more than take 
> the sword from Harry and place it in Griphook's possession. It 
> can't make Griphook the sword's rightful owner or undo the magic
> that binds it to come to a worthy Gryffindor at need. 

Irene:
> I wonder how Griphook reacted when the sword disappeared from his
> side (or house or cave or vault) and went to Neville's aide. That 
> would have been something to see!

Jen: I wondered how Griphook reacted too.  Not an event likely to 
help wizard-goblin relations!  Or not relations with the faction of 
goblins who are 'most prone to the belief' about treasure ownership.  
Although since Harry & Co. defeat Voldemort shortly after, giving 
control of Gringotts back to the goblins, perhaps the sword was 
forgiven (but not forgotten).

I don't see evidence for a magically binding contract in the 
handshake though, Carol.  The end point of the Harry/Griphook 
relationship is Harry realizing Griphook never did trust him to hand 
over the sword.  Griphook taking possession of the sword made it 
clear both of them had hidden clauses in the bargain they struck 
rather than a magical moment causing possession to change hands.




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sat Aug  9 15:52:20 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2008 15:52:20 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g79ori+6nco@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7kefk+5jca@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184023

> Questions:
> 
> 1) Any suggestions why JKR had these characters (Trio, Bill, Fleur,
> Mr Ollivander, Griphook, Luna, Dean) in a small house for weeks,
> maybe months?

Pippin:
It gives us a good cross section of what Harry is fighting for. Not
just his own survival, but all that will be destroyed if Voldemort is
not stopped. Of course by running a safe house and sheltering
fugitives, Bill *is* participating in the anti-Voldemort underground.
Being a secret keeper,  he can't risk himself on missions. It sounds
like the secret keeper spell was cast *after* Harry got there, which
would explain how he was able to enter. 

The timing is conditioned by seasonal and symbolic considerations,
IMO. The Snatchers episode had to take place around Easter so that
Draco would be at Malfoy Manor. That meant Easter had to be moved up
(or the camping interval would have lasted even longer) but the battle
of Hogwarts couldn't take place before May, if JKR didn't want Harry
to take his walk through the forest knee-deep in mud.<g>

I think it's also important  that Harry's sacrifice takes place well
after Easter, not during it. Symbolically, he's a follower of Jesus,
not Jesus himself. 



> 2) There is a relaxed mood in this chapter, with no spells used in
> anger. Some (adrenaline junkie) readers may have been tempted to
skip this chapter to get on with the fighting, and filling of body
bags. This chapter filled a few holes in what goes on with families in
> other parts of the Wizarding World. What tidbit did you enjoy,
hidden in this chapter?

Pippin:
I enjoyed the description of the cottage, the way a "small snake"
seems to stir inside Harry when he contemplates his dubious bargain
with Griphook, and  everything that Luna does.

> 
> 3) Fleur seemed to react worse to Griphook than the others. Were
> Wizard - Goblin relations worse in France?

Pippin:
Fleur's a kvetch. She's probably got her gripes about everyone, but
it's easier to vent about Griphook than her husband's relatives and
their friends. 

> 
> 4) There is a saying, "History was written by the winners". The
Daily Prophet has been doing it in most of the books. So are wizards
> the "lesser evil" compared to the "not fluffy bunnies", or just as
> bad, or worse?

Pippin:
There's no way to tell. We don't meet any goblin heroes, but we don't
meet any goblin villains either. It's not fair to judge all goblins by
Griphook. 


> 
> 5) We see many heroes in the Harry Potter books have bad qualities.
> Is the possibility of Godric Gryffindor's stealing the sword ("For
> the greater good") the thing Harry has to come to terms with about
> his house hero?

Pippin:
It's impossible to know whether Godric made an honest bargain for the
sword -- even if it was honest by his standards we might not agree
with him, because wizard notions of ownership are also not the same as
ours. We don't think it's proper to own sentient beings, for one
thing. If Gryffindor owed some of his wealth to forced labor, then we
might feel he purchased the sword with gold that wasn't truly his. 

 For another, Dumbledore says in HBP that Grimmauld Place could have
been enchanted so that only a pureblood could own it. That turns out
not to be the case, but introduces the wizard notion that the rightful
owner of an object may be determined by the object itself, regardless
of the legally expressed wishes of its previous owner.

Stealing something from its rightful owner is hardly a valorous
act. If the sword can belong only to a Gryffindor who takes it under
conditions of need and valor, that implies that if Gryffindor  had
stolen the sword he wouldn't have been able to use it properly  --
so I'd imagine that Gryffindor had no misgivings about how he obtained
the sword. But we might think he should have. 

It's interesting that despite paying attention in history of magic
Hermione has no idea that Goblin ideas about ownership are so
different, and Bill doesn't expect Harry to know this either. Of
course we will shortly discover that the author of "A History of
Magic" has been *selective* about other things too. 

Thinking that Griphook must be lying about Gryffindor changes how
Harry thinks about deceiving him. Harry never really comes to grips
with the idea that goblin ideas about ownership should be taken into
account. It's a case where he does what is easy rather than what's right.


> 
> 6) To seal the bargain, Griphook shook hands with Harry Potter. That
> sounded ominously like "Just sign here for Dumbledore's Army" to me.
> How did you feel about it?

Pippin:
This bargain was one of the most cowardly things Harry ever did IMO--
indeed one could say it's the *only* cowardly thing Harry ever did.
IMO, it's the proof that Harry can be cowardly as the crucio is the
proof that he can be cruel. 

Harry could have told Griphook that he would need access to the sword
in the future,  and bargained on that basis.  I think Griphook knew
perfectly well that Harry was planning to cheat him, and that made
planning to cheat Harry right in his own eyes. I'm sure he intended to
trap Harry in the vaults all along.



> 
> 7) Luna deserves her own question. Flowers on Dobby's grave: loyalty
> to her father; the only one who Mr Ollivander gave a personal
> compliment to as he left; and never complained despite her account
of missing Christmas in a cellar jail. Why do you think she is such an
> important presence in Harry Potter's life?

Pippin:
She's the anti-Hermione, and also the anti-Fleur. Harry was once
comforted by Fleur's beauty (at the end of GoF), and turned off by
Luna's scraggly weirdness. Now he finds Luna's presence more
comforting than Fleur's.

> 
> 8) We see Fleur in her own environment here. She quickly changes
from (ze goblin) fury; to (you are safe 'ere) over-protectiveness; to
> getting Mr Ollivander to deliver the tiara (when Bill was going
there too); to (glancing at the window) worry about Bill outside; to
anger at Muriel; to baby hugger; to humble wife ("Wait" said Bill)
within one meal time. What do you think of her?

Pippin:
Her changeable moods I think are part of her "water" personality. I
think that, like Harry, she really did believe that Gabrielle was in
danger, and so she's grateful to him not only for "saving" her sister
but for making her seem less foolish by viewing the situation the same
way she did. 

> 
> 9) Did you pick up that subtle reminder of the "Lost Diadem of
> Ravenclaw" in your first reading? Were there enough clues to
identify this as the last Horcrux?

Pippin:
Not much to add here. I was one of those who thought the Ravenclaw
horcrux ought to be a wand, since we already had a cup, a jewel and a
sword, but I felt that the tiara Harry had found in the RoR was a
strong contender.

> 
> 10) Every culture has differences with Births, Marriages and Deaths
> (Hatch, Match and Dispatch). Lupin offers us our only insight into
> Wizard Births. Especially a new born Metamorphmagus. Anything
special you see here?

Pippin:
There was no formal christening ceremony presided over by the "tufty
little man" in black. But perhaps there would have been when things
were more settled.  

> 
> 11) Goblin ownership laws: "the true owner of an object is the
maker, not the purchaser". This sounds like our copyright and patent
laws. I can't buy a CD and copy a song onto my I-Pod. Are arguments
against the goblin law grounds for authors to re-think copyright laws?

Pippin:
Ownership can be considered a "bundle of rights" -- goblins evidently
bundle things differently than wizards do. 

Goblin law sounds  like a "life interest" in real estate. But RL fine
artists have attempted to extend their rights in their work, so that
the creator of a painting gets some share of the future sales, or
maintains control over how it can be displayed. 

> 
> 12) Is Harry getting reckless, like his thoughts on Sirius? Any
other thoughts about Harry being a godfather?

Pippin:
I don't think Harry was being reckless, exactly, but I think his
conscience was  uneasy with the bargain he'd made. By becoming a
godfather, Harry is formally taking responsibility for the next
generation of wizards, and like Sirius, he's off to a rocky start,
planning something he might not feel like boasting of to Teddy.

Pippin




From janelekus at yahoo.com  Sat Aug  9 18:39:04 2008
From: janelekus at yahoo.com (janelekus)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2008 18:39:04 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7k8ui+ibdk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7ko88+dq94@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184024





> Jen:
<BIG SNIP>
> I don't see evidence for a magically binding contract in the
> handshake though, Carol.  The end point of the Harry/Griphook
> relationship is Harry realizing Griphook never did trust him to
hand
> over the sword.  Griphook taking possession of the sword made it
> clear both of them had hidden clauses in the bargain they struck
> rather than a magical moment causing possession to change hands.
>


Hello all,

This is Jane, a new group member, adding her two cents to the
conversation for the first time.

I have a slightly different take on Griphook's motives in demanding
the sword. I think he was trying to extract the highest price
possible for his participation in the "caper". Short of blood, Harry
had nothing of greater value to offer him.

Although Harry does not specifically tell him what the trio is after
in the Lestrange's vault, Griphook has been assured that they are
not after gold or treasure to enrich themselves. So he must reason
that it is something with a different kind of value, and he may
surmise that is is also goblin-made. By agreeing to assist them, he
does not stipulate that they may not take anything made by goblins.
And when they are in the vault, and he sees what it is they have
come for, he does not indicate that he is surprised at what it is.
Of course by that point he might believe that the trio will be
entombed in the vault, and that it doesn't matter what it is they
wanted.

For me, this leads to the further question: Did Griphook expect the
trio to die in the vault, and was he using this expectation to steal
back the sword? Or was he willing to "trade" whatever else they were
after for the sword? I put the word trade in quotes, since at the
time the deal was made, he didn't know specifically what they were
after, but he would have had a good idea of what the Lestranges had
in their vault.

Finally, I took the handshake to be Griphook's understanding of the
human concept of the gesture, and he was impressing upon Harry the
seriousness of what he expected out of Harry. He was not making a
similar commitment in return.


Jane



From danjerri at madisoncounty.net  Sun Aug 10 13:34:15 2008
From: danjerri at madisoncounty.net (Jerri&Dan Chase)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2008 08:34:15 -0500
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <1218372397.2922.50488.m46@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1218372397.2922.50488.m46@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <ACF56AC8389441DAB1707C2CD2BB226B@JerriPC>

No: HPFGUIDX 184025


>    Posted by: "Jen Reese" stevejjen at earthlink.net ariadnemajic
> I don't see evidence for a magically binding contract in the
> handshake though, Carol.  The end point of the Harry/Griphook
> relationship is Harry realizing Griphook never did trust him to hand
> over the sword.  Griphook taking possession of the sword made it
> clear both of them had hidden clauses in the bargain they struck
> rather than a magical moment causing possession to change hands.

I wonder, in light of what I have been reading in the discussion and Bill's 
warning to Harry, if one form of goblin magic is the ability to tell if/when 
they are being lied to, or someone is planning to cheat them in some 
fashion.  It is possible that the "handshake" was a test by Griphook of 
Harry's good faith, and when he sensed Harry's reservations, Griphook 
decided that Harry was just like all wizards, planning to cheat goblins, and 
it is at this point that Griphook decided to set Harry and the rest of the 
trio up in a trap.

Jerri





From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Sun Aug 10 14:41:29 2008
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2008 14:41:29 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7ko88+dq94@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7mump+tt9u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184026

> Hello all,
> This is Jane, a new group member, adding her two cents to the
> conversation for the first time.

Jen: Hi Jane, welcome!

Jane:
> Although Harry does not specifically tell him what the trio is after
> in the Lestrange's vault, Griphook has been assured that they are
> not after gold or treasure to enrich themselves. So he must reason
> that it is something with a different kind of value, and he may
> surmise that is is also goblin-made.  By agreeing to assist them, 
> he does not stipulate that they may not take anything made by 
> goblins.  And when they are in the vault, and he sees what it is
> they have come for, he does not indicate that he is surprised at 
> what it is.  Of course by that point he might believe that the trio
> will be entombed in the vault, and that it doesn't matter what it 
> is they wanted.

Jen: 
That's a good point that Griphook doesn't appear to care if the Trio 
are after another item that's goblin-made.  It's entirely possible 
Griphook wondered what could be of more value than the sword to the 
Trio, that he was willing to help in order to assess the value of the 
item to goblins before the Trio attempted to remove it. 

Jane: 
> For me, this leads to the further question: Did Griphook expect the
> trio to die in the vault, and was he using this expectation to steal
> back the sword? Or was he willing to "trade" whatever else they were
> after for the sword? I put the word trade in quotes, since at the
> time the deal was made, he didn't know specifically what they were
> after, but he would have had a good idea of what the Lestranges had
> in their vault.

Jen: It's a conundrum what Griphook thought.  The most obvious is he 
didn't expect the Trio to escape Gringotts even if they did make it 
to the vault & extract the wanted object, but that would mean 
Griphook wouldn't escape with the sword either.  Or is Griphook so 
entranced by the thought of having the sword that he doesn't plan 
past actually obtaining it?  Maybe he does think the Trio will die & 
he, with his inside knowledge of Gringotts, will escape.  Because the 
other part of the question is what he expected to do with the sword.  
Was he assuming all of the other goblins would allow him to take it 
out of Gringotts or hide it somewhere within Gringotts forever, 
allowing the copy to become the real thing in the eyes of the 
humans?  I suppose so, seeing as 'The Goblin's Revenge' was not 
admitting to the copy in the first place. 

The only thing I can say with much certainty is Griphook knew what 
was in the Lestrange vault: "But the fake sword isn't the only thing 
in the vault, is it?" asked Harry.  "Perhaps you've seen other things 
in there?" ...The goblin twisted his beard around his fingers 
again.  "It is against our code to speak of the secrets of 
Gringotts.  We are the guardians of fabulous treasure.  We have a 
duty to the *objects* placed in our care, which were, so often, 
wrought by our fingers."  Hah!! I loved the way Griphook made it 
clear their duty was to the objects and not the people putting them 
there.  I suspect they know every single goblin-made object placed in 
their care very well.  (Quote from Chap. 24, p. 489, US edition.)

Jerri:
> I wonder, in light of what I have been reading in the discussion
> and Bill's warning to Harry, if one form of goblin magic is the 
> ability to tell if/when they are being lied to, or someone is 
> planning to cheat them in some fashion. It is possible that 
> the "handshake" was a test by Griphook of Harry's good faith, and 
> when he sensed Harry's reservations, Griphook decided that Harry
> was just like all wizards, planning to cheat goblins, and it is at
> this point that Griphook decided to set Harry and the rest of the
> trio up in a trap.

Jen: I don't think the goblins really need a test to assume humans 
are cheating them, for story purposes I mean.  They're sitting on a 
bunch of treasure they feel cheated out of already.  Taking a moment 
to get inside the goblin's thinking, it's easy to see why they 
wouldn't trust any wand-carriers around treasure.  Yes, Harry may be 
unusual & treat other races more respectfully than Griphook's seen up 
to this point, but around treasure?  Nah, Harry's just the same, 
taking the sword away from Griphook the first night they meet.  




From mariewhitten at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 10 14:40:26 2008
From: mariewhitten at yahoo.com (Marie)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2008 14:40:26 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7kefk+5jca@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7mukr+fnq1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184027

Aussie:
> > 8) We see Fleur in her own environment here. She quickly changes
> from (ze goblin) fury; to (you are safe 'ere) over-protectiveness; to
> > getting Mr Ollivander to deliver the tiara (when Bill was going
> there too); to (glancing at the window) worry about Bill outside; to
> anger at Muriel; to baby hugger; to humble wife ("Wait" said Bill)
> within one meal time. What do you think of her?
>
> Pippin:
> Her changeable moods I think are part of her "water" personality. I
> think that, like Harry, she really did believe that Gabrielle was in
> danger, and so she's grateful to him not only for "saving" her sister
> but for making her seem less foolish by viewing the situation the same
> way she did.


Marie:
Hi, Pippin, I just want to comment here that I think that is a really
interesting reading.  Once you say it I can totally see how someone
would read it that way but I was also kind of shocked because it has
never crossed my mind to think that part of Fleur's gratefulness to
Harry was a  kind of "foolishness loves company" reaction.  I think
she was completely sincere.  I think she knows, intellectually, that
Dumbledore would not have let her sister die but on a visceral level
sees that her sister was in terrible danger and that Harry had enough
concern for someone he didn't even know to stand up to the merpeople
not to mention fall behind in the competition.

And I think people forget about him but I think in that scene we were
also supposed to note Percy's reaction.  Percy is also absolutely
terrified for Ron and clearly takes the situation very seriously.  I
really wish we had seen the twins here too - I rather think they would
have been quite upset themselves.

I think that the juxtaposition of the reaction of characters who have
a sibling in danger (Fleur and Percy) with those who do not (Cedric
and Krum) kind of points out the selfless and sometimes irrational
nature of love.  I think it was a very different position that Fluer
was put into compared to Cedric and Krum.  I know 17 year olds always
think their bf/gf is their one true love but at 17 (and now) I would
have a much stronger reaction if one of my sisters was put in danger
than I would if my boyfriend of a couple of weeks was.

So my point is that all of this draw attention to the fact that Harry
was treating all of the hostages as if they were as precious to him as
 those of his own blood.  What I took away from this was that Harry
treats everyone as though they were his own brothers and sisters.  I
think this a very important precursor to what Harry does in the forest
in DH and the way his charm protects all of the Hogwarts defenders.
He loves all of them.  This is central to his presentation as a
Christ-like figure.  Although for some reason what Harry does there
has less resonance for me that what he does during the second task.

Aussie:
> > 11) Goblin ownership laws: "the true owner of an object is the
> maker, not the purchaser". This sounds like our copyright and patent
> laws. I can't buy a CD and copy a song onto my I-Pod. Are arguments
> against the goblin law grounds for authors to re-think copyright laws?
>
> Pippin:
> Ownership can be considered a "bundle of rights" -- goblins evidently
> bundle things differently than wizards do.
>
> Goblin law sounds  like a "life interest" in real estate. But RL fine
> artists have attempted to extend their rights in their work, so that
> the creator of a painting gets some share of the future sales, or
> maintains control over how it can be displayed.

Marie:
Your comment really got me thinking about how we view ownership of
ancient works of fine art.  People are always saying things like "That
belongs in a museum."  I think even in our world there comes a point
where people believe that an important work of cultural significance
kind of belongs to everyone.  I think the goblin attitude is probably
very similar - perhaps they believe that a true work of art can never
really belong to a person.  I don't really have a problem with this as
 I kind of feel the same way.

Consider if something like the Mona Lisa were in someone's private
gallery and they never let anyone look at it.  Wouldn't that be wrong?
   It may technically belong to their family but for something so
important you would expect them to place it in a museum or public
gallery - and to donate it if they were rich enough.

Or how about the Elgin marbles?  Obviously, by some people's
definition of ownership, what the Earl of Elgin did by removing those
pieces from the Acropolis was OK, and the British Museum paid for
them.  But for many, especially today, it amounts to nothing less than
vandalism and it seems clear that the pieces should be returned to Athens.


-Marie, who is making her first post and hoping she does it right




From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Sun Aug 10 16:56:55 2008
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 10 Aug 2008 16:56:55 -0000
Subject: Weekly Chat, 8/10/2008, 1:00 pm 
Message-ID: <1218387415.14.14781.m44@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184028

Reminder from: HPforGrownups Yahoo! Group
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal

Weekly Chat
Sunday August 10, 2008
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  2008 
 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: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpforgrownups/attachments/20080810/9600bfcb/attachment.html>

From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 10 19:27:52 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2008 19:27:52 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7kefk+5jca@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7nffo+r7i7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184029

Aussie:
> 4) There is a saying, "History was written by the winners". The
Daily Prophet has been doing it in most of the books. So are wizards
> the "lesser evil" compared to the "not fluffy bunnies", or just as
> bad, or worse?

Pippin:
There's no way to tell. We don't meet any goblin heroes, but we don't
meet any goblin villains either. It's not fair to judge all goblins by
Griphook. <BIIG SNIP>

Alla:

I will ask the same question as I used to ask those readers who were 
telling me that it is so very unfair to judge the House Slytherin by 
Draco Malfoy. Why not?

I mean of course it is unfair to do so in RL ? to judge any entity of 
people by one representative, I know it and get it. But in the book? 
I think it is a very fair assumption to make that author does want me 
to judge all Slytherins of younger generation by Draco Malfoy being 
their typical representative, since we see no Slytherins who are 
better than him lurking in the background, no?

And since we have not seen it by the time book ended and none of 
those just name character showed up and demonstrated their great 
qualities, I believe I was correct in judging Slytherin house not 
more and no less than I would judge Draco Malfoy. She showed us older 
Slytherins doing much better things, true, but within the students? 
Who? 

Anyways, back to goblins. Why again it is unfair to judge all Goblins 
by Griphook? Because maybe there are better Goblins than him? Of 
course, maybe and one is entirely within one's right to make such 
assumption, it is just an assumption I refuse to make. I need more 
evidence for that.

I do not think that Griphook is an evil impersonated of course; I 
just think that he is a greedy selfish liar, who fully planned to 
take advantage of Harry from the very beginning and with his 
storyline Goblins lost all appeal to me, I have none left whatsoever.

Not that Harry behaved any better of course IMO.


Pippin:
This bargain was one of the most cowardly things Harry ever did IMO--
indeed one could say it's the *only* cowardly thing Harry ever did.
IMO, it's the proof that Harry can be cowardly as the crucio is the
proof that he can be cruel.

<SNIP>

Alla:

Yes agreed. 

JMO,

Alla





From datalaur at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 10 20:16:20 2008
From: datalaur at yahoo.com (datalaur)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2008 20:16:20 -0000
Subject: Resolutions (was: Epilogue (was Re: Ron and Parseltongue)/Slytherins are Bad
In-Reply-To: <g40mel+tgu3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7niak+32vr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184030

Very very late on this, but perhaps Dumbledore was thinking it's a
whole lot better to have IntactSoul!Draco holding the Elder Wand than
MurderousTornSoul!Draco in control of the 'unbeatable' wand.  

Dumbledore's lack of concern for Draco's soul earlier (not to mention
the people that Draco would have killed, except for chance) makes it
rather hard for me to see that Dumbledore's focus was anything other
than his Plans.

laur



Pippin:
> Yes, Dumbledore had a material as well as a moral reason for planning
> to let Snape to kill him instead of Draco. But that plan was spoiled
> when he lost the wand. At the moment  on the tower when
> Dumbledore decides to talk Draco out of killing him, the plan looks
> completely trashed.
> 
> DD hasn't been able to send for Snape. If he talks  Draco down but the
> Death Eaters  reach the Tower, both he and Draco will probably be
> killed. There's no chance of disabling the Elder Wand, no chance of
> giving Harry vital information about the sword.  If by some miracle
> Snape arrives, there'll be no concealing from the WW or Harry that
> Snape is a "murderer", no way to follow through on the offer to give
> Narcissa and Draco protection from Voldemort.  And it looks like DD's
> about to die anyway. No wonder that  Snape  hesitates. They are way,
> way  off plan.
> 
> But with all this going on, Dumbledore chooses to save Draco's soul,
> the action with the most moral importance but the least obvious
> benefit to the war. If it had turned out that saving Draco had some
> major material benefit, we would think that Dumbledore could have
> foreseen it, as he did with Pettigrew, and that would diminish the
> moral impact of his choice.





From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 10 20:58:14 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2008 20:58:14 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7ko88+dq94@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7nkp6+4148@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184031

Jane
> Although Harry does not specifically tell him what the trio is after
> in the Lestrange's vault, Griphook has been assured that they are
> not after gold or treasure to enrich themselves. So he must reason
> that it is something with a different kind of value, and he may
> surmise that is is also goblin-made. By agreeing to assist them, he
> does not stipulate that they may not take anything made by goblins.
> And when they are in the vault, and he sees what it is they have
> come for, he does not indicate that he is surprised at what it is.
> Of course by that point he might believe that the trio will be
> entombed in the vault, and that it doesn't matter what it is they
> wanted.
> 
> For me, this leads to the further question: Did Griphook expect the
> trio to die in the vault, and was he using this expectation to steal
> back the sword? Or was he willing to "trade" whatever else they were
> after for the sword? I put the word trade in quotes, since at the
> time the deal was made, he didn't know specifically what they were
> after, but he would have had a good idea of what the Lestranges had
> in their vault.
> 
> Finally, I took the handshake to be Griphook's understanding of the
> human concept of the gesture, and he was impressing upon Harry the
> seriousness of what he expected out of Harry. He was not making a
> similar commitment in return.

Montavilla47:

Welcome Jane!  I like the way you and Pippin are heading with
Griphook.  I hadn't thought of it that way before, because I was 
seeing Harry and Co. very much as the "good guys"  and everyone
ought to help the good guys, right?

But if you think about it from Griphook's perspective, it's almost
like he's a bank employee who is forced to help rob his own bank.
In which case, he acts very ethically and cleverly at the same time.
He persuades his captors that he's willing to help--given the 
incentive of an valuable item that the Goblins would like back in
their possession.

Then he tells him captors just enough to get them trapped 
inside the vault.  So clever!  

And yeah, I know we shouldn't expect Harry to be--you know--
a hero or anything.  He's just a guy trying to destroy Horcuxes.
But I really was disgusted at Harry lying to Griphook.  Plus, I was
a bit disgusted at having to sit around for several weeks while
the Trio planned their bank heist.  

(Digression alert:  Just whose brilliant idea was it to have 
Hermione impersonate Bellatrix Lestrange?  Wouldn't Ron
have been a better choice, since he's the one with the mad
mimicry skillz?  Hermione has pretty much been 
established by this point as the worst actress in the world.)

So, I was rooting for Griphook to grab the sword and run.






From kersberg at chello.nl  Sun Aug 10 16:00:12 2008
From: kersberg at chello.nl (kamion53)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2008 16:00:12 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7kefk+5jca@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7n3ac+9ifm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184032

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at ...> wrote:
>
> The timing is conditioned by seasonal and symbolic considerations,
> IMO. The Snatchers episode had to take place around Easter so that
> Draco would be at Malfoy Manor. That meant Easter had to be moved up
> (or the camping interval would have lasted even longer) but the battle
> of Hogwarts couldn't take place before May, if JKR didn't want Harry
> to take his walk through the forest knee-deep in mud.<g>
>
> I think it's also important  that Harry's sacrifice takes place well
> after Easter, not during it. Symbolically, he's a follower of Jesus,
> not Jesus himself.
>
> Pippin


Kamion writing:
Honestly I think JKR let the timing rule by two quite different reasons
and well two that come directly from the store:

Nl the role and function of Draco:
Draco needed to be in Harry's presence at a certain moment to be
overpowered a lose his Mastership of the Elder Wand (which he did not
knew he had). Without winning Draco's wand Harry would not have won the
Mastership of the Elder Wand. So Draco needed to be present at Malfoy
Manor when Harry was brought in as a captive, what he did with the
identification is of no importance.
Logic time for being present at home is the Easterbreak.

Would it not be more logic that Draco was at home during the whole year?
No; first, eduction had become mandatory, second Draco is the model type
student in Voldy's propaganda.
Third, and most important, he needed to be in a position for Narcissa
to become so worried about him, that she was prepared to break her
loyalty with Voldemort. Would Draco have been in the DE camp instead
of at beleaguered Hogwarts Narcissa never would have lied and Harry
really would have died.
In the end the quintessence of DH was the sacrifice that mothers make.
(Molly, Lily and Narcissa form a unity in this.)

Easter is at average the first or second weekend of April, I don't
think JKR looked it up at all, early April was enough, take a few weeks
for the goblin to heal as well for Hermione to recover and April is
gone and we arrive in May, which is mentioned.




From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Aug 11 03:46:40 2008
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 03:46:40 -0000
Subject: Muggle Parents and more (was The Malfoys WAS:  Wizarding kids and their
In-Reply-To: <g75d8v+8l06@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7ocn0+l0lj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184033

Justcorbly wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183968>:

<< JKR tells us nothing about how, or if, Hogwarts deals with Muggle
parents. Do they offer counseling session explaining such things as
"Here Is What Your Child Really Is" and "Here Is What The World of
Wizards and Witches Is All About." >>

In a webchat archived at
<http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2004/0304-wbd.htm>:

<< HPFreak7: How are muggle parents convinced to let their kids go to
Hogwarts, a strange place they never heard of before; and wouldn't
they think it was a practical joke?
JK Rowling replies -> In the case of Muggle parents, special
messengers are sent to explain everything to them. But don't forget
that they will have noticed that there's something strange about their
child for the previous ten years, so it won't come as a complete bolt
from the blue. >>

I suppose everyone knows that <http://www.accio-quote.org/> is the
place to look for citations to what Rowling said outside of her books.
But it also has a news blog on the home page that I bothered to look
at today, and found some things I want to comment on, which is why I
bothered with this reply even tho' Carol had already answered the
question in <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183973>:

<< Rowling on PotterCast! (snip) Jo was sad that she wasn't going to
write a Hogwarts graduation scene. Posted 18 December 2007 by roonwit>>

In the old days of this list, there was a constantly recurring
conversation, consisting of an American listie speculating something
about Hogwarts graduation, followed by a British listie scolding that
British high schools don't have graduations, only universities. No one
was pacified by the suggestion that Hogwarts might have borrowed a
university custom as well as some high school customs. But that quote
suggests that Rowling agreed with it.

<< Information from the WOMBATs. I have been working out how the
WOMBATs are scored, to see what extra information is obtained from
knowing the right answers. Some of what I was able to deduce in this
way is (snip) # There are no female centaurs. # There are no male Veela.>>

Maybe the centaurs and Veela are the males and females of the same
species.

<< It is impossible to transfigure animate objects into inanimate
objects. (snip) Posted 2 December 2007 by roonwit >>

Not so! In PS/SS, the Transfiguration class turns beetles (animate)
into buttons (inanimate) and in Gof, they turn hedgehogs into
pincushions, providing the lovely quote: "I might remind you that
*your* pincushion, Thomas, still curls up in fright if anyone
approaches it with a pin!"





From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Aug 11 03:58:01 2008
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 03:58:01 -0000
Subject: Hand of Glory  (was HoG/Rookwood
In-Reply-To: <g75j3d+hm6i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7odc9+j87j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184034

Carol wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183971>:

<< [Draco] could not have taken [the Hand of Glory] to Hogwarts then
[in CoS] because he canonically did not have it. Moreover, even if he
acquired it (offpage) in some other year, >>

My feeling is that Draco acquired the Hand of Glory off-page, by Owl
order, in CoS. To me, technically he did not *take* it to Hogwarts in
the CoS year because instead he had it delivered to him at Hogwarts.
The only canon I recall is that he did not buy it during the early CoS
visit to Borgin and Burke's. Please tell me if there is some other
canon that he did not have it hidden in his dorm room later in CoS.

I could even spin a tale that Narcissa was getting her hair done while
Lucius and Draco were at Borgin and Burke's, and the three then
re-united for a snack at Florean Fortescue's, and Draco whined to
Narcissa about Father being mean to him, and Narcissa immediately
glared daggers at Lucius and marched Draco back to Borgin and Burke's
and bought him the Hand of Glory, so he *did* TAKE it to Hogwarts in
his trunk. That Draco was no longer messing with it in Slytherin House
by Christmas holiday, the only time we got to see him in Slytherin
House, doesn't prove he hadn't messed with a lot before quickly
getting bored.

<< Ron would not have seen it, >>

Ron could have seen it when Draco showed it off in public (i.e.
anywhere but Slytherin House). Draco could have shown it off by waving
it around and telling of its properties; he didn't need to demonstrate
its properties to show it off. The other kids would have been
adequately impressed that it was a body part of a dead human being. As
long as he didn't show it off directly in view of a professor or Filch
or a particularly officious Prefect (like Hermione became), it
wouldn't have been confiscated. Even Draco is smart enough to hide it
in his bookbag or under his cloak if Filch comes by.

<< and Draco would have had to take it home each school year. He
couldn't hide it at the school where the House-elves would find it
over the holidays, >>

I don't think Draco would have wanted to leave it at school over the
holidays, but if he did, the House Elves would dust it. It is not the
job of House Elves to confiscate students' possessions. They probably
had reported to Dumbledore that he had it, but Dumbledore had a very
non-interfering attitude toward student behavior.

<< and he couldn't take it home because his father would have regarded
it as a tool for thieves and plunderers. >>

I think you either underestimate Draco's ability to hid things in his
bedroom, or overestimate his parents' desire to search his bedroom.
Why do you think they would want to find the pornography or the
guidebooks on how to cheat on exams that they assume he has hidden
from them?

I was pleased that Lynda offered her practical experience to support
my theoretical positions in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183982>: <<
having lived in a number of dormitories in my life (school,
military barracks) and realizing that it's not really all that
difficult to hide something if you really have to  >>

<< she also didn't consider how he could get it into the school under
the strict new security measures whether or not it had been there
before. >>

What is the canon to disprove that the security spells only detected
Dark artifacts which were coming to Hogwarts for the first time?

Steve bboyminn wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183977>:

<< So, how about DE enter B&B's shop and send something through,
something useful like the Hand of Glory? It goes through the cabinet
proving its function, Draco finds it, it by-passes security, it
resolves everything except how Ron knew about Draco having it. >>

Good idea, except not explaining how Ron said he had *seen* it.
<< "Remember that shriveled-up arm Malfoy had?" >>




From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Aug 11 04:41:18 2008
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 04:41:18 -0000
Subject: goblin property and Harry cheat/NeedValor&3Founders/Lucius/Luna/Reckless
Message-ID: <g7ofte+jtnp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184035

Aussie Hagrid wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183996>:

<< Griphook asserted that the sword was a lost Goblin masterpiece of
goblinwork, taken from its owner by Godric Gryffindor. "It belongs
with the goblins!" (snip) Harry found the idea that Godric Gryffindor
had stolen the sword unpleasant. Hermione told them that she knew of
no such story, but that wizarding history often glosses over wizards'
ill treatment of other races. >>

'Taken from its owner' sounds like a claim that Godric either snuck
into the goblin's home/workshop/treasure vault to grab the sword and
exit with it (burglary), or that Godric physically attacked the goblin
and subdued him and took the sword from him (mugging, robbery).

As we know from CoS, the sword has Godric Gryffindor's name spelled
out on it, worked into its structure. To me, that shows that the sword
was custom-made for Godric, probably because Godric commissionned it,
rather than on spec, and it is therefore terribly
unlikely that Godric got it by burglary or robbery. By far the most
likely way that a bloke who commission a custom-made personalized
object from an artisan could steal it is by not paying the artisan,
and Godric seemed to have enough money not to need to cheat tradesmen,
and miserliness is not a characteristic Gryffindor vice.

Altho' I suppose I could make up some unlikely stories, in which the
artisan made the personalised object for his own use, just because he
liked having other people's names on his stuff, or the artisan made
the object on commission but then refused to hand it over, either
because of having quarreled with the bloke who commissioned and
feeling generally hostile, or because the object came out so well that
the artisan wanted to keep it to show off.

If the bloke had already paid for the object, then it is the artisan
who is the thief, and if the block sneaks into the artisan's workshop
under cover of darkness using a Hand of Glory or an Invisibility
cloak, then the bloke is retrieving his property from a thief rather
than being a thief himself. If the bloke took the artifact before he
had paid for it, that seems to me to be an argumentative case in
contract law.

But there is no reason to think that any such a thing occurred
between Godric and his goblin swordsmith. I thought Harry was
excessively sensitive to even wonder if Godric really had stolen it.

Carol wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183997>:

<< his view that Goblinmade works, paid for by Wizards, belong to
the Goblin who made them is preposterous. >>

Altho' I agree with many of your points, "preposterous" is a big
word.

Aussie Hagrid wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183996>:

<< Bill explained that "[t]o a goblin, the rightful and true master of
any object is the maker, not the purchaser" and that they considered
the concept of passing on ownership among wizards after the purchaser
had died to be theft. >>

It seemed to me that Bill's explanation meant that normal goblins
thought they were selling their handiwork only for the purchaser's
lifetime, and therefore they felt deeply offended that purchasers
willed the artifact to heirs and maybe even sold it while still
alive. By the way, under this logic, they wouldn't have thought
Godric stole the sword; they would have though his heir stole it.

>From Bill's explanation, it seemed to me that normal goblins would
have been satisfied if the contracts of sale had stated (and been
obeyed) that whenever the artifact was inherited or sold, a
specified fee must be paid to the goblin maker or maker's heirs.
(For all I know, a goblin's heirs are the colleagues who learned
smithcraft from the same master rather than a relative.)

Such a contract is not preposterous. I read once of a then-current
painter who painted a contract on the back of each of his paintings,
which he made purchasers sign, that whenever ownership of this
painting was transferred, 5% of the price must be paid to the artist
or his heirs. He did that because of contemplation of the cliche of
artists starving in garrets, occasionally selling a painting for
enough to pay more paints but not enough to pay rent, and during the
dot.com boom, that painting sold for over ten million dollars.

Anyway, I don't know when wizards started buying artifacts from
goblins. If it was still a new practice in Godric's time, there
could INNOCENTLY be conflict because the buyer and the seller had
different unstated assumptions about 'obvious' parts of the deal.
But both sides should have been able to figure out the problem in
no more than a couple hundred years, and solve it by making
contracts that stated all those terms.

Griphook, however, seemed to me to believe that no artifact made by
goblins should ever be owned by a wizard, not even for just the
wizard's lifetime. I don't know what he thought the maximum term of
renting a goblin-made artifact to a wizard should be (one hour, one
day, one year, twenty years?) or what very high standards the wizard
would have to reach in order to be allowed to rent an artifact for
even one hour, but his view seems to me to be based on ideological and
racialist (species-ial-ist) opinions, not on opinions of contract law.
I think it was correct for Rowling to refer to him (in some Q&A) as a
fanatic.

Aussie Hagrid wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183996>:

<< Harry decided to tell Griphook he could have the sword after
helping them get into the Lestranges' vault, but not to tell him
that it might be years. >>

Carol wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183997>:

<< we see Harry forced by circumstances into making a somewhat
ethically iffy bargain--he intends to keep his promise to give
Griphook the Sword of Gryffindor as his reward, but only when he's
through with it. If Harry had named that condition, he'd have been
more honest, but Griphook might not have agreed to that condition,
and Harry couldn't take that chance. >>

Harry's bargain struck me as worse than 'ethically iffy' -- I might
class it as 'ethically challenged'. I was really bothered that he did
it, not only because of karma(*), but because in the likely event that
something went wrong, it would be another straw on the fire of
goblin-wizard hostility.

I think he should have told Griphook he needed the sword to destroy
the Horcruxes, and would give it to Griphook once all the Horcruxes
were destroyed. Griphook might have agreed to that or provided another
very powerful magical artifact with which to destroy the Horcruxes. If
Griphook had just outright refused, then Harry could have tried
another strategy, such as the one he did use.

(*) I said 'karma' in an entirely Euro-American way, with no
implications about Buddhism or Hinduism, but that seems to be the
word we use nowadays to mean 'what goes around, comes around', or
'the people you pass on the way up are the same people you pass on
the way down'.

I believe those proverbs were meant as worldly advice, like the fairy
tales in which Rose Red is nice to nasty dwarves and Psyche is nice to
lowly ants, and latter the dwarves give a valuable magical present to
Rose Red and the ants do one of the impossible tasks that Aphrodite
ordered Psyche to do, separating black seeds from white seeds in a
huge mixed heap of tiny seeds. In worldly terms, being honest and kind
is recommended as a way to make friends and avoid making enemies and
gain a good reputation.

But there is also a metaphysical level, the idea of events outside of
human control that occur to help the kind and honest person or to harm
the cruel and dishonest person, such as the bad guy is struck dead by
a meteorite or the good guy wins the lottery.

Whether or not superhuman forces reward virtue and punish vice in 
this life in real life, in fiction it can happen.

Jerri wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184025>:

<< I wonder, in light of what I have been reading in the discussion
and Bill's warning to Harry, if one form of goblin magic is the
ability to tell if/when they are being lied to, or someone is planning
to cheat them in some fashion. It is possible that the "handshake" was
a test by Griphook of Harry's good faith, and when he sensed Harry's
reservations, Griphook decided that Harry was just like all wizards,
planning to cheat goblins, and it is at this point that Griphook
decided to set Harry and the rest of the trio up in a trap. >>

I like this idea as an example of Instant Karma.

Aussie Hagrid wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183996>:

<< 11) Goblin ownership laws: "the true owner of an object is the
maker, not the purchaser". This sounds like our copyright and patent
laws. I can't buy a CD and copy a song onto my I-Pod. Are arguments
against the goblin law grounds for authors to re-think copyright laws? >>

I don't think Rowling intended any argument against copyright laws.
She doesn't appear to think there is any comparison between Griphook's
fanaticism and her role in copyright lawsuits about her
books.

Pippin wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184023>:

<< Stealing something from its rightful owner is hardly a valorous
act. >>

Sure it is, if the good guys do it and it's dangerous. Like our Trio
stealing Hufflepuff's Cup from Gringott's. If it had been in the vault
of an uncooperative rightful owner instead of Bellatrix's, that
wouldn't have decreased their valor (altho' the way they threw
Imperiuses around like Mardi Gras beads may have done).

Montavilla47 wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183998>:

<< Why did the Hat only produce the Sword? Would it have summoned the
Locket, if a Slytherin had needed it? Would it have brought the Cup
for a Hufflepuff and the Tiara for a Ravenclaw? >>

As Beatrice wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184016>, the
Sorting Hat was originally Gryffindor's hat, so maybe it had a special
relationship with Gryffindor's sword and Gryffindor's House that it
didn't have with the other Founders' artifacts and Houses. Or maybe it
just thinks that a tiara, locket, or cup would not be useful in a fight...

The sword goes to a Gryffindor in circumstances of need and valor.
Maybe the tiara of clear thinking would go to a Ravenclaw in
circumstances of research and analysis. Do we know of any special
power of Hufflepuff's cup, like causing all the people who drank 
out of it at the same meal to be friends? Then it might go to a
Hufflepuff in circumstances of facilitating a peace conference...

<< Heh. If so, Dumbledore could have saved himself (and Harry)
a lot of bother. >>

Well, if so, it could have provided my longed-for plot line in which
defeating Voldemort (destroying the Horcruxes) required the
participation of the heirs of each House, Marietta Edgecombe for
Ravenclaw, Zacharias Smith for Hufflepuff, Draco Malfoy for Slytherin,
and oh, not that it's a problem, the required Gryffindor is not Harry,
but Ron.

Mike Crudele wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184014>:

<< I've always wondered how Lucius would have gotten involved with
Voldemort in the first place. >>

I have sometimes wondered if Voldemort is Lucius's godfather. It would
have been useful for the young Tom Riddle to get in good with Malfoys
of an older generation. I am sure the Malfoys have accumulated a vast
library including many rare, even unique, books
teaching Dark Magic, and that they own ancient artifacts, even if not
the ones most associated with the Founders, and they also had money,
which is always nice.

Aussie Hagrid wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183996>:

<< 7) Luna deserves her own question. (snip) Why do you think she
is such an important presence in Harry Potter's life? >>

Carol wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183997>:

<< It isn't so much what she does as who she is that matters.
(snip) Luna is one of JKR's more brilliant creations. >>

I agree with all that good stuff I snipped.

To me, Luna is a spiritually enlightened person (like I thought Albus
Dumbledore had become via more than a hundred years of learning from
his mistakes, until DH totally destroyed even the remnants of that
lovely illusion). I don't know if Rowling would say she is an
unrecognized saint among us, but some Christians would (because there
are saints who are known only to God as saints). I was convinced she
was going to die young because anyone who is that spiritual as a young
person doesn't need to go through a long life to learn some enlightenment.

Her role is to lead Harry, by example and un-self-conscious comment
rather than by statements, not to spiritual enlightment, because
that's a kind of advanced level, but to religion. Because, while there
are a lot of ways that religion can be mis-used, one way most
religions can be used (possibly the way they were supposed to be used)
is as a way to practice virtues and feel compassion for others and
realize that this life is transitory and, in this case, believe in an
afterlife.

Pippin wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184023>:
<< I don't think Harry was being reckless, exactly, but I think
his conscience was uneasy with the bargain he'd made. By becoming
a godfather, Harry is formally taking responsibility for the next
generation of wizards, and like Sirius, he's off to a rocky start,
planning something he might not feel like boasting of to Teddy. >>

I thought Harry's concern was that he might be dead, insane, or in
Azkaban, and therefore unable to do anything for Teddy.





From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Mon Aug 11 16:13:16 2008
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 16:13:16 -0000
Subject: Griphooks view of the Sword (Was CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage)
In-Reply-To: <g7nkp6+4148@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7poes+s4fs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184036

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "montavilla47" 
<montavilla47 at ...> wrote:
>
> Jane
> > Although Harry does not tell him what the trio is after
> > in the vault, Griphook ...it is something with a  value (greater 
>than the sword), 
> > In the vault, and he sees what it is they have come 
> > for, ... and that it doesn't matter what it is they wanted.
> > 
> > ...the further question: Did Griphook expect the trio to die 
> > in the vault? 
> > 
> > I took the handshake to be Griphook's understanding of the
> > human concept of the gesture,

> 
> Montavilla47:
> 
> ...think about it from Griphook's perspective, 
> he acts very ...cleverly .. He persuades his captors that he's 
> willing to help--given the incentive of an valuable item that the 
> Goblins would like back in their possession.
> 
> Then he tells him captors just enough to get them trapped 
> inside the vault.  So clever!  ...
> 
> So, I was rooting for Griphook to grab the sword and run.
>

Aussie again:

Remember, Griphook was a bank employee. When he and Harry made the 
deal, he wasn't looking for poorly disguised guilty expressions from 
Hermione or Ron. He only looked at Harry. And very few Bank 
Employees agree for something so valuable (the Sword) without 
signing ... in triplicate. 

That's why the handshake ment a lot.

I wonder if the Goblins here know the identity of swords the way 
they knew them in LOTR. Maybe Griffyndor's sword was devistating to 
the Goblins in previous wars, and it's capture would make Griphook 
promoted in the eyes of fellow Goblins.

Escaping the vault, Griphook would have had a hard time getting out 
with the sword through all those DE. I think he hid the sword in the 
depths of Gringotts to be retrieved when things cooled down.

I don't think he wanted to harm HRH, but he didn't mind using them 
as a distraction so he could make his escape.

Aussie: (imagining Griphook getting re-employed at Gringotts and 
spending years searching for where he left that darn sword)




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon Aug 11 16:07:55 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 16:07:55 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7nffo+r7i7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7po4r+qu7q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184037

> 
> Pippin:
 It's not fair to judge all goblins by
> Griphook. <BIIG SNIP>
> 
> Alla:
> 
> I will ask the same question as I used to ask those readers who were
 telling me that it is so very unfair to judge the House Slytherin by
 Draco Malfoy. Why not?
> 
> I mean of course it is unfair to do so in RL ? to judge any entity
of people by one representative, I know it and get it. But in the
book?  I think it is a very fair assumption to make that author does
want me  to judge all Slytherins of younger generation by Draco Malfoy
being  their typical representative, since we see no Slytherins who
are  better than him lurking in the background, no?

Pippin:
If Draco's actions are  understood as the unique result of his
individual personality and experiences, which are explored in some
depth during the story, then I must assume that other Slytherins would
not -- could not --  make the same choices that Draco made. I don't
need to know them to know that they couldn't possibly have the exact
same personality or experiences as Draco. 

It's the same with the goblins. Though we don't meet them, Bill knows
goblins that he likes and respects, and cannot help thinking of as his
friends. Griphook is obviously not interested in that kind of
relationship with humans.

Alla:

 She showed us older  Slytherins doing much better things, true, but
within the students?  Who? 

Pippin:
No one in the books distinguishes between this generation of
Slytherins and previous ones. That such a distinction is relevant is
pure fanon, IMO.

Pippin





From jkoney65 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 11 17:30:05 2008
From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 17:30:05 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7nffo+r7i7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7psut+m4od@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184038

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" 
<dumbledore11214 at ...> wrote:
>
>> Alla:
snip
> 
> I do not think that Griphook is an evil impersonated of course; I 
> just think that he is a greedy selfish liar, who fully planned to 
> take advantage of Harry from the very beginning and with his 
> storyline Goblins lost all appeal to me, I have none left 
whatsoever.
> 
> Not that Harry behaved any better of course IMO.
> 
> 
> Pippin:
> This bargain was one of the most cowardly things Harry ever did IMO-
-
> indeed one could say it's the *only* cowardly thing Harry ever did.
> IMO, it's the proof that Harry can be cowardly as the crucio is the
> proof that he can be cruel.
> 
> <SNIP>
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Yes agreed. 
> 
> JMO,
> 
> Alla


Jack-A-Roe

How is Harry cowardly? He has a job to do. Destroying the horcruxes 
before Voldemort finds out. Short of randomly killing people, he can 
pretty much do what he wants and I'll back him up on it.

Bill has already warned him that he can't trust the goblins. He needs 
the help of a Goblin to get in to the vault. So he lies to Griphook, 
someone who he believes is going to lie & double cross him. I don't 
have any problem with this. I think that this would be one of the 
times that the end justifies the means.

JMO
Jack-A-Roe








From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 11 19:57:51 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:57:51 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7po4r+qu7q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7q5jv+hkil@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184039

> Pippin:
> If Draco's actions are  understood as the unique result of his
> individual personality and experiences, which are explored in some
> depth during the story, then I must assume that other Slytherins 
would
> not -- could not --  make the same choices that Draco made. I don't
> need to know them to know that they couldn't possibly have the exact
> same personality or experiences as Draco. 

Alla:

I think that it is a very big **if** that Draco's actions are 
understood as unique result of his individual personality and 
experiences. But I am not claiming that all Slytherins have the same 
personality and experiences, of course not. I am claiming that all 
current Slytherins believe that purebloods rule and I am basing it 
based on the only representative of younger generation of Slytherins 
that I met and got to know at some sort of depth. We do not know a 
lot of things about even Draco Malfoy that would make me think that I 
know him as a whole person, that leads me to believe that of course 
those other experiences that are hidden from eyes could be different 
for other Slytherins.

But yeah, I am convinced that what we saw is the similar pattern for 
majority of Slytherins and that hopefully they experienced some 
change at the end.

Again, I think that this was absolutely deliberately, I think for JKR 
Malfoy is the face of younger Slytherins. IMO of course.

When I read War and Peace, I will never make an assumption for 
example that all russian nobles wanted to free their serves. Do you 
know why? Because Tolstoy showed me that some of them wanted and some 
of them did not want to do it. I would NEVER make an assumption that 
all russian nobles wanted to join Massons for the same reason.

But I will make an assumption that pretty much all russian nobles 
wanted to fight Napoleon. Do you know why? Because I do not remember 
reading about anybody who did not want to do that.

And same with Potterverse. I think that if JKR wanted me to make an 
assumption that not all Slytherins believe in pureblood rule, she 
would have showed me one. She showed me that not all of them wanted 
Voldemort to rule, sure.

Pippin:
> It's the same with the goblins. Though we don't meet them, Bill 
knows
> goblins that he likes and respects, and cannot help thinking of as 
his
> friends. Griphook is obviously not interested in that kind of
> relationship with humans.

Alla:

But where do you get likes and respects part? My interpretation of 
his conversation with Harry was certainly that he does not hate 
Goblins, but I have not noticed particular liking from Bill. I guess 
that is open to interpretation. Regardless for me it is not enough. I 
am again thinking back to SS/PS and being so fascinated by Goblins in 
the bank that I wanted so badly to learn more about it. And here we 
go - Griphook came along.

 
> Alla:
> 
>  She showed us older  Slytherins doing much better things, true, but
> within the students?  Who? 
> 
> Pippin:
> No one in the books distinguishes between this generation of
> Slytherins and previous ones. That such a distinction is relevant is
> pure fanon, IMO.

Alla:

Huh? The only distinction I am making is that I do not see any 
student from Slytherin house whom I can respect more than Draco 
Malfoy. You are not disputing the distinction that neither Snape, nor 
Regulus, nor Slughorn are NOT current students? That's all I am 
saying. I think that is canon, the distinction I am making.

JMO,

Alla




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 11 20:38:32 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 20:38:32 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7psut+m4od@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7q808+fal2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184040

> Jack-A-Roe
> 
> How is Harry cowardly? He has a job to do. Destroying the horcruxes 
> before Voldemort finds out. Short of randomly killing people, he can 
> pretty much do what he wants and I'll back him up on it.
> 
> Bill has already warned him that he can't trust the goblins. He needs 
> the help of a Goblin to get in to the vault. So he lies to Griphook, 
> someone who he believes is going to lie & double cross him. I don't 
> have any problem with this. I think that this would be one of the 
> times that the end justifies the means.


Alla:

I did not say that Harry is cowardly. I agreed that he did a cowardly 
thing here and I stand by it. I love Harry's character dearly and will 
defend him from a lot of things other readers are often accusing him of.
But I will do so NOT because I love his character dearly, but because I 
will genuinely believe that in many situations Harry is either right or 
justified, or excused. Here not so. I still adore Harry's character, 
but I believe that he behaved pretty low here.

I am not sure I remember anything in canon stating that Harry believes 
that Griphook is going to lie and double cross him. Oh sure Bill warns 
him to be careful when bargaining with Goblins, but Harry specifically 
thinking that Griphook is planning something? I do not remember that.

If Harry knew, sure, I would have no problem with it, but I think here 
he stooped to Griphook's level. I wished he would have been honest and 
I thought he got smacked quite appropriately for stooping IMO to 
Griphook's level.

Harry is not dealing with the enemy here IMO. He is dealing with 
somebody whose priorities he does not like ( and neither do I), but 
somebody with whom IMO Harry should have been honest and if the bargain 
fell through, I think Harry should have kept looking and maybe somebody 
whom Bill knows would have indeed agreed to help him.

JMO,

Alla




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon Aug 11 22:21:32 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 22:21:32 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7q5jv+hkil@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7qe1c+gpm7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184041

> 
> Alla:. I am claiming that all  current Slytherins believe that
purebloods rule and I am 
basing it  based on the only representative of younger generation of
Slytherins 
> that I met and got to know at some sort of depth. 

Pippin:
They've all been indoctrinated with the idea that purebloods are
superior (which is just a subset of the belief that wizards in general
are superior. )

 But  there are lots of different ways of reacting to that
indoctrination, from Bella who believed in it more fervently that
Voldemort himself, to Slughorn who thinks he's not prejudiced but
could use some consciousness raising,  to  Snape who  had doubts from
the first and finally rejected it as much as possible.     

Why should I think all the present day Slytherins are like Draco (and
Bella) instead of like one of the others, especially when Draco moves
away from fanaticism over the course of the story, and Harry holds up
Snape as an example? 

> 
> Pippin:
> > It's the same with the goblins. Though we don't meet them, Bill 
> knows goblins that he likes and respects, and cannot help thinking
of as  his friends. Griphook is obviously not interested in that kind
of relationship with humans.
> 
> Alla:
> 
> But where do you get likes and respects part? 

Pippin:
>From Bill's own words:
"I know goblins," said Bill. "I've worked for Gringotts ever since I
left Hogwarts. As far as there can be friendship between wizards and
goblins, I have goblin friends--or at least goblins that I know well
and like." -- DH ch 25.

Obviously those goblins can't be like Griphook, who openly dislikes
wizards and does not seek the friendship or society of humans.

> Alla:
> 
> Huh? The only distinction I am making is that I do not see any 
> student from Slytherin house whom I can respect more than Draco 
> Malfoy. You are not disputing the distinction that neither Snape, nor 
> Regulus, nor Slughorn are NOT current students? 

Pippin:
But why should it matter that they're not current students? In the
books, nobody cares.  Young Albus doesn't say, "But Snape doesn't
count because that was forty years ago."

Pippin




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 11 22:30:57 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 22:30:57 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7qe1c+gpm7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7qej1+eb2h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184042

>
> Pippin:
> > It's the same with the goblins. Though we don't meet them, Bill
> knows goblins that he likes and respects, and cannot help thinking
of as his friends. Griphook is obviously not interested in that kind
of relationship with humans.
>
> Alla:
>
> But where do you get likes and respects part?

Pippin:
>From Bill's own words:
"I know goblins," said Bill. "I've worked for Gringotts ever since I
left Hogwarts. As far as there can be friendship between wizards and
goblins, I have goblin friends--or at least goblins that I know well
and like." -- DH ch 25.

Obviously those goblins can't be like Griphook, who openly dislikes
wizards and does not seek the friendship or society of humans.


Alla:

See I don't know, there is that qualifier "as far as there can be 
friendship between goblins and wizards". I discovered some time ago 
as I am sure mentioned here before that many americans put a bit 
different meaning to the word friend that I do for example. It seems 
to me that any acquaintance here is called a friend IMO. I use the 
word friends very very sparingly, the word is way too precious for 
me, you know?



It seems to me here that Bill is more talking about having 
acquaintances among goblins other than friends, or at least friends 
in the meaning that I put to this word.


BUT having said that I will agree that as far as those goblins are 
willing to even be acquaintances with humans they are different from 
Griphook. But are they really?

Are you sure that as soon as they will decide that some object that 
Bill possesses belong to the Goblins, they will not double cross him 
right away? I am not. After all, Griphook was also civil to Harry 
till the sword was involved.

JMO,

Alla




From falkeli at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 12 10:47:00 2008
From: falkeli at yahoo.com (hp_fan_2008)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:47:00 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0808060728r25a69613k863ea9bb59cba18f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <g7rpn4+248t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184043

Debbie:
> In my mind, this fact (and the reference to the crowd at Auntie
Muriel's)
> paints a picture of the faithful driven into hiding.  What's odd is that
> other then the Trio, who are planning the Gringotts break-in, no one
seems
> to be engaged in any active resistance operations.  If Lupin can make a
> visit just to announce Teddy's birth, I found it surprising that we see
> nothing of an active underground network.
> 

If we look at who shows up for the last battle of Hogwarts (other than
those already at the school before HRH show up), we see the DA, the
Weasley family, Lupin, Tonks, Neville's grandmother, Aberforth and
Kingley. Aberforth seems to think he was forced in by the use of his
bar; the Weasley family was in hiding; Lupin and Tonks were busy with
taking care of little Teddy. The only member of the order who could
reasonably go out and fight was Kingsley - and one person would have
little effect on LV and the DEs. Note that when Harry's life was at
risk at Hogwarts, Lupin, Tonks and the Weasleys did show up.



                   HP Fan 2008




From beatrice23 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 12 13:40:01 2008
From: beatrice23 at yahoo.com (Beatrice23)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:40:01 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
Message-ID: <g7s3rh+socl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184044

This message is a Special Notice for all members of
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups

In addition to being published onlist (available in webview),
this post is also being delivered offlist (to email in boxes)
to those whose "Message Delivery" is set to "Special Notices."
If this is problematic or if you have any questions, contact
the List Elves at (minus that extra space)
HPforGrownups-owner @yahoogroups.com

----------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
Chapter 26, Gringotts

The chapter opens with Harry, Ron, Hermione, and Griphook finalizing
their plan to break into the Lestranges' Gringott's Vault.  The plan
includes using a black hair the trio found on Hermione's sweater and
Bellatrix's actual wand to help Hermione pass as Bellatrix.

Hermione complains about Bellatrix's wand not working properly for
her.  Harry resists reminding Hermione of the way she scoffed at his
loathing of the blackthorn wand.  Ron, however, sees the wand and the
evil that has been committed with it as an opportunity for Hermione
to "get into character." Hermione reminds Ron that the wand tortured
the Longbottoms and performed the curse that killed Sirius, and Harry
has the sudden urge to destroy the wand.

Hermione wishes that Ollivander could make her a wand as he recently
sent Luna a new wand from Auntie Muriel's house.  Harry, on the other
hand, is surprisingly pleased with the performance of Draco's
hawthorn wand and knows that it is because he won the wand's
allegiance by disarming Draco himself. As soon as this thought occurs
to Harry, Griphook opens the bedroom door and enters.  Harry reaches
territorially for the sword of Gryffindor.

Harry regrets this action, because he doesn't want Griphook to sense
his reluctance about the deal that they have reached.  In the
previous chapter, Griphook agrees to help the trio if they give him
the sword of Gryffindor.  They agree, but reluctantly, as they know
that they need the sword to complete their task of destroying
Horcruxes.  Harry and Ron agree that they will give Griphook the
sword, but that they will not give it to him until they are done with
their task.  Hermione is not comfortable with this double cross and
refuses to help them determine how to do this.

The date and time of their departure is set for the next morning.
They have obtained a new tent from Bill after losing the old one when
they were apprehended by Greyback, et al.  Harry is thrilled that
Hermione was able to conceal the beaded bag with the majority of
their supplies.  Harry has mixed feelings about leaving Shell
Cottage.  He is sorry to leave Bill, Fleur, Luna, and Dean, but will
be glad to be rid of Griphook, who has been spying on them, looking
for signs of their duplicity.

The morning dawns and Harry thinks sadly of leaving Dobby's grave
behind as he waits in the garden for Hermione and Griphook.  Hermione
appears in the form of Bellatrix Lestrange with Griphook in tow.
Hermione comments that Bellatrix "tasted disguisting, worse than
Gurdyroots." Hermione transforms Ron's appearance, and Harry and
Griphook disappear underneath the invisibility cloak.

When they arrive at the Leaky Cauldron, Hermione immediately acts out
of character by being too nice to the barman, Tom.  Harry warns her
about this as they move out into Diagon Alley.  For the first time in
a long time, the reader is made aware of the stark changes to the
Wizarding World.  New shops devoted to the Dark Arts have opened in
Diagon Alley, wanted posters of Harry are posted everywhere, and
ragged people are huddled in doorways begging for gold.  Hemione is
accosted by a ragged man demanding to know where his children are.
As he lunges for her, Ron reacts quickly, stunning him, but the
disgust he feels is etched on his face.  They have little time to
think about this as Travers approaches "Bellatrix," and he joins them
as they move toward Gringotts.

Travers expresses his surprise at seeing Bellatrix, and we learn that
it is rumored that Bellatrix and the Malfoys have been confined to
Malfoy Manor.  Hermione disabuses Travers of this notion, asserting
the importance of her position, and Travers immediately changes the
subject to ask about the stunned, ragged man.  Hermione loftily
replies that he will not offend her again, and Travers recounts his
own encounters with a new class in the Wizarding World: "the
wandless."  Hermione introduces Ron as a foreign sympathizer.

As they enter Gringotts, they are greeted by security wizards
with "Probity Probes" which detect spells of concealment and hidden
magical objects.  Harry acts quickly and quietly, confunding the
guards so that they easily forget to examine "Bellatrix." As they
enter the bank, Harry is reminded again of the enormity of their task
by the warning posted in the lobby to thieves.  As they request
access to the Lestrange vault, the goblin demands identification in
the form of Bellatrix's wand, prompting Griphook to tell Harry that
the goblins know something is amiss, and Griphook urges Harry to use
the Imperius Curse.  Harry performs the curse on the goblin, Bogrod,
and on Travers, who immediately agree that Bellatrix's "new wand" is
excellent, and despite another goblin's attempt to delay them they
move toward the vault entrance.   Harry forces Travers to come with
them, but once inside he reveals himself and tells them of the
urgency, as Harry knows the goblins suspect them.  Harry tells Ron
and Hermione that he has used the Imperious Curse on Travers and
Bogrod, but says that he is not sure that he "did it strongly
enough."  Harry sends Travers to hide after Griphook tells him that
there won't be room for him in the cart.

The trio and the two goblins set off for the vault.  As they descend,
Harry thinks about how foolish it is to disguise Hermione as
Bellatrix and use her wand.  Suddenly they are hit with water and
thrown from the cart.  Hermione performs a cushioning charm, but
the "Thief's Downfall" has erased Ron and Hermione's disguises,
although Harry's cloak is still intact.  The Thief's Downfall has
lifted Bogrod's Imperius Curse and Harry once again places him under
the curse and forces him to continue their journey on foot.  Hermione
hears people coming and uses the shield charm to part the water and
clear their path.  Soon they come upon a dragon chained in front
of "four or five of the deepest vaults in the place. "  The dragon is
sickly and unhealthy looking, with "pale and flaky scales...eyes were
a milky pink
and scars made by vicious slashes across its face."
Griphook tells us that the dragon is "partially blind, but more
savage for it," and Harry realizes that it has been made to fear the
slashes of hot swords when it hears the "clankers," so the dragon
backs away from the vault and allows them to enter.  Bogrod places
his hand on the vault door and they enter and begin searching for the
cup or something with Ravenclaw's eagle.

They are plunged into darkness and Griphook urges them to light their
wands and hurry.  Harry notes the fake sword and glittering jewels.
Hermione seizes a jeweled cup, asking if this could be what they are
searching for, and immediately shrieks in pain as it burns her,
multiplying into a shower of goblets as it falls.  Griphook tell them
that the goblins have added Germino and Flagrante Curses to make
anything they touch burn and multiply.  Harry warns them not to touch
anything, but accidently hits a goblet with his foot, and more
explode on the floor.  Standing still, they search with their eyes
until Harry sees the cup on a high shelf as the flaming hot treasure
heats the tiny vault like a furnace.  Hermione attempts to Accio the
cup but has forgotten that this won't work.  Harry, using his wits,
asks for the sword and attempts to reach the cup.  He is unable to
reach it and pleads with Hermione for help.  Hermione instantly
whispers "Levicorpus," and Harry is hoisted in the air by his ankle,
hitting a burning suit of armor which multiplies, adding to the chaos
as the sound of clanking goblins approach, looking for the thieves.
Harry thrusts the sword through the handle of the cup, as Hermione
tries to protect herself, Ron, and Griphook from the burning hot
metal that threatens to crush them.  They scream, waist deep in
blazing treasure, and Griphook is completely covered with only his
fingers showing.  Harry pulls Griphook free and loses his grip on the
sword.  With Griphook on his back, he calls, frantically looking for
the sword and the cup.  Griphook, now on Harry's back, sees it and
seizes it and a handful of Harry's hair.  Harry realizes instantly
that Griphook never expected Harry to honor their bargain as he
raises the sword out of Harry's reach and the cup is launched in the
air.

Harry dives and catches the cup with Griphook still on his back.  He
holds on to the cup gripping it as it burns his flesh and multiplies
around him.  They find themselves riding a tide of treasure as the
door to the vault is opened and they are washed out into the outer
chamber.  Harry shoves the cup in his pocket and looks around for
Griphook and the sword, but Griphook is sprinting toward the other
goblins yelling, "Thieves! Thieves! Help! Thieves!"  Harry, Ron, and
Hermione start bellowing "Stupefy!" at the approaching hoard and
retreat.  Harry, in a fit of inspiration, releases the dragon and
orders the others to climb up.  The dragon roars and takes to its
wings, knocking goblins aside and making a mad dash out of its
underground prison.  The passageways are too narrow, but the dragon
breathes fire and the floor and ceiling crumble.  Hermione helps,
yelling "Defodio."  Harry and Ron copy her, and together they clear
the way for their escape.  At last they burst out of Gringotts and
the dragon launches itself toward the open sky with Harry, Ron, and
Hermione clinging to its back.


Questions:

1. HRH plan on using "a single long, coarse black hair (plucked from
the sweater Hermione had been wearing at Malfoy Manor)" (DH 519).
This might remind our readers of another time HRH attempted to use
polyjuice potion.  As you were reading did you have any fears that
this attempt might end as poorly as the previous?

2. Why do the trio align themselves with Griphook?  Why not ask for
Bill's help?  Would Bill help them?  Why doesn't Harry even consider
this idea?

3. Harry has the sudden urge to destroy Bellatrix's wand when he is
reminded of the spells it has performed.  Is this rational?

4. Why does Ollivander make Luna and Luna alone a new wand?  Why not
make new wands for all of the people who were incarcerated with him?
Why not make new wands for as many people as possible who have been
victimized as he was by Death Eaters?  Why doesn't Ollivander think
about arming the enemies of his enemy?  What does this say about his
character?

5. Is Harry's plan to withhold the Sword of Gryffindor from Griphook
a double-cross?  Should Harry have explained their need of the sword
(withholding certain details of course) and do something to ensure
that Griphook would allow them to use it for a while?  Were you
comfortable with Harry's decision?  Or did you agree with Hermione?

6. Before they leave, Hermione comments that Bellatrix "tasted
disguisting."  How do you think that Harry tasted?  His polyjuice
potion certainly was a more pleasant color.  Is a person's
polyjuice "flavor" significant?

7. Hermione breaks character as Bellatrix when she says "good
morning" to Tom, the Leaky Cauldron barman.  Of the three, who is the
best actor?  Is Hermione the best choice to play Bellatrix?  Would
Harry or Ron have done a better job with her character?

8. How did you feel about the changes to Diagon Alley?  Were you
surprised by any of the changes to the Wizarding World?

9. Ron is forced to stun a man who attempts to assault
Bellatrix/Hermione.  Did you agree with his decision?  Does he have a
choice?  How does he feel about the situation?

10. There has been a lot of debate about Harry's use of unforgivable
curses.  Here we have the first time he uses one as he performs the
Imperius Curse on Bogrod and Travers.  Why doesn't he confound them
as he does the security guard?  Is it really necessary to use this
curse?  Is this more effective than a Confundus Charm?  Does Harry's
feeling that he did not perform a very strong curse make it more
acceptable that he uses this tactic?

11. How did you feel about the description of the dragon and the
cruel way in which it is kept?  Did this make you feel any different
about Gringotts or goblins?  Harry thought he saw dragon fire when he
first entered Gringotts in SS/PS.  Are there more dragons? Or is this
the only one?

12. As they enter the vault, they realize that the treasure has been
charmed or cursed to burn their flesh and multiply.  Should Griphook
have anticipated this little snag?  Why aren't they more prepared for
this?  Was Griphook's lapse intentional?

13. How do you feel about Griphook's treatment of Harry after Harry
pulls him from the crushing, burning weight of the treasure?
Griphook grabs the sword, and in the process the cup is almost lost.
Did Griphook really intend for Harry to obtain anything from the
vault? Griphook is accepted without question into the hoard of
approaching goblins.  What do you make of this?

14. Harry, Ron, and Hermione escape on the dragon's back in truly
spectacular fashion.  How did you feel about the dragon's escape?
How do you feel about Gringotts and goblins in general after Harry's
experiences?

Beatrice

----------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: For more information on HPfGU's chapter discussions, please
see "HPfGU DH Chapter Discussions" at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database

Next Chapter Discussion, Chapter 27, The Final Hiding Place, August 18





From lizzyben04 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 12 19:18:01 2008
From: lizzyben04 at yahoo.com (lizzyben04)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 19:18:01 -0000
Subject: Muggle Parents and more
In-Reply-To: <g7ocn0+l0lj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7snl9+27hc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184045

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" 
<catlady at ...> wrote:
>
> Justcorbly wrote in
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/183968>:
> 
> << JKR tells us nothing about how, or if, Hogwarts deals with Muggle
> parents. Do they offer counseling session explaining such things as
> "Here Is What Your Child Really Is" and "Here Is What The World of
> Wizards and Witches Is All About." >>
> 
> In a webchat archived at
> <http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2004/0304-wbd.htm>:
> 
> << HPFreak7: How are muggle parents convinced to let their kids go 
to
> Hogwarts, a strange place they never heard of before; and wouldn't
> they think it was a practical joke?
> JK Rowling replies -> In the case of Muggle parents, special
> messengers are sent to explain everything to them. But don't forget
> that they will have noticed that there's something strange about 
their
> child for the previous ten years, so it won't come as a complete 
bolt
> from the blue. >>
<snip>

lizzyben:

While reading the books, I've often wondered what the wizards would 
do if some stubborn Muggles parents refused to let their child attend 
Hogwarts. I certainly wouldn't let my kid go to that school! Not 
every parent will be as thrilled as the Grangers or Evans were at the 
thought of giving up their child to a strange school & stranger 
wizards. Possibly the majority would refuse to let their child attend.

And what if the parents said no? The parents are legal guardians of 
the child, so if they refused, that should be the end of it. But 
wizards have never been very good about respecting Muggle customs. 
And if the wizard child doesn't learn to control their magic, & goes 
to normal Muggle schools, that child could expose the entire 
wizarding world. Plus, be a danger to themselves or others. Plus, 
what if those stubborn parents go talking to other Muggles about this 
Hogwarts school? Seems like there are many risks involved.

It would be so much easier for the wizard to do a memory-wiping 
spell, just like Hermione did to her parents, or a mind-altering 
spell, like Ron did to the Muggle driving instructor. W/a spell, the 
wizards could take the child to Hogwarts to learn magic, teach the 
child how to use magic properly & protect the wizarding world from 
being exposed by leaving a wild wizard wandering in the Muggle 
world.  The wizards haven't hestitated to use magic on Muggles 
before, for much less compelling reasons. 


lizzyben




From mros at xs4all.nl  Tue Aug 12 20:52:54 2008
From: mros at xs4all.nl (Marion Ros)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 22:52:54 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Muggle Parents and more
References: <g7snl9+27hc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000701c8fcbd$653e2850$63fe54d5@Marion>

No: HPFGUIDX 184046

lizzyben:
>>>It would be so much easier for the wizard to do a memory-wiping 
spell, just like Hermione did to her parents, or a mind-altering 
spell, like Ron did to the Muggle driving instructor. W/a spell, the 
wizards could take the child to Hogwarts to learn magic, teach the 
child how to use magic properly & protect the wizarding world from 
being exposed by leaving a wild wizard wandering in the Muggle 
world. The wizards haven't hestitated to use magic on Muggles 
before, for much less compelling reasons. <<<



Marion:
Indeed. Which no doubt gave rise to the folklore tales of changelings: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Changeling

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 12 23:30:18 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 23:30:18 -0000
Subject: Muggle Parents and more
In-Reply-To: <g7snl9+27hc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7t6ea+c4db@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184047

lizzyben wrote:
> 
> While reading the books, I've often wondered what the wizards would
do if some stubborn Muggles parents refused to let their child attend
 Hogwarts. I certainly wouldn't let my kid go to that school! Not 
every parent will be as thrilled as the Grangers or Evans were at the
thought of giving up their child to a strange school & stranger 
wizards. Possibly the majority would refuse to let their child attend.
> 
> And what if the parents said no? The parents are legal guardians of
the child, so if they refused, that should be the end of it. But 
wizards have never been very good about respecting Muggle customs. And
if the wizard child doesn't learn to control their magic, & goes to
normal Muggle schools, that child could expose the entire wizarding
world. Plus, be a danger to themselves or others. Plus, what if those
stubborn parents go talking to other Muggles about this Hogwarts
school? Seems like there are many risks involved.
> 
> It would be so much easier for the wizard to do a memory-wiping 
spell, just like Hermione did to her parents, or a mind-altering 
spell, like Ron did to the Muggle driving instructor. W/a spell, the
wizards could take the child to Hogwarts to learn magic, teach the 
child how to use magic properly & protect the wizarding world from 
being exposed by leaving a wild wizard wandering in the Muggle world.
 The wizards haven't hestitated to use magic on Muggles before, for
much less compelling reasons. 

Carol responds:
While I agree with you that most parents wouldn't want their children
to attend a boarding school, much less a school that would lead them
to become alienated from their parents, I suspect that the proposition
is presented to them in glowing terms--their highly talented and
unusual child is being given a unique opportunity for an education
geared toward his or her special talents--rather like being offered a
scholarship to Guilliard. Rather than having their memories wiped, I
suspect that reluctant parents would be charmed, in both senses of the
word, into granting their children a special privilege, with no hint
that the child would most likely end up estranged from them and their
world. (Surely even Hermione goes home to visit her parents on
occasion, bringing her Muggle-loving father-in-law along--and Ron and
the kids--so the estrangement isn't total. And Lily still corresponded
with Petunia, despite hating her apparently tasteless presents.)
Anyway, I think our model here should be Dumbledore and his contract
with Mrs. Cole via a blank sheet of ("everything seems to be in
order"). A nice, lasting Confundus Charm causing them to be happy to
have a witch or wizard in the family would do the trick better than a
Mamory Charm, which would cause them to forget that they had a child
and leave the child with no place to go over the summer holidays.
(Even Tom Riddle had to go back to the orphanage; kids can stay at
Hogwarts over the Christmas holiday, and most probably stay for Easter
break, but the two-month summer holiday, or vacation, as we Americans
say, is another matter.)

Another small thing--I don't thing there's any danger that the parents
of Muggle-borns, whether or not they send their kids to Hogwarts, will
talk to other Muggles about it. We see the Muggle Prime Minister
absolute certainty that he'll never speak of his contacts with the WW.
He knows that no one would believe him and fears, IIRC, that he'd be
considered insane. (Petunia must have had a similar fear when she told
Vernon about her disgraceful relatives.)

In any case, I don't think we're supposed to think about it overmuch,
but it seems likely to me that any coercion is accomplished subtly,
disguised as persuasion, causing the Muggles (like Hermione's parents)
to want what the Wizards want them to want, if that makes sense. It's
probably rather like the Muggle marketers of new technological gadgets
who persuade consumers that they want and desperately need some gadget
that they've lived all their lives without and never wished for till
they see and hear those seductive ads.

Carol, just tossing out some thoughts in reaction to your post




From lilandriss at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 13 05:18:52 2008
From: lilandriss at yahoo.com (Alanna)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 22:18:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Sirius and his family status
In-Reply-To: <g6kk4m+lsr7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <991226.94384.qm@web53405.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184048

Ok, so in reading some of the discussions going on, I had a the seed of
a question planted in my head and it's starting to drive me
crazy.? It started with the discussion of what the Ministry would
do with people's belonging who were sent to Azkaban and the thought
that belongings might be sent to their families and if Sirius'
belongings were sent to *his* family, what might they have done with
them.?



Ok, so, Sirius' family disowned him for being a Grifindor and turning
his back on the family values or whatever.? HOWEVER, when he ended
up being convicted of being this majorely insane DE who was supposedly
right up there in Voldie's top ranks, who not only betrayed two his
best friends to their deaths, but also blew up an ENTIRE street,
killing a whole bunch of innocent people (muggles among them I believe)
PLUS the 'heroic' Peter....wouldn't that have redeemed him in the eyes
of his family (mother)??



Like, all of a sudden, their black sheep traitor son is the great Lord
Voldemort's greatest supporter, fighting for the new world order!
Shouldn't he have been, like, the family hero?



Just something I've been wondering.



lanna :)
























From willsonkmom at msn.com  Wed Aug 13 12:55:04 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 12:55:04 -0000
Subject: Sirius and his family status
In-Reply-To: <991226.94384.qm@web53405.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <g7ulj8+ieir@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184049

 
>lanna: 
> Like, all of a sudden, their black sheep traitor son is the great Lord
> Voldemort's greatest supporter, fighting for the new world order!
> Shouldn't he have been, like, the family hero?


Potioncat:
This is what I recall from some of Harry and Sirius's conversations. 
The Black's were never DEs themselves. They were proud when Regulus 
joined, but at some point they thought LV had gone too far. I'm not 
sure what they knew about Regulus's death. We don't know when Mrs. 
Black went mad, or whether it's just her portrait that's over the bend. 
So I don't think they ever saw him as a hero.

I think it was the Dark Magic that caused the rift between them rather 
than any Muggle-loving attitudes. I'm not sure that's stated in the 
books, but Sirius waves at all the Dark objects in the house and 
says, "You can see what kind of wizards my parents were." (or something 
like that.)

Number 12 GP sat empty for 10 years. I wouldn't be surprised if 
Sirius's house hadn't done the same. All his old belongings may have 
come to GP after he escaped Azkaban. 






From kaamita at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 13 06:08:01 2008
From: kaamita at yahoo.com (Heather Hadden)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 23:08:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g7s3rh+socl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <726245.51067.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184050

Beatrice:
> 1. HRH plan on using "a single long, coarse black hair (plucked
> from the sweater Hermione had been wearing at Malfoy Manor)" (DH
> 519). This might remind our readers of another time HRH attempted
> to use polyjuice potion. As you were reading did you have any fears
> that this attempt might end as poorly as the previous?
?
Oh yeah. I kept thinking back to CoS and just thought "haven't they learned their lesson by now?" Though, knowing Hermione, she probably did learn from that mistake, and is more careful. Plus, the situation being what it is, I think they felt the risk was worth it to stop Voldemort.
?
> 2. Why do the trio align themselves with Griphook? Why not ask for
> Bill's help? Would Bill help them? Why doesn't Harry even consider
> this idea?
?
I never even questioned why they asked Griphook. I did wonder why not let Bill in on it. Knowing Bill though, he is probably like his mother, and would try to stop them, or want to protect them. Plus the trio never told anyone about the Horcrux. Not even in the end when Harry tells Neville to kill the snake if he gets a chance to. I understand why Griphook, he would know Gringotts better then anyone, even Bill, who probably wouldn't know everything about the goblin safety messures.
?
> 3. Harry has the sudden urge to destroy Bellatrix's wand when he is
> reminded of the spells it has performed. Is this rational?
?
No it wasn't rational. Understandable, yes, rational, no. But rage and revenge are rarely rational. Yes, it was only a wand, but in his mind, it did the killing, and without that wand, Bella wouldn't have been able to do the damage she did.
?
> 4. Why does Ollivander make Luna and Luna alone a new wand? Why not
> make new wands for all of the people who were incarcerated with
> him? Why not make new wands for as many people as possible who have
> been victimized as he was by Death Eaters? Why doesn't Ollivander
> think about arming the enemies of his enemy? What does this say
> about his character?
?
I found this rather sweet. Yes, I wondered why he didn't make another wand for the others, but I see this more as a thank you gift. I think he really enjoyed being with Luna, and I feel that she helped keep him sane while they were locked up together. Those two were probably in the cellar the longest, I would assume, so they had a better bond.
?
> 5. Is Harry's plan to withhold the Sword of Gryffindor from
> Griphook a double-cross? Should Harry have explained their need of
> the sword (withholding certain details of course) and do something
> to ensure that Griphook would allow them to use it for a while?
> Were you comfortable with Harry's decision? Or did you agree with
> Hermione?
?
I am not sure if it is a double cross. Tricky, yes. I really feel that if he didn't need the sword, or when he was finished with the sword, that Harry would have handed over the sword as promised. And we do see him not feeling completely okay with what they were going to do, but he never once said "Griphook can not get this sword, period." It was always we need it right now, but he can have it when we are through.
?
> 6. Before they leave, Hermione comments that Bellatrix "tasted
> disguisting. " How do you think that Harry tasted? His polyjuice
> potion certainly was a more pleasant color. Is a person's
> polyjuice "flavor" significant?
?
This is just gross. I don't know about anyone else, but since CoS, the thought of drinking any potion that has bits of other people in it just sounds revolting, no matter how good it would taste, but I assume that a person's aura so to speak would affect the taste of the potion. Makes you wonder what a polyjuice of Voldemort would look and taste like.
?
> 7. Hermione breaks character as Bellatrix when she says "good
> morning" to Tom, the Leaky Cauldron barman. Of the three, who is
> the best actor? Is Hermione the best choice to play Bellatrix?
> Would Harry or Ron have done a better job with her character?
?
Personally, I think that all three of them would have probably had some sort of slip up, but I think Ron might have done better out of the three. With him being in the WW longer, and understanding more of what happened?before, he could have been better.
?
> 8. How did you feel about the changes to Diagon Alley? Were you
> surprised by any of the changes to the Wizarding World?
?
I wasn't surprised. I knew that something had to change. We see on tv all of the time about places that are in the middle of a war, and how those places look horrible, so no, it wasn't that much of a surprise to me, face it, this is a huge war going on.
?
> 9. Ron is forced to stun a man who attempts to assault
> Bellatrix/Hermione. Did you agree with his decision? Does he have a
> choice? How does he feel about the situation?
?
I agreed with his decision. It shows his feelings towards Hermione that he hadn't yet been able to show. He wanted to protect her, and didn't once think that she was supposed to be Bella and could have taken care of herself.
?
> 10. There has been a lot of debate about Harry's use of
> unforgivable curses. Here we have the first time he uses one as he
> performs the Imperius Curse on Bogrod and Travers. Why doesn't he
> confound them as he does the security guard? Is it really necessary
> to use this curse? Is this more effective than a Confundus Charm?
> Does Harry's feeling that he did not perform a very strong curse
> make it more acceptable that he uses this tactic?
?
This isn't the first time he uses an unforgivable curse. He uses Crucio on Bella in OoTP. Though, this is the first one that he really means. Confundus would have worked, but the Imperius was used because it gave him the ablity to control them. Confundus might not have given him that power and could have backfired on them.
?
> 11. How did you feel about the description of the dragon and the
> cruel way in which it is kept? Did this make you feel any different
> about Gringotts or goblins? Harry thought he saw dragon fire when
> he first entered Gringotts in SS/PS. Are there more dragons? Or is
> this the only one?
?
I felt this was horrible. I really felt for the dragon, and I was rooting for him to be freed when they set him loose. I suppose there would be other dragons at Gringotts as I am sure others would want the same security measures dear Bella wanted on her vault. She couldn't have been the only one with a high security vault. Though, when you think about Dumbledore's vault in SS/PS, his vault wasn't guarded by a half beaten dragon. Maybe this shows his character?
?
> 12. As they enter the vault, they realize that the treasure has
> been charmed or cursed to burn their flesh and multiply. Should
> Griphook have anticipated this little snag? Why aren't they more
> prepared for this? Was Griphook's lapse intentional?
?
He probably should have suspected something, but what would it be? There would be so many spells, charms, curses, etc. that could have been on the vault. I am sure that Bella put that curse on the stuff in the vault herself, and not a goblin. Maybe Griphook felt he could have gotten the sword as soon as the door to the vault was open then he could have left the trio to their own doom?
?
> 13. How do you feel about Griphook's treatment of Harry after Harry
> pulls him from the crushing, burning weight of the treasure?
> Griphook grabs the sword, and in the process the cup is almost
> lost. Did Griphook really intend for Harry to obtain anything from
> the vault? Griphook is accepted without question into the hoard of
> approaching goblins. What do you make of this?
?
I think that Griphook could have cared less if they made it or not. I honestly don't think it mattered to him one way or the other. When he ran away yelling for help, calling them theives, I think it was more to slow them down so he could get away with the sword. I think that sword was the only thing on his mind. Period.
?
> 14. Harry, Ron, and Hermione escape on the dragon's back in truly
> spectacular fashion. How did you feel about the dragon's escape?
> How do you feel about Gringotts and goblins in general after
> Harry's experiences?
?
I feel like Bill does. During SS/PS I didn't think much of Goblins. They were just there. A little scary looking, maybe, but that was all. Then, the dealings with Griphook, and Bill's warnings, then the betrayal by Griphook left a sour taste in my mouth. I would be very weary in future dealings with any goblin.
?
Heather




From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net  Wed Aug 13 16:38:06 2008
From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:38:06 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g7s3rh+socl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7v2le+gk18@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184051

Beatrice asked:
> 2. Why do the trio align themselves with Griphook? Why not ask for
> Bill's help? Would Bill help them? Why doesn't Harry even consider
> this idea?

SSSusan:
I wish I knew the answer to this.  I don't know if it's because they 
thought Bill would try to dissuade them or would be reluctant to 
help?  Or whether they thought having his help might be putting more 
Weasleys in danger?  (But that doesn't really make sense ? Order 
members *are* going to be in danger.)  Or whether they thought that 
Bill simply wouldn't know as much as the goblins?  I really don't 
know.


Beatrice:
> 3. Harry has the sudden urge to destroy Bellatrix's wand when he is
> reminded of the spells it has performed. Is this rational?

SSSusan:
Probably not rational... but perhaps it's just an intuitive urge.  I 
know some will scoff at me, but I think Harry has a strong intuitive 
streak.  And with the connection that exists between wand & wizard, 
maybe it's not wholly irrational either.  Maybe there's reason to 
fear that a wand might be "inclined" towards evil-doing after years & 
years of "growing close" with its owner?


Beatrice:
> 4. Why does Ollivander make Luna and Luna alone a new wand? Why not
> make new wands for all of the people who were incarcerated with him?
> Why not make new wands for as many people as possible who have been
> victimized as he was by Death Eaters? Why doesn't Ollivander think
> about arming the enemies of his enemy? What does this say about his
> character?

SSSusan:
I have no idea what this says about Ollivander's character, but it 
does keep alive that *wondering* I've always had about the guy and 
just how much the Dark Side calls to him.  Okay, maybe not *calls* to 
him, but at least how much he thinks to do all he can for the White 
Hats.  

Frankly, I have no idea why he didn't head off to create a bunch of 
new wands for people he knew would fight against Voldemort, unless he 
simply didn't have access to his stores of materials ? and also 
would've had precious little time to recreate those stores.


Beatrice:
> 5. Is Harry's plan to withhold the Sword of Gryffindor from Griphook
> a double-cross? Should Harry have explained their need of the sword
> (withholding certain details of course) and do something to ensure
> that Griphook would allow them to use it for a while? Were you
> comfortable with Harry's decision? Or did you agree with Hermione?

SSSusan:
I really wasn't comfortable with Harry's decision.  I'm most often 
about full disclosure, about believing in its appropriateness and/or 
effectiveness in the end.  Now, I understand the concern that there's 
an uncertainty surrounding trusting *any* goblin and a recognition of 
the possessive look Griphook in particular has towards Gryffindor's 
sword.  Still, I think I would've opted for the option of telling 
Griphook that there WOULD be a delay before he got the sword back but 
that he WOULD get it.  If he would be inclined to believe this of any 
human, it would be of Harry, methinks.


Beatrice:
> 6. Before they leave, Hermione comments that Bellatrix "tasted
> disguisting." How do you think that Harry tasted? His polyjuice
> potion certainly was a more pleasant color. Is a person's
> polyjuice "flavor" significant?

SSSusan:
Hee.  I'd never thought of this.  I've no idea whether one's 
Polyjuice flavor is *significant* in any way... but I do realize now 
that I carry an idea that the flavor is somehow indicative or 
reflective of the person who's "whatever bit" was used in brewing 
it.  

I like to think that my Polyjuice potion might have a faint hint of 
margarita....


Beatrice:
> 7. Hermione breaks character as Bellatrix when she says "good
> morning" to Tom, the Leaky Cauldron barman. Of the three, who is the
> best actor? Is Hermione the best choice to play Bellatrix? Would
> Harry or Ron have done a better job with her character?

SSSusan:
Another excellent question, and one that I had not considered 
previously.  But you're right ? we have evidence with Crabbe & Goyle 
that one can cross genders via Polyjuice.  I liked the comment by 
Heather that Ron might have been the better choice, given his greater 
knowledge of the Wizarding World.  Not to mention that he has an 
occasional mean streak which he might have been able to tap into. ;)


Beatrice:
> 11. How did you feel about the description of the dragon and the
> cruel way in which it is kept? Did this make you feel any different
> about Gringotts or goblins? 

SSSusan:
I admit that I was stunned by it.  I didn't think that the goblins 
would have been so... I don't know... *pragmatic* about things that 
they'd have looked at a live creature only for its USE as a security 
device and damn the consequences of how its life was impacted.  I was 
repulsed, frankly.


Beatrice:
> 12. As they enter the vault, they realize that the treasure has been
> charmed or cursed to burn their flesh and multiply. Should Griphook
> have anticipated this little snag? Why aren't they more prepared for
> this? Was Griphook's lapse intentional?

SSSusan:
I have NO evidence on which to base my opinion that this wasn't 
intentional on Griphook's part.  In fact, I'd be excited to read 
anyone's hypothesis that it was.  But I tend to think there are just 
a million different curses or charms which can be used to protect 
things, and this is one of the million Griphook either wasn't aware 
of or didn't think of as a possibility.


Beatrice:
> 13. How do you feel about Griphook's treatment of Harry after Harry
> pulls him from the crushing, burning weight of the treasure?
> Griphook grabs the sword, and in the process the cup is almost lost.
> Did Griphook really intend for Harry to obtain anything from the
> vault? Griphook is accepted without question into the hoard of
> approaching goblins. What do you make of this?

SSSusan:
I made of it that his loyalty still and always lay with his fellow 
goblins and that they expected that.  I also was peeved with him, 
although a bit of me couldn't help but think the Trio should have 
expected it and perhaps even deserved it a little for their lack of 
disclosure concerning the path the sword was going to need to go down 
before ever being returned to Griphook (if it ever would have been).  

OTOH, I don't agree with goblin beliefs concerning craftsmanship = 
ownership, so other than that it had been (semi?-) falsely promised 
to him, I didn't feel he somehow automatically deserved it.


Beatrice:
> 14. Harry, Ron, and Hermione escape on the dragon's back in truly
> spectacular fashion. How did you feel about the dragon's escape?

SSSusan:
I believe that I thought, "Hmmm.  Highly implausible."  ;)  I'm not 
one who tends to nitpick much re: the plot or even too much about 
deus ex machina, but I think this one did strike me as especially 
unbelievable that it worked.

Nice summary, Beatrice, and great questions!

Siriusly Snapey Susan






From kaamita at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 13 17:09:31 2008
From: kaamita at yahoo.com (Heather Hadden)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 10:09:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Sirius and his family status
Message-ID: <792494.88223.qm@web56511.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184052

>Potioncat:
>This is what I recall from some of Harry and Sirius's conversations.
>The Black's were never DEs themselves. They were proud when Regulus
>joined, but at some point they thought LV had gone too far. I'm not
>sure what they knew about Regulus's death. We don't know when Mrs.
>Black went mad, or whether it's just her portrait that's over the bend.
>So I don't think they ever saw him as a hero.
>
>I think it was the Dark Magic that caused the rift between them rather
>than any Muggle-loving attitudes. I'm not sure that's stated in the
>books, but Sirius waves at all the Dark objects in the house and
>says, "You can see what kind of wizards my parents were." (or something
>like that.)

?
We also have to assume that if the Blacks?were DEs or whatever, they would have known that Sirius wasn't a DE and that he took the fall for someone in LV's ranks, they could have possibly known that it was Peter who gave LV the info he needed.
?
Heather




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 13 19:30:11 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 19:30:11 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g7s3rh+socl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7vco3+6ipr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184053

> CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
> Chapter 26, Gringotts
<snip thorough summary except for one bit>

> Hermione hears people coming and uses the shield charm to part the
water and clear their path.  <snip>

Carol responds:
I've always found Hermione's use of this particular spell rather
confusing. However, after rereading the section carefully, I think I
understand it. They've already gone through the waterfall, which has
washed away their disguises and knocked the cart off the track,
causing them to fall a long way down to the floor of the passage.
Rather than parting the water and clearing their path (which Protego
wouldn't do, anyway), I think the spell is intended to somehow
backfire on their pursuers (which is what a Shield Charm often but not
always does). It might have been better to turn it into a solid wall
(something like the way she creates a barrier for the DEs chasing them
down the Hogwarts stairs in a later chapter). In any case, the Goblins
appear to be running down the same passageway that HRH and their two
Goblin attendants are riding down in a cart. (I suppose that the carts
are faster and enchanted to find their way through the labyrinth.) The
water from the waterfall would naturally fall to the floor of the
passageway and downward. By sending it *up* the passageway, Hermione
turns it into an obstacle for the pursuing Goblins (at least until the
Vanish it or undo their own spell).

Anyway, I'd appreciate other poster's thoughts on this particular
spell, which confused me when I read (and reread) this chapter, maybe
because I didn't picture the carts as running along passageways, and
yet they'd have to in order to reach the vaults.

Nice to have an action-filled chapter for a change! I really want to
answer the questions, but I have an appointment with my optometrist,
so I have to wait till I get back.

Carol, wishing that she could get new glasses this very day rather
than waiting at least a week




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Wed Aug 13 19:57:26 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 19:57:26 -0000
Subject: Muggle Parents and more
In-Reply-To: <g7t6ea+c4db@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7veb6+932e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184054

 
> Carol responds:
> While I agree with you that most parents wouldn't want their 
children
> to attend a boarding school, much less a school that would lead them
> to become alienated from their parents, I suspect that the 
proposition
> is presented to them in glowing terms--their highly talented and
> unusual child is being given a unique opportunity for an education
> geared toward his or her special talents--rather like being offered 
a
> scholarship to Guilliard.

Potioncat:
Keep in mind, Hogwarts exists in a culture that favors boarding 
schools. So it wouldn't be as alien an idea as it would in the US. 
(Although I'm seeing more and more families choosing boarding school.)

I don't agree that Hogwarts alienates the Muggleborns from their 
parents. While Hermione spends a lot of her holidays with the 
Weasles, that is situational. I agree with Carol, Hogwarts would 
promote the positive reasons for attending.


Carol:
> Anyway, I think our model here should be Dumbledore and his contract
> with Mrs. Cole via a blank sheet of ("everything seems to be in
> order").
** A nice, lasting Confundus Charm causing them to be happy to
> have a witch or wizard in the family** would do the trick better 
than a
> Mamory Charm, which would cause them to forget that they had a child
> and leave the child with no place to go over the summer holidays.

Potioncat:
Look at the **______** section. Carol, you're a genius! The Potters 
were confunded! It makes so much sense. When we first see Lily 
performing magic, Petunia reminds her that Mummy said not to. Later 
we have a pair of beaming parents. Yep. No doubt about it. 

I used to wonder if Eileen had ever spoken to Mrs. Potter. Although 
that doesn't seem too likely, and I'm not sure she'd be the best 
witch to represent Hogwarts. (I still think she was expelled.)






From willsonkmom at msn.com  Wed Aug 13 20:41:42 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:41:42 -0000
Subject: Muggle Parents and more
In-Reply-To: <g7veb6+932e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7vgu6+587m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184055


> Potioncat:
> Look at the **______** section. Carol, you're a genius! The Potters 
> were confunded! It makes so much sense. When we first see Lily 
> performing magic, Petunia reminds her that Mummy said not to. Later 
> we have a pair of beaming parents. Yep. No doubt about it. 
> 
> I used to wonder if Eileen had ever spoken to Mrs. Potter. Although 
> that doesn't seem too likely, and I'm not sure she'd be the best 
> witch to represent Hogwarts. (I still think she was expelled.)
>
Potioncat:
Where am I? What happned? I've been confunded!

Of course, I was supposed to say "The Evans were confunded." and I 
wondered if "Eileen had spoken to Mrs. Evans". 






From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk  Wed Aug 13 22:24:10 2008
From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 22:24:10 -0000
Subject: Muggle Parents and more
In-Reply-To: <g7veb6+932e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7vmua+eqnh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184056

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" <willsonkmom at ...> wrote:
>
>  
> > Carol responds:
> > While I agree with you that most parents wouldn't want their 
> children
> > to attend a boarding school, much less a school that would lead them
> > to become alienated from their parents, I suspect that the 
> proposition
> > is presented to them in glowing terms--their highly talented and
> > unusual child is being given a unique opportunity for an education
> > geared toward his or her special talents--rather like being offered 
> a
> > scholarship to Guilliard.
> 
> Potioncat:
> Keep in mind, Hogwarts exists in a culture that favors boarding 
> schools. So it wouldn't be as alien an idea as it would in the US. 
> (Although I'm seeing more and more families choosing boarding school.)
> 
> I don't agree that Hogwarts alienates the Muggleborns from their 
> parents. While Hermione spends a lot of her holidays with the 
> Weasles, that is situational. I agree with Carol, Hogwarts would 
> promote the positive reasons for attending.

Geoff:
Are you suggesting that UK culture favours public schools which 
accommodate boarders? It ought to be pointed out that the numbers 
of pupils in boarding schools is a tiny minority. The vast majority of 
young people in the UK attend day schools - mainly state although 
there are some public day schools, again very much in a minority.




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Wed Aug 13 22:43:50 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 22:43:50 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH25, Shell Cottage
In-Reply-To: <g7qej1+eb2h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7vo36+lpq1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184057


> 
> 
> Alla:
> Are you sure that as soon as they will decide that some object that 
> Bill possesses belong to the Goblins, they will not double cross him 
> right away? I am not. After all, Griphook was also civil to Harry 
> till the sword was involved.
> 
>

Pippin:
Bill doesn't think they're going to double cross him -- he's been
working for them for years. I've worked in the banking business
myself, and I can tell you that, while not all bankers deserve their
customers' confidence, they generally work very hard to keep it. When
people lose confidence in their bankers, they sock their money in a
mattress instead. People have been stashing their valuables at
Gringotts for centuries, so I think the Gringotts goblins are
generally okay. 

Griphook himself says that the Gringotts goblins would regard what he
is about to do as a base treachery, and I think that refers to  the
the actual bargain as well as the putative one.

(I note that Harry should have phrased his request more carefully. He
only asked for help breaking into a Gringotts vault. Nothing was said
about getting out again <veg>.) 

Pippi;n 







From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 13 23:15:00 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 23:15:00 -0000
Subject: Muggle Parents and more
In-Reply-To: <g7veb6+932e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7vptk+crqd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184058

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" <willsonkmom at ...> 
wrote:

> The Evans (Evanses?) were confunded! It makes so much sense. 
> When we first see Lily performing magic, Petunia reminds her 
> that Mummy said not to. Later we have a pair of beaming parents. 
> Yep. No doubt about it. 


zanooda:

Not necessarily :-). Mummy forbade Lily to jump from the swings, but 
this is a very normal mother's reaction to her child doing something 
dangerous. Lily's parents didn't know yet it was magic, and their 
attitude could have changed after they found out the truth. 

I think when someone came from Hogwarts to talk to the parents of the 
Muggle-borns, they tried first to convince the parents it was a good 
idea to send their child to the wizarding school (and they also had 
to convince them the child *was* a wizard :-)), and only if the 
parents were too stubborn, they used magic on them - Confundus charm 
sounds about right :-).




From justcorbly at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 13 22:25:03 2008
From: justcorbly at yahoo.com (justcorbly)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 22:25:03 -0000
Subject: Muggle Parents
In-Reply-To: <g7t6ea+c4db@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g7vmvv+lib9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184059

> > lizzyben wrote:
> > While reading the books, I've often wondered what the wizards
> > would do if some stubborn Muggles parents refused to let their
> > child attend Hogwarts.

> Carol:
> ...I don't thing there's any danger that the parents
> of Muggle-borns, whether or not they send their kids
> to Hogwarts, will talk to other Muggles about it. We
> see the Muggle Prime Minister absolute certainty that
> he'll never speak of his contacts with the WW. He knows
> that no one would believe him and fears, IIRC, that he'd
> be considered insane. (Petunia must have had a similar
> fear when she told Vernon about her disgraceful relatives.)

justcorbly:

That's clearly JKR's intent, but she never directly addresses
the subject. I'd think that with their children being identified
as wizards and witches, then whipped off to Hogwarts, and with
the accompanying realization that magic is real and widespread,
that an awareness of Harry's world would be reasonably common
in Muggleland. (If that awareness is constantly obliterated by
wizards manipulating the minds of Muggles, then an entire new
set of questions is raised.)

The PM had considerably more riding on his silence than we would.
Indeed, many of us, on learning that magic was a working reality,
would seek to exploit it and its practitioners for our own benefit.
Some of us might even exploit our own children.

JKR had no reason to explore this in any depth (although I wish
she would have explored an adult wizard's relationship with his
or her Muggle parents), but I think Muggles must certainly have
had more knowledge of the world of magic than we might think.
In any case, it raises an interesting question: What would we
do if we learned both that a hidden magical world existed
alongside our world, and that some of our children had magical
powers?



From bawilson at citynet.net  Thu Aug 14 01:52:18 2008
From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson)
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 21:52:18 -0400
Subject: Muggle Parents and more
Message-ID: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAq7J8AJNZvxGJq/KbtzLRq8KAAAAQAAAA9gJjq3JUOU2ofVxRUmeq6QEAAAAA@citynet.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 184060

Carol:

"Another small thing--I don't thing there's any danger that the 
parents of Muggle-borns, whether or not they send their kids to 
Hogwarts, will talk to other Muggles about it. We see the Muggle 
Prime Minister absolute certainty that he'll never speak of his 
contacts with the WW. He knows that no one would believe him and 
fears, IIRC, that he'd be considered insane. (Petunia must have 
had a similar fear when she told Vernon about her disgraceful 
relatives.)"
(Quote ENDS)

"Little Hyacinth?  She's at St. Rita's; the sisters are so good 
at encouraging clever girls.

Little Ethelbert? He went to Godric Hall; he's such an athletic 
boy, you know, and they have excellent sports facilities.

Little Gertrude? St. Helga's; they provide such a well rounded 
education.

Little Tommy? Oh, Dr. Salazar's. So many influential people 
send their children there; he'll make so many little friends 
who will do him well in later life."

JKR has said also that not all wizardling families send their 
children to Hogwarts, but teach them at home. Perhaps there is 
a scheme whereby Muggle parents who are absolutely opposed to 
sending their children away will send their magesports to Muggle 
schools under a *geas* not to discuss CERTAIN TOPICS while a 
wizard teacher comes to the home to give special lessons.
"It is ill done to keep dark the mind of the mageborn." 
Almost every fantasy series that has a working system of 
magic described has some variant of this saying. It would 
not be hard for the outreach worker to demonstrate to Muggle
parents how having an untrained magesport running around 
would be a danger not only to the child, but to the larger 
community; after such a demonstration, I think that most 
Muggle parents would not only be willing to send the kid 
to Hogwarts, but a not-insignificant number would be glad 
to be rid of him/her.

I'm not entirely unsure that one of Prof. McG.'s jobs might 
not be to deal with Muggleborn students who, at the end of 
the year, don't find anyone waiting at King's Cross for them, 
whose Muggle parents have told the neighbors that the kid
is dead or gone to live with distant relatives; particularly 
students from broken homes, where a stepparent has said 'me 
or the magebrat.' She may have a list of Wizardling families 
willing to take in fosterlings; if the Weasleys hadn't so 
many of their own, I'm sure that Molly and Arthur would be 
on the list, considering how they informally took in Harry 
and to a lesser extent Hermione, and it is not unreasonable 
that others might not be so encumbered. (The Diggorys, after 
Cedric's death, might ask to be put on the list, for example.)

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 willsonkmom at msn.com  Thu Aug 14 02:57:20 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 02:57:20 -0000
Subject: Goblins, British school children and sterotypes ( was, Re: Muggle Parents and
In-Reply-To: <g7vmua+eqnh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g806ug+6ihh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184061

In 184042 Alla wrote:
> BUT having said that I will agree that as far as those goblins are 
> willing to even be acquaintances with humans they are different 
from Griphook. But are they really?
> 
> Are you sure that as soon as they will decide that some object that 
> Bill possesses belong to the Goblins, they will not double cross 
him 
> right away? I am not. After all, Griphook was also civil to Harry 
> till the sword was involved.


Potioncat:

I think JKR set up the differences between Goblins and humans in 
keeping with folklore. Generally in literature there's ill feeling 
between humans and other magical beings. Usually tricks are involved, 
and sometimes it's the humans who save the day by tricking the 
magical folk. Even the ones who are helpful in our old stories, have 
a touch of danger to them. JKR's put Goblins and humans side by side, 
but kept the animosity.

But something Alla said struck a chord, and I was working on a 
carefully written post about her comments and how stereotypes come 
about. You know, those sort are sneaking double-crossers and that one 
just proves it! Can't trust any of them. I was even going to share a 
personal experience I've had and my efforts not to resort to 
xenophobia.

Good thing I didn't because you never know when a stereotype will 
jump up and smack you. Take a look.

> > 
> > Potioncat:
> > Keep in mind, Hogwarts exists in a culture that favors boarding 
> > schools. snip
> Geoff:
> Are you suggesting that UK culture favours public schools which 
> accommodate boarders? It ought to be pointed out that the numbers 
> of pupils in boarding schools is a tiny minority. The vast majority 
of 
> young people in the UK attend day schools - mainly state although 
> there are some public day schools, again very much in a minority.

Potioncat, taking off her stereoptic glasses:
Really? Too many old novels, too many old TV shows. A couple of 
interviews from JKR and Emma Thompson I don't know why but I really 
did think the norm was boarding schools. 

Those stereotypes can sneak right up on you!

Does it tell us anything about the Dursleys that Dudley went to a 
boarding school?


Potioncat, wondering now if they really drink a lot of tea across the 
pond.





From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 14 03:11:30 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 03:11:30 -0000
Subject: Goblins, British school children and sterotypes ( was, Re: Muggle Parents and
In-Reply-To: <g806ug+6ihh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g807p2+na5r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184063

> Potioncat:
<SNIP>
>> But something Alla said struck a chord, and I was working on a 
> carefully written post about her comments and how stereotypes come 
> about. You know, those sort are sneaking double-crossers and that 
one 
> just proves it! Can't trust any of them. I was even going to share 
a 
> personal experience I've had and my efforts not to resort to 
> xenophobia.
> 
> Good thing I didn't because you never know when a stereotype will 
> jump up and smack you. Take a look. <SNIP>
> 


Alla:

LOL, I know what you are talking about and I snipped your example of 
your other stereotype, I guess, but I was talking more about writer 
for the purpose of literary economy giving us one representative of 
the entity and wanting us to judge the entity as whole on that 
representative.

Of course it can be a set up, and author can pull the rug from the 
reader's foot. You thought that they are all the same? Goblins, 
Slytherins whoever, here you go, not so at all.

What I was at least trying to say that I did not see pulling the rug. 
I mean, I saw it to a degree with former Slytherins - who fought 
against Voldemort, but nothing with Slytherin students, who 
experienced change IMO ala Malfoy but no drastic reversal and 
especiallly not from Goblins.

What I am trying to say that I believe that Griphook is a shortcut to 
how we meant to view Goblins. I mean, not that anybody has to, but I 
do. If for some readers he is a clever red herring, okay, but I would 
like to see to what exactly he is a red herring. To the mindsets? 
That we cannot judge the entity, nation, group of people by one 
representative? Okay, again, sure, of course we cannot in RL, but in 
fiction? JKR cannot really give us many goblins in the story where 
they are secondary characters, so I feel she gave us how one behaves.




Pippin:
Bill doesn't think they're going to double cross him -- he's been
working for them for years. I've worked in the banking business
myself, and I can tell you that, while not all bankers deserve their
customers' confidence, they generally work very hard to keep it. When
people lose confidence in their bankers, they sock their money in a
mattress instead. People have been stashing their valuables at
Gringotts for centuries, so I think the Gringotts goblins are
generally okay.



Alla:

Hmmm, I meant that they will double cross him in the personal 
relationships, if they find that he has something that belongs 
allegedly to them, not as employer/employee. I am sure they have 
worked hard to keep their customers trust. I am disputing that they 
have the real friendly relationship with Bill, which will stop them 
from taking advantage of him. And that to me goes back to as far as 
there can be friendship between humans and goblins.

If somebody is my friend I do not make those qualifiers. I trust my 
friend unconditionally. I will do basically anything for my friend, 
as long as I do not consider it immoral or illegal, and expect my 
friend to do same for me. Somehow I am not buying that Goblins will 
do so for human, any human. I am sure they value Bill as valuable 
employee though.

JMO,

Alla




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 14 03:34:21 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 03:34:21 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g7s3rh+socl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8093t+4qtd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184064

> CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
> Chapter 26, Gringotts
<snip action-filled summary> 
> Questions:
> 
> 1. HRH plan on using "a single long, coarse black hair (plucked from
the sweater Hermione had been wearing at Malfoy Manor)" (DH 519). This
might remind our readers of another time HRH attempted to use
polyjuice potion.  As you were reading did you have any fears that
this attempt might end as poorly as the previous?

Carol responds:
They've attempted to use polyjuice potion several times, first in CoS
(not disastrous, unles you count Hermione's hospital wing stint for a
furry face, but not productive). The raid on the MoM, though it
resulted in Yaxley's learning about 12 GP and Ron's being splinched,
wasn't disastrous, either. I didn't think about the one genuinely
disastrous expedition, to Godric's Hollow. I did think it was risky to
pose as someone as recognizable as Bellatrix, though. I knew the whole
expedition was risky, especially with Griphook along as untrustworthy
temporary ally, but I didn't anticipate anything like what actually
happened.
> 
> 2. Why do the trio align themselves with Griphook?  Why not ask for
Bill's help?  Would Bill help them?  Why doesn't Harry even consider
this idea?

Carol:
Harry promised Dumbledore that he wouldn't tell anyone about the
Horcruxes, which immediately rules out Bill. They'd have to tell him
why they were breaking into the Gringotts vault and why they were
destroying the cup. (Griphook doesn't need to be told that the object
is a Horcrux or that they intend to destroy it; all he needs to know
is that they intend to steal it but not for personal gain.) Also, even
though Bill works with Goblins (and used to work as a Curse breaker
and treasure seeker in the Egyptian pyramids--does that make him a
grave robber?), he probably doesn't know the location of the Lestrange
vault or how to get past its protections. Griphook does. (Harry may
think that Griphook can open the vault by scratching the door with his
fingernail as he did in SS/PS, but, of course, Griphook is no longer a
Gringotts Goblin.) Griphook, of course, is considerably easier to hide
than Bill; two wizards under an Invisibility Cloak would be very risky
in this venture. He (Griphook) fits more easily in the cart. He's
sneakier by far than Bill, but that could be an advantage. And he's
highly motivated; he wants the Sword of Gryffindor--whether or not
it's rightfully his or the Goblins' in general, he'll do what it takes
to get them into the Lestranges' vault. (Getting HRH out again,
however, does not seem to be part of his plan.)
> 
> 3. Harry has the sudden urge to destroy Bellatrix's wand when he is
reminded of the spells it has performed.  Is this rational?

Carol:
Well, no, but emotional responses by definition aren't rational. it's
a gut reaction. I suppose we could say that the spells a wand casts
are not the wand's fault, but, still, this wand chose Bellatrix
Lestrange and is compatible with her. If what Ollivander says about
wands learning along with their masters, this wand is, in a sense, her
partner in crime. Even if we don't grant wands that degree of
sentience, it's certainly an instrument of torture. IMO, even if one
of the Trio had clearly "won" that wand, teh wand would sense their
aversion to it and know them as an enemy. The complexities that
Ollivander hints at in wand ownership would come into play. Hermione
overcomes her aversion (and the fact that she didn't win the wand)
sufficiently to use it effectively (it may help that she's a powerful
Witch and it's a powerful wand), but she says that it doesn't feel
right to her and I'm quite sure that she'll be happy to exchange it
for a new one. (BTW, we don't get a similar reaction from Voldemort
with the Elder Wand, which is quite compatible with him despite his
not having won it--a powerful instrument of murder in the hands of a
powerful murderer. just my opinion.)
> 
> 4. Why does Ollivander make Luna and Luna alone a new wand?  Why not
make new wands for all of the people who were incarcerated with him?
Why not make new wands for as many people as possible who have been
victimized as he was by Death Eaters?  Why doesn't Ollivander think
about arming the enemies of his enemy?  What does this say about his
character?

Carol:
Only Luna spent any time with him. Dean and Griphook came in at the
same time as HRH, and since Mr. Ollivander spent his time at Shell
Cottage recuperating, he probably didn't get to know them well. True,
he might have made a wand for his rescuers (though technically it was
a now-dead House-Elf who got him out of the Malfoys' secret room),
but, again, he wouldn't have formed the bond with them that he did
with Luna and they do have wands, two of them "won" by their
possessors, so technically, only Luna and Dean need wands. It's
completely understandable, to me, at least, that he'd give a wand to
the sweet girl who made his imprisonment endurable and overlook the
equally wandless boy he doesn't know. as for making wands for as many
people as possible, I imagine that it's quite a complicated process
and he wouldn't necessarily have the materials at hand. (Where did he
get them, anyway? I don't suppose there are wand trees growing near
Auntie Muriel's house, much less the materials for the cores. Maybe he
borrowed a wand and summoned them from his shop? He can't have opened
the shop again as he's still in a "safe house" under the Fidelius Charm.)
> 
> 5. Is Harry's plan to withhold the Sword of Gryffindor from Griphook
a double-cross?  Should Harry have explained their need of the sword
(withholding certain details of course) and do something to ensure
that Griphook would allow them to use it for a while?  Were you
comfortable with Harry's decision?  Or did you agree with Hermione?

Carol:
I'm much more comfortable with this decision than with Harry's Crucio
or even the Imperius Curses. He did need the sword and he did intend
to give it to Griphook when he no longer needed it. (The validity of
Griphook's claim doesn't seem to concern him as it would me. I'd have
pointed out to Ron and Hermione that Gryffindor probably *did* pay for
the sword and that it apparently belongs not to the Goblins but to the
House of Gryffindor based on what Scrimgeour said.) At any rate, it's
not a double cross as he did intend to pay Griphook for his services.
He just intended to delay the payment. It's not the most ethical
decision Harry has ever made, but they can't pass up the opportunity
to steal the cup and they need the sword to destroy it. Maybe Harry
expected to destroy the Horcrux in front of Griphook, who probably
wouldn't know what it was but would certainly see that it was an evil
object associated with Voldemort. If Griphook saw Harry's need and
that Harry was telling the truth, maybe he'd have agreed to wait for
the sword (or even have realized that it wasn't rightfully his). OTOH,
without any such demonstration, Griphook, being neither trusting nor
trustworthy himself, could not be expected to understand that Harry
would pay him as soon as he'd finished with the sword. Anyway, if
we're going to argue that the Imperius Curse and other less than
admirable tactics (such as stealing and bank robbery) are necessary to
accomplish the goal of destroying Voldemort, stretching the truth and
delayed fulfillment of a promise seem excusable as well. It's not as
if Harry intended either to steal the sword or to actually break his
promise. In the end, it's Griphook, calling them thieves and leaving
them to be swallowed up by burning and replicating treasures, is the
more faithless, or rather, treacherous.

Carol, who wants to finish answering the questions, but the lights are
flickering and there's a thunderstorm coming, so I'd better get off
the computer




From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Thu Aug 14 03:48:43 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 03:48:43 -0000
Subject: Goblins, British school children and sterotypes ( was, Re: Muggle Parents and
In-Reply-To: <g807p2+na5r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g809ur+23v9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184065

> Alla:

> What I am trying to say that I believe that Griphook is a shortcut to 
> how we meant to view Goblins. I mean, not that anybody has to, but I 
> do. If for some readers he is a clever red herring, okay, but I would 
> like to see to what exactly he is a red herring. To the mindsets? 
> That we cannot judge the entity, nation, group of people by one 
> representative? Okay, again, sure, of course we cannot in RL, but in 
> fiction? JKR cannot really give us many goblins in the story where 
> they are secondary characters, so I feel she gave us how one behaves.

Magpie:
I see it the same way for both Goblins and Slytherins. Far more so with 
Slytherins, since we see so many of them, and the exceptions prove the 
rule. They all start out with moral disadvantages, but a few wind up 
having specific experiences in life that make them do the right thing 
or the less wrong thing. There's little point in wondering about better 
Slytherins since they don't exist in terms of being on the page 
(they're Sorted for these tendencies, so it's not really a stereotype).

In Griphook's case his personality isn't really the issue, is it? It's 
not like we imagine every single Goblin would have his personality. 
It's his pov that's supposed to give us a view to Goblins--they don't 
think they've been treated well by Wizards and they believe the crafter 
of something is the true owner. There may be Goblins that don't believe 
these things (good Goblins who agree with the Wizards' pov!) but 
Griphook's just showing us a common pov that Goblins have. He's telling 
us something about their society more than something about the 
character of every Goblin.

-m




From gav_fiji at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 14 04:03:16 2008
From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 04:03:16 -0000
Subject: British school children and sterotypes (was many other things - long thread)
In-Reply-To: <g806ug+6ihh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g80aq4+dlgf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184066

> > > Potioncat:
> > > Keep in mind, Hogwarts exists in a culture that favors 
> > > boarding schools. snip

> > Geoff:
> > Are you suggesting that UK culture favours public schools 
> > which accommodate boarders?
<SNIP - statistics of a sort>

> Potioncat, taking off her stereoptic glasses:
> Really? Too many old novels, too many old TV shows.
<SNIP>
> Does it tell us anything about the Dursleys that Dudley went 
> to a boarding school?

Goddlefrood:

It is true, as pointed out by Geoff, that only a very small 
number of students board in the UK. I was one of the fortunate 
(or unfortunate depending how one views it) few who did board, 
but around a fifth of the school were day students local to the 
town in which the school was situated. As an aside, I did wonder 
why there were no day students at Hogwarts, given that the denizens 
of Hogsmeade presumably had a child or two amongst them. Maybe 
they all boarded at Hogwarts, or maybe they were simply never 
mentioned.

However, in terms of the wizarding world, and no doubt this is 
what Potioncat really meant despite her admision, the norm is 
to board rather than to be home schooled. So that's alright 
then and there's no reason to be embarrassed.

Vernon and Petunia were, no doubt, secretly relieved to get shot 
of Dudley for a good part of the year.

> Potioncat, wondering now if they really drink a lot of tea 
> across the pond.

Goddlefrood:

Gallons of it, but coffee is apparently available now.





From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk  Thu Aug 14 06:42:49 2008
From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 06:42:49 -0000
Subject: Goblins, British school children and sterotypes ( was, Re: Muggle Parents and
In-Reply-To: <g806ug+6ihh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g80k59+k2ep@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184067

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" <willsonkmom at ...> wrote:

Geoff:
> > Are you suggesting that UK culture favours public schools which 
> > accommodate boarders? It ought to be pointed out that the numbers 
> > of pupils in boarding schools is a tiny minority. The vast majority 
> of 
> > young people in the UK attend day schools - mainly state although 
> > there are some public day schools, again very much in a minority.
 
Potioncat:
> Really? Too many old novels, too many old TV shows. A couple of 
> interviews from JKR and Emma Thompson I don't know why but I really 
> did think the norm was boarding schools. 
> 
> Those stereotypes can sneak right up on you!
> 
> Does it tell us anything about the Dursleys that Dudley went to a 
> boarding school?

Geoff:
Probably. It smacks of a little bit of snobbery - one upmanship on the 
neighbours. Petunia and Vernon do seem to want to be slightly better 
than the rest. Although, Dudley didn't go to Smeltings until he reached 
the age at which pupils in the Little Whinging area transferred to 
secondary school in the state sector.

It's interesting that they didn't pack him off to a public preparatory 
school at nine.
 
> Potioncat, wondering now if they really drink a lot of tea across the 
> pond.

Geoff:
Yes.






From willsonkmom at msn.com  Thu Aug 14 11:57:06 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 11:57:06 -0000
Subject: Muggle Parents and more
In-Reply-To: <g7vptk+crqd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g816ii+rrlq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184068

 
> zanooda:
> 
> Not necessarily :-). Mummy forbade Lily to jump from the swings, 
but 
> this is a very normal mother's reaction to her child doing 
something 
> dangerous. Lily's parents didn't know yet it was magic, and their 
> attitude could have changed after they found out the truth. 

Potioncat:
Lily does two magical acts in that scene. First she "flys" down to 
the ground from the high swing. That's when Petunia says twice that 
Lily isn't allowed. From the way it's written, I don't think it's 
simply the jumping from the swing that the parents are concerned 
about.  

The other act is making the flower move. Petunia says it isn't right. 
It isn't clear if that's just her opinion or the family's. It seemed 
very weird to me--at least by the way it was described. Obviously at 
this point, no one knows about the WW, because Snape is the one 
telling Lily about it. 

Probably the Hogwarts representative wouldn't have had to confund Mr. 
and Mrs. Evans because Lily was already set on going. On the other 
hand, I think she would have confunded them if she had to. (I know, 
she wouldn't know how. But look at what she's already doing!)

I agree with earlier posts, perhaps from earlier threads. If your 
child has been doing these strange things, and someone shows up who 
can explain them and says there's a place where your child can thrive-
--you'd go for it.





From willsonkmom at msn.com  Thu Aug 14 12:15:01 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 12:15:01 -0000
Subject: British school children and sterotypes (was many other things - long thread)
In-Reply-To: <g80aq4+dlgf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g817k5+kj8o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184069

 
> Goddlefrood:
snip
 As an aside, I did wonder 
> why there were no day students at Hogwarts, given that the denizens 
> of Hogsmeade presumably had a child or two amongst them. Maybe 
> they all boarded at Hogwarts, or maybe they were simply never 
> mentioned.

Potioncat:
Good point.

There have been many questions about life at Hogwarts over the years. 
One of the big ones is why all the students go to London to ride the 
Express to Hogwarts. Certainly some of those students live closer to 
Hogwarts than to London.

If the series had been about Hogwarts the details would have been 
different. Both in which details we read about and in how they played 
out. JKR was writing about Harry Potter; Hogwarts was part of his 
experience. She only had to concentrate on those aspects of the 
school that impacted Harry. And actually, to make the details of the 
school work to Harry's story. If the story had been 'about' a 
wizarding school--even with Harry as the main character--the facts 
and events would have been different.

This difference hit home with me when I read two other school-based 
novels. "To Serve Them All My Days"  is about school life from a 
teacher's point of view. "Gentlemen and Players" is told from both a 
student's point of view, and a teacher's. 






From lfreeman at mbc.edu  Thu Aug 14 12:37:20 2008
From: lfreeman at mbc.edu (lmf3b)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 12:37:20 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <726245.51067.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <g818u0+ncop@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184070

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Heather Hadden <kaamita at ...> wrote:
>
> Beatrice:
> ?
> > 7. Hermione breaks character as Bellatrix when she says "good
> > morning" to Tom, the Leaky Cauldron barman. Of the three, who is
> > the best actor? Is Hermione the best choice to play Bellatrix?
> > Would Harry or Ron have done a better job with her character?
> ?
> Personally, I think that all three of them would have probably had some sort of slip up, 
but I think Ron might have done better out of the three. With him being in the WW longer, 
and understanding more of what happened?before, he could have been better.

It seems that people in general prefer same-sex polyjuice transformations whenever 
possible, the exception being Crabbe and Goyle  as little girls and Hermione and Fleur as 
two of the seven Potters. 

Perhaps they figure it's better for a female to play a female and vice versa to avoid a 
person giving themselves away through  opposite-sex-typical body language or gestures.  
I'm reminded of Huck Finn giving himself away as a disguised girl by the way he catches a 
ball. This would be important if you had to interect extensvey with other, a opposed to 
simply guard a door.

Also, Hermione, as a wanted Muggleborn, would need a stronger disguise than Ron.

Louise




From kersberg at chello.nl  Thu Aug 14 12:30:50 2008
From: kersberg at chello.nl (kamion53)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 12:30:50 -0000
Subject: Sirius and his family status
In-Reply-To: <g7ulj8+ieir@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g818hq+p2t1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184071

lanna:
> > Like, all of a sudden, their black sheep traitor son is the great
> > Lord Voldemort's greatest supporter, fighting for the new world
> > order! Shouldn't he have been, like, the family hero?

Potioncat:
>----- I'm not sure what they knew about Regulus's death. We don't
> know when Mrs. Black went mad, or whether it's just her portrait
> that's over the bend.

kamion:
I think Mrs. Black already became pretty unstable when Sirius ran
away, Kreacher says something like: breaking Mistress' heart.
but by the time Sirius is arrested and inprisoned at Azkaban, Mrs.
Black is a widow, for two years already, who lost her husband and her
last brother in the same year as her youngest son went missing.
This according the Black family tree.

She then lived completely alone in a gloomy grim old house for
another four years before dying herself. Quite enough I would say to
get her over the edge completely. I don't think she saw Sirius as a
hero or whatever, but more as a miscreant who got himself in deep
trouble just to spite and damage the family name.

Sirius states that Kreacher has taken orders from her portrait too
long, from which I conclude that Mrs. Black's father, Pollux Black,
was neither around at the time she died, his year of death is given
as 1990, five years after hers. Maybe he lived in the house where
Bellatrix and Narcissa grew up.

Question is when was her portrait made?  In this period, she lived alone as a widow and did a freeze her last state of mind. Or was it made much earlier, (commisioned by her husband when she was
younger) and soaked up the deranging state of mind of a lonely old
woman?

kamion



From foxmoth at qnet.com  Thu Aug 14 16:26:28 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 16:26:28 -0000
Subject: Goblins, British school children and sterotypes ( was, Re: Muggle Parents and
In-Reply-To: <g807p2+na5r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g81mbk+9ka6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184072

Alla: 

> That we cannot judge the entity, nation, group of people by one 
> representative? Okay, again, sure, of course we cannot in RL, but in 
> fiction? JKR cannot really give us many goblins in the story where 
> they are secondary characters, so I feel she gave us how one behaves.

Pippin:
But why? You've already said   that this one cowardly and
treacherous act on Harry's part doesn't make him a coward or a
traitor, but at the same time, you think JKR wants us to believe that
one cowardly and treacherous act on the part of a goblin makes not
only him but his whole race cowardly and treacherous. If they are,
shouldn't we say the same of wizards?


Doesn't it make more sense that she wants to show us how easily people
can be manipulated to embrace such a belief, even if they've been
taught that in real life such beliefs are wrong and dangerous? Why is
it so appealing to think that all goblins are bad? Because it
justifies the way wizards have been treating them? But wouldn't that
justify the way the goblins treat wizards too? 

Isn't it interesting that Harry wouldn't dare think of  asking Bill to
betray his employers, but he thinks a goblin would do it? That he is
worried about Griphook stealing the sword, but not any of the others,
even though he doesn't know Ollivander, Fleur or even Bill all that
well? Harry isn't consciously treating Griphook differently than the
others, but he's absorbed his culture's expectations of goblin
treachery and unconsciously acts accordingly.

I think what Bill was trying to explain to Harry was that goblins do
have a concept of right and wrong, and that they have in their eyes an
honest claim to some of the treasure that wizards have accused them of
stealing, so in their eyes it's wizards who are thieves. That is why
he wanted Harry to be careful, IMO, because  as we know, goblins show
no mercy to thieves. 

JKR characterized Griphook as a goblin fanatic. But I don't believe
she showed that all goblins are fanatic, so I have no reason to think
they all share Griphook's view. Bill himself says that this is a
belief among goblins, and Gringotts goblins are especially prone to
it, which shows that he doesn't believe all goblins think the same way. 



> Alla:
> 
> If somebody is my friend I do not make those qualifiers. I trust my 
> friend unconditionally. I will do basically anything for my friend, 
> as long as I do not consider it immoral or illegal, and expect my 
> friend to do same for me.

Pippin:
I'm sure it's the same for Bill and his goblin friends, but he's aware
that the goblins are a different breed, and they may have a different
concept of what their moral rights are, especially when it comes to
goblin-made treasure.

Exodus spoilers:
I'm reminded of the scene in Exodus (the novel) where Taha asks Ari
for Jordana. By Taha's standards he's doing a moral, honorable thing
by asking Ari for his sister, and by Ari's standards he's doing the
moral, honorable thing by punching Taha in the face. (And by my early
twenty-first century standards, they're both behaving immorally, since
neither one even considers asking Jordana.) Of course it's the end
of their friendship. But was Uris saying that Jews and Arabs should
never be friends, or that no Arabs can be trusted where women are
concerned?

I don't think so. IMO, he was showing how different customs and
beliefs could cause a tragic misunderstanding between two very moral
people who had been lifelong friends.

 I think Bill is aware that there could be a similar sort of conflict
between him and the goblins, and he qualifies his use of the word
"friend" because he doesn't want to get in the habit of taking their
friendship for granted. He wants to be able to stop and think, not
automatically react with outrage because a person he thought of as a
friend said something offensive. (And that has an echo, doesn't it?)

Pippin





From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 14 17:08:51 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 17:08:51 -0000
Subject: Goblins, British school children and sterotypes ( was, Re: Muggle Parents and
In-Reply-To: <g81mbk+9ka6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g81or3+r4fs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184073

Pippin:
But why? You've already said that this one cowardly and
treacherous act on Harry's part doesn't make him a coward or a
traitor, but at the same time, you think JKR wants us to believe that
one cowardly and treacherous act on the part of a goblin makes not
only him but his whole race cowardly and treacherous. If they are,
shouldn't we say the same of wizards?

Alla:

Because Harry is the main character and IMO JKR has the luxury and 
desire to develop him fully ? all his good and bad acts together. I 
do not believe that she desired to do the same with Goblins.



Pippin:
Doesn't it make more sense that she wants to show us how easily people
can be manipulated to embrace such a belief, even if they've been
taught that in real life such beliefs are wrong and dangerous? Why is
it so appealing to think that all goblins are bad? Because it
justifies the way wizards have been treating them? But wouldn't that
justify the way the goblins treat wizards too?


Alla:

But who says that it is appealing that Goblins are all bad? I am not 
even saying that they are **bad** per se. I fully acknowledge their 
right to hold the views that they do, I just dislike those views. I 
would never think of Goblins as my enemies, I would just stay away 
from them, since I think they would not hesitate to lie to me and 
sell me staff, which they are really not selling to me IMO.
And me disliking Goblins now is as I mentioned before it is one of 
the few minor disappointments I had with the book. I thought they 
were cool since book 1 ? smart (bankers cannot be stupid), strong 
(resisting Wizards in those rebellions) and mysterious. I was dying 
to know more about them.

And hey, you can be absolutely right. It is just as I said before, 
for me to agree with you I need more evidence. 

Pippin:
Isn't it interesting that Harry wouldn't dare think of asking Bill to
betray his employers, but he thinks a goblin would do it? That he is
worried about Griphook stealing the sword, but not any of the others,
even though he doesn't know Ollivander, Fleur or even Bill all that
well? Harry isn't consciously treating Griphook differently than the
others, but he's absorbed his culture's expectations of goblin
treachery and unconsciously acts accordingly.

Alla:

Oh absolutely that I agree with.






From kaamita at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 14 16:33:06 2008
From: kaamita at yahoo.com (Heather Hadden)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 09:33:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g818u0+ncop@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <552970.73114.qm@web56515.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184074

>Louise:
>Also, Hermione, as a wanted Muggleborn, would need a stronger disguise than Ron.
?
I'm not saying that the choice was wrong. But don't forget that Ron?was supposed to have been at home sick, but since the Malfoy manor,?he is as wanted for being a blood traitor as Hermione is.?I am just looking at it from the point of who would have made a better Bella, not what would have been safer for all of them. I still believe Ron would have made a better Bella. As mentioned before, he knows more about the WW. He also proved he had a meaner streak when provoked. In the end, it all comes down to the fact that these are still teenagers doing a very dangerous thing. They didn't think it all through, like "Ok Hermione. When you are Bella, you have to be mean to people." They had enough examples of Bella's personality.
?
Heather


      

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Thu Aug 14 19:21:01 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 19:21:01 -0000
Subject: Goblins, British school children and sterotypes ( was, Re: Muggle Parents and
In-Reply-To: <g81or3+r4fs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g820it+v5qf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184075

 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> But who says that it is appealing that Goblins are all bad? I am not 
> even saying that they are **bad** per se. I fully acknowledge their 
> right to hold the views that they do, I just dislike those views. I 
> would never think of Goblins as my enemies, I would just stay away 
> from them, since I think they would not hesitate to lie to me and 
> sell me staff, which they are really not selling to me IMO.

Pippin:
See, this is where there is a disconnect for me, where  you imagine
yourself in the Potterverse, but aren't concerned that your views
might contribute to prejudice there, even though you admit they might
be wrong. 

Not only that, in order to "stay away from them" you would have to not
use wizard money, since it's all made by goblins. So, IMO, unless you
modified your views, you'd have to behave in ways that would probably
make most wizards view you as an anti-goblin fanatic. 

Pippin




From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 14 20:41:21 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 20:41:21 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g7s3rh+socl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8259h+7h07@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184076

> Questions:
> 
> 1. HRH plan on using "a single long, coarse black hair (plucked from
> the sweater Hermione had been wearing at Malfoy Manor)" (DH 519).
> This might remind our readers of another time HRH attempted to use
> polyjuice potion.  As you were reading did you have any fears that
> this attempt might end as poorly as the previous?

Montavilla47:
No.  There's a big difference in long human hair and "long" cat hair. 
The polyjuice potion had become pretty ordinary by this point in the
book.  I didn't anticipate any problem.


> 2. Why do the trio align themselves with Griphook?  Why not ask for
> Bill's help?  Would Bill help them?  Why doesn't Harry even consider
> this idea?

I have no idea why Harry doesn't ask Bill for help.  It seems really
stupid not to.  Bill WORKS for Gringotts.  In OotP, it was Bill who
had the blueprints to the Ministry.  Bill's a Weasley.  He's gone 
above and beyond to help Harry in the past.  He is, as Harry noted
in GoF, Rock-Star Cool.  

And he's a CURSEBREAKER!

I'm not sure how a human with extensive knowledge of goblins,
AND the very bank they're trying to break into, AND cursebreaking,
could possibly help when you're trying to negotiate with a goblin,
break into a bank, and steal an object that's probably cursed. 

Sorry.  That thumping sound was my head hitting the desk.

> 3. Harry has the sudden urge to destroy Bellatrix's wand when he is
> reminded of the spells it has performed.  Is this rational?

No.  As others have said, it's an emotional reaction.  


> 4. Why does Ollivander make Luna and Luna alone a new wand?  Why not
> make new wands for all of the people who were incarcerated with him?
> Why not make new wands for as many people as possible who have been
> victimized as he was by Death Eaters?  Why doesn't Ollivander think
> about arming the enemies of his enemy?  What does this say about his
> character?

I wonder what it says about the others that they never think to ask him.
If I had been Dean, I'd be begging Ollivander to take me on as an 
apprentice.

> 5. Is Harry's plan to withhold the Sword of Gryffindor from Griphook
> a double-cross?  Should Harry have explained their need of the sword
> (withholding certain details of course) and do something to ensure
> that Griphook would allow them to use it for a while?  Were you
> comfortable with Harry's decision?  Or did you agree with Hermione?

Not exactly.  Yes.  No.  Yes.

I think what really bugs me about what Harry does here is not that
he's double-crossing Griphook.  He isn't--or at least he doesn't intend
to double-crossing Griphook ultimately.  

What bugs me is that he decides to act in a way that's going to be
perceived as a double-cross.  For no good reason that I can see.
If he doesn't want to hand it over to Griphook immediately, but 
intends in good faith to hand it over eventually, then he ought to
just say that.

Does he expect Griphook to intuit--when Harry doesn't hand
over the sword as expected--that Harry is acting honorably?  No.
Of course Griphook is going to think he's being double-crossed.

And he'll act accordingly.  Harry knows this is wrong and he 
does it anyway.  

> 6. Before they leave, Hermione comments that Bellatrix "tasted
> disguisting."  How do you think that Harry tasted?  His polyjuice
> potion certainly was a more pleasant color.  Is a person's
> polyjuice "flavor" significant?

I really don't want to think about how Harry tasted.  I find this
whole polyjuice character test extremely distasteful.  (Pun intended.)
Shall we speculate on how those little girls that Crabbe and Goyle
transformed into tasted?  

> 7. Hermione breaks character as Bellatrix when she says "good
> morning" to Tom, the Leaky Cauldron barman.  Of the three, who is the
> best actor?  Is Hermione the best choice to play Bellatrix?  Would
> Harry or Ron have done a better job with her character?

Ron is, canonically speaking, the best actor of the three.  He's the 
one who mimics Peter Pettigrew and Harry's parseltongue.  He's 
seen almost as much of Bellatrix as Hermione has.  And, let's face 
it, Hermione is a terrible actress.  The one time she tried it before
(in B&B's), she was a dismal failure.


> 8. How did you feel about the changes to Diagon Alley?  Were you
> surprised by any of the changes to the Wizarding World?

Only after thinking about the book and wondering why the 
muggle-born weren't going to their muggle relatives for help.  
It's not like anyone was chasing these ragged, homeless, injured
wizards in Diagon Alley.  So, presumably they could go stay with
muggle relatives until the war was ended.  But, I suppose these 
were wizards without any muggle resources.  There were bound
to be some of those around.

My main thought in reading this was to wonder what real life
Nazi-esque situation this was referring to.  I assumed it must be
based on something, because everything else seemed to be,  But
it didn't ring any bells.  

> 9. Ron is forced to stun a man who attempts to assault
> Bellatrix/Hermione.  Did you agree with his decision?  Does he have a
> choice?  How does he feel about the situation?

I imagine he felt it was neccessary.  Stunning is probably the 
least offensive way to stop the guy from ruining their plan.


> 10. There has been a lot of debate about Harry's use of unforgivable
> curses.  Here we have the first time he uses one as he performs the
> Imperius Curse on Bogrod and Travers.  Why doesn't he confound them
> as he does the security guard?  Is it really necessary to use this
> curse?  Is this more effective than a Confundus Charm?  Does Harry's
> feeling that he did not perform a very strong curse make it more
> acceptable that he uses this tactic?

It didn't bug me.  I'm not sure why it doesn't.  With both Imperius and 
Avada Kadavra, I feel like they're not quite as bad as Crucio.  I mean,
you could have someone do things under Imperius that they'd feel horrible
about afterwards--and that would be quite evil.  

But you could also use Imperius for a good reason.   For example, if 
someone had a fear of heights, and they needed to cross a bridge, you 
could use Imperius to make them cross the bridge without feeling fear 
(in GoF, Harry feels a warm, comfortable feeling under Imperius). 

And, unless you make someone do something they'd regret, there seems
to be no ill effect from the curse.

Also, Avada Kadavra, whiile a killing curse, creates a quick, painless 
death.  As Dumbledore tells us, there's a lot worse ways of dying.

On the other hand, Crucio has no purpose other than to cause pain.  
In order to cast it effectively, your purpose has to be to inflict suffering.
And, we see its effect on the Longbottoms.  How many of us have felt
that between Harry and Neville's loss of parents, Neville had it just a 
tiny bit worse?

> 11. How did you feel about the description of the dragon and the
> cruel way in which it is kept?  Did this make you feel any different
> about Gringotts or goblins?  Harry thought he saw dragon fire when he
> first entered Gringotts in SS/PS.  Are there more dragons? Or is this
> the only one?

It seemed like a very terrible waste of a dragon to keep it underground
like that.  

> 12. As they enter the vault, they realize that the treasure has been
> charmed or cursed to burn their flesh and multiply.  Should Griphook
> have anticipated this little snag?  Why aren't they more prepared for
> this?  Was Griphook's lapse intentional?

I hope the lapse was intentional.

You know, it might have been handy for them to have had a 
cursebreaker along for the heist, don't you think?  Wonder where they
could have found a cursebreaker....

> 13. How do you feel about Griphook's treatment of Harry after Harry
> pulls him from the crushing, burning weight of the treasure?
> Griphook grabs the sword, and in the process the cup is almost lost.
> Did Griphook really intend for Harry to obtain anything from the
> vault? Griphook is accepted without question into the hoard of
> approaching goblins.  What do you make of this?

I was really confused during that passage. It was unclear to me 
whether Griphook was grabbing Harry's hair to pull himself
out of the burning gold, or Harry.   That Griphook was accepted
made sense to me.  He's a goblin who has been missing for weeks.
I'm sure they were delighted to see him alive.

> 14. Harry, Ron, and Hermione escape on the dragon's back in truly
> spectacular fashion.  How did you feel about the dragon's escape?
> How do you feel about Gringotts and goblins in general after Harry's
> experiences?

The chapter didn't change how I felt about goblins in general.  We 
knew that they cared more about goblins than about wizards, even
Harry Potter.  The only thing I didn't like was, of course, the poor
dragon being treated so cruelly.  I was happy that the dragon got
out.  

Montavilla47




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 14 20:58:03 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 20:58:03 -0000
Subject: Goblins, British school children and sterotypes ( was, Re: Muggle Parents and
In-Reply-To: <g820it+v5qf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8268r+pu59@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184077

> Pippin:
> See, this is where there is a disconnect for me, where  you imagine
> yourself in the Potterverse, but aren't concerned that your views
> might contribute to prejudice there, even though you admit they 
might
> be wrong. 

Alla:

Okay,  first of  I do not **want** to live in Potterverse , I would 
love to visit since there are characters that I adore, I would hope 
that Harry's generation will improve things, but as it stood at the 
end of the series, thanks but no thanks.

I placed myself in the hypothetical with Goblins as just that pure 
hypothetical.

And say I would want to imagine myself living in Potterverse, that 
would mean I would have to look at it as real place, no? Then of 
course I will not be thinking that  by one representative we can 
judge the whole race, I will be absolutely sure  to get to know more 
about Goblins before I judge them.

And again, I admit that they are wrong? We are talking about two 
different possibilities ? what writer was trying to achieve and what 
we can think of Goblins as if they were real beings. If Goblins 
are "real" beings, sure, I would not think of all of them as I think 
of Griphook, if I am strictly looking at them as construct from the 
book, um, no I do not admit that my views are wrong. I cannot read 
JKR's mind, so of course you can be right, but since  I  did not see 
another Goblin doing something differently from what Griphook did, 
then I can say that my views are wrong **only** in hypothetical way.

 Pippin:
> Not only that, in order to "stay away from them" you would have to 
not
> use wizard money, since it's all made by goblins. So, IMO, unless 
you
> modified your views, you'd have to behave in ways that would 
probably
> make most wizards view you as an anti-goblin fanatic. 

Alla:

"Antigoblin fanatic"?. But no by staying away from Goblins I meant 
refraining from **buying** staff from them. Last time I checked, 
wizards did not buy money from Goblins, no?

I reread the post and realized that I still sound confusing. SO to 
make a long story short - I would definitely stay away from Goblins 
if I look at them from outside of the story. It is my belief that in 
Griphook JKR modeled the views of your average Goblin and as I said 
before I think he is a greedy and selfish liar.

If I would appear in the "real Potterverse" ( boy sounds absurd, but 
whatever), of course I would make sure that I get to know more 
Goblins before I judge them.








From foxmoth at qnet.com  Thu Aug 14 21:34:13 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 21:34:13 -0000
Subject: Goblins, British school children and sterotypes ( was, Re: Muggle Parents and
In-Reply-To: <g8268r+pu59@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g828cl+uvsr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184078


> Alla:
> 
> "Antigoblin fanatic"?. But no by staying away from Goblins I meant 
> refraining from **buying** staff from them. Last time I checked, 
> wizards did not buy money from Goblins, no?
> 
>

Pippin:
 Hermione's father exchanged a ten-pound note at Gringotts for wizard
gold (ch 4 CoS), on Hermione's behalf of course.  Hermione does not
seem to be worried that goblins are going to repossess her gold. 

>From the AOL chat:
 When people trade in Muggle money for Wizard money, what does
Gringotts do with the Muggle money?

Those goblins are sneaky people. They manage to put the Muggle money
back into circulation. They are like "fences" --British slang, do you
understand it? 

Pippin


 





From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 14 21:45:57 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 21:45:57 -0000
Subject: Goblins, British school children and sterotypes ( was, Re: Muggle Parents and
In-Reply-To: <g828cl+uvsr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8292l+6su2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184079

> > Alla:
> > 
> > "Antigoblin fanatic"?. But no by staying away from Goblins I 
meant 
> > refraining from **buying** staff from them. Last time I checked, 
> > wizards did not buy money from Goblins, no?
> > 
> >
> 
> Pippin:
>  Hermione's father exchanged a ten-pound note at Gringotts for 
wizard
> gold (ch 4 CoS), on Hermione's behalf of course.  Hermione does not
> seem to be worried that goblins are going to repossess her gold. 
> <SNIP>

Alla:

I have to assume that I am being that unclear. I do not consider the 
exchange of the currency to be the same as buying the jewelry and all 
other crafts from Goblins. This is one of the examples where goblins 
will be IMO very sure to not loose their clients' trust.

But we do not even know that Goblins consider money their property 
forever and ever,do we?

I will not be surprised that those views are restricted to highly 
valuable items similar to Sword, but that is of course just 
speculation.

It just feels so incredibly unfair to me, but I wrote about it 
earlier. And yes, before you ask I think that prohibition to carry 
wands is just as unfair. 

JMO,

Alla




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 14 23:01:01 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 23:01:01 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <726245.51067.qm@web56505.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <g82dfd+oe8t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184080

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Heather Hadden <kaamita at ...> 
wrote:

> > Are there more dragons? Or is this the only one?

> I suppose there would be other dragons at Gringotts as I am 
> sure others would want the same security measures dear Bella 
> wanted on her vault. She couldn't have been the only one with a high 
> security vault.


zanooda:

Lestranges' wasn't the only vault guarded by that dragon :-). There 
were four or five vaults in all in that cave (p.535), and the dragon 
barred access to all of them. I wonder whose vaults they were :-). 
Potters seem like a very old family, but they don't have a dragon 
guarding their vault :-). 




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 15 07:40:36 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 07:40:36 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g7s3rh+socl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g83btl+ll12@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184081

CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
Chapter 26, Gringotts
 
> 6. Before they leave, Hermione comments that Bellatrix "tasted
disgusting."  How do you think that Harry tasted?  His polyjuice
potion certainly was a more pleasant color.  Is a person's polyjuice
"flavor" significant?

Carol:
Boy, I'm really responding to this chapter discussion in bits and pieces! 

Hermione says that Harry's polyjuice potion looks like it tastes good,
but the actual taste isn't mentioned (DH Am. ed. 50) because Harry, of
course, doesn't drink it. We aren't told what "essence of Crabbe"
tasted like, but Hermione (correctly) remembers that it looked liked
bogeys. Goyle's merely tasted like overcooked cabbage (CoS Am. ed.
215)--given that JKR also uses "cooked cabbage" to describe an
unpleasant smell ("cats" is another), I get the feeling that JKR
heartily dislikes that particular vegetable, at least the cooked
variety. If, as the color suggests, "essence of Crabbe" actually
tasted like "bogeys," it's on a par with "essence" of Bellatrix (worse
than gurdyroots). I imagine that even at best Polyjuice Potion is not
particularly delicious, what with lacewing flies and all those other
ingredients plus human hair (or worse, fingernail or toenail
clippings), and the actual effects of turning into someone else will
be unpleasant regardless of who you're turning into. Still, some
peop;e's Polyjuice Potions apparently taste worse than others, with
the worst taste for the worst people. (Was Crabbe's potion a clue to
how very bad--worse than either Draco or Goyle--he would turn out?)

Color is evidently even more of an indicator of the person's "essence"
than taste, with Harry's  being "a clear, bright gold" (DH 50), in
contrast to the bogey green and murky brown of Crabbe's and Goyle's or
the "sick sort of yellow" of Millicent's cat's (CoS 215). 

Interestingly, Mafalda Hopkirk, the Ministry employee who sent Harry
his notice of expulsion (and then wished him a pleasant morning) turns
out to be a harmless and even kindly little witch, judging from the
color of her polyjuice potion, "a pleasant heliotrope color" (DH 238).
Neither taste nor color is mentioned for wimpy little Reg Cattermole
or the burly DE-loving Runcorn. i don't recall any details of the
Muggles' potions before the Godric's Hollow visit. Apparently, their
"essence" isn't important.

Crabbe and Bellatrix are another matter, as is Harry. The very
expression "essence of Crabbe" (from CoS) seems to indicate JKR's
usual essentialist view, that a person (despite the occasional
possibility of redemption and the importance of choice) is who he (or
she) is, good or bad, brave or cowardly, from at least age eleven and
possibly from birth, and that person's quality can most clearly be
judged, not from his words and actions (which can be deceptive, as
with Snape or the false friend, Wormtail) but from the taste and color
of his Polyjuice Potion. I exaggerate, I realize, but Harry's pure
gold potion annoyed me, as did JKR's inability to allow Harry to lose
a Quidditch match through his own error or misjudgement. In her eyes,
Harry is perfect; his essence pure gold. 
> 
> 7. Hermione breaks character as Bellatrix when she says "good
morning" to Tom, the Leaky Cauldron barman.  Of the three, who is the
best actor?  Is Hermione the best choice to play Bellatrix?  Would
Harry or Ron have done a better job with her character?

Carol:

Even though a precedent has been set with characters changing to a
person of the opposite sex through Polyjuice (Crabbe and Goyle as
first-year girls in HBP; Hermione, Tonks, and Fleur as Harry in DH),
all three probably find it easiest to play a person of their own sex.
More important, possibly, Harry and Ron have wands that they've won,
which leaves Hermione with Bellatrix's. (They don't, of course,
realize what a giveaway that will be.) Harry, as leader, really needs
to be under the Invisibility Cloak with Griphook, and Hermione is the
only one of the three with the Transfiguration skills to disguise the
unPolyjuiced person, another reason why she rather than he needs to
take the potion. I really don't know what would have happened if Ron,
who's a good mimic but net necessarily a good actor, had played
Bellatrix. It might have been disastrous. Harry, who knows Bellatrix
all too well, might have gotten into character easily enough (though
we've never seen any indication of his acting ability), but in the
end, it didn't matter. The Goblins had been warned that the vault
would be robbed, and the wand confirmed their suspicions.
> 
> 8. How did you feel about the changes to Diagon Alley?  Were you
surprised by any of the changes to the Wizarding World?

Carol:
We'd been prepared for changes as early as the opening chapters of
HBP, and, of course, we knew about the DE takeover, so it was hardly
surprising that Diagon Alley had changed drastically. I wasn't
prepared for begging "wandless" or wanted posters of Harry, but the
spread of shops that normally would have belonged in Knockturn Alley
and the closing of shops like those of Ollivander and Florean
Fortescue, both empty for nearly two years at this point in the story.  
> 
> 9. Ron is forced to stun a man who attempts to assault
Bellatrix/Hermione.  Did you agree with his decision?  Does he have a
choice?  How does he feel about the situation?

I don't think he has any choice. He has to stay in character and help
Hermione out of her predicament. Obviously, he regrets Stunning the
poor man, but he'll recover, and it's imperative to keep the rattled
Hermione from being throttled by a desperate man. (Harry can't act
without giving them all away. It's up to Ron, and he does the only
thing he can think of to do.)
> 
> 10. There has been a lot of debate about Harry's use of unforgivable
curses.  Here we have the first time he uses one as he performs the
Imperius Curse on Bogrod and Travers.  Why doesn't he confound them as
he does the security guard?  Is it really necessary to use this curse?
 Is this more effective than a Confundus Charm?  Does Harry's feeling
that he did not perform a very strong curse make it more acceptable
that he uses this tactic?

Carol:
No to the last question, especially since he uses it on Bogrod again
after they go through the waterfall. If it's unacceptable, it doesn't
matter whether it's weak or strong. As for why he doesn't Confund
Travers again, I don't know. Apparently, his Confundus Charm isn't
very long-lasting or, unlike Snape, he doesn't know how to use it to
control people. Once Bogrod's first Imperius Curse washes off and
they're in real danger, I think the curse is somewhat more justified.
He can't just be confused; he actually needs to open the vault for
them. I don't like the idea that Harry is performing Unforgiveable
Curses, but the Imperiuses are certainly more justifiable in my mind
than the Cruciatus Curse. Here they're in serious trouble; they need
Travers, a potentially deadly enemy, out of their way and they can't
Stun or Petrify him without giving themselves and their plan away, and
they can't get into the vault without Bogrod. These are very different
circumstances from a Cruciatus Curse for pure revenge when there's no
immediate danger. 

Sidenote here: I noticed that the Imperius Curse, in contrast to
Confundus, sends a surge of tingling warmth from the mind of the
caster, down his arm and through the wand, a much more powerful
sensation than we've noted with any other curse, no doubt very
addictive to power-hungry wizards like Mulciber, the Imperius
specialist. I would hope that Harry never uses that curse again unless
it's an equal emergency. 
> 
> 11. How did you feel about the description of the dragon and the
cruel way in which it is kept?  Did this make you feel any different
about Gringotts or goblins?  Harry thought he saw dragon fire when he
first entered Gringotts in SS/PS.  Are there more dragons? Or is this
the only one?

Carol:
I always imagined that there were more dragons, but I hope this was
the only one. The cruelty of the Goblins toward teh poor dragon, not
to mention Griphook's treachery, causes me to lose whatever sympathy I
had for them.
> 
> 12. As they enter the vault, they realize that the treasure has been
charmed or cursed to burn their flesh and multiply.  Should Griphook
have anticipated this little snag?  Why aren't they more prepared for
this?  Was Griphook's lapse intentional?

Carol:
I don't think that's a normal protection on these high-security
vaults, which are already virtually impossible for an outsider to
find, guarded by a dragon (or dragons), and can only be opened by a
Gringotts Goblin. He recognizes the curses when he sees them, but I
don't think he anticipated them. He might not have told them, in any
case, since all he wants is the sword and he plans to betray them.
> 
> 13. How do you feel about Griphook's treatment of Harry after Harry
pulls him from the crushing, burning weight of the treasure? Griphook
grabs the sword, and in the process the cup is almost lost. Did
Griphook really intend for Harry to obtain anything from the vault?
Griphook is accepted without question into the hoard of approaching
goblins.  What do you make of this?

Carol:
As I said, I'm sure that he planned all along to betray them and leave
them trapped in the vault or at the mercy of the dragon and Goblins. I
thought it was odd at first that the Goblins believed him without
question, but since he's one of them and they know him, and they don't
trust Wizards, it's not that strange, really. Besides, he has the
Sword of Gryffindor in his hand, which he's returning to the Goblins,
whereas HRH are clearly stealing a treasure from the Lestranges'
vault. If any DE or Goblin doubts him, all he needs to do is plead the
Imperius Curse, which Bogrod and Travers will state was also used on them.
> 
> 14. Harry, Ron, and Hermione escape on the dragon's back in truly
spectacular fashion.  How did you feel about the dragon's escape? How
do you feel about Gringotts and goblins in general after Harry's
experiences?

Carol:
Happy for the dragon, which I hope will find its way to the dragon
preserve in Romania. (Presumably, HRH will tell Charlie about it.) I
hope it doesn't kill any people, but they'd better watch out for their
sheep! I don't care about Gringotts, except that I hope the damage to
the doors and the lobby is repaired. No one's money will be safe till
it is, and, besides, there was a kind of grandeur to that lobby. The
Goblins may have been mistreated by some Wizards and certainly by
Voldemort and the DEs, but they're an unloveable lot. I have some
sympathy for Bogrod. Griphook was badly treated by the Snatchers and
Bellatrix, which probably did nothing to improve his view of wizards
even with the counterexample of Harry and his friends, but I don't
like him. He's underhanded and malicious, and I'm very happy that the
Sword left him to return to its rightful home, Hogwarts, thnks to the
valor in the face of peril of Neville Longbottom.

Carol, who typed this post during commercial breaks in the women's
all-around gymnastics, so it may be full of errors




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 15 18:20:51 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 18:20:51 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g8093t+4qtd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g84he3+t81b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184082

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:

> I imagine that it's quite a complicated process
> and he wouldn't necessarily have the materials at hand. 
> (Where did he get them, anyway? I don't suppose there are 
> wand trees growing near Auntie Muriel's house, much less the 
> materials for the cores. 


zanooda:

Don't forget that at Aunt Muriel's Ollivander lived in the same house
with Fred and George :-). They still operated their business (by
Owl-Order), which means they were in contact with both their clients
and their suppliers. I bet F&G could get you anything :-).




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 15 19:16:55 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 19:16:55 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g7s3rh+socl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g84kn7+fco3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184083

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Beatrice23" <beatrice23 at ...> wrote:

> 4. Why does Ollivander make Luna and Luna alone a new wand?


zanooda:
While he was at Bill and Fleur's, Ollivander was too weak to do
anything. He spent only a week or so at Aunt Muriel's, iirc, and I
guess he only had enough time to make a wand for himself and for Luna.
Also, as others wrote, he needed some time to procure the materials.

BTW, I don't understand LV's attitude towards Ollivander. What was the
need to keep the old man in a dark damp cellar, in rugs? I understand
why Olly was kidnapped, but he is a very valuable prisoner (he is the
 only person in Britain who can make wands!) - why treat him this way?
If he died in the cellar, as I'm sure he nearly did, who would provide
wands?


> 10. There has been a lot of debate about Harry's use of unforgivable
> curses.  Here we have the first time he uses one as he performs the
> Imperius Curse on Bogrod and Travers.  Why doesn't he confound them
> as he does the security guard?  Is it really necessary to use this
> curse?  Is this more effective than a Confundus Charm? 


zanooda:

I'm not sure that the Confundus Charm would have worked in that
situation. I've read through the books about the use of the CC. It
seems  to cause an extreme confusion (and sometimes physical
disorientation, like in McLaggen's case :-)). 

However, to use this confusion to his advantage, the caster needs to
talk to the victim to convince him to act according to the caster's
wishes. For example, the Gringotts guards didn't know they are not
supposed to search Hermione/Bella until she told them that they
already did it. Snape also had to talk to Confunded Mundungus. 

It's not like the Imperius Curse, where the caster's order is
transmitted directly from the caster's head to the victim's head :-).
HRH didn't expect that the goblins knew about Bella's wand being
stolen, so they didn't discuss their tactics in this case. If Harry
Confunded Bogrod, Hermione wouldn't have known what to do.

In order for the CC to work, Hermione needed to say something like
"But I have a new wand made!", and then the Confunded Bogrod would
have said "Yes, you are right, I can see it now". But, as you
remember, Hermione wasn't ready for this turn of events and continued
to insist that she had her (Bella's) old wand even after the
Imperiused goblin said it was new. If HRH agreed beforehand on the use
of the CC, *then* it could have worked.


> 13. Griphook is accepted without question into the hoard of
> approaching goblins.  What do you make of this?


zanooda:

Maybe the goblins (except for Griphook) didn't know that the sword in
the vault was fake, so they might have assumed that Griphook grabbed
it from the vault to save it from the intruders :-).
 




From lwalsh at acsalaska.net  Fri Aug 15 19:38:54 2008
From: lwalsh at acsalaska.net (Laura Lynn Walsh)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 11:38:54 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g84kn7+fco3@eGroups.com>
References: <g84kn7+fco3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3597080F-2EA9-4CF5-9DA4-0F87959D7E38@acsalaska.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 184084


On 2008, Aug 15, , at 11:16, zanooda2 wrote:

> BTW, I don't understand LV's attitude towards Ollivander. What was the
> need to keep the old man in a dark damp cellar, in rugs? I understand
> why Olly was kidnapped, but he is a very valuable prisoner (he is the
>  only person in Britain who can make wands!) - why treat him this way?
> If he died in the cellar, as I'm sure he nearly did, who would provide
> wands?

I was under the impression that Ollivander was NOT the only
person in Britain who made wands.  When Hagrid takes Harry
there, he says that it is the best - not that it is the ONLY.  And,
if you can deprive everyone else of getting good wands while
you pursue the best wand, why not.  You save him for if you
need him, but meanwhile deprive everyone else.

Laura W




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 15 20:28:17 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 20:28:17 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <3597080F-2EA9-4CF5-9DA4-0F87959D7E38@acsalaska.net>
Message-ID: <g84ot1+ftgu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184085

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Laura Lynn Walsh <lwalsh at ...> wrote:

> I was under the impression that Ollivander was NOT the only
> person in Britain who made wands.  When Hagrid takes Harry
> there, he says that it is the best - not that it is the ONLY.


zanooda:

It's possible, yes. However, in this case it's difficult to explain
Travis's surprise at the news that Bella has a new wand: "A new wand?
... But how could you have done, which wandmaker did you use?" Maybe
there was another wandmaker when Harry was 11, but he later died :-)?


> Laura Lynn Walsh:

> And, if you can deprive everyone else of getting good wands while
> you pursue the best wand, why not.


zanooda:

Absolutely :-)! It's the conditions in which Olly was kept that I
mind, not the fact that he was kidnapped - that's quite understandable
:-).


> Laura:

> You save him for if you need him


zanooda:

Exactly, you need to *save* him, and in good condition, otherwise
he'll be dead by the time you need him :-).





From k12listmomma at comcast.net  Fri Aug 15 20:35:36 2008
From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 14:35:36 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
References: <g84kn7+fco3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <005201c8ff16$79840e00$6401a8c0@homemain>

No: HPFGUIDX 184086

zanooda:
> BTW, I don't understand LV's attitude towards Ollivander. What was the
> need to keep the old man in a dark damp cellar, in rugs? I understand
> why Olly was kidnapped, but he is a very valuable prisoner (he is the
> only person in Britain who can make wands!) - why treat him this way?
> If he died in the cellar, as I'm sure he nearly did, who would provide
> wands?

To me, this passage just shows Voldemort's blatant disrespect for all of 
humanity. He is never concerned with comfort, feelings or is never ever 
moved by the suffering he has caused. We saw it in the graveyard with 
Wormtail, who was bleeding from the spot where his own hand was chopped off. 
The hand regrown, as we quickly find out, isn't the blessing that Wormtail 
thinks it is, but is rather a leash to harness Wormtail to- a curse that he 
can't undo. Notice Voldemort isn't at all concerned that Wormtail is in 
great pain; rather, he just expects people to sacrifice greatly for him. He 
stops Wormtail's suffering only because it suited him to curse Wormtail with 
the hand, and Wormtail would welcome it without question.

With Ollivander, he's not a "valuable" prisoner- he's just an agent to be 
tortured and squeezed to get information out of. Voldemort was only keeping 
him around for as long as he needed him- after than, he's to be discarded. 
If Ollivander died, I am sure Voldemort would not blame himself for 
Ollivander's mistreatment- rather, he'd just take the opportunity to lash 
out his bad temper on one of his servants, and then quickly move on to find 
another answer to his problem with the wands.

FWIW, I don't think he was keeping Ollivander for his knowledge of how to 
make wands, but rather his intensive knowledge of how wands work and act. I 
think Voldemort thinks the secret of the wands in not in the materials, but 
in the method, timing or circumstances of its creation (such as the tail 
feathers being of the same, special bird). If he could find that special 
trick to his new wand, that spell or whatever circumstance he could 
manipulate, I think he feels that any wandmaker would do to create it. 
Voldemort is the master manipulator, and he cares nothing about the people 
that he manipulates. Ollivander is nothing to him, except that piece of 
information he needs to become invincible and unbeatable, or that 
information that he needs to keep from getting his butt kicked again by the 
young Harry Potter. His attitude is...."I used Ollivander".......not one of 
attributing greatness, brains or wisdom to Ollivander, that he should be 
respected in any way.

Shelley 




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 03:03:46 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 03:03:46 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g8259h+7h07@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g85g2i+n5go@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184087

Montavilla47:
> <snip> In OotP, it was Bill who had the blueprints to the Ministry.
 <snip>

Carol responds: Bill is just cleaning up after the meeting, which was
Snape's report, about all of the Order were very excited. I'm quite
sure that he's the one who obtained the plans. Bill was just clearing
them away so the kids wouldn't see them.

I could be wrong, of course, but how would Bill, who is a Gringotts
employee, not an MoM employee, get hold of those floor plans? Snape,
as a DE spy, is much more likely to have had access to (stolen)
floorplans (perhaps copying them with a Gemino spell) and presented
them as part of his report on the DEs' and Voldemort's plot to steal
the Prophecy orb. 

Carol, just commenting on this one point




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sat Aug 16 10:07:11 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 10:07:11 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g84ot1+ftgu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g868sf+hkqh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184088

 
> zanooda:
> 
> Exactly, you need to *save* him, and in good condition, otherwise
> he'll be dead by the time you need him :-).
>

Pippin:
Keeping people almost but not quite dead is the sort of thing
Voldemort is good at. He would make quite sure Ollivander didn't die
until all useful information had been extracted from him. Like Bertha
Jorkins. 

Ollivander is very particular about wand materials in what he sells,
but I'd imagine he could put together a wand out of just about
anything at a pinch. Keeping him weak from lack of food would be one
way of making sure he didn't. That would leave him vulnerable to
disease, but since he was isolated in the cellar, it's unlikely he'd
have caught anything. 


Pippin




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 16:33:35 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 16:33:35 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g7s3rh+socl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g86vgv+ebda@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184089

Beatrice:

1.HRH plan on using "a single long, coarse black hair (plucked from
the sweater Hermione had been wearing at Malfoy Manor)" (DH 519).
This might remind our readers of another time HRH attempted to use
polyjuice potion. As you were reading did you have any fears that
this attempt might end as poorly as the previous?

Alla:

Okay, so coming late to answer those great questions. No, actually 
for some reason I was not being nervous that it will be CoS take 2.


2. Why do the trio align themselves with Griphook? Why not ask for
Bill's help? Would Bill help them? Why doesn't Harry even consider
this idea?


Alla:

Truly, beats me, really really beats me. Would have made so much more 
sense to me to ask Bill for help and I personally do not doubt that 
Bill would have at least tried to get one of his Goblins friends to 
help Harry. Would he had been successful? I do not know, maybe not. 
But they did not **try**. And if Harry would have lied to Griphook as 
a very urgent last resort, I may have been easier on him.

3. Harry has the sudden urge to destroy Bellatrix's wand when he is
reminded of the spells it has performed. Is this rational?

Alla:

He wants to destroy the wand that killed Godfather, makes a perfect 
sense to me and I am not sure if it is rational or not, but it is 
very understandable.


4. Why does Ollivander make Luna and Luna alone a new wand? Why not
make new wands for all of the people who were incarcerated with him?
Why not make new wands for as many people as possible who have been
victimized as he was by Death Eaters? Why doesn't Ollivander think
about arming the enemies of his enemy? What does this say about his
character?

Alla:

Well, Olivander's character had always been an enigma to me since his 
book 1 characterization of Voldemort's deeds and still is at the end 
of the series. I mean clearly he is not a DE himself as we know, but 
what the heck is this awe of the monster, I do not know.

The best I can do to characterize him is the person who cares only 
about his craft and if somebody can push the products of his making 
to the limit, no matter how horrible that limit can be, he will 
respect that person.

Why he makes Luna alone a new wand? Frankly I am surprised that he 
did that for her. I would imagine that maybe in his head he thinks 
that magic is neutral and in his head he decided that he is not 
supposed to help none of the parties? But he was just tortured for 
crying out loud, wasn't that enough to tip the scales in his mind? I 
have no idea. I know that I for sure would not have been behaving as 
he did, and would do my very best to try and make as many wands as 
strength will allow me to make sure that the monster paid if not for 
what he did to people around me (which I would have worked for 
definitely), but at least for what he did to me. But hey, I am not 
Ollivander.

5. Is Harry's plan to withhold the Sword of Gryffindor from Griphook
a double-cross? Should Harry have explained their need of the sword 
(withholding certain details of course) and do something to ensure
that Griphook would allow them to use it for a while? Were you
comfortable with Harry's decision? Or did you agree with Hermione?


Alla:

I wrote about it recently, it is dishonest and wrong IMO. Double-
cross? I do not know, if double-cross means taking immediate 
advantage of the person, then sure IMO it was.

I mean Harry wanted Griphook's help, but intended to give sword back 
when Voldemort is gone? For all Harry knows it could have been 100 
years. Bad move Harry.

Having said that, if I had evidence that Harry knew that Griphook 
intended to double-cross him, I would have no problems with Harry's 
decision.




10. There has been a lot of debate about Harry's use of unforgivable
curses. Here we have the first time he uses one as he performs the
Imperius Curse on Bogrod and Travers. Why doesn't he confound them
as he does the security guard? Is it really necessary to use this
curse? Is this more effective than a Confundus Charm? Does Harry's
feeling that he did not perform a very strong curse make it more
acceptable that he uses this tactic?

Okay, I am pretty sure that what I am going to write right now stands 
a chance to be misinterpreted, so I am going to try to be very clear 
lol. While I have very little problem per se with Harry using 
**either** Imperio or Crucio, comparatively and ONLY comparatively if 
I were to choose which one I have less problems with , it will 
definitely be Imperio here. Again let me stress, all that it means 
that on the scale of 1 to 10 I would grade me having problem with 
Harry using Imperio as 1.5 and Harry using Crucio as 0.5, I think.

Why? Because when I read about Harry using Imperio here, I was like 
huh? What sense of urgency do you have Harry? Did Goblins hurt you in 
some way? Were they the ones who tortured kids in your school or 
something? Who the hell gave you the right to compel the free will of 
another being just because you need a sword from **their** bank?

I definitely understand that ends justify the means here

See, if character is provoked badly or hurt or upset, I will cut a 
huge slack to that character in **fiction**, accordingly I have no 
problem with Harry's crucio. I have no problem with disproportional 
response to bad guy ( character I see as bad guy) in fiction, as long 
as I am satisfied that another character was indeed provoked or was 
defending himself or others, etc, etc. But here? Yes, since there was 
no harm done, I do not have much problem either, but I would for sure 
prefer Harry to use another curse. I do not LIKE Goblins at all, as I 
said before, but surely I do not see them as enemies.



11. How did you feel about the description of the dragon and the
cruel way in which it is kept? Did this make you feel any different
about Gringotts or goblins? Harry thought he saw dragon fire when he
first entered Gringotts in SS/PS. Are there more dragons? Or is this
the only one?

Alla:

Oh yeah, cruelty to living creature made me feel even worse about 
Goblins. As I said before Goblins went way down in my mind after book 
7, way way down.


12. As they enter the vault, they realize that the treasure has been
charmed or cursed to burn their flesh and multiply. Should Griphook
have anticipated this little snag? Why aren't they more prepared for
this? Was Griphook's lapse intentional?

Alla:

I would not put anything past Griphook, yeah I am ready to believe 
that he knew about it.

13. How do you feel about Griphook's treatment of Harry after Harry
pulls him from the crushing, burning weight of the treasure?
Griphook grabs the sword, and in the process the cup is almost lost.
Did Griphook really intend for Harry to obtain anything from the
vault? Griphook is accepted without question into the hoard of
approaching goblins. What do you make of this?

Alla:

The bastard, he could do with a little bit more gratefulness. If 
Griphook did not intend for Harry to obtain anything from the vault, 
that makes him double bastard in my eyes. But only if he did not know 
that Harry was not being honest with him either.  And yeah, the fact 
that he is accepted without the question tells me loads.

14. Harry, Ron, and Hermione escape on the dragon's back in truly
spectacular fashion. How did you feel about the dragon's escape?
How do you feel about Gringotts and goblins in general after Harry's
experiences?

Alla:

I loved that part and I already said how I feel about Goblins. Thanks 
for amazing questions Beatrice.





From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sat Aug 16 17:07:57 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 17:07:57 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g7s3rh+socl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g871hd+n1d0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184090

 
> Questions:
> 
> 2. Why do the trio align themselves with Griphook?  Why not ask for
> Bill's help?  Would Bill help them?  Why doesn't Harry even consider
> this idea?

Pippin:
Harry says that only a goblin could help. He is probably remembering
what Griphook once told him, that if anybody but a Gringotts goblin
tried to open  a vault, the thief would be drawn inside and trapped there.

In addition, IMO, Griphook's initial response to Harry was honest:
there was  no chance of getting away with it, it would be against his
code to reveal Gringotts secrets, and the Gringotts goblins would
regard it as base treachery. I think JKR ran a conversation between
Harry and Bill through her mind, and decided it wouldn't move the
story forward to have Bill repeat what Griphook had told Harry already.

It's not a given that Bill would have thought helping Harry was a good
idea. What if it led to another goblin rebellion? That could be worse
than Voldemort.

> 
> 4. Why does Ollivander make Luna and Luna alone a new wand?  Why not
> make new wands for all of the people who were incarcerated with him?
> Why not make new wands for as many people as possible who have been
> victimized as he was by Death Eaters?  Why doesn't Ollivander think
> about arming the enemies of his enemy?  What does this say about his
> character?

Pippin:
I don't think unicorn hair, dragon heartstring, or phoenix feathers
would be easily available under the current regime. It also appears
that not every tree is suitable for wand wood, so those are probably
being watched as well. I think it's touching that Ollivander thought
first of the girl who had helped him. Since he's been cooped up in
that dungeon since before the coup, he may not even know about the
hordes of wandless.

> 
> 5. Is Harry's plan to withhold the Sword of Gryffindor from Griphook
> a double-cross?  Should Harry have explained their need of the sword
> (withholding certain details of course) and do something to ensure
> that Griphook would allow them to use it for a while?  Were you
> comfortable with Harry's decision?  Or did you agree with Hermione?

Pippin:
I was pretty sure Harry's decision would be a disaster, though I don't
know whether explaining things would have made a difference. I don't
think Griphook ever had a real plan to get the Trio out of the
dungeon, and probably wouldn't have been able to come up with one if
he'd tried. It would be like three teenagers trying to rob Fort Knox.
Even with inside help it's highly unlikely they could get away with it.

If it was up to me, I think I'd have tried to con one of Bella's
family into getting the cup out rather than trying to smuggle the Trio
in. But that might not have been as much fun to read about.

I enjoy the irony that Harry, our supposed upholder of Western values,
is the one planning to be what they used to call, in my benighted
youth, an Indian giver, while Griphook, the non-human, cons Harry into
shaking on  a one-sided deal any robber baron would be proud of. 

> 
> 7. Hermione breaks character as Bellatrix when she says "good
> morning" to Tom, the Leaky Cauldron barman.  Of the three, who is
the best actor?  Is Hermione the best choice to play Bellatrix?  Would
> Harry or Ron have done a better job with her character?

Pippin:
Polyjuice doesn't change the way you move or gesture. I think Ron
would have felt awkward in the body of a grown woman, and  not able to
disguise this without a lot of practice.  Hermione could have used
some rehearsals though. She *can* act convincingly when her heart is
in it. Remember how she told McGonagall that challenging the troll had
been her idea? And how coolly she robbed Snape's office in CoS? I
think she just trusted too much in the polyjuice, and forgot that
she'd need to act like Bella as well as look like her.

> 
> 8. How did you feel about the changes to Diagon Alley?  Were you
> surprised by any of the changes to the Wizarding World?

Pippin:
I thought the wandless were a metaphor for the homeless in the real
world. But I remembered that there have always been wandless in the
WW: goblins, werewolves, the mentally unstable and the unjustly
expelled. In an awful, unacceptable way, Voldemort made  the problems
of the wandless  visible. 

> 
> 9. Ron is forced to stun a man who attempts to assault
> Bellatrix/Hermione.  Did you agree with his decision?  Does he have
a choice?  How does he feel about the situation?

Pippin:
You can't make an omelet without breaking eggs. Griphook had warned
them they might have to attack wizards to get into the vaults. 

> 
> 10. There has been a lot of debate about Harry's use of unforgivable
> curses.  Here we have the first time he uses one as he performs the
> Imperius Curse on Bogrod and Travers.  Why doesn't he confound them
> as he does the security guard?  Is it really necessary to use this
> curse?  Is this more effective than a Confundus Charm?  Does Harry's
> feeling that he did not perform a very strong curse make it more
> acceptable that he uses this tactic?

Pippin:
Harry's got a lot worse things to be concerned about than a life
sentence in Azkaban. And that's mostly the way Imperius and Crucio
have been presented to him: not as uniquely evil actions but simply
ones that will get you into a lot of trouble if you're caught. Only
the act of murder is consistently called evil in itself.


The victims of Imperius and Cruciatus *may* suffer dreadful
consequences; Crouch and the Longbottoms were driven insane. But
Fake!Moody used Imperius on Harry and scads of his classmates with no
harmful effects, and Harry himself has suffered the cruciatus curse
several times. Though each time he thought he would die or go mad from
the pain, he didn't. 

> 
> 11. How did you feel about the description of the dragon and the
> cruel way in which it is kept?  Did this make you feel any different
> about Gringotts or goblins?  Harry thought he saw dragon fire when
he first entered Gringotts in SS/PS.  Are there more dragons? Or is
this the only one?

Pippin:
Harry didn't enter that section of the vaults, so either there are
other dragons, the vaults move around, or the dragon isn't always in
the same place. This being the WW, anything is possible.

I was sorry for the dragon. I don't know that the goblins are entirely
to blame for its condition, though. I doubt it was captured and
brought to Gringotts without wizard help. In any case, Bella and
others with dragon-guarded vaults must know about the dragon, so they
are complicit at least. 


> 12. As they enter the vault, they realize that the treasure has been
> charmed or cursed to burn their flesh and multiply.  Should Griphook
> have anticipated this little snag?  Why aren't they more prepared
for this?  Was Griphook's lapse intentional?

Pippin:
Since the curses have  names in Latin not Gobbledegook, they are
probably wizard enchantments, and Griphook didn't know about them. I
doubt his plan included getting burnt and smothered. A little present
from Bella, perhaps, just in case the goblins got any ideas about
repossessing the treasures in her vault. 

I think he did expect that the goblins would show up and trap Harry
and the others, and that he planned to excuse himself by claiming to
have been under the Imperius curse. He is the one who suggests using it. 

Griphook could have denounced the Trio as imposters the moment they'd
entered the bank of course, and seized the sword then. But he kept to
the letter of his bargain with Harry, showing the same kind of
fractured honor that Harry did in promising himself that he'd deliver
the sword some day (if he wasn't killed or robbed of it in the
meantime, that is, a possibility Harry conveniently didn't consider.) 

> 
> 13. How do you feel about Griphook's treatment of Harry after Harry
> pulls him from the crushing, burning weight of the treasure?
> Griphook grabs the sword, and in the process the cup is almost lost.
> Did Griphook really intend for Harry to obtain anything from the
> vault? Griphook is accepted without question into the hoard of
> approaching goblins.  What do you make of this?

Pippin:
Griphook never promised to help Harry obtain anything from the vault. 
He said, carefully, that if there were any wizard he could believe
didn't want something for personal gain, it would be Harry. But he
didn't quite say he believed Harry. I think when Harry said, "Get it!"
he knew for sure that Harry had never really intended to hand over the
sword. Griphook evidently doesn't feel any bond with Harry for saving
him from the treasure, but if it was enchanted by wizards, not
goblins, then he may feel that he didn't owe anything to a wizard for
saving him from it. 

> 
> 14. Harry, Ron, and Hermione escape on the dragon's back in truly
> spectacular fashion.  How did you feel about the dragon's escape?
> How do you feel about Gringotts and goblins in general after Harry's
> experiences?

Pippin:
There was no credible way for them to escape from the vaults. Only an
incredible escape would do. <g> I'd seen an illustration of the Trio
mounted on a dragon's back, so I knew something was coming. As far as
goblins in general, I've already posted a lot about this, but I'll
just say here that while I'd be suspicious of a goblin who offered to
sell me an ancient and valuable artifact, I'd be very foolish not to
be equally suspicious of a human in such circumstances. Both humans
and goblins can lose their heads where treasure is concerned.

Pippin, thanking Beatrice for the excellent summary and questions




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 17:21:17 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 17:21:17 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g86vgv+ebda@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g872ad+pafs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184091

Alla:
<SNIP>
While I have very little problem per se with Harry using
**either** Imperio or Crucio, comparatively and ONLY comparatively if
I were to choose which one I have less problems with , it will
definitely be Imperio here.<SNIP>

Alla:

DUH! Way to contribute to misinterpretation Alla, lol. Of course I 
meant to say that I will have **more** problems with Imperio, not less. 




From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 18:07:41 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 18:07:41 -0000
Subject: Goblins; different from Griphook?
In-Reply-To: <g81mbk+9ka6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8751d+h3f4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184092

> Alla: 
> 
> > JKR cannot really give us many goblins in the story where 
> > they are secondary characters, so I feel she gave us how one
> > behaves [as a representative of how they all behave].
> 
> Pippin:
> But why? You've already said that this one cowardly and
> treacherous act on Harry's part doesn't make him a coward or a
> traitor, but at the same time, you think JKR wants us to believe 
> that one cowardly and treacherous act on the part of a goblin
> makes not only him but his whole race cowardly and treacherous.
> If they are, shouldn't we say the same of wizards?
> 
> 
> Doesn't it make more sense that she wants to show us how easily
> people can be manipulated to embrace such a belief, even if
> they've been taught that in real life such beliefs are wrong and
> dangerous?  <snip>

Mike:
No, actually it doesn't, at least not to me. Let me first add that I 
don't think Griphook was acting cowardly or treacherously, not 
according to his norms. If you look at his actions objectively, 
without the Harry colored glasses, he made a bargain stuck to it and 
took his asking price (the Sword) once the bargain was completed. 
Where's the treachery in that? Other than him pointing to the Trio 
and calling them thieves when he was part of their thievery, he 
really did nothing wrong. And he certainly wasn't being a coward.

But he was being our typical goblin, a standard by which we should be 
allowed to judge all goblins. Just as we know all Centaurs are aloof 
and stay out of the wizards affairs. Whoops, hello Firenze, the 
exception. Then, look who joined the battle of Hogwarts.

Just as all House Elves want is to serve humans, any humans, they 
don't care. Whoops, hello Dobby, the exception. Then they join the 
battle on the good guys side, showing it *does* matter to all of them 
who they serve.

Giants are just gormless, barbaric creatures that can't be civilized 
and must be shunted off to a land far, far away. Whoops, hello Grawp, 
and thanks for joining the battle on the good guys side.

Werewolves; hello Lupin. Even a vampire is invited to Sluggy's party.

But goblins? Where was the exception? Which one broke ranks to show 
us that they don't all think the way Griphook thinks? Is Griphook the 
exception because he initially helped Harry? Personality-wise he 
probably is an exception, or rather, they all have individual 
personalities. But belief-wise, not really. And Bill confirms that 
all goblins think like Griphook, independent of Harry's 
interpretation or experience. Bill wasn't privy to what Griphook said 
about the Sword to Harry, but he knows how goblins think and conveyed 
that to us.



> Pippin:
> JKR characterized Griphook as a goblin fanatic. But I don't
> believe she showed that all goblins are fanatic, so I have no
> reason to think they all share Griphook's view. Bill himself says
> that this is a belief among goblins, and Gringotts goblins are
> especially prone to it, which shows that he doesn't believe all
> goblins think the same way. 

Mike:
I don't see how you get there from what Bill says. "Especially prone 
to it" (and it was with regards to gold and treasure) sounds to me 
like Gringott's goblins, which Griphook was until recently, are more 
fanatical in their application but not differing in their base 
beliefs.

Though it may be possible that Griphook belongs to a more fanatical 
faction of goblins, we have no exception to prove that postulation. 
In what way they are fanatical, we can't know because JKR gives us no 
other examples. Conversely, we do get confirmation that this belief 
held by Griphook is typical amongst goblins even if it varies by 
degrees. IOW, Griphooks views are the goblin views. Rather than 
getting an exception like we do with Centaurs, Elves, Giants, and 
Werewolves, we get an independent confirmation from a human that 
works every day with goblins.

Finally, note that these other creatures, or at least one amongst 
them, all join Harry in the fight against the Dark side. Not the 
goblins, they happily remain on the sideline. Though the goblins have 
supposedly been wronged too by this bullying wizard faction, not one 
of them thinks enough of the fight against Voldemort to join in. They 
view it as a matter for wizards, they care not who wins, and they 
don't believe anything will change between wizards and goblins no 
matter who wins. IMO of course. And Griphook was a perfect poster 
goblin for this species.

Mike




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Sat Aug 16 19:37:57 2008
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 19:37:57 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g7s3rh+socl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g87aal+trlg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184093

Beatrice:
> 10. There has been a lot of debate about Harry's use of unforgivable
> curses.  Here we have the first time he uses one as he performs the
> Imperius Curse on Bogrod and Travers.  Why doesn't he confound them
> as he does the security guard?  Is it really necessary to use this
> curse?  Is this more effective than a Confundus Charm?  Does Harry's
> feeling that he did not perform a very strong curse make it more
> acceptable that he uses this tactic?

Jen: The Imperius bothered me for story reasons more than the Crucio. 
It was included right after Harry made the choice to pursue Horcruxes 
rather than Hallows, to reject the path most wizards would deem the 
better choice - the pursuit of magical power - for the more difficult 
path of destroying Horcruxes.  Dumbledore suspected the temptation on 
Harry's part once Harry learned he was in possession of two Hallows, 
thus the reason for willing Harry the Stone in such a cryptic manner 
(and giving Hermione the fairy tale book in order to help stall him.)

So Harry puts everything together & rejects magical power as the 
answer, then casts his first Imperius.  Total control over another. 
What?!?

The only answer that makes sense to me is JKR classified the 
Unforgiveables exactly the way Pippin describes here:

"Harry's got a lot worse things to be concerned about than a life
sentence in Azkaban. And that's mostly the way Imperius and Crucio
have been presented to him: not as uniquely evil actions but simply
ones that will get you into a lot of trouble if you're caught. Only
the act of murder is consistently called evil in itself."

Jen again:  It's true that HBP presents the idea that there is 
something worse than Unforgiveables, and that something is murder.  
That murder is a moral evil while Unforgiveables are a legal evil.  
I'm suddenly realizing that distinction made for a good red herring 
in HBP when Snape kills DD by using Avada Kedavra.  Was it the AK 
that was the worst evil or the murder itself?  (If indeed it had been 
a real murder I mean.)  In my mind after HBP it was the AK that 
presented the dilemma as much as the murder itself.  Snape couldn't 
possibly be *good* if her performed an Unforgiveable even if he was 
loyally killing Dumbledore at Dumbledore's request.  

> Pippin:
> JKR characterized Griphook as a goblin fanatic. But I don't
> believe she showed that all goblins are fanatic, so I have no
> reason to think they all share Griphook's view. Bill himself says
> that this is a belief among goblins, and Gringotts goblins are
> especially prone to it, which shows that he doesn't believe all
> goblins think the same way.

Mike:
> I don't see how you get there from what Bill says. "Especially prone
> to it" (and it was with regards to gold and treasure) sounds to me
> like Gringott's goblins, which Griphook was until recently, are more
> fanatical in their application but not differing in their base
> beliefs.

> Though it may be possible that Griphook belongs to a more fanatical
> faction of goblins, we have no exception to prove that postulation.
> In what way they are fanatical, we can't know because JKR gives us
> no other examples. 


Jen: I read it the same as Pippin but not because of the section 
where Bill says 'especially prone to' the beliefs about treasure.  It 
was the sentence right above that says: "However there is a belief 
among some goblins..."  'Some' to me sounds like a part of, a 
faction, a few.  I didn't think all goblins believed as as Griphook 
does, that in fact those who did were the ones attracted to working 
at Gringotts in the first place.  Those are the goblins Bill would 
know, the ones who are part of his everyday life. 

Mike:
> But he was being our typical goblin, a standard by which we should 
> be allowed to judge all goblins. Just as we know all Centaurs are
> aloof and stay out of the wizards affairs. Whoops, hello Firenze,
> the exception. Then, look who joined the battle of Hogwarts.

> Just as all House Elves want is to serve humans, any humans, they
> don't care. Whoops, hello Dobby, the exception. Then they join the
> battle on the good guys side, showing it *does* matter to all of
> them who they serve.

> Giants are just gormless, barbaric creatures that can't be civilized
> and must be shunted off to a land far, far away. Whoops, hello 
> Grawp, and thanks for joining the battle on the good guys side.

> Werewolves; hello Lupin. Even a vampire is invited to Sluggy's 
> party.

> But goblins? Where was the exception? Which one broke ranks to show
> us that they don't all think the way Griphook thinks? <snip> 

Jen: This doesn't prove all goblins are like Griphook in their 
beliefs about treasure though, only that all goblins appear to 
believe as Griphook does when it comes to the 'wizarding war'.  They 
have more to lose if they join the Hogwarts group because they have 
more power within wizarding society.  At least Voldemort allows them 
to continue working at Gringotts when he's in power; should they 
choose Harry's side & lose, goblins will likely lose any connection 
to Gringotts because Voldemort wouldn't allow it.  Perhaps it's not a 
noble choice by human standards in the story, but it *is* a prudent 
choice by a group who's mounted rebellions in order to gain their 
power in the WW.




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 19:56:16 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 19:56:16 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g86vgv+ebda@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g87bd0+nqat@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184094

> 4. Why does Ollivander make Luna and Luna alone a new wand? Why not
make new wands for all of the people who were incarcerated with him?
Why not make new wands for as many people as possible who have been
victimized as he was by Death Eaters? Why doesn't Ollivander think
about arming the enemies of his enemy? What does this say about his
character?
> 
> Alla:

> The best I can do to characterize him is the person who cares only 
about his craft and if somebody can push the products of his making to
the limit, no matter how horrible that limit can be, he will respect
that person.
> 
> Why he makes Luna alone a new wand? Frankly I am surprised that he
did that for her. I would imagine that maybe in his head he thinks
that magic is neutral and in his head he decided that he is not 
supposed to help none of the parties? But he was just tortured for 
crying out loud, wasn't that enough to tip the scales in his mind? I 
have no idea. I know that I for sure would not have been behaving as
he did, and would do my very best to try and make as many wands as
strength will allow me to make sure that the monster paid if not for
what he did to people around me (which I would have worked for 
definitely), but at least for what he did to me. But hey, I am not
Ollivander.

Carol responds:

Luna has been his friend and sole companion in what amounts to a
prison cell in the Malfoys' cellar. Why not give her what amounts to a
present out of gratitude and affection?

As for making wands for all the good guys, HRH don't really need them
(though Hermione would probably appreciate a new one) and he doesn't
really know Dean, the only other wandless member of the group at shell
Cottage.

And, in any case, he's ill and weak. He takes longer to recuperate
than Griphook does. He's probably as old as Dumbledore. And even when
he leaves Shell Cottage for Auntie Muriel's, where is he supposed to
get wandwood and material for cores? I know that Fred and George are
still supposedly operating a mail order business, but they probably
took supplies from their shop (and the Burrow) with them into hiding.
Ollivander has bee imprisoned for nearly two years and can't get to
his shop (assuming that it hasn't already been vandalized by DEs).

It seems to me that people who expect him to arm all the good guys in
the short interval between his leaving Shell Cottage and the Battle of
Hogwarts, which he has no way of anticipating (a month, possibly?) are
expecting more of him than even a brilliant (in his field) and highly
talented Wizard can accomplish. How long does it take to make a wand?
And if he didn't know who he was making it for and what that person's
former wand had been, how would he know which wand was suitable for whom?

By the way, I hope you'll forgive me for inserting a usage note here
to clarify what I think is Heather's intended meaning in asking this
question. "Ollivander's character" means his character traits (what
kind of person he is), not Ollivander himself. We can talk (on the
Movie List) about John Hurt's character, meaning Mr. Ollivander in the
SS/PS film, but characters in a book aren't playing roles. Ollivander
is Ollivander, not "Ollivander's character." the same is true for
Harry, Hermione, Dumbledore, Snape, or any other character.

Carol, snipping a lot of stuff that she agrees with in this post






From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sat Aug 16 19:57:25 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 19:57:25 -0000
Subject: Goblins; different from Griphook?
In-Reply-To: <g8751d+h3f4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g87bf5+oh67@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184095

Mike:
> 
> But goblins? Where was the exception? Which one broke ranks to show 
> us that they don't all think the way Griphook thinks? 

Pippin:
The goblin family murdered by Voldemort that Bill mentioned  in OOP. 

Most of the goblins sit out the war. So do most of the wizards. Of
those who do fight back, the majority are those whose children are
directly threatened.  

Now, if there were goblin children at Hogwarts and the goblins still
didn't want to fight Voldemort, I'd think they had very different
moral standards than wizards. But there are no goblin kids at
Hogwarts. Hmmm.

What a previous poster said about Hogwarts applies to the goblins as
well, IMO. If the story was about what goblins are like, then I would
expect Griphook to be a fair example of them. But the story is about
what *Harry* is like, and to understand that we only need to know what
Harry knows about goblins. 

I think it would be a bit disingenous to say that Griphook made an
honest bargain. IMO, he knew Harry would reasonably expect him to help
Harry  get out of the vault as well as into it, just as Harry knew
perfectly well that Griphook could reasonably expect to receive the
sword when he'd fulfilled his side of the bargain. There isn't any
cultural misunderstanding here,IMO, just two sharp bargainers each
counting on the other's greed to keep him from asking too many
questions. What's that saying? Oh yeah, "You can't cheat an honest
man." Or goblin.

Does Griphook show goblins in a bad light? Sure, just as Greyback
shows werewolves in a bad light, and Voldemort shows humans in a bad
light. And if the story were a sort of fictionalized reportage, like
those social studies texts we used to have where you'd follow a
"typical" Chinese boy through his day (it would always be *his* day)
then, yeah, I could think, that's what goblins are like. But JKR is
writing a novel, not social studies for the WW. 

Pippin






From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 20:23:48 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 20:23:48 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g87bd0+nqat@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g87d0k+8i5v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184096

Carol earlier:
> <snip> By the way, I hope you'll forgive me for inserting a usage
note here to clarify what I think is Heather's intended meaning in
asking this question. <snip>

Carol again:

Make that Beatrice's meaning. My apologies to both Beatrice and
Heather for not checking upthread before posting.

Carol, wasting a post and glad she has nothing else to respond to today!





From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 21:12:57 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 21:12:57 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g87bd0+nqat@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g87fsp+m048@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184097

> Carol responds:
> 
> Luna has been his friend and sole companion in what amounts to a
> prison cell in the Malfoys' cellar. Why not give her what amounts to a
> present out of gratitude and affection?
< HUGE SNIP>

Alla:

Indeed why not. I do not remember expressing unhappiness about him 
doing it, I remember expressing surprise based on what my opinion of 
his character was and is.






From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 16 22:27:35 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 22:27:35 -0000
Subject: Goblins; different from Griphook?
In-Reply-To: <g87bf5+oh67@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g87k8n+sfbg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184098

> > Mike previously:
> > 
> > But goblins? Where was the exception? Which one broke ranks to 
> > show us that they don't all think the way Griphook thinks? 
> 
> Pippin:
> The goblin family murdered by Voldemort that Bill mentioned in OOP.

Mike:
How? We know "[t]hey've suffered losses too" from what Arthur said, 
but how did that show a breaking from Griphook's position? Isn't 
Griphook on the run from the snatchers? That shows that Griphook 
himself has run afoul of Voldemort's forces, just as that family 
mentioned in OotP must have. If anything, they would seem to have had 
the same opinion of LV and the DEs that Griphook had. It shows us 
nothing of goblin ownership beliefs.



> Pippin:
> What a previous poster said about Hogwarts applies to the goblins
> as well, IMO. If the story was about what goblins are like, then I
> would expect Griphook to be a fair example of them. But the story
> is about what *Harry* is like, and to understand that we only need
> to know what Harry knows about goblins.

Mike:
Granted, we get very intimate knowledge three very different elves. 
Which gives us good insight into what elves are all about. But we 
really only get Griphook on behalf of the goblins. Why do you suppose 
that is? Could it be that in the Potterverse understanding one 
goblin's views suffice to tell you what all goblins are about?

Are we really in the dark about goblins? Bill told us in OotP that 
the goblins were still feeling pretty anti-wizard over the Bagman 
incident. Over gold. Which is the same thing that Bill warned Harry 
about, gold and treasure. Add in their grievance against wizards over 
wand usage, and you have Griphook and all goblins in a nutshell.

Bill also said that he thought the goblins might sit out the war. He 
was proved right. Griphook said in the woods, "We take no sides. This 
is a wizards' war."

The upshot, IMO, is that if it's not gold or treasure, goblins have 
no interest in it. That was Griphook's take, despite his curiosity 
over this strange wizard named Harry Potter. I saw nothing in goblin 
society that would lead me to believe otherwise.



> Pippin:
> I think it would be a bit disingenous to say that Griphook made
> an honest bargain.

Mike:
*honest*;-) I wouldn't call it honest at all, unless you were to look 
at it from a goblin perspective, I suppose. But Griphook did follow 
to the letter what he had agreed to. 

I also suppose goblin society could function amongst themselves, if 
they lived in a vacuum. But as a group within a larger world, I find 
the goblin perspective untenable. For all the reasons Carol has 
enumerated so I won't repeat them.



> Pippin:
> IMO, he knew Harry would reasonably expect him to help Harry get
> out of the vault as well as into it, just as Harry knew perfectly
> well that Griphook could reasonably expect to receive the sword
> when he'd fulfilled his side of the bargain.

Mike:
I agree with Rita (Catlady) that this was a case of karmic justice. 
Harry was uncomfortable with the bargain he had made. I'm guessing 
that breaking into Gringotts was not high on Griphook's to do list 
either. So they both made a pact in which neither really liked what 
they had promised to the other. Harry got his justice earlier. But 
I'll bet somewhere down the line Griphook was made to answer for his 
part in this escapade. And without the Sword to show why he did it 
(having lost it to Neville), Griphook probably got a bigger payback.



> Pippin:
> There isn't any cultural misunderstanding here,IMO, just two
> sharp bargainers each counting on the other's greed to keep him
> from asking too many questions. What's that saying? Oh yeah,
> "You can't cheat an honest man." Or goblin.

Mike:
How about, "It's easier to receive forgiveness than get permission"? 
I like my corollary to that old standy, "Don't ask the question if 
you can't stand the answer." Neither of them asked the question.



> Pippin:
> Does Griphook show goblins in a bad light? Sure, just as Greyback
> shows werewolves in a bad light, and Voldemort shows humans in a
> bad light.

Mike:
But we have Lupin to show that not all werewolves are like Greyback. 
We have lots of people, Harry at the top of the list, to show humans 
are not all Voldemorts. Which goblin did you see that showed they 
weren't all like Griphook in constitution?

Griphook wasn't all bad, he did fail to inform Snape that the Sword 
they put in Gringotts was a fake. (He didn't know that Snape was 
already well aware of it.) And he later lied to Bella in Malfoy Manor 
about the real Sword. At least in the second case, he had no reason 
to believe he was going to be rewarded for that act. It seems he 
failed to inform Snape out of spite.

But even in that scene in the woods, the goblins showed little to no 
compassion for the other species. In fact, I believe the two goblins 
were on the run because one wouldn't be treated as a house elf and 
Griphook recognized "no Wizarding master." There is very little 
subtlety in the way goblins were portrayed, and that was purposeful, 
IMO.

Mike




From wildirishrose at fiber.net  Sat Aug 16 21:26:25 2008
From: wildirishrose at fiber.net (wildirishrose)
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 15:26:25 -0600
Subject: Confunding Parents
Message-ID: <1671AEBC3F244C11820231E153EF9D79@Marianne>

No: HPFGUIDX 184099

Sorry.  I deleted the digest I was intending to post on.

If the WW would confund muggle parents into being happy/proud that they had a witch or wizard in the family, what about entire families?  Siblings that weren't witches or wizards.  I would think that siblings would have to be confunded too.  Can you imagine siblings announcing to friends that they had a brother/sister that was part of the WW.  I can't imagine that all muggle born witch/wizards, like Hermoine, were only children?  It seems like WW families were very small.  Only children.  With the exception of Weasleys.

Except Petunia.  It wouldn't be necessary to confund her.  She was ashamed of Lily being a witch.  She said that Lily was a freak.  She was upset that her parents were so proud that Lily was a witch.  Sibling rivalery.  Obviously she wouldn't go around blabbing about things like that.  But I'm thinking that she would have liked to be like Lily.  Her letter to Dumbledore gave that impression.  Or perhaps she just wanted to go to the same school as Lily.  But JKR had to have Petunia the way she was, or else that plot of the story would screw up the whole series.

Marianne


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Aug 17 00:51:42 2008
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 00:51:42 -0000
Subject: Sirius Black Sheep / Ollivander / Magesport Summer/ Money Changers
Message-ID: <g87smu+g8e9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184100

Lanna wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184048>:

<< Ok, so, Sirius' family disowned him for being a Grifindor and
turning his back on the family values or whatever.  HOWEVER, when he
ended up being convicted of being this majorely insane DE who was
supposedly right up there in Voldie's top ranks, who not only betrayed
two his best friends to their deaths, but also blew up an ENTIRE
street, killing a whole bunch of innocent people (muggles among them I
believe) PLUS the 'heroic' Peter....wouldn't that have redeemed him in
the eyes of his family (mother)? >>

I have wondered about that. Maybe Orion and Walburga Black viewed
Getting Caught and sent to Azkaban as an even bigger disgrace to the
family name than joining Gryffindor House and having a best friend who
had married a Mudblood. 

Or maybe their objection to their oldest son had little to do with
disgracing the family, but much to do with him constantly calling them
names, like 'bigot' and 'arrogant' and 'idiot'.

I also wonder about the related question of why didn't Draco view
Sirius Black as a hero martyr of the Dark Side. It seems to me that
Draco in PoA should been fanboyishly in support of Sirius's assumed
intention to kill Harry, with the hero worship continuing either until
he found out that Sirius was on the Light Side or else until his own
disenchantment with Death Eating.

The way Draco could have 'found out' that Sirius was on the Light Side
is Dad or Auntie told him. Lucius and Bellatrix were high rank DEs
during the first Voldemort War, so they may have known at the time
that the spy/traitor was Peter Pettigrew, not Sirius Black. *Some* DEs
knew, because Sirius in PoA asserted that the imprisoned DEs in
Azkaban were cursing Peter for getting LV killed, and asserted that
Peter had been in hiding all these years for fear of vengeance being
taken on him by DEs who had avoided Azkaban. Supposing that only Bella
knew, that would account for the shouting in Azkaban, and Peter's fear
of DEs out of Azkaban was just paranoia.

During OoP, Lucius at least knew that Sirius, disguised as a dog, was
sheltering the Order in  his hidden house. Both he and Bella saw
Sirius die in the Department of Mysteries trying to protect Harry. I
don't know if they had a chance to tell Draco that, until they were
busted out of Azkaban in HBP.

Beatrice summarized Chapter 26 in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184044>:

<< 4. Why does Ollivander make Luna and Luna alone a new wand? Why not
make new wands for all of the people who were incarcerated with him?
Why not make new wands for as many people as possible who have been
victimized as he was by Death Eaters? Why doesn't Ollivander think
about arming the enemies of his enemy? What does this say about his
character? >>

Ollivander is a frail old man not in the best of condition. We don't
know how physically demanding it may be to make a wand, nor how long
it takes. We do know that wand wood comes from special trees and that
each wand must have a core of a magical substance. I don't know where
Ollivander found wand wood and a magical substance when unable to
visit his shop. 

Btw I feel sure that the core of Luna's wand is unicorn hair. What is
the wood of Luna's wand? Rowan?

Zanooda wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184082>:

<< Don't forget that at Aunt Muriel's Ollivander lived in the same
house with Fred and George :-). They still operated their business (by
Owl-Order), which means they were in contact with both their clients
and their suppliers. >>

Okay, maybe some of their suppliers had wand wood and unicorn hair in
stock. That makes it a little less okay that he didn't, after handing
Luna her personalized wand, hand half a dozen more wands to Luna or
Harry or Bill and say: "Maybe some of these wands will select some of
your wandless friends."

Carrying on business by Owl Order strikes me as a security breach. So
okay, the bad guys couldn't *follow* the owl, but couldn't they send a
letter bomb by owl? A portkey that transports the victim to a DE trap
where he is put under Imperius and sent back to capture the Secret
Keeper to reveal the Secret...

<< I bet F&G could get you anything :-). >>

To me, even F&G would have to leave their safe house to get unusual
things.

Carol wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184094>:

<< Luna has been his friend and sole companion in what amounts to a
prison cell in the Malfoys' cellar. Why not give her what amounts to a
present out of gratitude and affection? >>

I meant to say that! As the for the rest of Carol's post, it makes my
replies to this question rather unneccessary.

Zanooda wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184083>:

<< I don't understand LV's attitude towards Ollivander. What was the
need to keep the old man in a dark damp cellar, in rugs? I understand
why Olly was kidnapped, but he is a very valuable prisoner (he is the
only person in Britain who can make wands!) - why treat him this way?
If he died in the cellar, as I'm sure he nearly did, who would provide
wands? >>

LV doesn't plan ahead. That he never considered what he would do for
wands if Ollivander died is only one example. This is one of the
reasons why LV's rule would destroy wizarding civilization in his kingdom.

Bruce wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184060>:

<< She may have a list of Wizardling families willing to take in
fosterlings; >>

If that had existed before DD became Headmaster, wouldn't it have been
better for everyone if Tom Riddle had spent his summers with wizards,
who might have been able to control him while he was still young, than
sent back to the orphanage for the summers? It has always seemed odd
to me (i.e. requiring more Confundus) that an orphanage would accept a
child for summer only.

Pippin quoted in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184078>:

<< From the AOL chat:
When people trade in Muggle money for Wizard money, what does
Gringotts do with the Muggle money?

Those goblins are sneaky people. They manage to put the Muggle money
back into circulation. They are like "fences" --British slang, do you
understand it? >>

Despite JKR, *I* think they give muggle money for wizarding money as
well as the other way around. I can think of various reasons a wizard
might want muggle money (e.g. Dumbledore's muggle newspaper
subscriptions) but the one that interests me most is the import/export
business, in which wizards buy muggle goods (like blue jeans and
sneakers) to sell at a mark-up at a wizarding shop.





From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 17 03:20:26 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 03:20:26 -0000
Subject: Sirius Black Sheep / Ollivander / Magesport Summer/ Money Changers
In-Reply-To: <g87smu+g8e9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g885dq+qcq8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184101

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)"
<catlady at ...> wrote:

> Okay, maybe some of their suppliers had wand wood and unicorn 
> hair in stock. That makes it a little less okay that he didn't, 
> after handing Luna her personalized wand, hand half a dozen more 
> wands to Luna or Harry or Bill and say: "Maybe some of these wands 
> will select some of your wandless friends."


zanooda:

Even *if* Ollivander had access to the materials, I still think he
didn't have enough time to make several wands before the end of the
book. I'm not good at timelines, but the day when Ollivander left for
Aunt Muriel's Harry told Fleur that he, Hermione and Ron would be
leaving soon as well. 

I don't know what "soon" means here, but I'm guessing not more than a
couple of weeks :-). HRH already spent a few weeks at Shell Cottage
before Ollivander left, how much more time could they need for
planning :-)? I think they arrived at the end of March, they left May
1st, which means they spent a month or a little more at Bill and
Fleur's. If Olly only left a week or two before HRH, it's not enough
time to start a mass production of wands :-).


zanooda, who admits that timelines are not her strong point ...




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sun Aug 17 13:47:20 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 13:47:20 -0000
Subject: Sirius Black Sheep / Ollivander / Magesport Summer/ Money Changers
In-Reply-To: <g87smu+g8e9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g89a58+e70a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184102

Catlady:
> I also wonder about the related question of why didn't Draco view
> Sirius Black as a hero martyr of the Dark Side. It seems to me that
> Draco in PoA should been fanboyishly in support of Sirius's assumed
> intention to kill Harry, with the hero worship continuing either
until he found out that Sirius was on the Light Side or else until his
own disenchantment with Death Eating.

> 
> The way Draco could have 'found out' that Sirius was on the Light
Side is Dad or Auntie told him. 

Pippin:
But he didn't 'find out', not in PoA. He tried to goad Harry into
going after Sirius. He obviously believed that Sirius wanted to kill
Harry, and he apparently also 'knew' that Sirius betrayed Harry's
parents,  which, according to Fudge, was not generally known. He says
he would want to go after Black if it were him --  an early hint that
Malfoy family loyalty will trump  loyalty to Voldemort.

But Arthur also  clearly 'knew' about the betrayal, and worried that
Harry might hear about it somehow and be tempted to go after Black.
It's the kind of 'insider' knowledge that Lucius, with his connections
at the Ministry, could have picked up. He must have believed it, if he
was the source of Draco's 'knowledge.'

But of course after GoF, it would have been obvious to anyone in the
circle of DE's  that Pettigrew was the traitor and Sirius must  have
been innocent. 


Pippin





From zgirnius at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 17 15:21:50 2008
From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 15:21:50 -0000
Subject: Goblins; different from Griphook?
In-Reply-To: <g8751d+h3f4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g89fme+ti1l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184103

> Mike:
> But goblins? Where was the exception? Which one broke ranks to show 
> us that they don't all think the way Griphook thinks? Is Griphook the 
> exception because he initially helped Harry? Personality-wise he 
> probably is an exception, or rather, they all have individual 
> personalities. But belief-wise, not really. 

Zara:
Yes, I think Griphook is supposed to be the exception because he 
initially consents to help Harry (and also, to be *NOT* the exception, 
as Firenze and Dobby are proven not to be in the examples from your 
post I snipped). I think the text is pretty heavy-handed in getting 
across to us that Harry's behavior in burying Dobby is *not* that of a 
typical wizard. And Griphook responds by being "not typical". To me, 
this is saying that, just as with all the other races, the issues 
wizrds are having with goblins, are absolutely created at least in 
part, by the treatment of goblins by wizards.





From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Sun Aug 17 16:56:51 2008
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 17 Aug 2008 16:56:51 -0000
Subject: Weekly Chat, 8/17/2008, 1:00 pm 
Message-ID: <1218992211.10.13292.m43@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184104

Reminder from: HPforGrownups Yahoo! Group
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal

Weekly Chat
Sunday August 17, 2008
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  2008 
 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: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpforgrownups/attachments/20080817/cc7e5c71/attachment.html>

From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 00:55:21 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 00:55:21 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g871hd+n1d0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8ah9p+h2v0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184105

Thanks to Beatrice for an excellent review and some even more 
excellent, thought-provoking questions. BTW, did y'all realize that 
this chapter provided the answer to two of our per-DH cover art 
questions? The Bloomsbury chidren's edition and the deluxe editions 
covers come from this chapter. :-)

> Questions:
> 
> 2. Why do the trio align themselves with Griphook?  Why not ask
> for Bill's help?  Would Bill help them?  Why doesn't Harry even
> consider this idea?

>> SSSusan:
> I wish I knew the answer to this. I don't know if it's because
they thought Bill would try to dissuade them or would be reluctant
to help?  <snip>
Or whether they thought that Bill simply wouldn't know as much as
the goblins? I really don't know.

>> Montavilla47:
> I have no idea why Harry doesn't ask Bill for help. It seems really
stupid not to. Bill WORKS for Gringotts. <snip>
And he's a CURSEBREAKER!

Mike:
I see three reasons why Harry picked Griphook and not Bill. 

1st. Harry remembered Griphook and sees him as a Gringotts goblin, 
the ultimate insider. You have to consider Harry's mindset. He's 
looking at Gringotts as a goblin stronghold, and who better to help 
him than a goblin? Plus, there's the point that Pippin brought up...

> Pippin:
> Harry says that only a goblin could help. He is probably
> remembering what Griphook once told him, that if anybody but a
> Gringotts goblin tried to open  a vault, the thief would be drawn
> inside and trapped there.

Mike:
2nd. Bill has only worked at Gringotts for 2+ years, and that plus is 
a little iffy, considering what has gone on this last year. He's just 
not going to know as much about Gringotts. And Bill has gone into 
hiding himself. He's not working at Gringotts for now. Had Harry 
thought that Bill was the better choice, he would have been forced to 
change his plans. And Pippin has one more about Bill...

> Pippin:
> It's not a given that Bill would have thought helping Harry was
> a good idea. What if it led to another goblin rebellion? 

Mike:
3rd. Harry has got it in his head that he can't let anyone from the 
order in on this Horcrux hunt. He even tells Bill that he can't tell 
him what they're planning in the previous chapter. Hey, I didn't say 
they were *good* reasons, just reasons.

Harry's holding to Dumbledore's lamebrained plan, despite the fact 
that he's been questioning Dumbledore and his plan for most of the 
year. He's already decided to eschew DD's desire to block out 
Voldemort (as Hermione reminds him back in 12 GP) and instead to use 
this insight to his advantage. Why he doesn't question Dumbledore's 
request that he keep this whole Horcrux hunt just between himself, 
Ron and Hermione; I am completely dumbfounded. Why not use BOTH 
Griphook and Bill? Ugh! 

or as Montavilla47 put it:
"Sorry. That thumping sound was my head hitting the desk."


> 5. Is Harry's plan to withhold the Sword of Gryffindor from
> Griphook a double-cross?  Should Harry have explained their need
> of the sword (withholding certain details of course) and do
> something to ensure that Griphook would allow them to use it for
> a while?  Were you comfortable with Harry's decision?  Or did you
> agree with Hermione?

Mike:
Pardon me while I take a slight tangent. Why on earth would Harry 
even consider that Godric Gryffindor could have "stolen" that sword? 
Does he really think it possible that the sword used to belong to 
Ragnuk the First, and that Godric scratched his own name into a 
goblin made sword. Huh? Isn't this whole thing about goblin 
metallurgical and magical skills; and Harry is wondering if Godric 
could have done to that sword what he just did to a rock for Dobby's 
headstone? And what happened to that logic loving Hermione we met in 
PS/SS? What was with her answer to Harry's question?

Now, as for Beatrice's question; Irrespective of whether the plan 
itself was the best choice, I think this approach with the sword was 
the best way to implement that plan. I understand Harry's reluctance 
to tell the goblin any more than absolutely necessary. Ethically, 
this is what we call a quibble, and I don't have a big problem with 
it. Mostly for the reasons that I don't believe Griphook is telling 
the truth about the sword's history and I don't give the goblin credo 
on ownership much acceptance as reasonable.

Even at this point of the story, I doubted the goblin would have 
accepted a caveat of "you'll get it when we're done needing it". Of 
course, that skepticism was borne out in the end.



> 8. How did you feel about the changes to Diagon Alley?  Were you
> surprised by any of the changes to the Wizarding World?

Mike:
Along with the picture we got in HBP, these changes in Diagon Alley 
struck me the hardest. One of my favorite scenes in my favorite book, 
PoA, was Harry getting two "Dursley free" weeks to stroll around that 
fascinating place called Diagon Alley. I loved it. All those 
wonderful wizardly shops, the atmosphere, drew me into this magical 
world that JKR made. To see what had become of it made me sad. I 
think it was at this point that I really wanted the story to be over. 
I wanted Voldemort gone so I would get my lovely Diagon Alley back.


>> Montavilla47:
> My main thought in reading this was to wonder what real life
Nazi-esque situation this was referring to. I assumed it must be
based on something, because everything else seemed to be, But
it didn't ring any bells.

Mike:
I was thinking the Warsaw ghetto. YMMV



> 10. There has been a lot of debate about Harry's use of
> unforgivable curses.  Here we have the first time he uses one as
> he performs the Imperius Curse on Bogrod and Travers. 

Mike:
Pippin had a very good answer for this. I will just add that as a 
part of their plan, using Imperious was perfectly acceptable to me. 
The wizarding world has it bass-ackwards when it comes to laws and 
punishment. You don't make the magic illegal, you make the results 
of the magic illegal. In this case, the use of Imperious minimizes 
the damage as well as advances the Trio's objectives. Am I advocating
"the end justifies the means"? In a way, yes, but I've just said that 
it's questionable as to whether the means should be considered wrong, 
in this case.



> 12. As they enter the vault, they realize that the treasure has
> been charmed or cursed to burn their flesh and multiply.  Should
> Griphook have anticipated this little snag?  Why aren't they more
> prepared for this?  Was Griphook's lapse intentional?

Mike:
I just realized why you asked this question, this way. Griphook was 
the one who put the fake sword in the Lestrange vault. He must have 
been told what to expect there and what to be careful of not doing.

I still like Montavilla47's answer:

>> You know, it might have been handy for them to have had a
cursebreaker along for the heist, don't you think? Wonder where they
could have found a cursebreaker.... <<

LOL!!



> 14. Harry, Ron, and Hermione escape on the dragon's back in truly
> spectacular fashion.  How did you feel about the dragon's escape?
> How do you feel about Gringotts and goblins in general after
> Harry's experiences?

Mike:
It just confirmed to me what the goblins were all about. Gold and 
treasure. And they don't care a whit for other species or cultures. 
They probably justify in their own minds their position on ownership 
of goblin craftsmanship and somehow square that with their position 
on wand ownership. But to me, it's a nonsensical contradiction that 
can't be reconciled.

>From http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184093

>> Jen: I read it the same as Pippin but not because of the section
where Bill says 'especially prone to' the beliefs about treasure. 

Mike:
I need to correct a canon misinterpretation. This "prone" section was 
about mistrust of wizards "in matters of gold and treasure".

In the next paragraph, Bill says, "To a goblin, the rightful and true 
master of any object is the maker, not the purchaser. All goblin-made 
objects are, in goblin eyes, rightfully theirs." <DH p.517, US>

There are no qualifiers to this. No "some goblins" when it comes to 
ownership. It's "to a goblin" and "in goblin eyes". So there is no 
question that this is a goblin belief, not just a Gringotts' goblin 
or a Griphook position.


>> Mike previously:
>> But goblins? Where was the exception? Which one broke ranks to
>> show us that they don't all think the way Griphook thinks?

> Jen: This doesn't prove all goblins are like Griphook in their
beliefs about treasure though, only that all goblins appear to
believe as Griphook does when it comes to the 'wizarding war'.

Mike now:
I think it shows both. Goblins were the second magical creatures we 
met through Harry (if you don't count Hagrid's half-gianthood ;)) I 
give them credit for fighting wizards for their beliefs, I just wish 
I'd seen that those beliefs were worth fighting for. Other than 
carrying wands (covered above) all I see goblins interested in is 
gold and treasure.

I can't prove all goblins think like Griphook. But without a 
contradicting example I don't see why I should formulate a non-
canonical goblin position. 


Zara thinks that Griphook is the exception when it comes to goblins.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184103
>> Zara:
> Yes, I think Griphook is supposed to be the exception because he
initially consents to help Harry (and also, to be *NOT* the
exception, as Firenze and Dobby are proven not to be in the examples 
from your post I snipped). <snip>

Griphook responds by being "not typical". To me,
this is saying that, just as with all the other races, the issues
wizards are having with goblins, are absolutely created at least in
part, by the treatment of goblins by wizards.

Mike:
I've no doubt wizards treat goblins poorly. They treat all non-humans 
poorly. Hell, they treat wizards that don't have the right blood 
poorly. But goblins don't have the moral high ground over wizards 
here. They have the same disdain for all non-goblin creatures that 
wizards have for non-humans.

But I must be missing something. I don't understand what you're 
saying about Griphook. What does "to be *NOT* the exception" mean?

I do think Dobby and Firenze were the exceptions. They also happened 
to be leaders, that eventually got others in their species to follow 
their example. Griphook seems to be the opposite. He looks like a 
follower to me. He may be more like Bella than Lucius in his zeal, 
but he's not a trail-blazer in my eyes. YMMV

Mike




From danjerri at madisoncounty.net  Mon Aug 18 01:24:23 2008
From: danjerri at madisoncounty.net (Jerri&Dan Chase)
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 20:24:23 -0500
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <1218631185.3638.73928.m46@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1218631185.3638.73928.m46@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <8CB7F5DF7CF544CE86A5A97C9A1079A5@JerriPC>

No: HPFGUIDX 184106

>4. Why does Ollivander make Luna and Luna alone a new wand?
>Why not make new wands for all of the people who were
>incarcerated with him?  Why not make new wands for as many
>people as possible who have been victimized as he was by Death
>Eaters?  Why doesn't Ollivander think about arming the enemies of
>his enemy?  What does this say about his character?

I vote with those who feel that the issues of Ollivander's health and lack 
of access to materials were the main limiting issue.  He pushed himself to 
manage to make a wand for Luna.  We don't know if he made any more wands 
AFTER HRH left Shell Cottage, or if he was working on more wands while they 
were there.  If Harry didn't know it we don't!  And we don't know how long 
it takes or how much energy.  Like so many things in the WW, we don't have 
enough data to make a judgment.

>10. There has been a lot of debate about Harry's use of unforgivable
>curses.  Here we have the first time he uses one as he performs the
>Imperius Curse on Bogrod and Travers.  Why doesn't he confound them
>as he does the security guard?  Is it really necessary to use this
>curse?  Is this more effective than a Confundus Charm?  Does Harry's
>feeling that he did not perform a very strong curse make it more
>acceptable that he uses this tactic?

In addition to the issue of if Harry SHOULD use the Imperious curse here, I 
personally wonder how he COULD use it.  Harry has long had to practice to 
get complex spells to work correctly.  It seems clear to me that there is 
more to the Imperious curse than just saying (or thinking) the word Imperio. 
The caster also has to communicate his/her wishes with the cursed person. 
And we know that at least sometimes the Imperious curse can go wrong 
(Herbert something, who was quacking like a duck in the first chapter of 
HBP, for one example.)  No matter how "strong" a curse Harry cast, he was 
able to communicate his wishes to multiple people at the same time, at least 
one at a distance from himself.  And all without ever practicing.  I don't 
believe it.  If JKR wanted me to believe that Harry could do these 
successful Imperio's then she should have had him practicing, at least on 
insects or animals or something in his days at Shell Cottage.

>11. How did you feel about the description of the dragon and the
>cruel way in which it is kept?  Did this make you feel any different
>about Gringotts or goblins?  Harry thought he saw dragon fire when
>he first entered Gringotts in SS/PS.  Are there more dragons? Or is
>this the only one?

I hope that it is the only one, but again, we don't know.  And the only way 
I can think of to get a large dragon inside those deep and narrow passage 
ways is to bring in an egg or baby, and have it grow up inside, which makes 
it even worse.  I hope that Charlie or someone went and found the poor thing 
and got it somewhere safe and took as good a care of it as possible for 
whatever remains of it's life.

>14. Harry, Ron, and Hermione escape on the dragon's back in
>truly spectacular fashion.  How did you feel about the dragon's
>escape?  How do you feel about Gringotts and goblins in
>general after Harry's experiences?

I agree with whoever (Pippin I think) said that there was no plausible, 
simple way for HRH to get out of Gringotts with the cup, so there had to be 
some big spectacular escape.  And, in light of the existence of the deluxe 
cover with HRH riding a dragon, as soon as we saw the poor dragon in front 
of the vaults I expected it somehow.  However, like Harry's Imperio's 
working so well without practice, I can't believe it, so just accepted it as 
part of the "ride" of the last book.

Jerri 




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Mon Aug 18 12:49:18 2008
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 12:49:18 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g8ah9p+h2v0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8br4e+uvd6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184107

> From http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184093
> 
> Jen: I read it the same as Pippin but not because of the section
> where Bill says 'especially prone to' the beliefs about treasure. 
 
> Mike:
> I need to correct a canon misinterpretation. This "prone" section 
> was about mistrust of wizards "in matters of gold and treasure".
> 
> In the next paragraph, Bill says, "To a goblin, the rightful and 
> true master of any object is the maker, not the purchaser. All 
> goblin-made objects are, in goblin eyes, rightfully theirs." <DH 
p.517, US>
 
> There are no qualifiers to this. No "some goblins" when it comes to 
> ownership. It's "to a goblin" and "in goblin eyes". So there is no 
> question that this is a goblin belief, not just a Gringotts' goblin 
> or a Griphook position.

Jen: Touche. <g>  I have to agree when re-reading both paragraphs. 

Here's what I'm thinking about goblins after reading all the posts.  
The only goblins who matter in the story are the Gringotts goblins.   
Griphook is an exception to this particular group, as Zara said, 
because he consents to help the Trio violate Gringotts.  Yes, he 
demands payment in return for his help, unlike a more selfless Dobby 
or Firenze, but ultimately he helps even more than the centaurs by 
making it possible for Harry to recover an impossible-to-obtain 
Horcrux. (Kreacher is another example of one willing to help Harry 
when promised something in return.)  

Plus, I think there IS at least one goblin who cares about the 
wizarding war.  Griphook knows what's going down despite all his 
harsh talk about wizards.  He's seen firsthand what life under LV 
will be like.  He manages to both help Harry *and* get something he 
wants (briefly) *and* make it impossible for Voldemort to trace back 
any help from the goblins, ensuring no reprisals if Harry loses.  
Griphook's one smart cookie.  




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 15:46:04 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 15:46:04 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g8ah9p+h2v0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8c5fs+esor@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184108

Mike wrote:
> <snip> I've no doubt wizards treat goblins poorly. They treat all
non-humans poorly. Hell, they treat wizards that don't have the right
blood  poorly. But goblins don't have the moral high ground over
wizards here. They have the same disdain for all non-goblin creatures
that wizards have for non-humans.

Carol responds:
You forgot Wizard contempt for Muggles, who are human but not magical.
However, it's interesting to me that, except for House-Elves and
Merpeople, the nonhuman creatures tend to be just as intolerant of
Wizards as Wizards are of them. Even Firenze regards himself and his
species (who have just kicked him in the chest and expelled him from
the herd) as superior to humans, at least with regard to divination
and lack of concern for mundane, everyday matters. The others use
"Human" as if it were an insult, sneering at the Wizards as beings
whose intelligence is inferior to their own. And we don't need to talk
about the Goblins' delight in tricking Wizards, chuckling over the
supposed gullibility of Severus Snape in not knowing that the Sword he
sent to the Lestranges' vault is fake or leaving HRH to die painfully
amid red-hot, magically reproducing treasure, do we? Giants may be
stupid and afraid of Wizards' magic, but they're just as brutal and
dangerous (Grawp excepted) as they're reputed to be.

In short, I agree with Mike about Goblins, and I think that Centaurs
are nearly as bad in their "speciesist" attitude. How can Wizards
negotiate with beings who regard themselves as the Wizards' superiors
(or with subhuman brutes like Giants and Trolls)? I'm not talking
about Muggles here. I'm just trying to say that the Wizard attitude
toward all these other species is perfectly understandable. Even the
Merpeople probably *appear* ferocious to those who don't speak Mermish
and accidentally encounter them (underwater, where the Wizaard would
in any case be at a distinct disadvantage). Fortunately, Wizards and
Merpeople live in different worlds and can safely pursue a
live-and-let-live policy. 

Mike: 
> I do think Dobby and Firenze were the exceptions. They also happened 
> to be leaders, that eventually got others in their species to follow 
> their example. Griphook seems to be the opposite. He looks like a 
> follower to me. He may be more like Bella than Lucius in his zeal, 
> but he's not a trail-blazer in my eyes. YMMV

Carol responds:
I agree about Griphook, whose a treacherous and murderous little
zealot, and about Firenae (but, as I said, even he thinks his
sometimes brutal species is superior to humans). But I'm not sure that
he can be considered a leader, only, possibly, a pioneer. IIRC.
Magorian and Bane, of all peo--er, Centaurs, followed his example only
after he was injured and Harry Potter was "dead." And I don't think
that the Elves followed or were persuaded by Dobby at all. He died as
he lived, an eccentric Elf devoted to Harry Potter but divided from
his fellow House-Elves in his devotion to "freedom" and his fondness
for clothing. It was Kreacher, whose values they understood (once he
cleaned himself and started behaving respectfully toward his master,
that the House Elves followed into battle. And his rallying cry was
not freedom for House-Elves but "Fight! Fight! Fight for my master,
defender of House-Elves. Fight the Dark Lord in the name of brave
Regulus! Fight!" (DH am. ed. 734). That is, fight in the name of a
Wizard master (Regulus, not Harry) who cared enough about House-Elves
to die for one. Of course, they're also fighting to avoid being
enslaved to the cruel DEs, but (IMO) it's Kreacher, still loyal to a
dead master, not Dobby, the "Fee Elf," who's the trailblazer here. No
one is following or even remembering Dobby, whose ideal of freedom is
not what the Hogwarts House-Elves are fighting for.

Carol, who otherwise agrees with Mike's post




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 16:13:01 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:13:01 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g8br4e+uvd6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8c72d+lk7d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184109


Jen wrote: 

> Touche. <g>  I have to agree when re-reading both paragraphs. 
> 
> Here's what I'm thinking about goblins after reading all the posts.  
> The only goblins who matter in the story are the Gringotts goblins.   
> Griphook is an exception to this particular group, as Zara said, 
> because he consents to help the Trio violate Gringotts.  Yes, he 
> demands payment in return for his help, unlike a more selfless Dobby 
> or Firenze, but ultimately he helps even more than the centaurs by 
> making it possible for Harry to recover an impossible-to-obtain 
> Horcrux. (Kreacher is another example of one willing to help Harry 
> when promised something in return.)  
> 
> Plus, I think there IS at least one goblin who cares about the 
> wizarding war.  Griphook knows what's going down despite all his 
> harsh talk about wizards.  He's seen firsthand what life under LV 
> will be like.  He manages to both help Harry *and* get something he 
> wants (briefly) *and* make it impossible for Voldemort to trace back 
> any help from the goblins, ensuring no reprisals if Harry loses.  
> Griphook's one smart cookie.
>
Carol responds:
I disagree. Yes, Griphook is an exception in that he happens to fall
into the company of Wizards, rescued in part by them and in part by a
House-Elf, but I think that almost any Goblin, especially a Gringotts
Goblin, would have behaved as he did. (They're all clever and obsessed
with treasure, as far as I can see. Look at the Goblins and Ludo
Bagman, for example.)

The thing about Griphook is that he's helping HRH, all right--helping
them get *in* to Gringotts and the vault so that he can get the sword.
But he has no interest in helping them to get safely *out* again or in
helping them to steal the cup. In fact, he joins in the chase after
the thieves that he aided, no doubt claiming that he was forced to do
so under the Imperius Curse (or perhaps telling the truth--that he
tricked them into thinking that he was helping in order to retrieve
the true sword, expecting them to be trapped there).

He's leading them to the treasure (and urging them on in their
commission of a crime) with no intention whatever of letting them get
away with it--or even survive. Some friend and ally! If he'd
succeeded, the Goblins would have had not only the Sword of Gryffindor
but the cup that HRH were attempting to steal and three young Wizards
would be dead or, at best, prisoners of the Goblins and the DEs.
Griphook is clever all right. Diabollically clever.

Carol, very happy that the enchantment on the sword returned it to the
Wizards in the end




From zgirnius at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 16:39:12 2008
From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:39:12 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g8br4e+uvd6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8c8jg+6934@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184110

> Mike:
> > There are no qualifiers to this. No "some goblins" when it comes 
to 
> > ownership. It's "to a goblin" and "in goblin eyes". So there is 
no 
> > question that this is a goblin belief, not just a Gringotts' 
goblin 
> > or a Griphook position.
> 
> Jen: Touche. <g>  I have to agree when re-reading both paragraphs. 

Zara:
I think there is a subtlety there. All goblins believe the maker of 
an object is its rightful owner, no debate from me. But how they act 
when dealing with humans, is an area in which there may be 
differences. They are intelligent beings just like humans, so I 
believe they are capable of understanding the human position (that 
the purchaser of an artifact becomes its owner and may pass that 
right to his chosen heirs in perpetuity) just as we understand 
theirs. It is entirely possible to therefore understand and accept, 
that however wrongheaded this seems, one can "sell" this natural 
right to ownership of one's own creation. I think Griphook is an 
example of a goblin who does not want to accommodate humans in this 
regard.

> Jen:
> The only goblins who matter in the story are the Gringotts 
goblins.   
> Griphook is an exception to this particular group, as Zara said, 
> because he consents to help the Trio violate Gringotts.  Yes, he 
> demands payment in return for his help, unlike a more selfless 
Dobby 
> or Firenze, but ultimately he helps even more than the centaurs by 
> making it possible for Harry to recover an impossible-to-obtain 
> Horcrux. (Kreacher is another example of one willing to help Harry 
> when promised something in return.)  

Zara:
I don't know, to me Griphook gave the impression of one who feels he 
is acting on behalf of something greater. He insists he has a right 
to the sword, and is insulted by the offer of other treasures. His 
wording "the goblins of Gringotts *will consider* it base treachery" 
(emphasis mine) suggests he does not so consider it, even though he 
speaks quite seriously of the responsibnility goblin shave to protect 
the artifacts in their care. Harry agrees to right what he sees as a 
wrong, and he agrees to help Harry. By his lights, anyway.




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon Aug 18 18:58:12 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:58:12 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g8c8jg+6934@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8cgo4+avqv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184111

> Zara:
> I think there is a subtlety there. All goblins believe the maker of 
> an object is its rightful owner, no debate from me. But how they act 
> when dealing with humans, is an area in which there may be 
> differences. They are intelligent beings just like humans, so I 
> believe they are capable of understanding the human position (that 
> the purchaser of an artifact becomes its owner and may pass that 
> right to his chosen heirs in perpetuity) just as we understand 
> theirs. It is entirely possible to therefore understand and accept, 
> that however wrongheaded this seems, one can "sell" this natural 
> right to ownership of one's own creation. I think Griphook is an 
> example of a goblin who does not want to accommodate humans in this 
> regard.

Pippin:
I think Zara is on the right track here. The connection between the
maker and the treasure may be goblin instinct, but goblins, like
humans, do not have to obey their instincts, and may choose not to do so. 

Goblins have made a great many objects  for use by other races,
objects which cannot attain their full power (by imbibing the strength
of other objects) unless they are used. Surely goblins did  not make a
helmet suitable for a giant, or a tiara to fit a human head and
flatter a human woman, or goblets with the Black family crest, in the
expectation that humans would not purchase these things. 

Wizards do not know the secrets of goblin manufacture -- they can't
have forced goblins to make all these things for them. And since
neither side is keeping their theories of ownership secret, these
differences must have become known centuries ago, though present-day
wizards have chosen to ignore them. 

IMO, Griphook has every right to feel it's unfair that goblins must
accommodate wizards to the point where wizards can blithely ignore
goblin feelings in this area. But of course that does not make the
sword the rightful property of goblins. I think that just as Harry
does not want to believe that the great Godric Gryffindor was a thief,
Griphook did not want to believe that Ragnuk the First compromised
with wizards. 

In the books generally, and certainly in DH, open-mindedness is
rewarded and closed-mindedness is ridiculed or punished. In this
episode, both Harry and Griphook made an effort to be open-minded, but
each in the end failed to respond to the good will  of the other, and
they relapsed into distrust and betrayal.

But I think the reader is expected to cultivate open-mindedness, and
not close off the possibility of better relations between goblins and
wizards simply because this effort was a failure. 


Pippin





From foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon Aug 18 19:28:57 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 19:28:57 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g8c5fs+esor@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8cihp+jbtq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184112

Carol:
 Of course, they're also fighting to avoid being
> enslaved to the cruel DEs,
> 

Pippin:
Voldemort  threatened to *kill* everyone at Hogwarts if Harry was not
turned over to him. Do you think he planned to make an exception for
Centaurs and Elves? More to the point, would the Centaurs and Elves
think so? They weren't fighting to avoid enslavement by cruel DE's.
They were fighting for their lives and homes.

It's important that they chose to fight rather than try to capture
Harry or flee the area. But that decision was the fruit of an era  
in which the Hogwarts authorities gave centaurs and house-elves their
protection and treated them  differently than other wizards did. There
was no such tradition with the goblins.

Pippin







From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Mon Aug 18 22:15:08 2008
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 22:15:08 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g8c72d+lk7d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8cs9c+hbhd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184113

Carol:
> The thing about Griphook is that he's helping HRH, all right--
> helping them get *in* to Gringotts and the vault so that he can get
> the sword.  But he has no interest in helping them to get safely 
> *out* again or in helping them to steal the cup. 

Jen: I can't figure out how your version works though, Carol.  How's 
Griphook planning to get out?  He's no longer a Gringotts goblin; 
he's dependent on a goblin taking them to the vault and getting them 
(or just him) out again, yet he suggests controlling Bogrod with the 
Imperius.

Another obstacle for the theory: The Theif's Downfall. Maybe Griphook 
faked surprise about The Thief's Downfall, maybe he wanted to set off 
the defenses so goblins would come running and provide cover for 
him.  Griphook still needs a reason why why he's there with the Trio, 
he still needs the sword, so he has to urge them to proceed to the 
vault.  

Once in the vault, Griphook's in danger from the Gemino & Flagrante 
Curses just like the Trio.  He's likely depending on Harry's good 
will and their wands to keep him alive, but now he really needs the 
sword for a cover story as to why he's in a high-security vault.  The 
reason the goblins accept Griphook when he comes out is he's 
brandishing the sword as if he's been thwarting the humans inside 
rather than helping them.  The other goblins, holding daggers 
themselves, accept Griphook's story.  It was an accident, not 
Griphook's planning, that caused Harry to lose the sword and Griphook 
to take possession of it. 

There are too many 'ifs' in this scenario for someone with the self-
preservation instincts of Griphook.  He took advantage of the 
situation, grabbed the sword and saved his own skin, but I don't 
agree he planned everything from the beginning.  There were too many 
things Griphook didn't expect, starting in the lobby with the request 
for Hermione/Bella's identification.  And the Trio aren't helplessly 
at Griphook's mercy.  Ron even asks how they're going to get out 
after The Thief's Downfall and Harry brushes it off with "Let's worry 
about that when we have to." (p. 535)
 
Carol: 
> In fact, he joins in the chase after the thieves that he aided, no
> doubt claiming that he was forced to do so under the Imperius Curse
> (or perhaps telling the truth--that he tricked them into thinking 
> that he was helping in order to retrieve the true sword, expecting
> them to be trapped there).

Jen: Technically the text doesn't say what Griphook did after 
escaping the vault.  He "had sprinted for cover amongst the 
surrounding goblins, brandishing the sword and crying, 'Thieves! 
Thieves! Help! Thieves!'  He vanished into the midst of the advancing 
crowd, all of whom were holding daggers and who accepted him without 
question." (p. 541 US)  That's the end of Griphook's story.

Zara:
> I don't know, to me Griphook gave the impression of one who feels he
> is acting on behalf of something greater. He insists he has a right
> to the sword, and is insulted by the offer of other treasures. His
> wording "the goblins of Gringotts *will consider* it base treachery"
> (emphasis mine) suggests he does not so consider it, even though he
> speaks quite seriously of the responsibnility goblin shave to 
> protect the artifacts in their care. Harry agrees to right what 
> he sees as a wrong, and he agrees to help Harry. By his lights,
> anyway.

Jen: I'm not sure what the 'something greater' is for Griphook, 
Zara?  Do you mean you agree Griphook wants to help the Trio defeat 
Voldemort?  Or is his 'something greater' more like a code of 
Gringotts goblins re: treasure?  






From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 18 22:52:39 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 22:52:39 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g8cihp+jbtq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8cufn+skcm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184114

Carol:
>  Of course, they're also fighting to avoid being enslaved to the
cruel DEs,
> > 
> 
> Pippin:
> Voldemort  threatened to *kill* everyone at Hogwarts if Harry was
not turned over to him. Do you think he planned to make an exception
for Centaurs and Elves? More to the point, would the Centaurs and
Elves think so? They weren't fighting to avoid enslavement by cruel
DE's. They were fighting for their lives and homes. <snip>

Carol responds:

When Voldemort demands Harry, he claims that he doesn't want blood. If
they give him Harry Potter, he says, he'll leave the school unharmed
(DH Am. ed. 610). After Harry's supposed death, Voldemort says,
"Anyone who continues to resist, man, woman, or child, will be
slaughtered, as will every member of their family" (729). He's
speaking to Witches and Wizards, to (magical) *humans*. It doesn't
occur to him to mention "lesser" beings, such as House-Elves or
Centaurs, even though one Centaur has already resisted him. Of course,
once he realizes that such a thing can happen, he intends to kill the
rebellious Centaurs and House-Elves, but there's no indication that he
intends to wipe out either species, any more than he intends to wipe
out Pure-Blood (or even Half-blood) Witches and Wizards. But *until
they rebelled*, I doubt that he gave a thought to the Centaurs, and he
probably thought of the House-Elves only in terms of how he could use
them (cf. Kreacher in the cave), or perhaps as spoils of war to reward
his loyal followers. He might kill a House-Elf just for the sake of
murder if he encountered one personally, but someone like Travers or
Yaxley would be much more inclined to enslave them. We have Dobby's
word (in CoS) for the way that House-Elves were treated during VW1.
And the House-Elves, IMO, don't want that to happen again. That's what
the rallying cry is all about, fighting the Dark Lord and his minions
in the name of Regulus, the good master who died for a House-Elf.

There's no indication whatever that they're fighting for their
*lives*. They wouldn't have been slaughtered as rebels if they hadn't
chosen to fight--or, to "resist," to use Voldemort's word. They're
following their unlikely leader, Kreacher, who believes in loyally
serving a worthy master, a belief that all normal House-elves share.
And they've had worthy masters at Hogwarts. (I'm quite sure that Snape
treated them as well as Dumbledore did, trying to keep conditions as
close to normal as possible at Hogwarts, though perhaps the Carrows
gave them a taste of what would happen if Voldemort won. and if
conditions for the Centaurs under Snape had been worse than under
Dumbledore, they'd have joined the battle much sooner, IMO.)

My main argument, which you snipped, was that neither Firenze nor
Dobby was the leader of a rebel movement. Both the House-Elves under
Kreacher and the Centaurs (who don't seem to be following a leader)
are fighting to preserve the status quo--the conditions at Hogwarts
under Dumbledore and Snape. That includes their homes, as you say, and
by extension, their lives. But it's the life they were previously
living that they're trying to preserve, not unmerited and pointless
wholesale slaughter, which Voldemort did not threaten, even to the
Witches and Wizards of Hogwarts. Only rebels and their families will
be slaughtered. The rest, teachers, students, and Hogsmeade merchants
alike, can live--as long as they accept Voldemort's regime.

Carol, who *does* think that Voldemort planned to make an exception of
House-Elves, Centaurs, and even humans as long as they didn't rebel
against his rule




From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net  Tue Aug 19 00:19:28 2008
From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 00:19:28 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g8cufn+skcm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8d3ig+gr17@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184116

Pippin:
> Voldemort threatened to *kill* everyone at Hogwarts if Harry was
> not turned over to him. Do you think he planned to make an exception
> for Centaurs and Elves? More to the point, would the Centaurs and
> Elves think so? They weren't fighting to avoid enslavement by cruel
> DE's. They were fighting for their lives and homes. <snip>
 
Carol responds:
> When Voldemort demands Harry, he claims that he doesn't want blood. 
> If they give him Harry Potter, he says, he'll leave the school 
> unharmed (DH Am. ed. 610). After Harry's supposed death, Voldemort 
> says, "Anyone who continues to resist, man, woman, or child, will be
> slaughtered, as will every member of their family" (729). He's
> speaking to Witches and Wizards, to (magical) *humans*. It doesn't
> occur to him to mention "lesser" beings, such as House-Elves or
> Centaurs, even though one Centaur has already resisted him. Of 
> course, once he realizes that such a thing can happen, he intends 
> to kill the rebellious Centaurs and House-Elves, but there's no 
> indication that he intends to wipe out either species, any more 
> than he intends to wipe out Pure-Blood (or even Half-blood) Witches 
> and Wizards. 
<snip> 
> There's no indication whatever that they're fighting for their
> *lives*. They wouldn't have been slaughtered as rebels if they
> hadn't chosen to fight--or, to "resist," to use Voldemort's word. 


SSSusan:
I don't know.  I'm just not convinced of this.  

You say that it doesn't occur to Voldemort to mention them, as if 
that means he intends to spare them so long as they don't resist.  I, 
OTOH, might argue that if it doesn't occur to Voldemort to mention 
them, it's because he simply has even less respect for them than he 
does for humans and doesn't think he needs to *bother* mentioning 
them.  I don't see any reason why they wouldn't assume they're 
included in Voldemort's "Anyone." 

Also, whether Voldemort ever said he might spare them or not, I see 
no reason for any being, of any make or model, to trust those words.  
He's VOLDEMORT, and I don't see any reason they would not all 
*believe* they should quite reasonably fear for their lives.

I mean, let's look at this guy.  You're saying that as long as these 
humans or other beings don't *resist,* they won't be slaughtered.  
But let's take a look at what he did when he was p*ssed about the 
Gringotts theft.  

'*And they took?*' he said, his voice rising, a terrible fear 
gripping him.  'Tell me! *What did they take?*"

'A... a s-small golden c-cup m-my Lord...'

The scream of rage, of denial, left him as if it were a stranger's: 
he was crazed, frenzied, it could not be true, it was impossible....

The Elder Wand slashed through the air and green light erupted 
through the room, the kneeling goblin rolled over, dead, the watching 
wizards scattered before him, terrified:  Bellatrix and Lucius Malfoy 
threw others behind them in their race for the door, and again and 
again his wand fell, and those who were left were slain, all of them, 
for bringing him this news, for hearing about the golden cup--" [UK 
children's ed., p. 443].

Yes, the goblin was ostensibly killed because he "betrayed" 
Voldemort.  But the others?  What was their crime?  What had they 
done wrong?  In what way did they resist or defy Voldemort?  In no 
way!  Rather, they just *were there* and became the victims of his 
rage.  

This is the kind of man Voldemort is, and I don't believe *anyone* in 
the WW is unaware of that.  Even those considered his most loyal, 
devoted DEs were frightened for their lives and *threw* others behind 
them in order to escape.  These, who were in Voldemort's innermost 
circle, had no protection, had no doubt that they would each be 
killed... and in fact *were* killed, all except those who literally 
ran fast enough for their lives.

Granted, the centaurs, house elves & goblins [other than the dead 
one, natch] aren't going to know about this specific killing rage, 
but this is what Voldemort *IS,* and I have to believe that any 
statement made my Voldemort, to humans or to "lesser" beings, is not 
going to be taken as any kind of true promise.  Everyone knew his 
life was in danger, I have to believe.  Everyone had to know he truly 
*was* fighting for his life.

Or so it would appear to me.

Siriusly Snapey Susan





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 19 00:43:59 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 00:43:59 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g8cs9c+hbhd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8d50f+feah@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184117

Carol earlier:
> > The thing about Griphook is that he's helping HRH, all right--
helping them get *in* to Gringotts and the vault so that he can get
the sword.  But he has no interest in helping them to get safely *out*
again or in helping them to steal the cup. 
> 
Jen responded:

I can't figure out how your version works though, Carol.  How's 
Griphook planning to get out?  He's no longer a Gringotts goblin; 
he's dependent on a goblin taking them to the vault and getting them 
(or just him) out again, yet he suggests controlling Bogrod with the
Imperius.

Carol responds:

Suggesting that Harry Imperius Bogrod will make Bogrod, who *knows*
that he was Imperiused, more likely to believe that Griphook was
Imperiused, too. Bogrod has no way of knowing that *Griphook*
suggested the Imperius Curse. And, of course, griphook is no longer a
Gringotts Goblin, but Harry knows that he used to be one and knows the
ways of Gringotts, so his being Goblin-napped and forced to help the
Wizards will at least seem credible. He's the only Goblin at hand that
they can ask for help; all he needs to do is change that to the only
Goblin at hand that they can *force* to help them. If his plan had
succeeded, he could have played the role of wily Odysseus and amused
the other Goblins with his story of tricking HRH into believing that
he intended to help them when he was really only retrieving the sword.
(Cf. his own amusement and that of Gornuk regarding the supposed
tricking of Severus Snape.)

Griphook says that the Goblins will regard his agreeing to help the
Wizards as "base treachery," but that may be what he wants HRH to
think. Or maybe, in his mind, actually helping them to steal treasure
from Gringotts really *would* be base treachery, and he has no such
intention. It's in his interest (or so he thinks) to get the Sword of
Gryffindor, which he can only receive as a reward for helping HRH get
into the vault. It's *not* in his interest, or the Goblins' interest
(which, to him, is the same thing) to allow HRH to escape with the
treasure.

Jen: 
> Another obstacle for the theory: The Theif's Downfall. Maybe
Griphook faked surprise about The Thief's Downfall, maybe he wanted to
set off the defenses so goblins would come running and provide cover
for him.  Griphook still needs a reason why why he's there with the
Trio, he still needs the sword, so he has to urge them to proceed to
the vault.  

Carol:
Right. He needs to get them *into* the vault, at which point he will
have earned his reward. here's his bargain with harry, on which they
shake hands:

"I have your word, Harry Potter, that you will give me the sword of
Gryffindor if I help you?" (DH Am. ed. 508). Not a word about how far
that help extends or about helping them to get out. earlier, Harry
tells Griphook, "We haven't got a chance of breaking in[to Gringotts]
without a Goblin's help" (490). Again, not a word about geeting out
again. So when Griphook promises to help them, "in return for
payment," he's offering to help them get into the vault, not
necessarily to help them actually steal one of the "fabulous
treasures" placed in the Goblins' care, which it's their duty to
protect (400), and not necessarily to get out again. He'll do enough
to earn the price of his "hire," the Sword of Gryffindor (and what an
irony, given his views on ownership, that his own possession or the
Sword is so brief!).

Griphook, Harry notes, is "unexpectedly bloodthirsty," laughing at the
idea of pain to lesser creatures and "seem[ing] to relish the
possibility that they might have to hurt other wizards to reach the
Lestranges' vault" (209-10). If he relishes other wizards' pain, will
he relish their predicament any less? I doubt it very much.

Ron asks, after they're spilled out of the cart, how they're going to
get out. Griphook says nothing and Harry says they'll worry about it
later, but the reader sees the flaw in the plan; Griphook is leading
them in, just as Gollum leads the way to Shelob's Lair in LOTR. And
while his treachery is not quite as inevitable as Gollum's, IMO, it
was in his mind all along. *It is not in his interest to help them
steal the cup and in so doing become a traitor to his people and his
code.* It is very much in his interest to get the Sword of Gryffindor
and *prevent* the cup from being stolen if he can do so. when they're
sealed inside the vault, he says that it's no matter; Bogrod will be
able to release them (537)--one more reason why he wants Bogrod
Imperiused so that he won't be left inside to die with HRH--but he
also says that they have very little time before the Goblins come,
meaning very little time for him to earn the Sword--or grab it from
Harry if Harry doesn't keep his part of the bargain on the spot.

Jen:
> Once in the vault, Griphook's in danger from the Gemino & Flagrante 
> Curses just like the Trio.  He's likely depending on Harry's good
will and their wands to keep him alive, but now he really needs the 
sword for a cover story as to why he's in a high-security vault.  The
reason the goblins accept Griphook when he comes out is he's 
brandishing the sword as if he's been thwarting the humans inside
rather than helping them.  The other goblins, holding daggers
themselves, accept Griphook's story.  It was an accident, not 
Griphook's planning, that caused Harry to lose the sword and Griphook
to take possession of it. 

Carol:
I don't think he anticipated either the Thief's Downfall, which would
have killed him along with HRH had it not been for Hermione's
cushioning Charm, nor do I think he anticipated the particular
defenses on the vault, though he recognized them when he saw them. (He
did, of course, know about the dragon and that they would need Bogrod
to get in.) When Griphook lunges for the Sword, Harry "knows] in that
second that the goblin had never expected them to keep their word." he
swings it high out of Harrys reach, slides from Harry's shoulders at
the first opportunity, and sprints for cover among the Goblins
shouting "Thieves! Thieves! Help! Thieves!" (540-41). Since he can
hardly have anticipated dying in the vault with the Wizards, this
stratagem was most likely planned from the beginning. The sword is not
his "cover story"; it's been his sole objective all along. When Harry
doesn't hand it to him immediately, he seizes it. Maybe riding on
Harry's shoulders, which he does from the beginning, was part of his
strategy for seizing the sword.

Surely, Griphook didn't anticipate that HRH would escape on the
dragon, taking the cup with them, instead of being killed by it or by
the Goblins, nor would he have expected them to take him with them
once he'd served his purpose. And he certainly didn't intend to be
viewed by his fellow Goblins as a traitor. All he wanted, as he
himself makes clear through words and actions, was the Sword of
Gryffindor, which he regards as belonging to the Goblins. He did not
three Wizards to outwit (or "outluck" a horde of Goblins and escape,
wrecking Gringotts and freeing their guard dragon in the process). If
he hadn't seized the sword and escaped, the alternative would be to
slide down without it, cry for help, and make clear that the thieves
had *both* the cup and the sword. 
> 
Jen:
> There are too many 'ifs' in this scenario for someone with the self-
preservation instincts of Griphook.  He took advantage of the 
situation, grabbed the sword and saved his own skin, but I don't 
agree he planned everything from the beginning.  There were too many
things Griphook didn't expect, starting in the lobby with the request
for Hermione/Bella's identification.  And the Trio aren't helplessly 
at Griphook's mercy. <snip>

Carol:
I agree that Griphook didn't anticipate all the contingencies (for
example, that the Goblins would know that Bellatrix didn't have her
own wand). But he certainly planned on encountering Wizarding
opposition (the narrator says he relished the possibility of seeing
Wizards hurt), and he must have had the Imperius Curse in mind as one
weapon in the Wizards' arsenal. And they may not be helplessly at
*Griphook's* mercy, but they certainly are helpless against the
onslaught of burning and multiplying objects, and he anticipates that
they'll be trapped with a dragon on one side and a horde of Goblins on
the other. In a worst case scenario, Griphook could probably find his
way out of Gringotts, especially if the other Goblins were focused on
HRH, but I don't think that was his plan. he wants to be a hero to his
people, returning the Sword of Gryffindor, not an outcast, a runaway
accomplice of thieving Wizards. So it's more likely that he planned
all along to run to the Goblins crying "Thieves!" preferably with the
Sword of Gryffindor in hand as payment for his services in getting the
Wizards *into* the vault.

If he really intended (against the Goblin code) to enable HRH to steal
the cup and escape, giving him the Sword as payment for his services,
how could he have faced his fellow Goblins, even with the Sword in
hand to pay for the lost cup? He'd have had to escape with HRH, which,
AFAICT, was no part of his plan--or theirs. And given the dragon, the
Goblins themselves, and whatever protections were put on the vault, he
could not have anticipated that they'd escape at all. "Yeh'd be mad to
try and break into Gringotts," as Hagrid once said.

Carol, pretty sure that Griphook, whose loyalties lie with the
Goblins, intended from the first to trick the Wizards, getting them
into but not out of the Lestranges' vault




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 19 01:47:24 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:47:24 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH26, Gringotts
In-Reply-To: <g8d3ig+gr17@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8d8nc+t9m7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184118

Carol earlier:
> > When Voldemort demands Harry, he claims that he doesn't want
blood. If they give him Harry Potter, he says, he'll leave the school
unharmed (DH Am. ed. 610). After Harry's supposed death, Voldemort 
says, "Anyone who continues to resist, man, woman, or child, will be
slaughtered, as will every member of their family" (729). He's
speaking to Witches and Wizards, to (magical) *humans*. It doesn't
occur to him to mention "lesser" beings, such as House-Elves or
Centaurs, even though one Centaur has already resisted him. Of 
course, once he realizes that such a thing can happen, he intends to
kill the rebellious Centaurs and House-Elves, but there's no 
indication that he intends to wipe out either species, any more than
he intends to wipe out Pure-Blood (or even Half-blood) Witches and
Wizards. 
> <snip> 
> > There's no indication whatever that they're fighting for their
*lives*. They wouldn't have been slaughtered as rebels if they hadn't
chosen to fight--or, to "resist," to use Voldemort's word. 
> 
SSSusan responded:
> I don't know.  I'm just not convinced of this.  
> 
> You say that it doesn't occur to Voldemort to mention them, as if 
that means he intends to spare them so long as they don't resist.  I,
OTOH, might argue that if it doesn't occur to Voldemort to mention
them, it's because he simply has even less respect for them than he
does for humans and doesn't think he needs to *bother* mentioning 
them.  I don't see any reason why they wouldn't assume they're
included in Voldemort's "Anyone." 
> 
Carol:
His "anyone" is specifically "any man, woman, or child," not "any
being or creature." They are, for the moment, beneath his notice. (I
certainly agree that he has even less respect for them than he does
for his fellow humans, even Muggles. In fact, that's my point. It
doesn't occur to him that they could pose a threat; the House-elves
are subservient subhumans in his view; the Centaurs mere beasts.) Once
they start fighting, of course, he wants to kill them, rather like
putting down a rabid dog. But there's no indication that he intended
to slaughter the entire population of Hogwarts, House-Elves and all.
He tries to *recruit* Neville, and he wants all the students to be
Sorted into Slytherin (to absorb its values) whether they want to be
there or not.

SSS:
> Also, whether Voldemort ever said he might spare them or not, I see
no reason for any being, of any make or model, to trust those words.
He's VOLDEMORT, and I don't see any reason they would not all 
*believe* they should quite reasonably fear for their lives.

Carol:
But do they? Where's the indication that anyone fighting on that field
or inside the walls does so because they fear for their lives? Those
who fear for their lives plead for mercy (wandless Draco with the DE)
or go into hiding with the first through fifth years (Zacharias
Smith). The teachers and students who remain and the townspeople who
come clambering over the walls and the House-Elves who come storming
out of the kitchen are all fighting for a *cause.* Sure, their lives
are part of it, but probably not the main part. It's like a medieval
Englishman fighting for God, king, and country. They risk dying in
battle to preserve and protect what's important to them--their
Hogwarts jobs or their students or their children or generalized
opposition to Voldemortian views--or to avenge the supposedly dead
Harry. Not one is fighting chiefly to keep himself or herself from
being slaughtered.

I'm not denying (how could I?) that Voldemort is capable of mass
murder in a blind fury. But I don't see that capability as motivating
anyone (except possibly Harry, who wants to keep it from happening
again) in the Battle of Hogwarts. They're not fighting because if they
don't, they'll be slaughtered. They're fighting, as Lupin says, a
better world than they will have if Voldemort wins, whether they
themselves survive or not. And the House-Elves, specifically, don't
want a return to the suffering of their kind in VW1.

So, of course, Voldemort is a liar. I'm not saying that he's telling
the truth, especially when he says that he'll spare everyone and even
reward them if they give him Harry. I'm just reporting his words both
beforeand after Harry's "death," which Pippin was saying threatended
to slaughter every being in Hogwarts. He didn't say that, and even
though he's capable of killing everyone in sight, on this occasion and
at this moment, his immediate concern is Wizards and Witches who
resist his will. That part we can believe. He intends to slaughter
anyone who thwarts him and their families as well. He's not planning
to kill everyone, whether they resist him or not, or he's going to be
the ruler of no one and nobody. Also, for the moment, House-Elves are
no more on his mind than the gargoyles in front of the headmaster's
hidden staircase. (Once they rebel, the DEs take notice of them, but
LV is still focused on wizards, fighting three at once.)

But we're talking about why the House-Elves (and the Centaurs) fought.
And we have no indication that it's because they heard Voldemort say
that he was going to kill any "man, woman, or child" who resisted him.
They're fighting for a cause, under the banner of Regulus, so to
speak, no out of fear but out of determination. They did not have to
fight. they could have stayed in the kitchen, waiting to serve the
victors. But, clearly, they didn't want the Dark Lord and the DEs (and
it's the DEs, not Voldemort, that they're actually fighting, Voldemort
himself being beyond their power) to be those victors.

Carol, who thinks that the House-Elves, the Centaurs, and the magical
humans who fought against Voldemort were fighting not because they
feared being slaughtered but because they wanted to defend and
preserve, or to restore, the good life they lived before Voldemort's
new regime




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Tue Aug 19 13:20:44 2008
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:20:44 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
Message-ID: <g8ehbc+n37b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184119

This message is a Special Notice for all members of
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups

In addition to being published onlist (available in webview),
this post is also being delivered offlist (to email in boxes)
to those whose "Message Delivery" is set to "Special Notices."
If this is problematic or if you have any questions, contact
the List Elves at (minus that extra space)
HPforGrownups-owner @yahoogroups.com
----------------------------------------------------------------- 

CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
Chapter 27, The Final Hiding Place
 
The Trio ride out of London atop the Gringotts' dragon, Harry feeling 
an overwhelming sense of gratitude for their escape.  He is fearful 
the dragon might turn sharply, roll, or even intentionally throw them 
off, but decides the dragon is too intent on flying away from his 
prison to consider the Trio.  As time passes, Harry's thoughts wander 
to Voldemort.  He wonders when Voldemort will find out the golden cup 
was removed from the Lestrange vault, thus finally realizing Harry is 
hunting Horcruxes.
 
The sun is sinking in the sky and Harry is aching from holding onto 
the dragon before Ron yells out that the dragon is flying lower and 
lower, apparently diverted by the fresh water supply of lakes.  Harry 
yells back for Ron & Hermione to jump on his word when he judges them 
low enough.  After a big drop directly into a lake sends the Trio 
plunging, they emerge in time to see the dragon some distance away 
scooping up water, apparently none the wiser that he had passengers 
on his flight.  
 
Harry casts the protective spells around their area, then the three 
drink pumpkin juice packed by Hermione, while dabbing essence of 
dittany on their many burns from the replicating cups.  They assess 
the situation, Ron noting they now have another Horcrux in their 
possession, with Harry finishing the sentence to say they've lost the 
sword in the process.  All three examine the glinting Hufflepuff cup 
on the ground in front of them until Hermione notices the dragon 
again.  She wonders what will happen to it until Ron makes the point 
that dragons can take care of themselves, and that the three of them 
are the ones to worry about because, "Well, I don't know how to break 
this to you," said Ron, "but I think they *might* have noticed we 
broke into Gringotts."  The Trio start laughing and can't stop, a 
release from the tension of the day.
 
Hermione turns serious, bringing up the conclusion Harry had drawn 
earlier: as soon as Voldemort learns about the missing cup, he'll 
know they are hunting Horcruxes.  Ron speculates about a DE cover-up 
scheme until, suddenly, "pain cleaved Harry's head like a sword 
stroke."  Once again he's in Voldemort's body, facing a semi-circle 
of wizards kneeling around him, talking to one small, quaking figure 
at his feet.  A goblin is the bearer of bad news, that the small 
golden cup was taken out of the Lestrange vault, that the Potter boy 
and two accomplices escaped with the cup.  Voldemort's rage is 
absolute; he doesn't understand how it's possible, but Harry Potter 
knows of his Horcruxes.  Voldemort proceeds to use the Elder Wand, 
first to AK the goblin, then every other wizard who isn't able to 
escape from the room.  Lucius and Bellatrix manage to escape by 
throwing other wizards out of their way as they all race to the door, 
while the rest are slain for bringing Voldemort the bad news and for 
hearing about the golden cup.
 
Alone among the dead, Lord Voldemort paces up and down the room, 
questioning, wondering, coming to a conclusion: Dumbledore is behind 
this, Dumbledore is reaching out from beyond the grave, working 
through the boy.  Voldemort is seized by the idea that all the other 
Horcruxes must be intact; after all, he is all-powerful, the killer 
of many men including the great Dumbledore! Surely he would know if 
the important and precious soul bits had been destroyed?  
 
Feeling calmer, Voldemort determines he will check all his 
Horcruxes.  He believes it impossible the boy could trace the ring to 
the Gaunt shack, to know they were his relations.  The same with the 
cave.  Even if the cave had been discovered, who could possibly get 
through the protections?  And the Horcrux at Hogwarts, only he knows 
of the place where it was hidden, only he had "plumbed the deepest 
secrets of that place."  Nevertheless, he will check on all his 
Horcruxes by himself.  
 
While considering which Horcrux to visit first, a sense of unease 
steals over Voldemort.  Dumbledore knew of his past at the orphanage, 
Dumbledore knew his middle name and might have traced Tom Riddle to 
the Gaunts.  And what if Dumbledore knew about his misdeeds at the 
orphanage, about the cave?  A very slight possibility.  But the 
Horcrux at Hogwarts, no, that one is safe; Potter won't be able to 
get near Hogsmeade or Hogwarts without detection.  Still, Snape must 
be alerted to the possibility.  He would share no more information 
with Snape, however, after the 'grave mistake' of trusting Bellatrix 
& Lucius.  He decides to set out at once for the Gaunt shack, Nagini 
safely with him from this point forward.  
 
Harry finds himself back in the present, back on the bank of the lake 
with Hermione and Ron watching him.  "He knows, and he's going to 
check where the others are, and the last one," he was already on his 
feet, "is at Hogwarts.  I knew it.  I *knew* it."  Harry explains 
what he just learned, that Voldemort could reach Hogwarts in mere 
hours and that they must leave at once.  Ron scrambles to his feet, 
asking questions, but Hermione attempts to stop them, expressing the 
need for a plan.  "We need to get going," said Harry firmly, for as 
soon as Voldemort discovers the Gaunt ring and Slytherin locket are 
gone, his next step would be Hogwarts.  
 
Harry decides their first stop will be Hogsmeade, where they'll 
determine the types of protection on the school.  Interrupted by the 
flapping of wings, they watch the dragon climb higher and higher into 
the sky until it vanishes over a nearby mountain.  Then Harry pulls 
the Invisibility Cloak over the three of them as far as it will fit, 
and "together they turned on the spot into the crushing darkness."
 
 
1)  What did you think would be the 'final hiding place' when reading 
the chapter title?  Were you expecting a Horcrux at Hogwarts all 
along?
 
2)  This is likely the shortest chapter in all of the HP books, yet 
descriptions of the dragon take up quite a few paragraphs at the 
beginning:  how the dragon feels, what it's doing while the Trio rest 
by the lake, where it might go next, etc.  Then right before leaving 
the lakes, they watch the dragon take flight until it vanishes, even 
though Harry insisted they must leave at once.  Do you think the 
dragon plays a symbolic role?  Is it a significant part of this 
chapter for another reason?  Or did you find the mentions of the 
dragon more filler?
 
3)  Harry's vision of Voldemort killing everyone within reach at 
Malfoy Manor is a first-hand view of Voldemort using the Elder wand.  
Do you believe Voldemort exhibits extraordinary magical power in this 
scene or were his powers about what you expected he was capable of 
regardless of the wand?   Any thoughts on Bellatrix and 
Lucius '[throwing] others behind them in their race for the door'?  
 
4)  Voldemort initially believes his Horcruxes must be safe because 
he would feel 'if he, himself, most important and precious, had been 
attacked, mutilated[.]'  Comments about either Voldemort's reasoning 
or how he describes his Horcruxes?  Did the course of Voldemort's 
thoughts about his Horcruxes and the realization that Harry is 
hunting them offer any new glimpses into his interior life?  
 
5)  If you were a Harry!Horcrux theorist, or argued against the 
theory, did you think the possibility of Harry being the final 
Horcrux was defunct when the last Horcrux was revealed as an object 
hidden at Hogwarts?  Were you keeping count at that point?  Were you 
already suspecting the possibility of a twist with the Horcruxes?
  
6)  Voldemort is fairly certain the Potter boy couldn't know of his 
connection to the Gaunts, or about the cave, until he remembers 
Dumbledore.  In a final assessment of why Dumbledore was the only 
wizard Voldemort reportedly feared, what was the basis of Voldemort's 
fear?  Did it have to do with Dumbledore's knowledge of Tom Riddle's 
past or other factors? 
 
7)  Harry is the one to determine when they jump off the dragon; he's 
the one who casts the protective spells.  When Hermione attempts to 
plan their trip to Hogwarts rather than following Harry's lead, 
Harry 'firmly' decides the course of action.  Is this a new twist in 
the Harry/Hermione relationship?  Do you think something changed 
between them over the course of the year or is it typical that Harry 
takes over in certain situations? 

8)  Any thoughts on Harry's decision to go to Hogsmeade even after 
learning Voldemort believed it would be 'impossible' for Harry to 
enter Hogsmeade undetected?  Did Harry forget this point in his haste 
to find the last Horcrux?
 
9)  Please add any additional questions or comments that aren't 
covered in this summary.  
 
Jen, with much thanks to SSSusan for her suggestions. :)

--------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
NOTE: For more information on HPfGU's chapter discussions, please
see "HPfGU DH Chapter Discussions" at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database 

Next Chapter Discussion, Chapter 28, The Missing Mirror, September 1.





From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 20 02:29:37 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 02:29:37 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8ehbc+n37b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8fvih+5d1b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184120

Jen:
1.	What did you think would be the 'final hiding place' when 
reading
the chapter title? Were you expecting a Horcrux at Hogwarts all
along?

Alla:

Heee, I thought that final hiding place would showcast somebody's 
death, would have nothing to do with Horcrux.

Jen:
2) This is likely the shortest chapter in all of the HP books, yet
descriptions of the dragon take up quite a few paragraphs at the
beginning: how the dragon feels, what it's doing while the Trio rest
by the lake, where it might go next, etc. Then right before leaving
the lakes, they watch the dragon take flight until it vanishes, even
though Harry insisted they must leave at once. Do you think the
dragon plays a symbolic role? Is it a significant part of this
chapter for another reason? Or did you find the mentions of the
dragon more filler?


Alla:

Oh heck, I am kicking myself all over again, but as you know I had 
been missing simple symbolism lately and not just here. Yes, I think 
Dragon plays symbolic role and I think it is a very simple symbolism. 
Hogwarts motto is Don't wake up a sleeping dragon, yes? 
I think escape of the Dragon foreshadows Hogwarts fighting and 
escaping Voldemort's tyranny.



Jen:

6) Voldemort is fairly certain the Potter boy couldn't know of his
connection to the Gaunts, or about the cave, until he remembers
Dumbledore. In a final assessment of why Dumbledore was the only
wizard Voldemort reportedly feared, what was the basis of Voldemort's
fear? Did it have to do with Dumbledore's knowledge of Tom Riddle's
past or other factors?

Alla:

I was about to answer that it is Dumbledore's raw magical power, but 
thinking about it, I think the answer that it is Dumbledore's 
knowledge of Tom's Riddle misdeeds makes more sense to me.

I mean Voldemort talks. " An old unease flickered inside him. 
Dumbledore had known his middle name
 Dumbledore might have made the 
connection with the Gaunt
 their abandoned home was, perhaps, the 
least secure of his hiding places, it was there that he would go 
first

The lake, surely impossible
 though was there a slight possibility 
that Dumbledore might have known some of his past misdeeds, through 
the orphanage"  - p.444

I think Voldemort is afraid because of the knowledge is power thing, 
I do not even think it is the Love thing, that Voldemort cannot 
understand. I think he is afraid that Dumbledore knew him when he was 
a little boy, who was already set up on hurting others, but who was 
probably also hurt that his parents "abandoned' him or something like 
that. I think that he is afraid that Dumbledore knew his 
vulnerabilities and despite his death managed to do something about 
it.


Jen:
7) Harry is the one to determine when they jump off the dragon; he's
the one who casts the protective spells. When Hermione attempts to
plan their trip to Hogwarts rather than following Harry's lead,
Harry 'firmly' decides the course of action. Is this a new twist in
the Harry/Hermione relationship? Do you think something changed
between them over the course of the year or is it typical that Harry
takes over in certain situations?

Alla:

Me? I was cheering and saying ? it is about time, Harry, but no I do 
not think it is something very new, we did see that Harry tends to 
take over in the moments of ultimate danger and responsibility, no?

Jen:
8) Any thoughts on Harry's decision to go to Hogsmeade even after
learning Voldemort believed it would be 'impossible' for Harry to
enter Hogsmeade undetected? Did Harry forget this point in his haste
to find the last Horcrux?

Alla:

I just did not think that Harry would let this stop him. Thanks for 
excellent questions Jen.





From olivier.fouquet at polytechnique.org  Wed Aug 20 10:15:34 2008
From: olivier.fouquet at polytechnique.org (olivierfouquet2000)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:15:34 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8ehbc+n37b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8gqs6+iro5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184121

  > 4)  Voldemort initially believes his Horcruxes must be safe because 
> he would feel 'if he, himself, most important and precious, had been 
> attacked, mutilated[.]'  Comments about either Voldemort's reasoning 
> or how he describes his Horcruxes?  Did the course of Voldemort's 
> thoughts about his Horcruxes and the realization that Harry is 
> hunting them offer any new glimpses into his interior life?  

I like this question very much. Voldemort is an interesting, and in fact somewhat atypical, 
villain. Unlike your garden-variety evil overlord bent to world domination (? la Sauron or 
Palpatine), he is in fact not overtly concerned with power, in the sense of having the 
ability to make other people do his bidding. With his talents and Slughorn support, he 
could have probably easily become Minister of Magic, or headmaster of Hogwarts, or 
appoint himself in DH after the fall of the ministry. But he doesn't. And what he really 
cares about, he does himself. Nor does he seem to really believe in pure-blood 
supremacy or in any coherent political ideology (? la Magneto or Lucius). And love or the 
appreciation of others leaves him apparently supremely cold (unlike, say, Jafar or Maurice 
de Bracy or Draco). Yet he is not totally devoid of motives either. What Voldemort is after 
is another sort of power: that of negating the external reality of the world. If something 
frustrates him, he refuses to even consider the possibility that something could be wrong 
with his desires. Rather, like an impatient very young child, he breaks something. So 
when he cannot kill Harry, he seeks a new wand, killing everyone in the way, when he 
doesn't get the prophecy, he tortures Avery...

And the ultimate frustration being that he is going to die, he will leave no stone unturned 
to escape death. Others around him, he simply doesn't care, and if he kills them or 
torture them, it is seemingly just because they are obstacles to the satisfaction of his 
desires or because he needs their deaths. Incidentally, because I understand Voldemort 
along those lines, I am with Carol on the questions of the battle of Hogwarts. In my 
opinion, Voldemort just doesn't care about other creatures as long as he is not frustrated, 
so I don't think he would have slaughtered anyone in Hogwarts if Harry had been handed 
to him (and until his next frustration). I even go as far as to take him at face values when 
applying for the DADA job: at this point in his life, I think he still respects and maybe 
even admires Dumbledore, but turns pure spite when denied what he wanted. That makes 
him a very Kantian villain, in the sense that his ultimate fault is neither ambition, nor lust, 
nor hate, nor pure baseless evil (? la Sauron or Palpatine again, or a la Greyback) but 
simply the fact that he treats others as means, and not ends. And so it is not surprising 
that the greatest evil in the Potterworld is to use another life as a mean to sustain one's 
(think Horcruxes and unicorn blood).

This also explains why the current Voldemort, contrary to Diary!Riddle or Locket!Riddle, is 
rather devoid of seductive powers. The deeper he goes in his deluded quest to negate 
external reality, the lesser his ability to communicate with others (or in the literal 
incarnation of symbolism typical of JKR, the more Horcruxes he makes, the less human he 
literally is).

And finally, this is also the reason why, in the end, I feel some pity for Lord Voldemort. I 
can't help but see, through the flaring nostrils and the red eyes, an insecure toddler 
which has grown too fast and who throw fits and tantrums at everything that displease 
him, in the hope, perhaps, that a loving mother will eventually take him in her arms and 
whisper in a soothing voice that everything is going to be alright.

Dumbledore raised his eyebrows. "Could you possibly be feeling sorry for 
Lord Voldemort?" HBP 13

Olivier





From willsonkmom at msn.com  Wed Aug 20 12:09:27 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:09:27 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8ehbc+n37b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8h1hn+gbc6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184122

  
> 1)  What did you think would be the 'final hiding place' when 
reading 
> the chapter title?  Were you expecting a Horcrux at Hogwarts all 
> along?

Potioncat:
Yes, I knew it would be the diadem, in the RoR with the Potions Book. 
I did expect the Potions book to be recovered. 

But I also wondered if Harry was a hidden horcrux. Final Hiding Place 
isn't exactly the same as the last hiding place. I wondered if the 
title had anything to do with death.
>  
> 2)  This is likely the shortest chapter in all of the HP books, yet 
> descriptions of the dragon take up quite a few paragraphs at the 
> beginning:  how the dragon feels, what it's doing while the Trio 
rest 
> by the lake, where it might go next, etc.  Then right before 
leaving 
> the lakes, they watch the dragon take flight until it vanishes, 
even 
> though Harry insisted they must leave at once.  Do you think the 
> dragon plays a symbolic role?  Is it a significant part of this 
> chapter for another reason?  Or did you find the mentions of the 
> dragon more filler?

Potioncat:
I may answer more on this one later, but for a start, I thought it 
was an act of preparation. They were savoring that very good moment, 
watching a dragon fly off to freedom. It would be like watching the 
sun set or the stars before a battle.

>  
> 3)  Harry's vision of Voldemort killing everyone within reach at 
> Malfoy Manor is a first-hand view of Voldemort using the Elder 
wand.  
> Do you believe Voldemort exhibits extraordinary magical power in 
this 
> scene or were his powers about what you expected he was capable of 
> regardless of the wand?   Any thoughts on Bellatrix and 
> Lucius '[throwing] others behind them in their race for the door'?  

Potioncat:
I think LV could have caused havoc with any wand. While it isn't 
clear to us, perhaps he thought the wand should have worked better.

It was a very scary scene. What kind of leader just kills his own 
ramdom people in a rage? In a way it prepares us for LV's murder of 
Snape. No it doesn't, but it shows how very little LV values life.

While Malfoy and Bellatrix seem cowardly for the way they escaped, 
I'm not sure anyone would have lined up calmly at the door. At first, 
I didn't realise they had escaped. I thought everyone had died. I'm a 
little surprised that JKR didn't name the other DEs. I'm curious 
about who was there.

Great summary and questions! I'm away from my books now. I hope to 
have time to review the chapter and post more later this week.  






From hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Aug 20 13:35:03 2008
From: hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk (lesley)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:35:03 -0000
Subject: Why did Voldemort go bad?
Message-ID: <g8h6i7+ga60@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184123

I have never understood this, i apologize if this has been addressed 
before but why was he bad?

Ok so he was an orphan, the childrens home (from the little we saw of 
it) seemed like a nice place, at least it wasn't a bad one anyway!

I don't believe in blood will out personally and there isn't a lot of 
evidence as to the nature of his parents, his mother didn't behave in 
the best way but she did act out of love and you can't judge his 
fathers actions after he left as being under a potion was the same in 
the real world as being given the date-rape drug! He was raped by the 
mother over quite a few months so having nothing to do with her 
afterwards is perfectly understandable (although finding his child 
would have been ideal but he would never have known the mother was 
dead).

By the sound of things Harry's upbringing was a lot worse than LV 
could ever have imagined so why wasn't he evil? Why didn't he let all 
the fame go to his head? 

LV seemed to be evil from an early age, it was never explained why, 
and even when he entered Hogwarts things could have been different 
for him, he could have changed if given support. DD at least knew of 
some of his problems and perhaps should have helped him early. Maybe 
he was power hungry but you can be good and perhaps have just as much 
power, look at DD!

LV in my opinion was capable of love, he loved Hogwarts and it 
remained in his heart for the rest of his life so it's just this i 
can't understand...

Why was he bad?




From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net  Wed Aug 20 15:08:04 2008
From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:08:04 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8h1hn+gbc6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8hc0k+41ot@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184124

Jen: 
> 1) What did you think would be the 'final hiding place' when
> reading the chapter title? Were you expecting a Horcrux at Hogwarts 
> all along?

Potioncat:
> Yes, I knew it would be the diadem, in the RoR with the Potions 
> Book.

SSSusan:
Me too, me too!  This was one I'd been counting on for a long time.  
And since I never wanted Harry to be a Horcrux, intentional or 
otherwise, I suspect I thought I was off the hook for that particular 
little theory. ;)


Jen:
> 2) Do you think the dragon plays a symbolic role? Is it a 
> significant part of this chapter for another reason? Or did you 
> find the mentions of the dragon more filler?

Alla:
> Oh heck, I am kicking myself all over again, but as you know I had
> been missing simple symbolism lately and not just here. Yes, I think
> Dragon plays symbolic role and I think it is a very simple 
> symbolism.  Hogwarts motto is Don't wake up a sleeping dragon, yes?
> I think escape of the Dragon foreshadows Hogwarts fighting and
> escaping Voldemort's tyranny.

SSSusan:
Wow, Alla, I totally missed this!  I'm smacking my forehead now, but 
this had *never* occurred to me. :)

My thought was more like Potioncat's....

Potioncat: 
> I thought it was an act of preparation. They were savoring that 
> very good moment, watching a dragon fly off to freedom. It would be 
> like watching the sun set or the stars before a battle.

SSSusan:
Yes, sort of like a moment of silent contemplation and calming before 
taking on a big endeavor.  At this moment, I can't help think of an 
Olympic athlete, visualizing his/her performance before actually 
beginning it.


Jen:
> 3) Harry's vision of Voldemort killing everyone within reach at
> Malfoy Manor is a first-hand view of Voldemort using the Elder
> wand.  Do you believe Voldemort exhibits extraordinary magical 
> power in this  scene or were his powers about what you expected he 
> was capable of regardless of the wand? Any thoughts on Bellatrix and
> Lucius '[throwing] others behind them in their race for the door'?

Potioncat:
> I think LV could have caused havoc with any wand. While it isn't
> clear to us, perhaps he thought the wand should have worked better.
>
> It was a very scary scene. What kind of leader just kills his own
> ramdom people in a rage? In a way it prepares us for LV's murder of
> Snape. No it doesn't, but it shows how very little LV values life.

SSSusan:
It was VERY scary indeed.  And it struck me in a way that I'll 
mention more in my response to question #4.


Jen:
> 4) Voldemort initially believes his Horcruxes must be safe because
> he would feel 'if he, himself, most important and precious, had been
> attacked, mutilated[.]' Comments about either Voldemort's reasoning
> or how he describes his Horcruxes? Did the course of Voldemort's
> thoughts about his Horcruxes and the realization that Harry is
> hunting them offer any new glimpses into his interior life?

Olivier:
> I like this question very much. Voldemort is an interesting, and in 
> fact somewhat atypical, villain. Unlike your garden-variety evil 
> overlord bent to world domination (? la Sauron or Palpatine), he is 
> in fact not overtly concerned with power, in the sense of
> having the ability to make other people do his bidding. With his 
> talents and Slughorn support, he could have probably easily become 
> Minister of Magic, or headmaster of Hogwarts, or appoint himself in 
> DH after the fall of the ministry. But he doesn't. And what he 
> really cares about, he does himself. Nor does he seem to really 
> believe in pure-blood supremacy or in any coherent political 
> ideology (? la Magneto or Lucius). And love or the appreciation of 
> others leaves him apparently supremely cold (unlike, say, Jafar
> or Maurice de Bracy or Draco). Yet he is not totally devoid of 
> motives either. What Voldemort is after is another sort of power: 
> that of negating the external reality of the world. If
> something frustrates him, he refuses to even consider the 
> possibility that something could be wrong with his desires. Rather, 
> like an impatient very young child, he breaks something. So when he 
> cannot kill Harry, he seeks a new wand, killing everyone in the way,
> when he doesn't get the prophecy, he tortures Avery...
>
> This also explains why the current Voldemort, contrary to Diary!
> Riddle or Locket!Riddle, is rather devoid of seductive powers. The 
> deeper he goes in his deluded quest to negate external reality, the 
> lesser his ability to communicate with others....

SSSusan:
Olivier likes the question (me, too), and I like the answer Olivier 
offered.  Voldemort is SUCH a fascinating character, and I am 
especially intrigued with what Olivier brought up concerning the 
*changes* in Voldemort "the deeper he goes in his deluded quest" and 
his description of Voldy as like an impatient young child.  Why?  
Because THIS is what strikes me about the Voldy we are seeing in the 
last year or two of the story.  

He's IRRATIONAL.  

He's always been someone who frightens even his closest followers, 
but I wonder if even they had always believed that he really would 
do ? or even if Voldy always *would* have done ? something like he 
did when he got the news about the cup and started AKing everyone in 
sight.

For all Snape's talk about Voldemort having his way with anyone who 
wears his emotions on his sleeve or anyone who lets his emotions 
control himself, what has Voldemort himself turned into as this year 
has progressed?  Someone whose emotions totally rule him!  He rages, 
he screams, he loses sight of what he's facing.  I'm sure he's always 
been somewhat irrational and definitely unpredictable in behavior, 
but we have to believe that, for him to have risen this far, he must 
have had some plans, some rationality, some charisma in addition to 
the fear he evoked in people.  And it seems to me that he's losing 
that more and more.  He's still arrogant and totally (over?) 
confident of his supreme talent & skill, but as doubts and 
insecurities and frustrations seep in, he seems to be unable to 
calculate, to reason, to keep his emotions from totally taking him 
over.


Jen:
> 6) In a final assessment of why Dumbledore was the only wizard 
> Voldemort reportedly feared, what was the basis of Voldemort's
> fear? Did it have to do with Dumbledore's knowledge of Tom Riddle's
> past or other factors?

Alla:
> I was about to answer that it is Dumbledore's raw magical power, but
> thinking about it, I think the answer that it is Dumbledore's
> knowledge of Tom's Riddle misdeeds makes more sense to me.
<snip>
> I think Voldemort is afraid because of the knowledge is power thing,
> I do not even think it is the Love thing, that Voldemort cannot
> understand.

SSSusan:
And I'm opting for the "All of the above" choice myself:  DD's raw 
magical power; DD's knowledge and *insight* into Tom (which Voldy 
surely found EXTREMELY disconcerting); and The Love Thing.  All of 
it, I think, contributed to his fearing DD.


Jen:
> 7) Harry is the one to determine when they jump off the dragon; he's
> the one who casts the protective spells. When Hermione attempts to
> plan their trip to Hogwarts rather than following Harry's lead,
> Harry 'firmly' decides the course of action. Is this a new twist in
> the Harry/Hermione relationship? Do you think something changed
> between them over the course of the year or is it typical that Harry
> takes over in certain situations?

SSSusan:
I think this is a continuation of what we saw after Dobby died at 
Shell Cottage.  Once Harry dug that grave, he became extremely 
decisive and take-charge.  I think this is more of the same, as he's 
out of the depressive on-the-run-and-making-no-progress phase, has 
been jolted by Dobby's death, and has now determined he must 
establish a real plan or at least not sit still but take action.

Siriusly Snapey Susan






From hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Aug 20 15:40:36 2008
From: hutchingslesley at yahoo.co.uk (lesley)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:40:36 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8ehbc+n37b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8hdtk+f9qg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184125

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at ...> wrote:
> 1)  What did you think would be the 'final hiding place' when reading 
> the chapter title?  Were you expecting a Horcrux at Hogwarts all 
> along?

Me>>>

Yep yep, it always had to end at Hogwarts, i also thought when reading 
it was the only logical place it could be but i would have thought the 
Diadem would have been mentioned more in the earlier books as well 
hints of the story behind the Bloody Baron and the Grey Lady!




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 20 20:47:53 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:47:53 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8ehbc+n37b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8hvtp+6svm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184126

CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
> Chapter 27, The Final Hiding Place
<snip fine summary>
>  
> 1)  What did you think would be the 'final hiding place' when
reading the chapter title?  Were you expecting a Horcrux at Hogwarts
all along?

Carol responds:
I didn't have a particular hiding place in mind, but I did think from
the titile that they'd get to use the other tent and have at least a
*little* time to hide. as it is, they only got a moment's rest and
some pumpkin juice (and, of course, treatment with dittany, a
substance whose powers have been considerably enhanced since HBP). As
for a Horcrux at Hogwarts, I was pretty sure that the Ravenclaw
Horcrux was the tiara Harry had used to help mark the place where
"his" (the HBP's) Potions book was hidden. the mere fact that two
tiaras were mentioned in the same book seemed like a Clue with a
capital C--not to mention the same thing occurring at Shell Cottage
and all the stuff about Ravenclaw's "diadem." (As far as I can
determine from definitions and photos, there's not much difference
between the two terms except that a diadem seems to be heavier and
more elaborate.)

Which reminds me--sorry to stray OT here, but I don't think this point
has been made (or, at least, developed) before. Something Pippin said
recently made me realize that Auntie Muriel's goblin-made tiara has
magical properites. *It* caused Fleur and everyone around her,
including the miraculously but temporarily unscarred Bill, to appear
beautiful and glowing while she was wearing it. Silly me. I had
attributed that moment at Fleur and Bill's wedding to Veela power or
something in the ceremony itself or maybe her simple white gown, but,
of course, it was the power of the Goblin-made diamond-and-moonstone
tiara. I'm surprised that Griphook let it go so easily, accepting
Bill's "and paid for by Wizards" without protest. But, I suppose, he
was forcused on the Sword of Gryffindor, whose powers were more to his
taste. (Too bad they only work for Gryffindors, as far as I can tell.)
>  
> 2)  This is likely the shortest chapter in all of the HP books, yet
descriptions of the dragon take up quite a few paragraphs at the
beginning:  how the dragon feels, what it's doing while the Trio rest
by the lake, where it might go next, etc.  Then right before leaving 
the lakes, they watch the dragon take flight until it vanishes, even 
though Harry insisted they must leave at once.  Do you think the 
dragon plays a symbolic role?  Is it a significant part of this
chapter for another reason?  Or did you find the mentions of the
dragon more filler?

Carol:
If it's a symbol, it's not an obvious one. I think that most readers
sympathize with it for its prolonged suffering and hope that its
rewarded somehow for its (inadvertent) role in helping HRH escape.
Maybe there's something to be said for Hagrid's view of dragons as
"interestin' creatures" (as long as they're unaware of your presence).
It certainly provides a contrast to the dragons in GoF (who, BTW, were
also mistreated, if not so brutally--nesting mothers forced into
captivity and threatened by thieves who intend to steal what they
think is one of their eggs. IIRC, at least two eggs were trampled by
one of the tormented mothers in her fear and rage.) The dragon's
plight is a digression, but it's nice to see the Trio focusing on
something other than BVoldemort and the Horcruxes, if only for a
moment. And I was glad that they got a nice long laugh, too, at Ron's
remark that their break-in to Gringotts might have been noticed. 
 
> 3)  Harry's vision of Voldemort killing everyone within reach at 
Malfoy Manor is a first-hand view of Voldemort using the Elder wand.
Do you believe Voldemort exhibits extraordinary magical power in this
scene or were his powers about what you expected he was capable of
regardless of the wand?   Any thoughts on Bellatrix and Lucius
'[throwing] others behind them in their race for the door'? 

Carol:
The Elder Wand does exactly what Voldemort wants it to do, which is
kill everyone he aims at. Not even the Elder Wand can be expected to
kill more than one person at a time unless he uses some spell other
than Avada Kedavra. He's relieving his anger by killing as another man
might slam his fist into the wall multiple times. There's no
indication that the wand has failed him (it hasn't). IMO, the wand is
perfectly compatible with him, whether or not he's its master, until
*it* learns that Harry is its true master and chooses to betray him.
(It's as treacherous and murderous as he is.) I have more to say about
wands being more sentient than most readers are willing to credit a
stick of wood as being, but I'll wait for the disagreement with my
view that's bound to surface. At any rate, this is the point at which
JKR could and, IMO, should have shown Voldemort attempting to do some
spectacularly evil spell (and perhaps not succeeding as fully as he
intended). She missed the opportunity, IMO, and I remain unconvinced
that the wand failed to perform for Voldemort up until the
confrontation with Harry, and even then, it "killed" Harry, who would
have died along with the soul bit had it not been for his mother's
sacrifice and the shared blood that protected them both.

As for Lucius and Bellatrix, it's perfectly in character for them to
preserve their own lives at the expense of others. I take it that
Narcissa wasn't present. Nor, of course, was Draco, who was at school.
>  
> 4)  Voldemort initially believes his Horcruxes must be safe because
he would feel 'if he, himself, most important and precious, had been
attacked, mutilated[.]'  Comments about either Voldemort's reasoning
or how he describes his Horcruxes?  Did the course of Voldemort's
thoughts about his Horcruxes and the realization that Harry is hunting
them offer any new glimpses into his interior life? 

Carol:
In the unlikely event that you haven't read LOTR or seen the films and
somehow don't know or want to know what happens in either or both,
please skip to the next question! 

"Most important and precious" suggests Sauron and his Ring, along with
Gollum's "Precious," which he can no longer fully distinguish from
himself. Of course, there are differences, too, since the destruction
of the One Ring is also the destruction of Sauron and everything he
created, whereas the destruction of all the Horcruxes merely makes
Voldemort mortal. Setting aside the almost certainly deliberate
allusion to LOTR, Voldemort's words are those of an egomaniac who
can't conceive of being either defeated or outsmarted. (It's
interesting that he, who believes that death is the end of everything,
speculates that Dumbledore is interfering from beyond the grave--as
indeed he is via Portrait!DD and Headmaster Snape.) Also, of course,
his inability to sense the theft or destruction of his Horcruxes
indicates how irreparably mutilated his soul now is, barring the
infinitesimally small chance that he'll repent. I'm not sure I
understand what you have in mind about glimpses of Voldemort's
internal life. I don't think he really has one. It's all plotting and
scheming or rage or fear, with the fear offset by supreme egotism. (No
one else has ever discovered the RoR? How did all those other objects
get in there, then?) He's completely unable to reason from B to C, as
Josephine Tey would say.
>  
> 5)  If you were a Harry!Horcrux theorist, or argued against the
theory, did you think the possibility of Harry being the final Horcrux
was defunct when the last Horcrux was revealed as an object hidden at
Hogwarts?  Were you keeping count at that point?  Were you already
suspecting the possibility of a twist with the Horcruxes?

Carol:
I was keeping count, of course, and since I had suspected the tiara as
the Ravenclaw Horcrux since HBP, it made no difference to my
(incorrect) view that Harry "couldn't" be a Horcrux because a Horcrux
is a deliberate creation requiring an encasing spell and because of
the complications that would ensue--Harry would have to die to destroy
the Horcrux, but Harry couldn't be "the one with the power to vanquish
the Dark Lord" if he were dead. I still think that an accidental
Horcrux is not quite the same thing as a Horcrux, but it took "The
Prince's Tale" to persuade me that I was wrong. (I did anticipate a
kind of resurrection for Harry if he was indeed a Horcrux based on the
resurrection symbolism of his holly-and-phoenix-feather wand, but that
was before Hermione accidentally broke it.) But, yes, a plot twist of
some sort involving Horcruxes was almost inevitable given that the
author is JKR.
>   
> 6)  Voldemort is fairly certain the Potter boy couldn't know of his
connection to the Gaunts, or about the cave, until he remembers
Dumbledore.  In a final assessment of why Dumbledore was the only 
wizard Voldemort reportedly feared, what was the basis of Voldemort's
fear?  Did it have to do with Dumbledore's knowledge of Tom Riddle's
past or other factors?

Carol:
He certainly knew that Dumbledore had talked with Mrs. Cole and knew
about some of his misdeeds (the stolen mouth organ, etc.), and he knew
that DD, unlike the other teachers, never trusted him. He may have
realized that DD suspected that he was behind the release of
Slytherin's monster (but, of course, couldn't prove it). And he knows
that DD knew his middle name. If he, Tom, could trace the Gaunts to
Little Hangleton, DD could do the same. He knows DD's power and
intelligence, and he feared him without having any idea that some of
that power came from the Elder Wand. Not even Voldemort can hide from
himself that Dumbledore was a very great Wizard, as great in his way
as Voldemort himself--or, at least, potentially as great, in LV's
view, if he didn't refrain from performing certain types of magic. At
any rate, Voldemort can't conceive of anyone except DD figuring out
the secret of the Horcruxes and he knows that DD was Harry's mentor.
Limited though LV's reasoning powers are in some respects, it's not
surprising that he concludes, correctly, that Dumbledore is somehow
responsible for Harry's discovery and theft of the cup Horcrux.
(Ironically, that's one Horcrux whose location DD didn't figure out
though he did show Harry exactly what it looked like.) 
>  
> 7)  Harry is the one to determine when they jump off the dragon;
he's the one who casts the protective spells.  When Hermione attempts
to plan their trip to Hogwarts rather than following Harry's lead, 
Harry 'firmly' decides the course of action.  Is this a new twist in
the Harry/Hermione relationship?  Do you think something changed
between them over the course of the year or is it typical that Harry
takes over in certain situations?

Carol:
It's odd that Harry casts the protective spells, which he learned from
her, but I don't think it's odd that he tells them when to jump off.
(In contrast, it's Hermione who thinks to cast Defodio ("Dig") spells
to help the dragon widen the passage, and he quite willingly follows
her lead. I think it would be out of character for Hermione, who hates
flying but probably hates falling even more, to suggest that they
jump. Action, especially involving heights, is Harry's department. But
also, this is Harry's quest; he's the one who has to face Voldemort.
He's the one who has the visions of Voldemort. Now that he knows it's
time, that Voldemort knows about the Horcruxes and will soon be at
Hogwarts, he's not going to allow any opposition. This time, in
contrast to OoP and the MoM expedition, he's not raging or panicking,
and the evidence that he's right (this is not some implanted vision
intended to trick him) is overwhelming. There's no arguing against his
rhetorical question, "Can you imagine what [Voldemort's] going to do
when he realizes the ring and the locket are gone?" (DH Am. ed. 552).
He disposes of her remaining objections quickly and firmly (maybe
being Quidditch captain helped him learn some needed leadership
skills), but he also has the advantage of being both right and in
control. At some other point in their three-way friendship Hermione
will no doubt assume her old role as the thinker and planner, but now
is the time for action.
> 
> 8)  Any thoughts on Harry's decision to go to Hogsmeade even after
learning Voldemort believed it would be 'impossible' for Harry to
enter Hogsmeade undetected?  Did Harry forget this point in his haste
to find the last Horcrux?

Carol:
Possibly Harry thinks that the Invisibility Cloak, Ignotus Peverell's
own cloak and a Hallow of which he is the rightful owner, will be
sufficient. Either that or he knows that they'll face obstacles but
have to act now, regardless. And Voldemort also thinks it's
"impossible" that any of the remaining Horcruxes could have been
stolen, much less destroyed--and, of course, Voldemort is wrong in
that regard. He could be equally wrong about the protections around
Hogsmeade being "impossible" to get by. 

Carol, who has no additional questions and congratulates Jen on coming
up with such good ones for a short and tricky chapter!




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 20 21:51:33 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 21:51:33 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8h1hn+gbc6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8i3l5+nq22@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184127

Potioncat wrote:
<snip>
> While Malfoy and Bellatrix seem cowardly for the way they escaped, 
I'm not sure anyone would have lined up calmly at the door. At first,
I didn't realise they had escaped. I thought everyone had died. I'm a
 little surprised that JKR didn't name the other DEs. I'm curious
about who was there. <snip>

Carol responds:

While I can't actually answer that question, we can eliminate some DEs
from the list of murder victims by looking at "the Battle of
Hogwarts," "The Forest Again," and "The Flaw in the Plan" to see who
was still alive and participating in the battle. We can also, of
course, eliminate the Carrows, Draco, and the quasi-DE Snape, who were
at Hogwarts. 

Setting aside the people I've mentioned, along with Lucius and
Bellatrix, who survived LV's monstrous temper tantrum by fleeing and
pushing others out of their way, and Narcissa, who either fled with
her sister and husband or wasn't present (unlikely given that LV is in
her house), the (named) DEs still alive for the battle include Dolohov
(who probably killed Lupin); the Minister for Magic, Pius Thicknesse
(admittedly not a real DE but manipulated by them and fighting
alongside them); Yaxley; Greyback (not a real DE, I know); Rowle;
Macnair; and Rookwood. (I thought that Travers, Imperiused by Harry in
the Gringotts break-in, was in the battle, but I can't find him now.
Apparently, he was  either still at Gringotts, recovering from Harry's
Imperius Curse, or he was killed by Voldemort after the break-in.)

Among the DEs who *aren't* named as being in the battle are both
Lestrange brothers (Rodolphus was injured, I don't know how badly, in
the Polyjuiced!Potters chase; Rabastan is, as usual, forgotten
throughout DH); Umbridge's relative, Selwyn, who was in the chase and
showed up later with Travers to arrest Xenophilius Lovegood; and
Avery, Mulciber, Nott, Crabbe (Sr.), and most of the other DEs
arrested after the MoM fiasco; and Goyle (Sr.), whose first and only
appearance is in the graveyard in GoF. Wormtail, of course, is already
dead.

I could come up with a few more names of DEs mentioned as arrested or
participating in the MoM raid (for example, the mysterious Jugson),
but I can't think of any besides Selwyn and Travers who are mentioned
in DH but don't seem to have been at the Battle of Hogwarts. However,
the only names given are those that Harry recognizes, and at least
some of the DEs kept their hoods on, so he couldn't tell who they were.

Carol, who suspects that DEs like Yaxley (and Macnair?) who had jobs
at the Ministry weren't present when LV started firing AKs and
survived for that reason




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 20 22:13:54 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 22:13:54 -0000
Subject: Why did Voldemort go bad?
In-Reply-To: <g8h6i7+ga60@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8i4v2+k2d5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184128

Lesley wrote:

<snip> > you can't judge his fathers actions after he left as being
under a potion was the same in the real world as being given the
date-rape drug! He was raped by the mother over quite a few months so
having nothing to do with her afterwards is perfectly understandable
(although finding his child would have been ideal but he would never
have known the mother was dead). <snip>

Carol responds:

I don't want to get back into the ugly, emotion-laden debates on this
subject, but I think you're judging Merope, herself a lifelong victim
of abuse, rather harshly. I'm sure she didn't think of herself as
"raping" Tom Riddle. (The concept of date rape or marital rape,
especially of a man by a woman, wouldn't have existed at that time
even among Muggles, and Merope was neither educated nor an enlightened
thinker.) She just wanted him to be her husband and love her,
physically and emotionally, as a husband (theoretically) loves his
wife. As Dumbledore said, a love potion would have seemed more
romantic to the poor girl, who was only eighteen, than an Imperius
Curse. As for Tom Riddle Sr., yes, he was taken advantage of and
tricked; yes, he had every reason to hate Merope (poor ugly, unloved,
wall-eyed Merope, whom he laughed at before she tricked him into
"loving" her), but that did not give him the right to abandon his
child by her and leave them both in direst poverty. He was rich; he
could have found a nice cottage for them somewhere far away and
provided for them as a medieval lord or prince provided for his
illegitimate children. Instead, he let her die in poverty and his son
live or die (the same to him either way) in poverty and obscurity. I
understand that he owed *her* nothing, but he owed his child
protection and food and shelter, and the child needed his mother's
care. Two wrongs don't make a right, and the child in any case was
innocent, whatever he later grew up to be.

I understand that we differ here, and I'm not attacking your views.
But I, personally, have little sympathy for a parent of either sex who
would abandon his or her child whether that child was conceived
through rape, seduction, carelessness, or love.

Carol, not trying to persuade anyone but simply expressing her own
views on this highly emotional subject





From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 20 22:28:35 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 22:28:35 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8h1hn+gbc6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8i5qj+b1re@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184129

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" <willsonkmom at ...> 
wrote:

> At first, I didn't realise they had escaped. I thought everyone 
> had died. 


zanooda:

Me too, me too :-)! When Lucius turned up a little later in the 
Shrieking Shack, I was so surprised :-)! I thought: "Wait a minute, 
isn't he dead?" I had to go back and reread the AK-ing scene, to find 
out that it could be both ways: Lucius and Bella were described racing 
to the door, but it wasn't shown if they managed to get through it :-)!





From justcorbly at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 20 22:30:59 2008
From: justcorbly at yahoo.com (justcorbly)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 22:30:59 -0000
Subject: Why did Voldemort go bad?
In-Reply-To: <g8h6i7+ga60@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8i5v3+jo4j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184130

--- "lesley" <hutchingslesley at ...> wrote:
>
> LV seemed to be evil from an early age...
>
> Why was he bad?

I can't answer that.  But, the parallels between Voldemort and Harry are so apparent that JKR must have intentionally led us in that direction.

Decisions and actions have consequences, though, and Tom Riddle made decisions and took actions that led him in one direction, while Harry went another direction.  Even at the end, JKR has Harry give Voldemort a chance to show remorse, knowing that if he did his future would be altered.  Voldemort chooses another path.

I also believe that we might have a different impression of Harry's childhood with his aunt and uncle if the first two books had been written at greater length and with an older target readership, as were the later books.  While it is made clear that Harry's childhood was painful,  the portrayal of the Dursleys is more comical than realistic. In reality, they'd likely have been brought up on abuse charges.

justcorbly



From happyjoeysmiley at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 21 05:20:15 2008
From: happyjoeysmiley at yahoo.com (Happy Smiley)
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 22:20:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Why did Voldemort go bad?
Message-ID: <618405.37860.qm@web46216.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184131

lesley wrote:
>By the sound of things Harry's upbringing was a lot worse than LV could ever have imagined so why wasn't he evil?? 
Joey:
I think that *could* be the cause why Harry wasn't evil. Harry had been a victim of abuse and cruelty (incl. horrible treatment by "Aunt" Marge) at "home" from a very early age and school was not much of a difference either for him. He learns at the age of 11 that his parents were murdered by Voldemort. So, he *knows* how it feels to be a victim of abuse and cruelty and he chose to fight back for himself and for others too. His drive to ensure that the Philosopher's Stone is safe had been just that.
I think Voldemort (though sadly deprived of parental love and care - a vital source of goodness removed, I agree) has never been a victim to this extent - he didn't *lose* anything because of any cruelty inflicted upon him by someone else (at least, there is no canon evidence). So, he never *knew* what it feels like to be in the receiving end, I suppose.
lesley wrote:
>Why didn't he let all the fame go to his head?
Joey:
Because Harry also faced the not-so-good aspects of being famous, I think. As per the Sorting Hat, he had a thirst to prove himself (quite natural, considering what he underwent till then) but then he never thought of himself as "special" like LV had done.
lesley wrote:
>LV seemed to be evil from an early age, it was never explained why, 
and even when he entered Hogwarts things could have been different 
for him, he could have changed if given support. DD at least knew of 
some of his problems and perhaps should have helped him early. 
Joey:
Er, he *was* given support, I feel. Prefect, Head Boy, accolades and warm treatment from all teachers, Best Outgoing Student award - quite a thing at that age. Also, in HBP, when he comes back requesting to be recruited as a teacher, he calls DD's theories (viz. "love is the most powerful force", "death is not the worst thing", etc.) as an *old* argument. So, it seems to me that DD has had discussions with him in the past. 
lesley wrote:
>Maybe he was power hungry but you can be good and perhaps have just as much power, look at DD! 
Joey:
Exactly. One needs to just *look* at people like say DD, Madam Pomfrey, Prof.Flitwick (just to name a few loving and lovable people in Hogwarts!) to understand what it means to be good, kind and fair. But did LV *look* at them at all? LV says that he found nothing (!) in the world that he saw (since he left Hogwarts) proved DD's words about the strength of love to which DD replies that he might have been looking in the wrong places. I don't have the book with me to quote - it's in the chapter Lord Voldemort's Request in HBP. Yes, he was power hungry - looks like this obscured every other thought/feeling in him. 
lesley wrote:
>LV in my opinion was capable of love, he loved Hogwarts and it 
remained in his heart for the rest of his life so it's just this i 
can't understand.. Why was he bad?
Joey:
Good question; this one nagged me too - if he can *love* Hogwarts and find a *home* there then why not develop on that positive feeling? But then that's where he differed from Harry guess, I think. He was too busy trying to make himself immortal and *stand out* amongst the powerful while Harry chose to keep himself busy by saving people in trouble and earning more loved ones in the process.???
JMHO,
~Joey


      

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From happyjoeysmiley at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 21 06:25:43 2008
From: happyjoeysmiley at yahoo.com (happyjoeysmiley)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 06:25:43 -0000
Subject: Harry's Swimming Skills?
Message-ID: <g8j1p7+tq83@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184132

In GoF, we are told that Harry does not know to swim. (Or were we told 
that he cannot stay *under* water for long?)

Yet in HBP when he goes along with DD to get the locket Horcrux and in 
DH when he tries to get the Sword of Gryffindor, he does swim and gets 
under water.

Just curious if this was a miss by JKR or something which I missed to 
gather while reading all those books. Has this has been discussed 
earlier in this forum / answered already by JKR? Any pointers?

~Joey




From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk  Thu Aug 21 09:50:21 2008
From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 09:50:21 -0000
Subject: Harry's Swimming Skills?
In-Reply-To: <g8j1p7+tq83@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8jdou+q74b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184133

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "happyjoeysmiley" <happyjoeysmiley at ...> 
wrote:
>
> In GoF, we are told that Harry does not know to swim. (Or were we told 
> that he cannot stay *under* water for long?)
> 
> Yet in HBP when he goes along with DD to get the locket Horcrux and in 
> DH when he tries to get the Sword of Gryffindor, he does swim and gets 
> under water.
> 
> Just curious if this was a miss by JKR or something which I missed to 
> gather while reading all those books. Has this has been discussed 
> earlier in this forum / answered already by JKR? Any pointers?
> 
> ~Joey

Geoff:
The relevant quote from GOF is:
'He wasn't a very good swimmer; he'd never had much 
practice. Dudley had had lessons in their youth but Aunt 
Petunia and Uncle Vernon, no doubt hoping that Harry 
would drown one day, hadn't bothered to give him any. 
A couple of lengths of this bath was all very well but that 
lake was very large and very deep.....'
(GOF "The Egg and the Eye" p.403 UK edition)

Now, the scene in HBP is about two years later so it is quite 
possible that Harry might have improved his swimming. In 
the HBP example, he has to swim a short distance in the sea 
and the main problems are his waterlogged clothes and the 
coldness of the water.

In the DH scenario, we are told that the frozen pool was a 
small one. nd his neck. The suggestion seems to be that it 
was not very deep and he did not have to go very deeply
under water to reach the sword. I think the problem was, 
again,  the coldness and the tightening of the chain around 
his neck which  made him disorientated and also lost his 
balance.




From happyjoeysmiley at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 21 11:02:18 2008
From: happyjoeysmiley at yahoo.com (happyjoeysmiley)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 11:02:18 -0000
Subject: Harry's Swimming Skills?
In-Reply-To: <g8jdou+q74b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8jhvq+4jfk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184134

Geoff wrote:

>Now, the scene in HBP is about two years later so it is quite 
>possible that Harry might have improved his swimming. In 
>the HBP example, he has to swim a short distance in the sea 
>and the main problems are his waterlogged clothes and the 
>coldness of the water.

Joey:

The distance is short, yes, but when it comes to depth, swimming in 
the *sea* would have been a challenge still, I suppose. As his 
swimming skills were discussed in particular in GoF 2nd task (so 
much so that he even sprouted gills using something called, IIRC, 
gillyweed), I was wondering about it when I read this scenes in HBP. 

As you have said, we might have to go beyond the canon evidence and 
assume that he might have improved his swimming in 2 years. I also 
had a feeling that swimming with DD might have made a difference to 
him (despite the fact that DD had already begun to swim with his 
wand held between his teeth by the time Harry joined). 

Geoff wrote:

>In the DH scenario, we are told that the frozen pool was a 
>small one. nd his neck. The suggestion seems to be that it 
>was not very deep and he did not have to go very deeply
>under water to reach the sword. 

Joey: Yeah, I agree. This tallies with the correct GoF quote you 
have helped me with, Geoff.





From willsonkmom at msn.com  Thu Aug 21 12:20:15 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 12:20:15 -0000
Subject: Why did Voldemort go bad?
In-Reply-To: <g8i4v2+k2d5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8jmhv+ed3k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184135

"lesley" wrote in 184123:
> snip
> Ok so he [Tom Riddle]was an orphan, the childrens home (from the 
little we saw of 
> it) seemed like a nice place, at least it wasn't a bad one anyway!
> 
> I don't believe in blood will out personally and there isn't a lot 
of 
> evidence as to the nature of his parents, his mother didn't behave 
in 
> the best way but she did act out of love and you can't judge his 
> fathers actions after he left as being under a potion was the same 
in 
?? the real world as being given the date-rape drug

Potioncat:
Why does anyone go bad? There are so many theories of personality 
development, that we could discuss this one question forever. The 
important thing is, why does JKR think people go bad?

Blood will out? I don't know how I feel about that. Certainly there 
are behavior traits that are inherited. JKR showed us a little of 
Tom's family. His uncle and grandfather were distrustful, emotionally 
distant, quick to anger, proud. Whether or not we believe those sorts 
of traits can be inherited, I think JKR showed them for a reason.

JKR has said that she doesn't think people are born bad (IIRC). I'm 
not sure if she writes with that in mind, but that's another matter. 
Tom Riddle seems to have been born angry and most of his actions seem 
to be in retaliation.  All Tom knew was that his mother came to the 
orphanage to give birth, then died. She probably planned to leave him 
there at any rate. He could only have wondered about his father. Very 
likely he felt abandoned. Put it all together and you get Lord 
Voldmort.


Combining two posts:
> Lesley
> By the sound of things Harry's upbringing was a lot worse than LV 
> could ever have imagined so why wasn't he evil? Why didn't he let 
all 
?? the fame go to his head? 

>Justcorbly wrote in 184130
>I can't answer that. But, the parallels between Voldemort and Harry 
are so
>apparent that JKR must have intentionally led us in that direction


Potioncat:
Not just a parallel between Harry and Tom, add Severus and you have 
the three lost boys. All have unpleasant backgrounds. All had similar 
desires and temptations.  DD has watched all of them grow up. I think 
this is why DD was so impressed with Harry's ability to love.

Tom went all the way into Darkness. Severus started down that path, 
but his ability to love one person stopped him. Harry was able to 
love many people and sort of skirted the Dark path, but managed to 
stay off it. 


> Carol responds in post 184128:
>snip
> Curse. As for Tom Riddle Sr., yes, he was taken advantage of and
> tricked; yes, he had every reason to hate Merope (poor ugly, 
unloved,
> wall-eyed Merope, whom he laughed at before she tricked him into
> "loving" her), but that did not give him the right to abandon his
> child by her and leave them both in direst poverty. 
> 

Potioncat:
I would agree fully except for one thing. I'm not sure we know if Tom 
Riddle Sr. ever knew about the baby. If he knew, then there's no 
excuse for not making some provisions for him. 

If he knew, and did nothing, does that go back to "blood will out"? 
Was he as emotionally unloving as the Gaunts? Come to think of it, I 
think that is what JKR is saying. 








From sweenlit at gmail.com  Thu Aug 21 16:14:33 2008
From: sweenlit at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 09:14:33 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's Swimming Skills?
In-Reply-To: <g8jdou+q74b@eGroups.com>
References: <g8j1p7+tq83@eGroups.com> <g8jdou+q74b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <43e41d1e0808210914i6f50eb79xe6ad1f80bf9ceaa0@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184136

My suggestion, is that two years have passed and maybe Harry's been able to
practice a bit. After all, we aren't treated to a minute by minute digest of
Harry's life. That would make the books more than a little boiring. . .

Lynda


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From lszydlowski at hotmail.com  Thu Aug 21 16:47:06 2008
From: lszydlowski at hotmail.com (mmizstorge)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:47:06 -0000
Subject: Why did Voldemort go bad?
In-Reply-To: <g8i5v3+jo4j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8k66a+jrl1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184137

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcorbly" <justcorbly at ...> 
wrote:
<snip>
Even at the end, JKR has Harry give Voldemort a chance to show 
remorse, knowing that if he did his future would be altered.  
Voldemort chooses another path.
<snip> justcorbly

This bit of their battle discussion that seemed to me the 
most outrageous part of their absurd duel. First, no one in that 
situation - and especially not Lord Voldemort - is going to say, "Oh 
dear, you're right! I have done simply terrible things and I 
suddenly feel bad about it! Here, take my wand, even if it isn't 
really the Elder wand. I don't deserve the privilege of practising 
magic." Voldemort was not the sort of character to 'come along 
quietly', any more than Dumbledore was, and wasn't going to languish 
in confinement like Grindlewald did. 

Second, all the other Horcruxes had been destroyed at that point. 
Voldemort had only a fraction of a soul left. Remorse wasn't going 
to rejoin the bits of his soul, so why bother mentioning it? 

Third, if this was meant to be an expository insight into the 
religion in JKRs world and Harry was expressing his personal concern 
about the destination of Voldemort's soul in the hereafter, then 
where in the world did that sentiment come from? Harry expressed no 
religious beliefs of any sort during the previous books. When did he 
become a theologian? 

And the part about 'be a man' was something I found insulting even 
as a reader. You're barely legal, Potter - don't lecture the adults.

Other than being there to strech out what was supposed to be the 
dramatic climax of the book, Ii thought that the demand to 'feel 
some remorse' was unnecessary and even out of character.






From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 21 18:03:27 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:03:27 -0000
Subject: Harry's Swimming Skills?
In-Reply-To: <g8jhvq+4jfk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8kalf+caar@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184138

Geoff wrote:
> 
> >Now, the scene in HBP is about two years later so it is quite 
>possible that Harry might have improved his swimming. In the HBP
example, he has to swim a short distance in the sea and the main
problems are his waterlogged clothes and the coldness of the water.
> 
> Joey:
> 
> The distance is short, yes, but when it comes to depth, swimming in
the *sea* would have been a challenge still, I suppose. As his
swimming skills were discussed in particular in GoF 2nd task (so much
so that he even sprouted gills using something called, IIRC,
gillyweed), I was wondering about it when I read this scenes in HBP. 
> 
> As you have said, we might have to go beyond the canon evidence and
 assume that he might have improved his swimming in 2 years. I also
had a feeling that swimming with DD might have made a difference to
him (despite the fact that DD had already begun to swim with his wand
held between his teeth by the time Harry joined). <snip>

Carol responds:

Unlike Dumbledore, who has a perfect breaststroke despite his injured
arm, Harry apparently needs only sufficient swimming skills to get
across the cold water in his water-logged clothes. It's more a matter
of determination than ability. The same is true of the nearly frozen
pool in DH. If he'd remembered to take off the Horcrux, he would
probably have retrieved the sword. (Heck, even I can retrieve a
quarter off the bottom of a swimming pool, and I was never a good
swimmer. I wouldn't try swimming in those conditions or lifting
something heavy, but I'm not a seventeen-year-old boy.) Ron, who may
never have had swimming lessons in his life, succeeds in retrieving
the sword *and* rescuing Harry. There's a lot to be said for
adrenaline, not to mention whatever accidental magic (or help from the
sword?) may have been involved.

And while Harry had the advantage of gills and webbed hands and feet
in GoF, he did still have to actually swim underwater to get to the
(supposed) hostages and get himself and two unconscious people to the
surface. That in itself required some swimming ability, possibly
mostly instinctive (like his ability to fly without a single lesson).
The gillyweed didn't enable him to swim (though the webbed feet and
hands gave him an added advantage he wouldn't have had otherwise); it
enabled him to survive (breathe) underwater for an hour through gills
in his neck. That he had some ability to swim both above- and
underwater already is indicated by the few lengths of the pool/tub,
and he could also stay underwater long enough to hear the Merpeople's
song, a matter not only of holding his breath but not returning to the
surface prematurely. I doubt, however, that he'd win a race against a
Muggle swimming champion without the gillyweed (which would only help
him underwater, in any case). Again, I think that instinct and
determination, in addition to the gillyweed that made survival
possible, enabled him to swim underwater without having been taught
how to do it as a professional or amateur athlete would.

One more thing that no one seems to have thought of. Both Harry and
Ron, one as Quidditch captain and the other as a Prefect, had access
to the Prefect's bathroom, with its swimming-pool-style bathtub, to
practice swimming both above and underwater during their off-page
leisure moments in their fifth and sixth years. that's very different
from actually mastering the breaststroke or butterfly or Australian crawl.

Carol, now wondering whether Dumbledore learned the breaststroke from
reading British Muggle sports magazines





From elfundeb at gmail.com  Thu Aug 21 19:13:17 2008
From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 15:13:17 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHAPDISC: DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8ehbc+n37b@eGroups.com>
References: <g8ehbc+n37b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <80f25c3a0808211213y220f564h67c5ed44cab3c470@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184139

1) What did you think would be the 'final hiding place' when reading
the chapter title? Were you expecting a Horcrux at Hogwarts all
along?

Debbie:
Hah!  I never read chapter titles!  However, as Hogwarts is
the central locale in each of the first six books, I would have been
astonished if the horcrux hunt did not end there, so I was certain that the
last one would be in the RoR.

2) This is likely the shortest chapter in all of the HP books, yet
descriptions of the dragon take up quite a few paragraphs at the
beginning: how the dragon feels, what it's doing while the Trio rest
by the lake, where it might go next, etc. Then right before leaving
the lakes, they watch the dragon take flight until it vanishes, even
though Harry insisted they must leave at once. Do you think the
dragon plays a symbolic role? Is it a significant part of this
chapter for another reason? Or did you find the mentions of the
dragon more filler?

Debbie:
I found the image of the freed dragon flying off, silhouetted against a
darkening sky, to be very compelling, and one that has stayed with me.  The
image of freedom contrasts sharply to our first view of the dragon at
Gringotts, in chains and made to obey through abuse.  The dragon's freedom,
an unanticipated consequence of the Gringotts break-in, and the fact that
the Trio stayed to watch it despite their haste to get to Hogsmeade, seems
to foreshadow the outcome of the upcoming battle at Hogwarts -- which we now
know will happen due to Harry's vision.  This is what Harry is fighting for
-- to free the WW from Voldemort's tyranny.  The free dragon contrasts
sharply with the image of Voldemort killing his own followers when things do
not go his own way.

There also is a parallel to the rescue of Norbert in the first book.

3) Harry's vision of Voldemort killing everyone within reach at
Malfoy Manor is a first-hand view of Voldemort using the Elder wand.
Do you believe Voldemort exhibits extraordinary magical power in this
scene or were his powers about what you expected he was capable of
regardless of the wand? Any thoughts on Bellatrix and
Lucius '[throwing] others behind them in their race for the door'?

Debbie:
Voldemort's killing spree required not a small bit of firepower, but his
targets were headed for the door, so I don't think he needed extraordinary
power to get the job done.  Lucius' actions show that he is first and
foremost out for himself, which of course becomes important later.

4) Voldemort initially believes his Horcruxes must be safe because
he would feel 'if he, himself, most important and precious, had been
attacked, mutilated[.]' Comments about either Voldemort's reasoning
or how he describes his Horcruxes? Did the course of Voldemort's
thoughts about his Horcruxes and the realization that Harry is
hunting them offer any new glimpses into his interior life?

Debbie:
I second Olivier's very insightful comments on Voldemort.

5) If you were a Harry!Horcrux theorist, or argued against the
theory, did you think the possibility of Harry being the final
Horcrux was defunct when the last Horcrux was revealed as an object
hidden at Hogwarts? Were you keeping count at that point? Were you
already suspecting the possibility of a twist with the Horcruxes?

Debbie:
I declare myself guilty of being an ardent Harrycrux theorist, but I thought
the evidence pointed to Accidental Harrycrux (because otherwise the fact
that Voldemort was trying to kill Harry would make no sense).  Moreover, I
expected the realization that he would have to sacrifice himself would come
to Harry only after the other Horcruxes had been destroyed, so Voldemort's
revelation was to my mind entirely consistent with my theories.

6) Voldemort is fairly certain the Potter boy couldn't know of his
connection to the Gaunts, or about the cave, until he remembers
Dumbledore. In a final assessment of why Dumbledore was the only
wizard Voldemort reportedly feared, what was the basis of Voldemort's
fear? Did it have to do with Dumbledore's knowledge of Tom Riddle's
past or other factors?

Debbie:
I don't think Dumbledore's knowledge is the source of the fear.  Voldemort
feared Dumbledore because he had no power over Dumbledore, in that Voldemort
could not charm Dumbledore the way he could charm other people he needed.
He seems to have known from his first meeting that Dumbledore was different
in this regard.  The underlying reason why Dumbledore can't be charmed
probably derives at least in part from his legilimency skills and the
consequent knowledge he has gained thereby rather than any specific
knowledge regarding Riddle's past.

7) Harry is the one to determine when they jump off the dragon; he's
the one who casts the protective spells. When Hermione attempts to
plan their trip to Hogwarts rather than following Harry's lead,
Harry 'firmly' decides the course of action. Is this a new twist in
the Harry/Hermione relationship? Do you think something changed
between them over the course of the year or is it typical that Harry
takes over in certain situations?
8) Any thoughts on Harry's decision to go to Hogsmeade even after
learning Voldemort believed it would be 'impossible' for Harry to
enter Hogsmeade undetected? Did Harry forget this point in his haste
to find the last Horcrux?

HRH did not enter Gringotts undetected; yet they still managed to accomplish
their mission.  They have to get to Hogwarts, and it appears that the only
way to check the defences or to get in is through Hogsmeade.  It seemed to
me to be a necessary gamble, and Harry knew best that they didn't have time
for reflection and planning anymore.

Thanks for the great questions!

Debbie


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 21 19:52:07 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 19:52:07 -0000
Subject: Harry's Swimming Skills?
In-Reply-To: <g8j1p7+tq83@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8kh17+989a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184140

---  "happyjoeysmiley" <happyjoeysmiley at ...> wrote:
>
> In GoF, we are told that Harry does not know to swim. (Or 
> were we told that he cannot stay *under* water for long?)
> 
> Yet in HBP when he goes along with DD to get the locket 
> Horcrux and in DH when he tries to get the Sword of 
> Gryffindor, he does swim and gets under water.
> 
> Just curious if this was a miss by JKR or something which I 
> missed to gather while reading all those books. Has this has
> been discussed earlier in this forum / answered already by 
> JKR? Any pointers?
> 
> ~Joey
>

bboyminn:

Well, you've started with at false assumption, and that has
colored everything.

>From GOF - Prefects Bathroom scene-
"It was so deep that his feet barely touched the bottom, and 
he actually did a couple of lengths before swimming back to
the side and treading water, staring at the egg."

Keep in mind this is a somewhat large pool; it has it's own
diving board. Certaily not a huge Olympic pool, but still good
sized.

So, Harry can swim a couple of laps and he can tread water.
Seems like a perfectly ordinary swimmer to me. 

No, he, not having has swim lessons, is not a technically
proficient swimmer, but very few people, lessons or no lessons,
are. 

When he swims with Dumbledore, despite the cold and wind, likely
it is in a somewhat protected cove, so no huge waves crashing 
down. Any reasonable swimmer should be able to traverse a short
distance in the ocean in calm conditions.

As others have pointed out the pool containing the sword was
cold, but not deep, at least not over Harry's head. At first,
he is just walking around in the pond feeling around with his
feet for the sword, then when ready to retrieve it, he dives
down after it. I suspect the water was roughly chest to 
shoulder high. 

So, my interpretation is that Harry is a fair swimmer like
most people, just not technically proficient, like most people.

Plus consider that two years have gone by, two years when most
boy grow into young men. At age 13, Harry was probably not
very big or well developed, though Hogwarts certainly provides
plenty of exercise walking up and down all those stairs. So,
later in the scene with Dumbledore, and with the sword in the
pond, and with jumping off the dragon into a lake, Harry is 
likely stronger, more developed, and more confident, all of 
which would improve his swimming even without practice.

Just a thought.

Steve/bluewizard




From donnawonna at worldnet.att.net  Thu Aug 21 19:53:29 2008
From: donnawonna at worldnet.att.net (Donna)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 15:53:29 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Subject: Finding Chamber of Secrets
Message-ID: <48ADC7B9.000008.01700@LIFESAVER>

No: HPFGUIDX 184141

Donna:
Okay, how did Tom Riddle find the entrance to the Chamber of Secrets?  We know it's in Moaning Myrtle's bathroom so, what was Tom doing in a girls' bathroom?  The trio was there to ask Myrtle how she died and she mentioned seeing the eyes by the sink which, as we know, is the entrance to the Chamber.  But, how did Tom know where the entrance was located?

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From kersberg at chello.nl  Thu Aug 21 15:53:38 2008
From: kersberg at chello.nl (kamion53)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 15:53:38 -0000
Subject: Why did Voldemort go bad?
In-Reply-To: <g8h6i7+ga60@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8k322+4urf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184142

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lesley" <hutchingslesley at ...>
wrote:
>
> I have never understood this, i apologize if this has
> been addressed before but why was he bad?
>
> Ok so he was an orphan, the childrens home (from the
> little we saw of it) seemed like a nice place, at least
> it wasn't a bad one anyway!
>
> I don't believe in blood will out personally and there
> isn't a lot of evidence as to the nature of his parents,
> <snip>
>
> By the sound of things Harry's upbringing was a lot worse
> than LV could ever have imagined so why wasn't he evil?
> Why didn't he let all the fame go to his head?
>
> LV seemed to be evil from an early age, it was never
> explained why, and even when he entered Hogwarts things
> could have been different for him, he could have changed
> if given support. DD at least knew of some of his
> problems and perhaps should have helped him early. Maybe
> he was power hungry but you can be good and perhaps have
> just as much power, look at DD!
> <snip>


kamion writing:
I think that although neither Harry nor Riddle got much love
and kindness during the early years, Harry at least saw it
given in front of him by the cuddling Petunia did to Dudley.
And I also don't think that the feeling in a child that mumsy
loves baby brother or sister better is that alien to a normal
childhood and most children learn to overcome that, so why
not Harry.

Riddle however never experienced any love in the orphanage,
even if it was a place where he children were well cared for
it was an unpersonal rather cold place. Besides that, Tom
Riddle was isolated among the isolated ones, in the
'20/'30-ties orphans were not held in high regard and his
unchecked magic kept him in even less regard then the rest.
Competition and pecking order must also have taken it's toll
on the development of Riddles character, when never to be
loved, then better be feared and being feared payed off.
Harry was in no situation of better be feared then never
loved, and when he came in the situation that his relatives
feared him there were much higher stakes to exploit it;
having the Dudleys tremble wasn't worth being expelled from
Hogwarts.

But most of all what makes the difference between Harry and
Riddle is genetics: Harry comes from a rather sane family;
on the wizard side hardly corrupted by Pure Blood Superiority,
on the Muggle side also rather openminded upon the unexpected.
Riddle however is the scion of a long line of inbred insanity,
all kinds of hereditairy mental diseases are more or less
accumulated in his Grandfather and Uncle and from the Muggle
side there are not much niceties to counteract it. The Riddle
family is probably also an old line and dady Riddle is even
more arrogant as Grandpa Riddle.

JKR clearly choose for genetics in this: did Hermione not
tell Harry that his flying and Quidditch skills were in his
blood?

If Riddle was capable of love because he loved Hogwarts I
doubt, if it's love it's a very selfish kind of love, more
a playground for using and learning new skills to gain power.
He uses the only nice aspect heritated from his father, his
good looks, to charm and deceive teachers and his skills to
impress others.  When he loves Hogwarts it is as something
he is entitled to and considers his right to rule it... I
would not call that love, love in JKR's work is altruistic
and Voldemort is as far away from altruism as we are from
the lesser moons of Pluto.  I would say; he did not love
Hogwarts for what it was, he loved the situation in which
he became strong.

I neither think that the way of conception has any influence
on the character of the offspring, but nevertheless it is a
known motive in litature and myth; take for instance Sir
Modred in the Arthur romans, who is the product of incest
and deceit, sired by the good King Arthur on his halfsister
Morgana or Morgause. JKR obvious choose to follow this
concept too.

In general, Riddle had with his inheritance very little
chance to end up good even in the best and warm of
upbringing.  Harry with his heritage and his upbringing
had every chance of ended wrong and badly, but sooner as a
patient in an asylum, then as a tyrant.
In the end it's blood that rules.




From kaamita at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 21 19:51:30 2008
From: kaamita at yahoo.com (Heather Hadden)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 12:51:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why did Voldemort go bad?
In-Reply-To: <g8jmhv+ed3k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <567891.94475.qm@web56504.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184143

>Carol responds in post 184128: <snip>
>Curse. As for Tom Riddle Sr., yes, he was taken advantage
>of and tricked; yes, he had every reason to hate Merope
>(poor ugly, unloved, wall-eyed Merope, whom he laughed at
>before she tricked him into "loving" her), but that did
>not give him the right to abandon his child by her and
>leave them both in direst poverty.

>Potioncat: <snip>
>I would agree fully except for one thing. I'm not sure we
>know if Tom Riddle Sr. ever knew about the baby. If he
>knew, then there's no excuse for not making some provisions
>for him.
?

Heather:
I am not saying that this forgives Tom SR, nor does it
excuse it, but he was used by Merope. He felt used, and
that made him feel weak. Plus the shame of being seen
with this ugly girl that the town looked down on. When
the love potion was taken off, he was embarraded and
humiliated. Then to find out that she was a witch and
used a spell on him. Suppose she did tell him about the
baby, which I feel she would have. Well, why would he
believe her? After everything she did to him, why should
he believe that she was a witch. Then he has to look at
the fact that this child is probably going to be magical
also and to him, anything magical is just an abomination,
so looking at all of that, why should he feel anything
for this child? After being used, and your free will
taken, and who knows what else (in his mind) he wants
nothing to do with anything magical.









From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 21 21:00:23 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 21:00:23 -0000
Subject: Why did Voldemort go bad?
In-Reply-To: <567891.94475.qm@web56504.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <g8kl17+pj38@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184144

> Heather:
> I am not saying that this forgives Tom SR, nor does it
> excuse it, but he was used by Merope. He felt used, and
> that made him feel weak. <SNIP> After being used, and your free will
> taken, and who knows what else (in his mind) he wants
> nothing to do with anything magical.


Alla:

I will go further and say as I always did that to me it **does** 
forgive Tom Sr. I always felt that Merope ( and I really do not think 
that her being unloved and abused somehow justifies her abusing another 
human being. I know you did not say it, just saying) raped Tom Riddle. 
While I think as Potioncat does that it is unclear that Tom Riddle knew 
about the baby, even if he did knew, I would have forgiven him had he 
wanted nothing to do with this baby.

I would have never say anything bad about a woman who does not want her 
baby if the woman was raped, and since I feel that this man was raped, 
I feel the same way.

Yes baby is not at fault for anything for circumstances of his birth of 
course.

I of course pity Merope for her home situation, but NOT for anything 
she did to Tom.

To me Tom's inability to return and make a normal life for himself 
portrays a broken man, a man horribly taken advantage of.

I do not blame him one way or another.

I would have LIKED him to take care of the baby, if I knew for sure 
that he did know about him, but even if I do not think that it can be 
totally right, it is in my mind completely excused.

JMO,

Alla





From justcorbly at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 21 22:33:10 2008
From: justcorbly at yahoo.com (justcorbly)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 22:33:10 -0000
Subject: Why did Voldemort go bad?
In-Reply-To: <g8k66a+jrl1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8kqf6+d8gl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184145

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mmizstorge" <lszydlowski at ...> wrote:

[JustCorbly said...]
<snip>
 Even at the end, JKR has Harry give Voldemort a chance to show
 remorse, knowing that if he did his future would be altered.
 Voldemort chooses another path.
</snip>

[mmizstorge said...]
<snip>
.....This bit of their battle discussion that seemed to me the
 most outrageous part of their absurd duel.
</snip>

I didn't read it that way.  I saw it as Harry acting on seeing the creepy thing that was LV during his otherwordly encounter with the dead Dumbledore. Harry had demonstrated an acceptance of the prophecy, but he never displayed any enthusiasm for killing LV. Also,
Harry asked if LV wanted  to show remorse, not if he wanted to surrender.

I can see basic Good versus Evil morality at play in the battle scene, but no particular religious coloring.  These were people fighting for their survival, and religion usually doesn't come into play at such moments. The compelling urge is to kill the enemy so that you live.

justcorbly




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Thu Aug 21 23:36:35 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 23:36:35 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8ehbc+n37b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8ku63+mntd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184146

>  
> 3)  Harry's vision of Voldemort killing everyone within reach at 
> Malfoy Manor is a first-hand view of Voldemort using the Elder wand.  
> Do you believe Voldemort exhibits extraordinary magical power in
this  scene or were his powers about what you expected he was capable
of  regardless of the wand?   Any thoughts on Bellatrix and 
> Lucius '[throwing] others behind them in their race for the door'? 

Pippin:
"[G]reen light erupted through the room" sounds enough like "green
light filled the cramped hallway" (from  chapter 17) that it could be
just a more vivid description of the same phenomenon, ie, reflected
light from an Avada Kedavra curse. 

But  the reaction of the watching wizards gives the lie to that. Why
did they scatter and flee when  only the goblin had been killed,
before Voldemort raised his wand to strike again? 

They'd seen Voldemort kill before -- that alone shouldn't have thrown
them into a panic. Unlike Harry, they couldn't have read Voldemort's
mind, and except for Bella, they didn't know the significance of the
cup.  

There must have been  something about the eruption of green light that
made them realize that they were all meant to die, not just the bearer
of bad news.  If green light not only struck the goblin but literally
"erupted" throughout the room, that might account for it. 

Without  the full power of the Elder Wand, the curse might touch but
not kill the watching DE's, just as it would later fail to kill Harry
in the forest. As Fake!Moody told us in GoF, the Avada Kedavra curse
needs a fair amount of magical power behind it. 

I think Lucius and Bella, who were close to the Dark Lord  in the days
of his first regime, were more aware than the others that the 'new'
Voldemort was more given to violent anger than the old one. That in
turn reminds me of Gandalf's words about Gollum, that the reawakening
of good in him would only make the evil part angrier in the end,
unless it could be conquered.

 Pippin
with much thanks to Jen and hoping to come back  to the other
questions soon




From happyjoeysmiley at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 22 08:38:42 2008
From: happyjoeysmiley at yahoo.com (happyjoeysmiley)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 08:38:42 -0000
Subject: Finding Chamber of Secrets
In-Reply-To: <48ADC7B9.000008.01700@LIFESAVER>
Message-ID: <g8ltui+7uea@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184147

> Donna:
> Okay, how did Tom Riddle find the entrance to the Chamber of 
Secrets?  We know it's in Moaning Myrtle's bathroom so, what was Tom 
doing in a girls' bathroom?  The trio was there to ask Myrtle how 
she died and she mentioned seeing the eyes by the sink which, as we 
know, is the entrance to the Chamber.  But, how did Tom know where 
the entrance was located?

Joey:

Hermione had found it quite difficult to find details about 
horcruxes but had managed to find details about the basilisk with 
her usual ease. However, Tom Riddle had it in him to find out about 
horcruxes (and also managed to create one by the time he was asking 
Slughorn if creating 7 horcruxes will help). He seems to have had 
researching skills similar to that of Hermione (or probably even 
better skills due to his hunger/obsession for power) and was also 
equipped with the ability to speak Parseltongue. He had a special 
reverence for Salazar Slytherin (as per some of his statements in 
CoS climax and DH climax scenes) - this would have driven him to 
find out a lot of information about him and CoS. So, he would have 
found out about the entrance to the CoS as well using his usual 
researching methods, I guess. Interesting question! Wonder what 
others will have to say about this. :)




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Fri Aug 22 15:36:20 2008
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:36:20 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8ehbc+n37b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8mmdk+mjeh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184148

Chapter question:
> 9)  Please add any additional questions or comments that aren't 
> covered in this summary.  

Jen answers herself: I thought of something else about this chapter.  
It was an unusual chapter because the reader spends so much time in 
Voldemort's head and so little in Harry's.  Voldemort's extreme 
rage 'extinguishes' Harry's present moment quickly and completely; 
Harry doesn't have any warning or awareness of his own.  I'm thinking 
the chapter isn't only meant to reveal aspects of the plot but to 
foreshadows how deep the connection between Harry & Voldemort is 
becoming.  Harry's chosen in the latter part of the story to use the 
connection rather than attempt to block it, and it seems like the two 
are even more strongly bound together because of it.  More 
foreshadowing for the soul piece in Harry?

> Alla: 
> Oh heck, I am kicking myself all over again, but as you know I had 
> been missing simple symbolism lately and not just here. Yes, I 
> think Dragon plays symbolic role and I think it is a very simple
> symbolism.  Hogwarts motto is Don't wake up a sleeping dragon, yes? 
> I think escape of the Dragon foreshadows Hogwarts fighting and
> escaping Voldemort's tyranny.

Jen:  That's good!  I honestly couldn't think why so much time was 
spent on the dragon when the Trio could've spent time talking about 
Gringotts/Griphook or the new Horcrux. It seemed unusual for JKR to 
completely drop such an important event as Gringotts with barely any 
discussion.  Where was Hermione saying "I told you so"?  What did 
Harry think about the events?

Now I'm thinking the not-exactly-sleeping dragon is Voldemort as 
well, waking up to the fact that Harry is hunting his Horcruxes. He 
was 'crazed, frenzied' in a way he hasn't yet exhibited imo.

Alla:
> I think Voldemort is afraid because of the knowledge is power
> thing, I do not even think it is the Love thing, that Voldemort 
> cannot understand. I think he is afraid that Dumbledore knew him
> when he was a little boy, who was already set up on hurting others,
> but who was probably also hurt that his parents "abandoned' him or
> something like that. I think that he is afraid that Dumbledore knew
> his vulnerabilities and despite his death managed to do something
> about it.

SSSusan:
> And I'm opting for the "All of the above" choice myself: DD's raw
> magical power; DD's knowledge and *insight* into Tom (which Voldy
> surely found EXTREMELY disconcerting); and The Love Thing. All of
> it, I think, contributed to his fearing DD.

Jen:  I used to think LV feared Dumbledore's magical power, 
particularly the mysterious defeat of Grindelwald during Riddle's 
younger years.  Then came the moment in the cave when Dumbledore says 
Tom fears the dark & dead bodies.  Was part of LV's fear how little 
Dumbledore fears *him*, the great Lord Voldemort?  Dumbledore still 
thinks of him as little Tom Riddle as he tells LV in 'Lord 
Voldemort's Request' in HBP.  Finally, this chapter pulls everything 
together - Voldemort underestimated yet again, never realizing 
Dumbledore might use his vulnerabilities against him, because in LV's 
mind Tom Riddle was obliterated.  

I like Debbie's thought too, that Riddle couldn't ever charm 
Dumbledore or convince him there was nothing suspicious about him 
after their first meeting. 

> Olivier:
> Yet he is not totally devoid of motives either. What Voldemort is
> after is another sort of power: that of negating the external 
> reality of the world. If something frustrates him, he refuses to 
> even consider the possibility that something could be wrong with 
> his desires. Rather, like an impatient very young child, he breaks 
> something. So when he cannot kill Harry, he seeks a new wand,
> killing everyone in the way, when he doesn't get the prophecy, he 
> tortures Avery...
<snip>
> And finally, this is also the reason why, in the end, I feel some
> pity for Lord Voldemort. I can't help but see, through the flaring
> nostrils and the red eyes, an insecure toddler which has grown too
> fast and who throw fits and tantrums at everything that displease 
> him, in the hope, perhaps, that a loving mother will eventually 
> take him in her arms and whisper in a soothing voice that 
> everything is going to be alright.

> SSSusan:
> Olivier likes the question (me, too), and I like the answer Olivier 
> offered.  Voldemort is SUCH a fascinating character, and I am 
> especially intrigued with what Olivier brought up concerning the 
> *changes* in Voldemort "the deeper he goes in his deluded quest" 
> and his description of Voldy as like an impatient young child. 
> Why? Because THIS is what strikes me about the Voldy we are seeing
> in the last year or two of the story.  
> 
> He's IRRATIONAL.  

Jen: I like Olivier's description too, as the world's biggest toddler 
run amuck. <g>  Seriously, I thought Olivier's analysis & SSSusan's 
additions (some snipped) sum up Voldemort very well. I do think 
Dumbledore wanted to instill a sense of pity in Harry by telling him 
Riddle's story, a story so similar to Harry's own life, yet diverging 
where it really mattered: Harry had a loving family once upon a time, 
and that made a huge difference.  Even after they were dead, Harry 
had parents or parent figures who protected and saved him.  Riddle 
knew nothing about his past, whether he was ever loved, and never had 
the experience of feeling deeply loved since Merope died so quickly 
after his birth.  (I think Merope would have shown love towards baby 
Tom, whatever she was capable of given her state of mind.  Otherwise 
she wouldn't have worried about delivering at a place where Tom would 
receive care.) 

Carol:
> Setting aside the almost certainly deliberate allusion to LOTR, 
> Voldemort's words are those of an egomaniac who can't conceive of 
> being either defeated or outsmarted. (It's interesting that he, who
> believes that death is the end of everything, speculates that 
> Dumbledore is interfering from beyond the grave--as indeed he is
> via Portrait!DD and Headmaster Snape.) Also, of course, his 
> inability to sense the theft or destruction of his Horcruxes 
> indicates how irreparably mutilated his soul now is, barring the 
> infinitesimally small chance that he'll repent. I'm not sure I 
> understand what you have in mind about glimpses of Voldemort's 
> internal life. I don't think he really has one. It's all plotting 
> and scheming or rage or fear, with the fear offset by supreme 
> egotism.

Jen: By 'interior life' I meant what Voldemort thinks & feels, how he 
processes events.  It's the most prolonged time we spend in 
Voldemort's mind, and the only time I remember hearing first-hand 
that LV had doubts or senses of 'unease', or how he thought of Harry 
& Dumbledore. It sounds like for you that glimpse was more of the 
same old thing the reader already knows about how Voldemort thinks & 
plans.  

Hehe, good thought about Dumbledore interfering from the grave....

Carol:
> I was keeping count, of course, and since I had suspected the tiara
> as the Ravenclaw Horcrux since HBP, it made no difference to my
> (incorrect) view that Harry "couldn't" be a Horcrux because a
> Horcrux is a deliberate creation requiring an encasing spell and 
> because of the complications that would ensue--Harry would have to
> die to destroy the Horcrux, but Harry couldn't be "the one with the
> power to vanquish the Dark Lord" if he were dead. I still think 
> that an accidental Horcrux is not quite the same thing as a 
> Horcrux, but it took "The Prince's Tale" to persuade me that I was
> wrong. 

Jen: I still don't think of Harry as a real Horcrux exactly.  What 
persuaded you from The Prince's Tale?  Dumbledore doesn't call him a 
Horcrux.  I guess DD wouldn't though, since he's not telling Snape 
everything about the Horcuxes.  Reading Dumbledore's explanation 
again about a bit of Voldemort's soul attaching to Harry's soul made 
Harry sound more like a host than a true Horcrux.  Not that I can't 
be convinced otherwise!!  

Chapater question:
> 8) Any thoughts on Harry's decision to go to Hogsmeade even after
> learning Voldemort believed it would be 'impossible' for Harry to
> enter Hogsmeade undetected? Did Harry forget this point in his haste
> to find the last Horcrux?

Carol:
> Possibly Harry thinks that the Invisibility Cloak, Ignotus
> Peverell's own cloak and a Hallow of which he is the rightful 
> owner, will be sufficient. Either that or he knows that they'll 
> face obstacles but have to act now, regardless. And Voldemort also
> thinks it's "impossible" that any of the remaining Horcruxes could
> have been stolen, much less destroyed--and, of course, Voldemort is
> wrong in that regard. He could be equally wrong about the 
> protections around Hogsmeade being "impossible" to get by.

Jen: Very true that Harry can't trust everything Voldemort thinks is 
impossible since LV's full of such certainty regarding his plans.  (A 
little like Harry 'never' forgiving Snape <g>).  I was a little 
surprised Harry didn't tell Hermione & Ron what he learned about the 
protections at Hogsmeade though, just to put Hermione, in particular, 
on the alert.  He didn't want to be bothered with delays apparently.  
I found that uncharacteristic.  Not the haste, that's Harry after 
all, but how little he explains to Ron/Hermione about the time spent 
in LV's head.  Harry seems more isolated from his friends in the 
chapter, which likely was intentional since Harry has to make a 
choice in the ROR about including others; making a choice not to be 
like Dumbledore.  





From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Fri Aug 22 15:51:56 2008
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:51:56 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8ku63+mntd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8mnas+ujob@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184149

Chapter question:
> 3)  Harry's vision of Voldemort killing everyone within reach at 
> Malfoy Manor is a first-hand view of Voldemort using the Elder
> wand.  Do you believe Voldemort exhibits extraordinary magical 
> power in this  scene or were his powers about what you expected he
> was capable of  regardless of the wand?   Any thoughts on Bellatrix
> and Lucius '[throwing] others behind them in their race for the 
> door'? 
 
> Pippin:
> "[G]reen light erupted through the room" sounds enough like "green
> light filled the cramped hallway" (from  chapter 17) that it could
> be just a more vivid description of the same phenomenon, ie, 
> reflected light from an Avada Kedavra curse. 
> 
> But  the reaction of the watching wizards gives the lie to that. Why
> did they scatter and flee when  only the goblin had been killed,
> before Voldemort raised his wand to strike again? 
<snip>
> There must have been  something about the eruption of green light
> that made them realize that they were all meant to die, not just
> the bearer of bad news.  If green light not only struck the goblin
> but literally "erupted" throughout the room, that might account for 
> it. 
> 
> Without the full power of the Elder Wand, the curse might touch but
> not kill the watching DE's, just as it would later fail to kill 
> Harry in the forest. As Fake!Moody told us in GoF, the Avada 
> Kedavra curse needs a fair amount of magical power behind it. 


Jen: I thought of how powerful the AK toward Harry was that it 
destroyed the Potter house.  It wasn't the love sacrifice that made 
the magic powerful; it was LV's power rebounding against him & 
everything around him.  So what occurred at Malfoy Manor didn't show 
me Voldemort had more power with the Elder wand than he'd shown 
previously. He was enraged & that fueled his powerful AK, but the 
wand didn't do anything extraordinary imo. 

This is likely the moment Voldemort determined the Elder wand wasn't 
working any better than his old wand, giving rise to his belief that 
Snape must be the true master.  





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 22 19:16:50 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 19:16:50 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8mmdk+mjeh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8n3b2+megj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184150

Carol earlier:
> > I was keeping count, of course, and since I had suspected the
tiara as the Ravenclaw Horcrux since HBP, it made no difference to my
(incorrect) view that Harry "couldn't" be a Horcrux because a Horcrux
is a deliberate creation requiring an encasing spell and because of
the complications that would ensue--Harry would have to die to destroy
the Horcrux, but Harry couldn't be "the one with the power to vanquish
the Dark Lord" if he were dead. I still think that an accidental
Horcrux is not quite the same thing as a Horcrux, but it took "The
Prince's Tale" to persuade me that I was wrong. 
> 
Jen responded: 

> I still don't think of Harry as a real Horcrux exactly.  What 
persuaded you from The Prince's Tale?  Dumbledore doesn't call him a 
Horcrux.  I guess DD wouldn't though, since he's not telling Snape
everything about the Horcuxes.  Reading Dumbledore's explanation 
again about a bit of Voldemort's soul attaching to Harry's soul made 
Harry sound more like a host than a true Horcrux.  Not that I can't 
be convinced otherwise!!  <snip>

Carol again:

I guessed you missed the part about my not thinking that an accidental
Horcrux is the same as a real Horcrux, a point on which we seem to
agree. Anyway, I was convinced that a Horcrux (or something resembling
it) couldn't be created accidentally for the reasons I cited above, so
I thought that what was in Harry's scar was not a soul bit but some of
Voldemort's powers (Parseltongue, a unique form of Legilimency, and
possibly the power of possession, which I suppose that JKR thought was
too Dark for Harry). "the Prince's Tale" showed me that I was wrong;
it *was* a soul bit and therefore Harry, the accidental Horcrux
(which, incidentally, spoiled whatever special magic was attached to
the number seven--obviously Voldemort wasn't aware of the Chinese
belief in the lucky number eight!!), had to be "killed" to release the
soul bit. that, of course, leads us to Harry's self-sacrifice (with
Snape protesting DD's pig-to-the-slaughter approach to the boy that
snape has been protecting!). 

So it's by no means my intention to convince you that Harry was a true
Horcrux. I agree that he wasn't. Obviously, Voldemort would never have
cast the encasing spell to make him one. He wanted Harry dead, and a
living Horcrux has to remain alive (which makes me wonder about
Nagini's natural lifespan. Would she have lived as long as a Basilisk,
or was it only the protective spells--or a shared life with LV--that
kept her alive as long as she didn't come in contact with Basilisk
venom?) Anyway, DD's statement that it was dangerous to create a
Horcrux that could move and think for itself always seemed to me to
miss the point. Surely, it was even more dangerous to create a Horcrux
that could be killed? (That, of course, is another reason why LV
wouldn't have made Harry or any other person into a Horcrux.)

I suppose "host" is as good as any term for Harry's relationship to
his soul bit, except that it doesn't appear to be as parasitic as
Vapormort's battered and fragmented "main" soul, which sucked the life
and power out of Quirrell and out of the lesser hosts, snakes and
small animals, that it inhabited (other than Nagini, who appears to
have been congenial to Voldemort both before and after she was
Horcruxed, very much his alter ego in female and animal form, a
magical animal functioning as his "familiar spirit"). Which takes us
back to accidental Horcrux or quasi-Horcrux. Harry's soul bit acted as
a Horcrux in helping to keep LV alive, but it was not a true Horcrux
in having been deliberately created and having additional protections
placed on it, nor did it require Basilisk venom to kill Harry and
destroy the soul bit. An AK would have sufficed, at least till the
shared drop of blood complicated matters. Harry's soul bit is also
different from the other soul bits (except Nagini's, which can
communicate directly and deliberately with LV, a two-way connection)
in that it still maintains a connection to the "main" soul. (I suspect
that Diary!Tom would have found his way to Vapor!mort and reanimated
him, but only after he had stolen Ginny's life and soul. As long as
that soul bit was confined to the diary, it had no more connection to
LV than the locket, the ring, the cup, and the tiara. Harry's
accidental Horcrux, ironically, maintains a connection that Voldemort
never intended to create.

Carol, now wondering how the cup and tiara soul bits would have
manifested themselves if they had not been destroyed





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 22 19:38:08 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 19:38:08 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8mnas+ujob@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8n4j0+67gv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184151

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at ...> wrote:
>
> Chapter question:
> > 3)  Harry's vision of Voldemort killing everyone within reach at 
> > Malfoy Manor is a first-hand view of Voldemort using the Elder
> > wand.  Do you believe Voldemort exhibits extraordinary magical 
> > power in this  scene or were his powers about what you expected he
> > was capable of  regardless of the wand?   Any thoughts on Bellatrix
> > and Lucius '[throwing] others behind them in their race for the 
> > door'? 
>  
> > Pippin:
> > "[G]reen light erupted through the room" sounds enough like "green
> > light filled the cramped hallway" (from  chapter 17) that it could
> > be just a more vivid description of the same phenomenon, ie, 
> > reflected light from an Avada Kedavra curse. 
> > 
> > But  the reaction of the watching wizards gives the lie to that. Why
> > did they scatter and flee when  only the goblin had been killed,
> > before Voldemort raised his wand to strike again? 
> <snip>
> > There must have been  something about the eruption of green light
> > that made them realize that they were all meant to die, not just
> > the bearer of bad news.  If green light not only struck the goblin
> > but literally "erupted" throughout the room, that might account for 
> > it. 
> > 
> > Without the full power of the Elder Wand, the curse might touch but
> > not kill the watching DE's, just as it would later fail to kill 
> > Harry in the forest. As Fake!Moody told us in GoF, the Avada 
> > Kedavra curse needs a fair amount of magical power behind it. 
> 
> 
> Jen: I thought of how powerful the AK toward Harry was that it 
> destroyed the Potter house.  It wasn't the love sacrifice that made 
> the magic powerful; it was LV's power rebounding against him & 
> everything around him.  So what occurred at Malfoy Manor didn't show 
> me Voldemort had more power with the Elder wand than he'd shown 
> previously. He was enraged & that fueled his powerful AK, but the 
> wand didn't do anything extraordinary imo. 
> 
> This is likely the moment Voldemort determined the Elder wand wasn't 
> working any better than his old wand, giving rise to his belief that 
> Snape must be the true master.
>
Carol:
I don't think so. an AK is an AK, and most people's don't create as
much green light as Voldemort's do (though I must say that Wormtails'
AK of Cedric, using the yew wand, seemed unusually powerful, too).
What more could LV want besided the person he was aiming at to fall
dead (and terror among his followers)? The wand certainly did not fail
him or he would not have had a dead goblin and a pile of dead wizards
at his feet. Nor did his thoughts turn to the wand at all; he thought
only of the Horcruxes and thwarting Harry. He uses that same wand to
turn the green potion clear and to make Nagini a bubble cage to float
in, and he uses it against its supposed master, Snape, to draw him
into Nagini's bubble--which ought to have been a clue. I doubt that
the wand would have been so eager to betray its master.

At any rate, there is, IMO only, no evidence whatever that the Elder
Wand is failing LV, who is as congenial a wizard as it could have
found. I think it serves him well until Harry's self-sacrifice creates
a love magic that defeats it *and* it discovers that LV is its true
master.

I know that most people on this list are unwilling to grant a wand the
degree of sentience that I grant it, but it's magical on two levels,
the wand and the core; the wand chooses the wizard; the wand can
*choose* to "bend its *will*" to that of the person who defeats its
master (but by implication, it can also choose *not* to do so). Some
wands, like the blackthorn wand, are so incompatible with a wizard
other than their owner that even a reasonably gifted and powerful
wizard like Harry has trouble with them (he has less trouble with
Hermione's even though he's not its master, either). A wand learns
along with its master (I think there's more to Hermione's horror of
Bellatrix's wand than that it was used in horrific crimes; something
of Bellatrix's sadism is in the wand itself). I think that Harry could
comfortably have used Draco's wand even if he hadn't won it because
they've learned and cast (or attempted to cast) much the same spells.
(An aha! moment--maybe the fact that he was using Draco's wand enabled
Harry to cast a semi-successful Imperius or two without having done it
before?). A wand can read its master's mind, not only in casting
nonverbal spells but in doing his will without an actual spell, as
when DD simultaneously Confunds Mrs. Cole, causing her to see what
isn't there, and creates a bottle of gin and glasses. (Simply thinking
Confundus and Inanimatus Conjuris could not have achieved that
complicated result. The wand needed to understand exactly what DD
wanted.) To take a simpler example, both DD and McGonagall conjure
chairs out of thin air, but the wand understands the caster's
personality and his or her idea of a chair--in DD's case, comfy and
purple; in McGonagall's case, stiff-backed and wooden and hard,
reflecting her stern personality. (Perhaps the wand itself is "stern,"
given that it chose her!)

Carol, who sees no evidence whatever that the Elder Wand failed LV
until Harry's return from "King's Cross" 




From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 23 01:03:49 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 01:03:49 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8ehbc+n37b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8nnlm+qflm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184152

> Jen questioned me: 
>  
> 1)  What did you think would be the 'final hiding place' when 
> reading the chapter title?  Were you expecting a Horcrux at 
> Hogwarts all along?

Mike:
So that's what the chapter title meant. I've never been more confused 
by chapter titles than I was by this book. Like chapter 11, "The 
Bribe". Who was bribed? Who did the bribing? I thought maybe she 
mistyped the title, and meant the "Bride". Though I kept waiting for 
Kreacher to come home with a fianc?, nothing. Then I waited all 
chapter 14 for that "Thief". I figured it must have been GG snatching 
the EW from whatsisname, but I had to think about it. I thought it 
could have been the Trio stealing the locket back from Dumbridge, or 
Harry re-stealing back Mad-Eye's eye.

So now we get the "Final Hiding Place". What,... where? By the lake? 
Not such a good hiding place, I'm thinking. Huh, it wasn't the Trio 
that were hiding, as in chapter 9, "A Place to Hide"? Now I'm lost. 
No, wait,... that's chapter 29 with "The Lost Die-dum". 



> Jen continued the questions: 
> 2)  This is likely the shortest chapter in all of the HP books,
> yet descriptions of the dragon take up quite a few paragraphs at
> the beginning:  how the dragon feels, what it's doing while the
> Trio rest by the lake, where it might go next, etc.  Then right
> before leaving the lakes, they watch the dragon take flight until
> it vanishes, even though Harry insisted they must leave at once.
> Do you think the dragon plays a symbolic role?  Is it a
> significant part of this chapter for another reason?  Or did you
> find the mentions of the dragon more filler?

Mike:
Umm, symbolism? I don't do symbolism. I just think it was cool for 
the Trio to get to ride a dragon. Though, without a saddle like 
Eragon had, their uhh, hindquarters must of been getting a bit raw, 
dontcha think?


> Despite my ineptness, Jen tried again: 
> 3)  Harry's vision of Voldemort killing everyone within reach at 
> Malfoy Manor is a first-hand view of Voldemort using the Elder
> wand.  Do you believe Voldemort exhibits extraordinary magical
> power in this scene or were his powers about what you expected
> he was capable of regardless of the wand?   Any thoughts on
> Bellatrix and Lucius '[throwing] others behind them in their race
> for the door'?

Mike:
Can I just admit that I missed the part where LV goes crazy with the 
AKs the first read through? But now my considered analysis is that LV 
must have a form of Tourette's that causes him to fire off two-word 
spells instead of four-letter words. ... Not buying that one? Oh 
well, I tried.



> Jen, do you really want to ask me another? Oh shoot: 
> 4)  Voldemort initially believes his Horcruxes must be safe
> because he would feel 'if he, himself, most important and
> precious, had been attacked, mutilated[.]'  Comments about either
> Voldemort's reasoning or how he describes his Horcruxes?  Did the
> course of Voldemort's thoughts about his Horcruxes and the
> realization that Harry is hunting them offer any new glimpses
> into his interior life?

Mike:
Yeah, well Voldemort wasn't being attacked "himself", so I don't have 
any answer for what the heck he's thinking. He doesn't give a crap 
for his soul, so why would he think the soul pieces would give a crap 
about "himself". What, he thought they would text him if they were 
under attack? So my insight into LV's interior life is that he has 
Tourette's and is delusional.



> Jen, Jen, will this never cease: 
> 5)  If you were a Harry!Horcrux theorist, or argued against the 
> theory, did you think the possibility of Harry being the final 
> Horcrux was defunct when the last Horcrux was revealed as an
> object hidden at Hogwarts?  Were you keeping count at that point?
> Were you already suspecting the possibility of a twist with the
> Horcruxes?

Mike:
Well, I was a Harry!Crux proponent. But since I was still confused 
about who was hiding at this point, I,... umm,... what was I saying? 
Oh yeah, Horcrux counting. I was still on track, cuz I didn't have 
Nagini on my dream team. Besides, with JKR's math, I figured we could 
get anywhere from 5 to 9 Horcruxes and still be within the margin of 
error.



> So, Jen, you liked my last answer, huh? Wanna try another:  
> 6)  Voldemort is fairly certain the Potter boy couldn't know of
> his connection to the Gaunts, or about the cave, until he
> remembers Dumbledore.  In a final assessment of why Dumbledore
> was the only wizard Voldemort reportedly feared, what was the
> basis of Voldemort's fear?  Did it have to do with Dumbledore's
> knowledge of Tom Riddle's past or other factors?

Mike:
In addition to Tourette's and Delusionalism, LV has *Life Dyslexia*. 
He gets everything backwards and mixed up when it comes to life. He 
figured the best way to achieve immortality was to rip apart his life 
one piece at a time. He also thinks that Dumbledore is most dangerous 
now that he's dead. 

A subset of this dyslexia shows up when he thinks about the RoR. Cuz 
of course he was the first and only one to find the place, and all 
that other stuff in there musta come after he hid the "Die-dum", 
except it's already in there when he hides the die-dum, which wasn't 
really lost in the first place, it was stolen. Hey, that's who "The 
Thief" was, ya think? No, well in any case, I figured Voldemort was 
gonna die dumb.



> So I'm getting better, Jen? No. Well try another anyway: 
> 7)  Harry is the one to determine when they jump off the dragon;
> he's the one who casts the protective spells.  When Hermione
> attempts to plan their trip to Hogwarts rather than following
> Harry's lead, Harry 'firmly' decides the course of action.  Is
> this a new twist in the Harry/Hermione relationship?  Do you
> think something changed between them over the course of the year
> or is it typical that Harry takes over in certain situations?

Mike:
OK, I know this one. Riding on the dragon made Harry flash back to 
the TWT. See, now that he's defeated the dragon (well he did get a 
free ride, that counts doesn't it?) he has to do the next task, which 
is to go jump in a like. Didn't y'all notice Harry fishing around in 
his pockets for some gillyweed?

So of course the last task is the maze of streets in Hogsmeade and 
the maze of tunnels into Hogwarts. Naturally Harry won't let Hermione 
talk him out of it. He's even going to have to find the Tri-wizard 
Cup,... ahh, I mean the Hufflepuff cup. No wait, they just found that 
in the maze of tunnels of Gringotts. But it was a cup, right?


> I don't know why you insist on continuing, Jen. Once more into
> the breach, I guess:
> 8)  Any thoughts on Harry's decision to go to Hogsmeade even after 
> learning Voldemort believed it would be 'impossible' for Harry to 
> enter Hogsmeade undetected?  Did Harry forget this point in his
> haste to find the last Horcrux?

Mike:
Oh, this one is easy. Harry snuck into Hogsmeade in PoA under the IC. 
He went to the Three Broomsticks under it again in GoF. Then he tags 
along with DD under the IC in HBP. Harry thinks the only way to visit 
Hogsmeade is under his cloak. So he throws it on and heads off. 
Pretty much par for the course for Harry.



> Jen, are we done yet?:
> 9)  Please add any additional questions or comments that aren't 
> covered in this summary.  

Mike:
I guess we are. Wait, I have a question. If the Diary Horcrux had 
succeeded in killing Ginny, would that soul piece tear? The damn 
things could be like Tribbles.


Mike, who is sure he has Jen confused and wondering if she really 
wrote that stuff that Mike credited her for :o)




From kaamita at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 22 21:46:45 2008
From: kaamita at yahoo.com (Heather Hadden)
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 14:46:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8n3b2+megj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <588294.59903.qm@web56512.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184153

> Carol again:
> <huge snip>
> but it was not a true Horcrux in having been deliberately created and having additional protections placed on it, nor did it require Basilisk venom to kill Harry and destroy the soul bit. An AK would have sufficed, at least till the shared drop of blood complicated matters.
?
Heather:
I always saw the Harry Horcrux as Voldemort's soul doing. His soul was already so damaged and mangled, that it acted out on it's own. A way to preserve itself. After so many Horcruxes he made, it wouldn't be a surprise that his soul, after being hit with the AK acted of it's own will to do what it could to try to save itself, so it created it's own container inside of Harry.

On another note, even without the protections on the other horcruxes, it would still take Basilisk venom to destroy it, but it wouldn't take the venom to destroy the horcrux in a human. If Voldemort had created a horcrux inside of a human, and didn't use any protection spells, it would still only take the AK to destroy it. Remember, the only way to destroy a horcrux is to destroy the container so completely that even magic couldn't repair it. The AK would have done that with any human as no magic or anything could bring that person back to life.
?
> Carol, now wondering how the cup and tiara soul bits would have
> manifested themselves if they had not been destroyed
?
Heather, who also wonders about that.




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sat Aug 23 11:36:15 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 11:36:15 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8i3l5+nq22@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8osnf+n4ca@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184154

> Carol responds:
snip
 (I thought that Travers, Imperiused by Harry in
> the Gringotts break-in, was in the battle, but I can't find him now.
> Apparently, he was  either still at Gringotts, recovering from 
Harry's
> Imperius Curse, or he was killed by Voldemort after the break-in.)

Potioncat:
I was curious about Travers once before, and re-read the Gringotts 
chapter very carefully. The last we see him, he's hiding in a niche 
in the tunnel. Well, with all the blasting out of the passageways to 
make room for a dragon, I doubt Travers survived.

I wonder what happened to Griphook too. The Goblin (not Griphook) who 
reports to LV dies. Did he report voluntarily, was summoned, or 
brought in by the DEs? Afterwards, what did the surviving Goblins do 
to Griphook, do you think?

I will feel really stupid if Griphook was fighting at Hogwarts.

Carol:
 However,
> the only names given are those that Harry recognizes, and at least
> some of the DEs kept their hoods on, so he couldn't tell who they 
were.

Potioncat:
I wonder why JKR didn't identify the DEs who died because of LV's 
tantrum? Wouldn't that give it a bigger emotional punch? I pictured 
LV as sort of waving his wand wildly while yelling the AK curse--so 
that the killing was random. But others seem to think he had to aim 
at one specific person at a time and cast the curse. Still sort of 
random, but with aiming involved.





From scarah at gmail.com  Sat Aug 23 03:03:01 2008
From: scarah at gmail.com (tommy_m_riddle)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 03:03:01 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8nnlm+qflm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8nul5+p68j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184156

I've been away for quite a while, but I guess this is as good a place 
to jump back in as any.  Hi, all.

> Mike:
> Like chapter 11, "The 
> Bribe". Who was bribed? Who did the bribing?

Sarah:
Umbridge was bribed by Mundungus.  The bribe was the locket.  If he 
hadn't bribed her, she would have had him fined for selling 
artefacts.  But she liked the locket, and agreed to take it and let 
him free.

> Mike:
> Well, I was a Harry!Crux proponent. But since I was still confused 
> about who was hiding at this point, I,... umm,... what was I 
saying? 
> Oh yeah, Horcrux counting. I was still on track, cuz I didn't have 
> Nagini on my dream team. Besides, with JKR's math, I figured we 
could 
> get anywhere from 5 to 9 Horcruxes and still be within the margin 
of 
> error.

Sarah:
Ha ha! To answer the original question, I was a proponent.  But I 
always knew it was accidental if it was true, so I figured it didn't 
count in the number.  (And yeah, I don't think it was an actual 
"Horcrux," but that's kind of semantics, to me.)  I wasn't sure about 
Nagini either.  Dumbledore really didn't seem too convinced of it in 
HBP.  But he sure did in The Prince's Tale.  If he'd been wrong about 
Nagini, Harry would have had to sacrifice himself by accident like he 
normally tries to.  And then he wouldn't be able to come back, and 
we'd never have young Albus Severus.  (I'm trying not to make it too 
obvious that I would have preferred the ending I'm describing, but I 
think it's failing.)

> Mike:
> I guess we are. Wait, I have a question. If the Diary Horcrux had 
> succeeded in killing Ginny, would that soul piece tear? The damn 
> things could be like Tribbles.

Sarah:
What I'd like to know is, could the Harry and Hermione from the 
locket have eaten Ron's soul and made themselves corporeal?  Would 
there then be two Voldemorts running around that look like Harry and 
Hermione?  That would have been kind of awesome.

Sarah




From zgirnius at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 23 14:48:30 2008
From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 14:48:30 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8nnlm+qflm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8p7vu+j4rr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184157


> Mike:
> So that's what the chapter title meant. I've never been more confused 
> by chapter titles than I was by this book. Like chapter 11, "The 
> Bribe". Who was bribed? Who did the bribing? 

Zara:
I may merely be demonstrating that my sense of humor is inadequatley 
develpoed...but Dung bribed Umbridge with a locket (that also happened 
to be a Horcrux).





From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sat Aug 23 15:09:21 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 15:09:21 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8n4j0+67gv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8p971+eq2t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184158

> Carol:
> I don't think so. an AK is an AK, 

Pippin:
I don't think so. A Reparo is not a Reparo, not when performed by the
Elder Wand. The Elder Wand gives usual spells unusual power, and that
should apply to the killing curse as to any other. Hermione thinks
that wands are only as powerful as the wizard who uses them. But she's
wrong. 

In terms of what that means, you can't kill anyone deader with an
AK-47 than you can with a flint axe or the jawbone of an ass, but you
can do it faster, with less effort, and from further away. That's what
people expect of superior weapons, and that's what the Elder Wand is
supposed to be.  Light show or not, all that came from  the Elder Wand
was the usual killing curse, acting as it usually does. Naturally
Voldemort would be disappointed when he came to think about it. 

Travers thinks a new wand needs a bit of a break-in period, which
could explain why Voldemort didn't become disillusioned sooner.

Carol:
. Nor did his thoughts turn to the wand at all; he thought
> only of the Horcruxes and thwarting Harry.

Pippin:
And Harry must know all of Voldemort's relevant thoughts? Then there
would have been no need to hunt for the Hogwarts horcrux. Voldemort
obviously knew what it was and where it was hidden but as Snape said,
most minds are multi-layered and complex. It's not like reading
information off a page, and it doesn't work the way Muggles think it
would. 

Carol:
I think it serves him well until Harry's self-sacrifice creates
> a love magic that defeats it *and* it discovers that LV is its true
> master.

Pippin:
(assuming you meant to type "Harry is its true master")

LV was never its  master, because he never understood what Grindelwald
understood, that you have to defeat the previous master. Voldemort
thinks that killing is enough. 

I know you don't want to  believe that Snape had to die. But he did,
for thematic as well as plot-related reasons. I didn't see it myself,
until I realized the significance of using "levicorpus" to retrieve
the cup. Snape's aid and instruction was vital in the destruction of
each of the horcruxes. 

 Snape brought Harry the sword that destroyed the locket, Snape's
spell retrieved the cup, Snape stationed the Carrows in Ravenclaw
Tower,  Snape's memories showed that Dumbledore was much more certain
about Nagini than it seemed when he spoke to Harry, and of course
"expelliarmus" was the final destruction of Voldemort.

Snape was not Harry's antagonist. He was a *mentor* -- and we all know
(sniff!) what happens to them.

Pippin





From zgirnius at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 23 20:28:50 2008
From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 20:28:50 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8p971+eq2t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8pru2+8nep@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184159

> Pippin: 
> Snape's aid and instruction was vital in the destruction of
> each of the horcruxes. 
> 
>  Snape brought Harry the sword that destroyed the locket, Snape's
> spell retrieved the cup, Snape stationed the Carrows in Ravenclaw
> Tower,  Snape's memories showed that Dumbledore was much more certain
> about Nagini than it seemed when he spoke to Harry, and of course
> "expelliarmus" was the final destruction of Voldemort.

Zara:
Ooh, cool observation. Though I am not clear how the presence of the 
Carrows in Ravenclaw Tower was needed for the destruction of the tiara. 
COuld you expand on your ideas about this? Or did you mean that the 
Carrows themselves were instrumental (because Amycus taught Crabbe to 
cast Fiendfyre)?

My own thought, because I like your suggestion, is that his conection 
to it is greater in HBP. Harry's affection for the Prince sent him into 
the RoR to hide the Potions book, where he found the tiara and used it 
to mark the location of the book.




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 23 21:13:23 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 21:13:23 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8p971+eq2t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8puhk+bt3j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184160

Carol earlier:
> I think it serves him well until Harry's self-sacrifice creates a
love magic that defeats it *and* it discovers that LV is its true master.
> 
> Pippin:
> (assuming you meant to type "Harry is its true master")

Carol again:

Yes. Sorry about that. LV and Harry are so similar, you know. :-0
Seriously, however, I don't think we're ever going to agree on this
point, and I still see no time at which the wand failed LV--but also
no indication, except for the "enchanted, starry sphere" in which
Nagini floats, of the "extraordinary magic" that Snape says LV has
performed with that wand (not that he's been present for any of it)
and that LV attributes to his own extraordinary powers (DH Am. ed.
652-53). Exactly how does a Wizard with extraoedinary powers who has
already performed extraordinary magic (including Horcruxes and the
protections surrounding the locket Horcrux) with the yew wand that has
done everything he asks of it except kill Harry Potter (655) determine
that the Elder Wand, which has created Nagini's bubble and killed all
those people and is performing his "usual" extraordinary magic, is
failing him? What has he asked it to do that it hasn't done?  And he
says that he feels no difference between it and the yew wand that
chose him and was created for him. Whatever he is expecting--and does
not even notice until the night of the battle even though he obtained
the Elder Wand at Easter time ("all this long night . . .  I have sat
here wondering," p. 655)--is completely unralistic. The wand can't do
more than it has already done--except kill Harry Potter--which, to all
intents and purposes, it later does, thwarted only by the drop of
blood and not by LV's not being its true master (the death of Snape
having been for nothing in that regad). The Death Stick has indeed
been a Death Stick. There is no evidence *on page* of its failure
before Harry's self-sacrifice throws love magic into the works.

Anyway, there's no point in playing ping pong here. My arugments
aren't going to change your mind and yours won't change mine. IMO, JKR
wanted to give Voldemort a reason, or rather an excuse, to kill Snape
without AKing him, which in turn would give Harry the opportunity to
obtain Snape's memories in what must rank as Snape's most spectacular
feat of magic and look, one last time, into Snape's eyes. It's a plot
device, and, to be less than objective for a moment, it stinks. (Well,
it will be extremely horrific and hair-raising on film, and it does
ultimately result in an act of supreme courage and self-sacrifice by
both Snape and Harry, but it still makes me angry that JKR had Snape
die for no reason except to give Harry his memories and be
redeemed/forgiven. The wand *did not* fail Voldemort, and, of course,
Snape did not murder or defeat Dumbledore, a secret he reveals to
*Harry* but keeps from LV at the price of his life. He could have
said, "But my lord, I am not the wand's master," confessing either the
deal with Dumbledore or the fact that DD had been disarmed by
*someone* before he entered the room. He remains silent, in the face
of death, but it still stinks, in my view, because *there is no reason
for LV to doubt the Elder Wand's power in his hands.* It has done
everything he asked it to do. Just my opinion, and not one with which
I expect anyone to agree.)

Pippin: 
> LV was never its  master, because he never understood what
Grindelwald understood, that you have to defeat the previous master.
Voldemort thinks that killing is enough.

Carol:
Of course. I'm not questioning that. I just see no evidence whatever
that the wand that killed all those people, turned the green potion
clear, created Nagini's bubble, killed snape by sucking him into
Nagini's bubble, and "killed" Harry (or at any rate, kille his soul
bit and sent Harry to "King's Cross," however we interpret that scene)
failed LV before Harry's self-sacrifice and the shared blood come into
play. I understand how the Elder Wand works and why LV was not its
true master. I just don't buy that it failed him in any way that he
could recognize. This is the guy, after all, who can't even sense that
his own Horcruxes have been destroyed. How can he sense that a wand
that works perfectly well, as well as the powerful wand that chose him
in the first place, is failing him. Do you see a flaw in Nagini's
bubble? I don't. the flaw is LV's self-confidence, which prompts him
to release her after he's killed Snape. Another reason, I suppose, why
Snape "had" to die for the plot to succeed, but that's no my point.

Pippin: 
> I know you don't want to  believe that Snape had to die. But he did,
for thematic as well as plot-related reasons.

Carol:
I agree that *JKR* considered his death necessary or she would not
have killed him. But I don't want to discuss that here or we'll get
off track. I'm saying, and I'm sorry to keep repeating myself, that
*if* Snape had to die *because the Elder Wand was failing Voldemort*,
we ought to have seen the Elder Wand actually fail Voldemort. And we
saw no such thing. That's all I'm saying.

Pippin:
> I didn't see it myself, until I realized the significance of using
"levicorpus" to retrieve the cup. Snape's aid and instruction was
vital in the destruction of each of the horcruxes. 

Carol responds:
Now there I won't argue with you. In fact, we could discuss it in
detail in another post. But his vital role in the destruction of the
Horcruxes is irrelevant with regard to JKR's failure to show the wand
failing Voldemort. Complete sidenote (sorry): I wonder why Levicorpus
and Liberacorpus, specically identified as <nvbl> in HBP, suddenly
become spoken spells in DH. Never mind. JKR forgot the characteristics
of her own invented spells. Again.

Pippin: 
>  Snape brought Harry the sword that destroyed the locket, Snape's
spell retrieved the cup, Snape stationed the Carrows in Ravenclaw Tower, 

Carol:
Did he? I know that McGonagall says so, but I thought it was LV who
sent them there. (Snape doesn't argue with McGonagall because he can't
blow his cover and is clearly preoccupied with finding and talking to
Harry, as he is again in the fatal interview with LV,) And, in any
case, how does that action, if it's Snape's, help Harry? He certainly
didn't know that Harry would find out about the Ravenclaw Horcrux there.

Pippin:
Snape's memories showed that Dumbledore was much more certain about
Nagini than it seemed when he spoke to Harry, and of course
"expelliarmus" was the final destruction of Voldemort. 

Carol:
Okay. I didn't want to get into Snape's role in helping to destroy the
Horcruxes, which does not really relate to the topic at hand (LV and
the wand or the "need" for Snape to die), but we can add that Snape's
putting Lockhart in his place ("the man, the very man") and telling
him that this is his chance to open the CoS leads to Ron's decision to
talk to Lockhart about rescuing Ginny and, ultimately, to Harry's
destruction of the diary Horcrux. And it's he who discovers that Harry
can speak Parseltongue, also necessary for the destruction of the
diary and cup Horcruxes. With regard to the ring Horcrux, he didn't
help to destroy it, "only" to prolong DD's life afterwards. However,
if Harry hadn't entered to CoS in the first place, the Sword of
Gryffindor could not have been used to destroy the ring and the
locket. (Of course, Snape is only one of a number of characters who
contributed in one way or another to the opening of the chamber. (I
give Harry sole credit for the actual destruction of the diary and the
accidental steeping of the Sword of Gryffindor in Basilisk venom, and
DD and Fawkes credit for his survival, setting aside the question of
the "will" and sentience of the magical artifacts involved. Hermione's
research, of course, also contributed to Harry's ultimate success.)

Pippin: 
> Snape was not Harry's antagonist. He was a *mentor* -- and we all
know (sniff!) what happens to them.

Carol:
That's an interesting way to look at it. He was Harry's ally and
teacher, certainly. And in that role, we should also remember that he
taught Harry about Bezoars (and as HBP reminded Harry of what he had
learned earlier).

Anyway, Snape's life and Harry's are intertwined in unexpected ways
throughout the series, and Harry may never realize the full extent.
But that's not a reason why he has to die, nor does it have any
bearing on his dying the *way* he did and for the *reason* he did. I
do think that Harry's shock at both those things prepared the way for
his acceptance of Snape's memories. If he had witnessed Snape being
killed for a good reason in a less horrific manner, he probably would
have thought smugly that it served him right. But if he'd been AK'd,
he couldn't have provided the memories.

In short, I understand perfectly how Snape's death fits JKR's plot
requirements. I'm just not convinced that Voldemort had sufficient
reason to suspect that he wasn't the Elder Wand's master.

As for the thematic "necessity" of Snape's death, or the thematic
implications of having him die, we could write a book on that topic.

Carol, who probably should have made two different posts here to keep
from going off track




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sat Aug 23 21:18:05 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 21:18:05 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8pru2+8nep@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8puqd+d1jn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184161


> Zara:
> Ooh, cool observation. Though I am not clear how the presence of the 
> Carrows in Ravenclaw Tower was needed for the destruction of the tiara. 

 COuld you expand on your ideas about this? Or did you mean that the 
> Carrows themselves were instrumental (because Amycus taught Crabbe
to  cast Fiendfyre)?
> 
> My own thought, because I like your suggestion, is that his
conection  to it is greater in HBP. Harry's affection for the Prince
sent him into  the RoR to hide the Potions book, where he found the
tiara and used it  to mark the location of the book.
>

Pippin:
Good points, but  I was thinking of  this: 

"*Voldemort thought I'd go to Ravenclaw Tower.* [emphasis original]
There it was: a solid fact, the place to start. Voldemort had
stationed Alecto Carrow in the Ravenclaw common room, and there could
be only one explanation: Voldemort feared that Harry already knew his
horcrux was connected to that house." -DH ch 31


Harry attributes the Alecto's presence in the common room to Voldemort
directly, but  from earlier canon  the instructions would have come
through Snape.

"Nevertheless, it would be prudent to alert Snape that the boy might
re-enter the castle...to tell Snape why the boy might return would be
foolish of course;" -- DH ch 27

McGonagall says that the Carrows are wherever [Snape] told them to be,
and I don't imagine that Flitwick would have admitted Alecto to
Ravenclaw Tower except on Snape's orders. That she is alone and
without backup is certainly Snape's doing.


Pippin








From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 24 00:55:30 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 00:55:30 -0000
Subject: T-Bay (sort of) - Griphooks Hearing
Message-ID: <g8qbi2+hj70@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184162

> Potioncat:
> I wonder what happened to Griphook too. 
> Afterwards, what did the surviving Goblins do 
> to Griphook, do you think?


Meeting Minutes from the Goblingamut 
Augrod 6, 27th Goblin Dynasty
Ragnuk the 12th presiding

Ragnuk: Bring in the prisoner.

The defendant Griphook is led in with a anti-magic collar around his 
neck. Finely crafted by the greatest of goblin manufacturers, it is 
made with strongest of lodestones and black diamonds. Using dragon 
hide, the collar... [the recorder stopped here as Ragnuk gave him a 
look that said "can we get back to the hearing now?"]

Ragnuk: Griphook, you are charged with aiding and abetting humans in 
the breaking into Gringotts Goblin bank. You are further charged with 
aiding the assault against a goblin in the employ of this bank. Add 
in general stupidity and causing us to loose a valuable dragon. What 
do you wish to say to these charges?

Griphook: I am innocent, my lord. I invoke the Goblin Rule of 
Recovery in my defense.

R: Oh you do, huh? What is it that you've recovered?

G: The Sword of Ragnuk, my lord.

R: What are you talking about, I have no such named sword.

G: No, no, my lord; You see, I reclaimed the sword that the humans 
think belonged to Godric Gryffindor [:spits on the floor: "curse his 
soul"] by explaining to them that it was Ragnuk the First's sword 
before Gryffindor stole it.

R: And these humans believed *that*? How did you explain the 
name "Godric Gryffindor" etched into the blade?

G: I didn't have to my lord.

R: You mean they just believed you?

::rhetorically - Don't they teach them anything up at that school? No 
one but the finest craftsgoblin could have put that name there. :: 

R: That's all well and good Griphook, but what about the attack on 
Bagrod? What about you showing them how to get to that vault and how 
to get in? And WHAT ABOUT MY DRAGON?

G: My lord, I,... uh,... I,... wasforcedtodoit.

R: You what?

G: I was forced to do it, my lord. I,... was,... under the Imperious 
Curse, just like Bagrod.

R: Griphook, you dare to insult ME?? You think I'm as stupid as you? 
If you were under the Imperious Curse, how would you know that Bagrod 
was under one? You expect me to believe that as part of controlling 
you they told you they also Imperiused Bagrod? Hmmm?

G: I,... No my lord, I would never insult *you*. I found out from 
Bagrod afterward. And they Imperiused that other wizard, that's how I 
figured out that they Imperiused me.

R: Griphook, I think you are lying to me. But as I have no proof 
against you, I am willing to let you off on this one. So, where is 
this Sword of Gryffindor? You have secured it in one of our Bank's 
top security vaults, I take it?

G: Umm,... well,... sir, it's like this. You know how Gryffindor had 
the mastercrafts goblins imbued it with that "in time of need and 
valor" charm? I'm afraid one of those brats called for it in one of 
those times. I'm sorry to report,... uh, it's gone back to the 
wizards.

R: Griphook, you idiot. We could have put it under a magical charm 
block. Why didn't you bring it to me?

G: I'm sorry my lord, but it was called away the very next morning. I 
didn't have a chance to bring it to you.

Ragnuk scowls down upon the whimpering Griphook:
Well, Griphook, seeing as how you have invoked the Rule of Recovery 
without actually recovering ANYTHING; I have the perfect job for you. 
You will keep wearing that collar and take the place of the dragon we 
lost, guarding those high security vaults until *we recover* a new 
dragon to take your place. Take him away!

********
Faithfully recorded and submitted this day by Mikerad, Goblin Liason 
to those wand carriers.
_______________________
Thanks PC, I've been wanting to write this for awhile. Perfect lead 
in, m'dear.

Mike




From dctalkpc3freak at aol.com  Sun Aug 24 02:44:34 2008
From: dctalkpc3freak at aol.com (mysterious_one1987)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 02:44:34 -0000
Subject: DD not reacting to Hagrid's mention of Sirius?
Message-ID: <g8qhui+tske@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184163

Hey there, I'm new here, so please excuse any mistakes I may make,
although they may get taken care of by the moderators.  I was reading
an old forum today where someone posted a question that was never
answered, and after spending the day searching for an answer, I have
nothing to show for it, except finding this spectacular group that
I'm sure will provide me with some insight :)

In SS/PS, Hagrid turns up at Privet Drive with Harry, where he meets
McGonagall and DD, as we all know.  They proceed to talk about the
defeat of Voldemort and the death of the Potters.  Hagrid states that
when he went to pick up Harry, he saw Sirius there and borrowed his
motorbike.

Now, the Potters are already dead, and DD knows that a Fidelius Charm
was put in place to protect their whereabouts from LV.  Dumbledore
also presumed that Sirius was the SK for the Potters, so it would
follow that Dumbledore thinks, as everyone else does, that Sirius
betrayed the Potters.  So why doesn't he react at all when Hagrid
tells them that he saw Sirius?  I mean... maybe he is trying to
protect Hagrid's or McGonagall's feelings at this point, since the
death of their friends is so incredibly fresh in their minds, but I
do think that JKR would have mentioned SOMETHING, whether it be a
look, a small movement, anything by DD here, as she usually employs
these sorts of small details to hint at something much larger.

*I'm sure this question has been posted before, but I couldn't find
it in anything recent.  Please forgive me if I'm about the 100th
person who's wondered this.*

~mysterious_one1987



From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Aug 24 05:29:57 2008
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 05:29:57 -0000
Subject: Chapter 27 Discussion / Why LV is bad / How TMR found the CoS / Cup Soul Bit
Message-ID: <g8qrkl+8br5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184164

Jen summarized Chapter 27 in 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184119>:

<< dabbing essence of dittany on their many burns  >>

Carol replied in 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184126>:

<< dittany, a substance whose powers have been considerably enhanced
since HBP >>

Did I ever mention how much it annoyed me that dittany, which is a
real herb and in HBP served only to prevent scars once a wound had
been closed up by other means, in DH suddenly turned into a miracle
cure-all for any wound?

Jen wrote in Chapter 27 summary in 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184119>:

<< and for hearing about the golden cup. >>

If the killings had been a secrecy measure rather than a temper
tantrum, he would have killed the escapees even after he calmed down.

Potioncat replied to Jen in 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184122>:

<< It was a very scary scene. What kind of leader just kills his own
ramdom people in a rage? In a way it prepares us for LV's murder of
Snape. No it doesn't, but it shows how very little LV values life. >>

And SSSusan replied in 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184124>:

<< the Voldy we are seeing in the last year or two of the story. He's
IRRATIONAL. He's always been someone who frightens even his closest
followers, but I wonder if even they had always believed that he
really would do ? or even if Voldy always *would* have done ?
something like he did when he got the news about the cup and started
AKing everyone in sight. >>

I agree that killing one's followers because of a temper tantrum is
not an effective technique for having a large number of followers or
deeply loyal followers. But I think it was part of Voldy's personality
at least since he turned into a snake-man. Tom may have been equally
eager to massacre, but he used self-control for the sake of
self-preservation. 

If Voldy the first time around rarely was in the presence of a large
number of followers at the same time, then his temper tantrums would
have killed fewer followers in front of fewer witnesses, and those who
heard it second or third hand would have thought that the victim had
failed in some assignment or otherwise done something else to deserve it.

Jen wrote in Chapter 27 summary in 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184119>:

<< Dumbledore knew his middle name and might have traced Tom Riddle to
the Gaunts. >>

Lord Voldemort doesn't know that Diary!Tom told Harry that his name
was 'Tom Marvolo Riddle', that Riddle was a Muggle name, and that he
had been abandoned to a Muggle orphanage. I'm pretty sure that a smart
Muggle like Hermione would find that enough information to find out
which orphanage, check its records, and interview any survivors of it,
but maybe LV doesn't know about Muggle records.

Olivier wrote in 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184121>:

<< [Voldemort] is in fact not overtly concerned with power, in the
sense of having the ability to make other people do his bidding.
(snip)  Nor does he seem to really believe in pure-blood supremacy or
in any coherent political ideology (snip). And love or the
appreciation of others leaves him apparently supremely cold (snip).
Yet he is not totally devoid of motives either. What Voldemort is
after is another sort of power: that of negating the external reality
of the world. (snip) And the ultimate frustration being that he is
going to die, he will leave no stone unturned to escape death. Others
around him, he simply doesn't care, and if he kills the or torture
them, it is seemingly just because they are obstacles to the
satisfaction of his desires or because he needs their deaths. >>

The authorial voice agrees with you, but it seems to me that Voldemort
greatest desire is not to live forever, but to hurt and kill people,
The text shows him so much enjoying hurting and killing people that he
does it unneccesarily and even counterproductively, but never shows
him putting that much energy into hating or fearing his own death. 

I think he continued also the ambition Diary!Tom expressed, to be
feared by all wizards but all he needed to do to achieve it was to do
what he wanted anyway.

BTW Diary!Tom's quote is 'a name I knew wizards everywhere would one
day fear to speak'. And only Britain (and maybe Ireland) knew of him,
but 'feared to speak' was literal. I don't know if that is because LV
and all other wizards and possibly Rowling have a habit of not saying
the name of what they fear. Maybe not - maybe it is because LV himself
took steps during his first reign of terror to make people fear to say
his name, by punishsing some of the ones who did. He could had had the
same Taboo in the first Voldie War as he did in the second, and sent
DEs to respond to the Taboo's signal by massacring the people who said
it. If so, it was remarkably stupid of Dumbledore if he didn't know
there was a Taboo. If he did know, it was remarkably stupid of him to
encourage the Order members not to fear saying the name: he was making
them targets, possibly explaining why so many of them were killed by
the bad guys.

Lesley wrote in 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184123>:

<< Why did Voldemort go bad? (snip) Ok so he was an orphan, the
childrens home (from the little we saw of it) seemed like a nice
place, at least it wasn't a bad one anyway! (snip) LV seemed to be
evil from an early age, it was never explained why, and even when he
entered Hogwarts things could have been different for him, he could
have changed if given support. (snip) LV in my opinion was capable of
love, he loved Hogwarts and it remained in his heart for the rest of
his life >> 

Kamion replied in 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184142>:

<< If Riddle was capable of love because he loved Hogwarts I doubt, if
it's love it's a very selfish kind of love, more a playground for
using and learning new skills to gain power. >>

I agree with Lesley that TMR's orphanage tried to be kind. It was not
a cruel place that could have turned ordinary children bad. I agree
with Kamion that TMR's didn't really LOVE Hogwarts, just wanted to
possess it.

I believe that Tom M. Riddle / Lord Voldemort was bad because he was
born bad. I believe he was born with a specific defect in his brain
that made him a psychopath, unable to feel any concern (never mind
love!) for other people and thus coming to believe that all
expressions of concern he saw other people doing were a big fake,
which he also learned to fake. He wanted to get his own way and didn't
care what it cost other people, not because he chose not to care about
other people, but because he was built that way. He was amused by
manipulating people, because that is said to be a symptom of
psychopathy. I don't know why he was so full of anger and resentment
(emotions that even psychopaths can feel) even before he came to
Hogwarts and was treated like a Mudblood and also looked down on for
his poverty. The one thing that confuses me is that he seems to me to
show real affection for Nagini.

I suppose Kamion is right that in the Potterverse, TMR was born a
psychopath because of 'bad blood'. I believe that in Real Life, it is
kind of random when a baby is born a psychopath. 

Either way, it kind of conflicts with the Potter ouevre's alleged
moral that people have a choice of doing good or evil. 

Asking Voldemort to repent or feel remorse was asking him to do
something he was physically unable to do. Rowling's excuse is that the
drop of Harry's blood inside Voldemort mystically gave Voldemort the
ability to repent.

I don't know, I believe there may be techniques of raising children
born with psychopathy so that they don't grow up to be serial killers.
I believe things MIGHT have turned out different for TNR if he had
been put with wizarding foster parents instead of in a Muggle
orphanage because the wizarding foster parents would have understood
that he was doing magic and known how to control children's untrained
magic, so he wouldn't have been the most powerful person around like
he was among Muggles. Maybe it wasn't too late when he came to
Hogwarts, if the people there had seen through him and subjected him
to the same rules and punishments as everyone else (which is what I
assumed was meant by 'if given support'), he might have learned to
behave himself for reasons of self-preservation.

In <http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/0900-ew-jensen.htm>,
Rowling said: "You have Voldemort, a raging psychopath, devoid of the
normal human responses to other people's suffering, and there ARE
people like that in the world."

In <http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/news_view.cfm?id=80>, someone
asked: "Has Voldemort or Tom Riddle ever cared for or loved anyone?"
and Rowling answered: "Now, that's a cracking question to end
with?very good. No, never. [Laughter.] If he had, he couldn't possibly
be what he is."

In <http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/faq_view.cfm?id=122>, Rowling
said: "the power of Lily's sacrifice is a positive force that not only
continues to tether Harry to life, but gives Voldemort himself one
last chance (Dumbledore refers to this last hope in chapter 35).
Voldemort has unwittingly put a few drops of goodness back inside
himself; if he had repented, he could have been healed more deeply
than anyone would have supposed. But, of course, he refused to feel
remorse." 

Donna wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184141>:

<< Okay, how did Tom Riddle find the entrance to the Chamber of
Secrets? We know it's in Moaning Myrtle's bathroom so, what was Tom
doing in a girls' bathroom? >>

Joey replied in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184147>:

<< He had a special reverence for Salazar Slytherin (as per some of
his statements in CoS climax and DH climax scenes) - this would have
driven him to find out a lot of information about him and CoS. So, he
would have found out about the entrance to the CoS as well using his
usual researching methods, I guess. >>

Adding more detail to Joey's answer, TMR would have looked up the
layout of the Castle during the time of the Founders. That room may
not have been a bathroom then, or may have been Salazar's private
bathroom; the castle may have been smaller then. TMR would have looked
up everything he could find about where Salazar hung out and where had
he hidden other treasures. If he learned that Salazar had a habit of
using Parseltongue as a password for hiding places, or if a legend had
lingered in Slytherin House that Salazar's secret chamber was opened
by speaking in Parseltongue, TMR would have gone everywhere he could
in the Castle, at the least the parts that had existed in the
Founders' time, speaking Parseltongue just to see what happened. When
he spoke Parseltongue in that bathroom, maybe the engraved image of a
snake responded by sparkling at him, so he knew he was on the right track.

Carol wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184150>:

<< wondering how the cup and tiara soul bits would have manifested
themselves if they had not been destroyed >>

The cup responded, just off-page, when Hermione destroyed it because
Ron decided it was her turn to destroy a Horcrux. I feel sure it put
up illusions to prey on her insecurities, just as the locket did to
Ron. Maybe her insecurities were about Ron not loving her, and maybe
Ron and Harry mocking her for having no wizarding ancestors.





From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 24 07:11:51 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 07:11:51 -0000
Subject: DD not reacting to Hagrid's mention of Sirius?
In-Reply-To: <g8qhui+tske@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8r1jn+485v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184165

---  "mysterious_one1987" <dctalkpc3freak at ...> wrote:
>
> Hey there, ...
> 
> In SS/PS, Hagrid turns up at Privet Drive with Harry, where 
> he meets McGonagall and DD, as we all know. ... Hagrid states
> that when he went to pick up Harry, he saw Sirius there and 
> borrowed his motorbike.
> 
> Now, the Potters are already dead, and DD knows that a Fidelius
> Charm was put in place to protect their whereabouts from LV.  
> Dumbledore also presumed that Sirius was the SK for the 
> Potters, so it would follow that Dumbledore thinks, as everyone
> else does, that Sirius betrayed the Potters.  So why doesn't he
> react at all when Hagrid tells them that he saw Sirius?  ...
> 
> ~mysterious_one1987
>

bboyminn:

Tricky question that didn't go where I thought it was going to
go. 

First, you are making the assumption that AT THAT MOMENT
Dumbledore thought Sirius betrayed the Potters. I don't think
that's true. He knew something went wrong, but I don't think
he really knows what yet. 

The next day, it appears that Sirius kills Peter and several
muggle by-standers, and seems quite deranged, and as good as
admits it is all his fault. Now Dumbledore probably thinks 
Sirius did betray the Potters, though I'm sure even as he 
believed it, he felt the idea was unbelievable. 

A lot of what we know about that night and Sirius's role is
not in fact truth, but idle gossip and speculation by people
with no direct knowledge. A sort of myth or legend grew up
around Sirius's role that is now later accepted as truth.

Finally, I think in that moment with the arrival of Harry, 
Dumbledore is pre-occupied with the task at hand - getting
Harry safely to the muggles where he will be protected. That
is a real priority. 

So, while I can only speculate, I don't think in that
moment Dumbledore is convinced or knows or thinks that
Sirius betrayed the Potters. He knows something went wrong,
but he doesn't know what. 

Just a thought.

Steve/bluewizard  







From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 24 16:27:12 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:27:12 -0000
Subject: DD not reacting to Hagrid's mention of Sirius?
In-Reply-To: <g8qhui+tske@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8s250+pfkg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184166

> mysterious_one1987:
> 
> In SS/PS, Hagrid turns up at Privet Drive with Harry,  <snip>
> Hagrid states that when he went to pick up Harry, he saw Sirius
> there and borrowed his motorbike.
> 
> Now, the Potters are already dead, and DD knows that a Fidelius
> Charm was put in place to protect their whereabouts from LV.
> Dumbledore also presumed that Sirius was the SK for the Potters,
> so it would follow that Dumbledore thinks, as everyone else does,
> that Sirius betrayed the Potters.  So why doesn't he react at all
> when Hagrid tells them that he saw Sirius?   <snip> 

Mike:
Because he's Dumbledore. Think back and you'll find that Dumbledore 
doesn't usually betray his feelings. The only time that comes to mind 
is the "gleam of triumph" in GoF. In that situation, you have a DD 
that's well aware of the properties of blood - 12 uses of dragon's 
blood, setting up Harry's blood protection - and realizes almost 
immediately what this means. DD knows by then that Harry has "a bit 
of Voldemort" in him. And though he has been raising Harry as a "pig 
for slaughter", he realizes immediately that Harry now has a chance 
to survive.

But this was a rarity for Dumbledore. Secretive is his byword and 
that usually includes his emotions and outward appearances. Besides 
which, what else is there to react to in this case. As you've said, 
Dumbledore had probably already worked out in his mind what had 
happened with regards to Sirius. He may not have expected Sirius to 
still have been at the Potters to meet Hagrid, but Sirius, the 
Potters' betrayer, was most likely fresh on his mind and the mention 
of his name would seem more natural than a shock.



> mysterious_one1987:
>
> but I do think that JKR would have mentioned SOMETHING, whether
> it be a look, a small movement, anything by DD here, as she
> usually employs these sorts of small details to hint at something
> much larger.

Mike:
Yes, this is a favorite trick of JKR's. It would have been nice if 
she had done it here. Though I think she thought just bringing 
Sirius's name into the conversation was a sufficient piece of 
foreshadowing. 

DD's gleam was a part of a very important plot motif that she must 
have had planned from the beginning. And this is the only time JKR 
hinted at the blood protection that was to eventually save Harry's 
life. That she had Dumbledore do it was natural, because only DD 
could have realized the significance of LV taking Harry's blood.

But remember, JKR also used those tiny movements as red herrings, or 
at least as things that led nowhere. Snape's reaction to Lucius 
Malfoy's name in GoF, Lily's almost smile at Sev's grey underpants in 
SWM, come to mind. 

So the mere fact that she had Hagrid mention Sirius's name was enough 
of a subtle hint. To have Dumbledore react to the name would have 
been overkill and may have taken on the air of a red herring in this 
case, IMHO. So JKR uses his name like she used the locket in OotP, 
throwing it out there as one amongst many names mentioned that night. 
Giving us the hint, not hitting us over the head with a bludger 
beater.

Mike 




From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Sun Aug 24 16:56:46 2008
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 24 Aug 2008 16:56:46 -0000
Subject: Weekly Chat, 8/24/2008, 1:00 pm 
Message-ID: <1219597006.10.79702.m49@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184167

Reminder from: HPforGrownups Yahoo! Group
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal

Weekly Chat
Sunday August 24, 2008
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  2008 
 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: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpforgrownups/attachments/20080824/3a6c146e/attachment.html>

From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sun Aug 24 17:00:37 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 17:00:37 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place (not about the EW, promise!)
In-Reply-To: <g8ehbc+n37b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8s43l+71tj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184168

Responding to  the rest of Jen's excellent questions:
  
> 1)  What did you think would be the 'final hiding place' when
reading  the chapter title?  Were you expecting a Horcrux at Hogwarts
all  along?

Pippin:
I was expecting a horcrux at Hogwarts, certainly since JKR said she
had dreamed about it. The obvious place would be the RoR, though I
thought the Chamber of Secrets might be a runner up.

>  
> 2)  This is likely the shortest chapter in all of the HP books, yet 
> descriptions of the dragon take up quite a few paragraphs at the 
> beginning:  how the dragon feels, what it's doing while the Trio
rest  by the lake, where it might go next, etc.  Then right before
leaving  the lakes, they watch the dragon take flight until it
vanishes, even  though Harry insisted they must leave at once.  Do you
think the  dragon plays a symbolic role?  Is it a significant part of
this  chapter for another reason?  Or did you find the mentions of the 
> dragon more filler?

Pippin:
I never thought about the symbolism of the dragon before. But it makes
a good metaphor for the wizarding world at the end of the story. It's
scarred and blind, and its future prospects are uncertain. But for
now, it's free, and all is well. I wonder if the dragon's blindness is
from a conjunctivus curse, which Sirius says is used to control
dragons. Perhaps it, like the wizarding world, might recover from the
blindness, ie prejudice, inflicted on it. 
  
>  
> 4)  Voldemort initially believes his Horcruxes must be safe because 
> he would feel 'if he, himself, most important and precious, had been 
> attacked, mutilated[.]'  Comments about either Voldemort's reasoning 
> or how he describes his Horcruxes?  Did the course of Voldemort's 
> thoughts about his Horcruxes and the realization that Harry is 
> hunting them offer any new glimpses into his interior life? 

Pippin:
The full sentence interests me: 
'He, the greatest wizard of them all, he, the most powerful, he, the
killer of Dumbledore and of how many other worthless, nameless men:
how could Lord Voldemort not have known, if he, himself, most
important and precious, had been attacked, mutilated?'

Dumbledore, too, once described himself as unconcerned about nameless,
faceless others.

'I cared[...]more for your life than for the lives that might be lost
if the plan failed. In other words, I acted exactly as Voldemort
expects we fools who love to act. [...] What did I care if numbers of
nameless and faceless people and creatures were slaughtered in the
vague future, in in the here and now you were alive, and well, and
happy?'(OOP ch37)

Voldemort here behaves like a fool who loves: not caring what has
become of those he slaughtered as long as what he loves, himself, is
alive and well, and, like Dumbledore, not recognizing any connection
between the life of what he loves and the lives of others.  

Does he not know what has become of his detached soul bits because he
himself is detached from others? Dumbledore seemed to think  so.

'"Does Voldemort know when a horcrux is destroyed, sir? Can he feel
it?" Harry asked, ignoring the portraits.
"A very interesting question, Harry. I believe not. I believe that
Voldemort is now so immersed in evil, and these crucial parts of
himself have been detached for so long, he does not feel as we do."'
HBP ch 23


 
>  
> 5)  If you were a Harry!Horcrux theorist, or argued against the 
> theory, did you think the possibility of Harry being the final 
> Horcrux was defunct when the last Horcrux was revealed as an object 
> hidden at Hogwarts?  Were you keeping count at that point?  Were you 
> already suspecting the possibility of a twist with the Horcruxes?

Pippin:
Oh, I was pretty sure there would be a soul bit inside Harry, and that
Voldemort's count was off. JKR wouldn't let LV have the mystical power
of seven. I figured JKR would come up with a way to spare Harry's life
if that was so, though I was way off on how she would manage it. I was
sure we would revisit The Veil, although that didn't fit with the
climax being at Hogwarts. I do remember thinking that ideally, Harry
would find a way to make Voldemort destroy himself, but I couldn't see
how that would work either. 
   
> 6)  Voldemort is fairly certain the Potter boy couldn't know of his 
> connection to the Gaunts, or about the cave, until he remembers 
> Dumbledore.  In a final assessment of why Dumbledore was the only 
> wizard Voldemort reportedly feared, what was the basis of
Voldemort's  fear?  Did it have to do with Dumbledore's knowledge of
Tom Riddle's past or other factors? 

Pippin:
Tom seems to have forgotten that he wrote his  name in the diary and
tied Harry to Riddle Sr's gravestone. That would be enough for a crack
researcher like Hermione. But Voldemort tends to be dismissive of
anything he doesn't understand, and certainly he understands
Dumbledore much better than he understands any of the Trio.

  
> 7)  Harry is the one to determine when they jump off the dragon;
he's  the one who casts the protective spells.  When Hermione attempts
to  plan their trip to Hogwarts rather than following Harry's lead, 
> Harry 'firmly' decides the course of action.  Is this a new twist in 
> the Harry/Hermione relationship?  Do you think something changed 
> between them over the course of the year or is it typical that Harry 
> takes over in certain situations?

Pippin:
I think Harry realizes that Hermione doesn't have any information with
which to formulate a plan. 

> 
> 8)  Any thoughts on Harry's decision to go to Hogsmeade even after 
> learning Voldemort believed it would be 'impossible' for Harry to 
> enter Hogsmeade undetected?  Did Harry forget this point in his
haste  to find the last Horcrux?

I don't think Harry forgot. But he's just done the impossible by
breaking into Gringotts and escaping on a dragon. Hogsmeade can't be
more protected than Gringotts was. He knows that the protections won't
be set up to kill him, since Voldemort plans to do that himself.

Pippin 







From hays1962 at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Aug 24 12:47:25 2008
From: hays1962 at yahoo.co.uk (hays1962)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:47:25 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8ku63+mntd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8rl8t+jjhu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184169


Jen:
> > 3)  Harry's vision of Voldemort killing everyone within reach at
> > Malfoy Manor is a first-hand view of Voldemort using the Elder
wand.
> > Do you believe Voldemort exhibits extraordinary magical power in
> this  scene or were his powers about what you expected he was
capable
> of  regardless of the wand?   Any thoughts on Bellatrix and
> > Lucius '[throwing] others behind them in their race for the
door'?
>
> Pippin:
> "[G]reen light erupted through the room" sounds enough like "green
> light filled the cramped hallway" (from  chapter 17) that it could
be
> just a more vivid description of the same phenomenon, ie, reflected
> light from an Avada Kedavra curse.
<SNIP>


I think that this is similar to the point in HBP when Harry pretends
to give Ron some Felix Felicis. Ron, beleiving that nothing can
possibly go wrong, plays brilliantly. Voldemort believes that just
because he possesses the Elder Wand he will be imbibed with its
power. It is only later that he realises that he is no more powerful
than he was before.

Jon




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 24 18:28:07 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 18:28:07 -0000
Subject: Chapter 27 Discussion / Why LV is bad / How TMR found the CoS / Cup Soul Bit
In-Reply-To: <g8qrkl+8br5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8s97n+3bc7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184170

Catlady wrote: <snip>
> Adding more detail to Joey's answer, TMR would have looked up the
layout of the Castle during the time of the Founders. That room may
not have been a bathroom then, or may have been Salazar's private
bathroom; the castle may have been smaller then. TMR would have looked
up everything he could find about where Salazar hung out and where had
he hidden other treasures. If he learned that Salazar had a habit of
using Parseltongue as a password for hiding places, or if a legend had
lingered in Slytherin House that Salazar's secret chamber was opened
by speaking in Parseltongue, TMR would have gone everywhere he could
in the Castle, at the least the parts that had existed in the
Founders' time, speaking Parseltongue just to see what happened. When
he spoke Parseltongue in that bathroom, maybe the engraved image of a
snake responded by sparkling at him, so he knew he was on the right track.

Carol responds:
That's a good answer, and yet surely Dumbledore also would have looked
at old plans of the castle. Another thng, too. If he, like Harry,
heard it inside the walls, he would have figured out, as Hermione did,
that it was roaming the pipes and that, therefore, the entrance to the
underground chamber must be through a bathroom.

I always assumed that the Basilisk sensed the presence of Slytherin's
heir in the castle and started roaming the pipes, or that it always
roamed the pipes and Tom Riddle heard it, just as Harry did, which
gave a sense of urgency to the hunt for the beast. He could somehow
have traced it or even, given his powers and the fact that he was
Slytherin's heir, spoken telepathically with it to find out where the
entrance to the chamber was. I always thought that Dumbledore failed
to find it because he couldn't speak Parseltongue. HBP seems to
indicate otherwise (unless it's another memory lapse on JKR's part).
But I think that something, in addition to speaking Parsletongue, gave
Tom and advantage over Dumbledore. I think, in part, it's because he's
a natural Parselmouth, born, like the Gaunts (who apparently never
attended Hogwarts) with the ability to speak Parseltongue, whereas,
for Dumbledore (who perhaps couldn't hear the snake?), it was a
learned language, like Mermish (or Bulgarian). Little Tom tells
Dumbledore that snakes come to him and speak to him of their own
volition. The Basilisk (and Voldemort's dear Nagini) would be no
different.

All of which leads me to wonder: What happened to Salazar Slytherin's
other descendants? Did he have a child or grandchild at Hogwarts at
the time he left Hogwarts never to return? Was that child not a
Parselmouth, or was he or seh sworn to secrecy regarding the existence
of the Basilisk? What about later descendants? I suspect that the
surname Slytherin died out quickly so that he had descendants only in
the female line (from a daughter or granddaughter). These descendants
married first into the Peverell family (which in turn became extinct
in the male line) and then into the Gaunt family (which at some point
started intermarrying perhaps because it knew of no other families
descended from Slytherin). The Peverells, PureBloods according to
Marvolo Gaunt, would have gone to Hogwarts and most likely met their
brides there. At what point did Antioch Peverell's Gaunt descendants
stop attending Hogwarts, and why had no Hogwarts-attending descendant
of Slytherin not discovered the existence of the Chamber of Secrets? 

I can't see Salazar Slytherin being so furious with the other three
Founders that he pulled his children or grandchildren out of Hogwarts
and demanded that they be home-schooled. That would defeat the purpose
of having his true heir open the Chamber of Secrets later. Could the
Parseltongue gene have skipped a huge number of generations only to
surface nine hundred years later in the demented Gaunts? that seems
unlikely, too. *Something*--aside from being a Parselmouth and
attending Hogwarts, unlike Marvolo and his children (who never read
the messages delivered to them by owls and would have ignored the
Hogwarts invitations)--made Tom "special." Maybe it was that snakes
came to him, voluntarily talked to him (as they must have done to
Slytherin). Whatever made Tom Slytherin's true heir after generations
of his descendants, at least some of whom must have been Parselmouths,
attended Hogwarts must have been what enabled him and him alone to
find and open the Chamber of Secrets.
> 
Carol earlier:
> << wondering how the cup and tiara soul bits would have manifested
> themselves if they had not been destroyed >>

Catlady: 
> The cup responded, just off-page, when Hermione destroyed it because
Ron decided it was her turn to destroy a Horcrux. I feel sure it put
up illusions to prey on her insecurities, just as the locket did to
Ron. Maybe her insecurities were about Ron not loving her, and maybe
Ron and Harry mocking her for having no wizarding ancestors.

Carol:
Maybe, but the locket, which the Trio foolishly wore around their
necks (near their hearts, if that matters), had time to get to know
the Trio, to sense their thoughts and influence them. Ron, already
jealous and insecure despite his efforts to fight off those feelings
for more than six years, was most susceptible. The cup, however, could
not be worn, and they'd only had it in their possession for a few
hours when it was destroyed. Hermione certainly had not formed any
kind of bond with it, and it wouldn't know how to torment her. Also,
to state the obvious, it's a *cup.* The diary drew in its victims
through an interactive relationship involving reading and writing. The
locket, which could be worn, sensed and played on their insecurities,
fears, and resentments. It also weakened them by robbing them of
cheerfulness and hope, preventing Harry from casting an effective
Patronus. And once it was *opened* (like the diary) it could interact
with its enemy. (Interestingly, it chose Ron, not Harry, to torment,
probably because he was the one holding the sword.) But a cup can't be
read or worn or opened. How would it know that it was under threat of
destruction? How would it open itself up so that the soul bit could
torment the would-be destroyer? My thought is that it might seduce an
unwary person through its beauty (cf. Hepzibah, who liked to look at
it before it was even cursed). Maybe handling it often, regarding it
as "my precious," even foolishly drinking from it, might cause a
relationship similar to the one between the locket and Ron. But,
still, a cup can't open to reveal its soul bit. 

As for the tiara, it probably worked like the Sorting Hat; it had to
be put on the head to interact with the wearer's mind. Anyone who put
it on knowing it to be Ravenclaw's diadem and expecting to become
brilliant and wise (tempted as DD was with the cursed ring, but at
least he destroyed the soul bit first!) would be in serious trouble.
But as long as it wasn't placed on the person's head, I don't see how
it could interact with him or her. Certainly, it didn't interact with
Harry. It merely vibrates or trembles, "bleeds," and screams faintly
after being burned by the Fiendfyre. I suspect that the cup behaved in
a similar fashion. (The diary bled ink and gave a "dreadful, piercing
scream. I have no idea whether the ring screamed, but it, or rather
Voldemort, certainly got its/his revenge for its destruction via the
curse he placed on it.) But Ron's and Hermione's behavior in the RoR
seems to indicate that they've just had an exciting little adventure,
not a horrific encounter with an evil object like Ron's with the locket.

BTW, I'm surprised that the tiara was tarnished. I'm sure that when
Helena stole it, it was as bright and beautiful as Auntie Muriel's
Goblin-made tiara. Was that because it was Wizard-made (well,
Witch-made) and lacked the Goblin's protective enchantments (silver,
though beautiful, will tarnish if it's not cared for) or because
Voldemort deliberately made it look unattractive like the junk around
it? Certainly, Harry wasn't seduced by its beauty? And yet Voldemort,
great mind that he is, thought that he alone had found that room full
of junk. Still, taking away its lustre would be an extra precaution
similar to the curse he placed on the ring--*just in case* someone of
extraordinary intellect almost as great as his own (in LV's mind, I
mean) were to find that hidden room. Making it look tarnished and
worthless was the perfect way to hide it in plain sight.

Carol, now wondering how Ron and Hermione got back out of the Chamber
of Secrets without Fawkes to hold on to




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 24 18:49:19 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 18:49:19 -0000
Subject: DD not reacting to Hagrid's mention of Sirius?
In-Reply-To: <g8s250+pfkg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8saff+o45o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184171

mysterious_one1987 wrote:
> > 
> > In SS/PS, Hagrid turns up at Privet Drive with Harry,  <snip>
Hagrid states that when he went to pick up Harry, he saw Sirius there
and borrowed his motorbike.
> > 
> > Now, the Potters are already dead, and DD knows that a Fidelius
Charm was put in place to protect their whereabouts from LV.
Dumbledore also presumed that Sirius was the SK for the Potters, so it
would follow that Dumbledore thinks, as everyone else does, that
Sirius betrayed the Potters.  So why doesn't he react at all when
Hagrid tells them that he saw Sirius?   <snip> 
> 
Mike responded:
> Because he's Dumbledore. Think back and you'll find that Dumbledore
doesn't usually betray his feelings. <snip>  Secretive is his byword
and that usually includes his emotions and outward appearances.
Besides which, what else is there to react to in this case. As you've
said, Dumbledore had probably already worked out in his mind what had
happened with regards to Sirius. He may not have expected Sirius to
still have been at the Potters to meet Hagrid, but Sirius, the
Potters' betrayer, was most likely fresh on his mind and the mention
of his name would seem more natural than a shock.

Carol adds:
I agree with you. Also, of course, Dumbledore doesn't want to alarm
McGonagall, or worse, Hagrid, who has already made a lot of noise just
by flying in on the motorcycle. The last thing DD wants to do is to
reveal his suspicions at that point, especially since nothing happened
and Harry has been safely delivered.  
> 
mysterious_one1987 wrote:
> >
> > but I do think that JKR would have mentioned SOMETHING, whether it
be a look, a small movement, anything by DD here, as she usually
employs these sorts of small details to hint at something much larger.

Carol responds:
Ah, but she did. Of course, merely mentioning "young Sirius Black" and
his flying motorcycle calls him to our attention, foreshadowing his
appearance in a later book, as Mike said. But look at Dumbledore's
words: "No problems, were there?" (SS Am. ed. 15). Hagrid says no and
DD is satisfied, but the alert reader wonders why DD would suspect
"problems." Clearly, DD anticipated that Black would try to claim
Harry as his godson, but Hagrid, though not suspecting Black's
motives, has his orders and refuses to give him up. DD must wonder why
Black has given/lent (depending on which edition you're reading) the
motorcycle to Hagrid, especially since he anticipates "problems"
related to Black, but he doesn't want to say anything at the moment,
especially since Black isn't making more trouble *yet.* The trouble
comes soon enough, in the form of Black's supposed murder of thirteen
people--really Pettigrew's disappearance and murder of twelve Muggle
bystanders. So DD is right that the SK who betrayed the Potters to LV
will cause more problems. He's just mistaken as to the identity of
that SK.

Carol, who sensed some sort of trouble involving "young Sirius Black"
based on Dumbledore's quiet words




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sun Aug 24 18:54:53 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 18:54:53 -0000
Subject: Chapter 27 Discussion / Why LV is bad / How TMR found the CoS / Cup Soul Bit
In-Reply-To: <g8qrkl+8br5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8sapt+63fe@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184172

> Carol replied in 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184126>:
> 
> << dittany, a substance whose powers have been considerably enhanced
> since HBP >>

Catlady: 
rushed> Did I ever mention how much it annoyed me that dittany, which is a
> real herb and in HBP served only to prevent scars once a wound had
> been closed up by other means, in DH suddenly turned into a miracle
> cure-all for any wound?

Pippin:
How could it prevent scarring except by causing skin to regrow, which
is what it does here? 

This gives me the opportunity to remark that although the narrator
made it sound as if our heroes were about to be crushed, smothered and
burned to death by the replicating treasure, their actual wounds were
superficial. "Angry red burns" are first degree burns, not that
serious. No charred flesh, nor so much as singed eyebrows, IIRC,
though their clothing suffers. 

Even Griphook, buried up to his fingertips, was only blistered. I
think the enchantments were designed to panic and immobilize the
victims, not kill them. Like Voldemort, the goblins would want to
question any intruder who got so far inside their defenses. 

I think Griphook knew about the enchantments, and  expected that if he
kept his head, he'd get a chance to seize the sword from the Trio and
flee the vault before they could stop him. He could then claim that
his burns had shocked him out of the Imperius curse that the Trio had
put on him. 

I think he took it for granted that the notorious Harry Potter, AKA
Undesirable Number One, would be proficient at the Imperius curse. He
wouldn't mention that to Harry, since he wouldn't want Harry to get
any  ideas about actually using Imperius on *him.*  

If so, this was was nearly the undoing of his plan. IMO, he expected
to get as far  as the vault before setting off any alarms or
encountering the Thieves Downfall, which he says is activated only
when intruders are suspected. Of course the bank would not routinely
dump water on its oldest and most respected customers!

Catlady:

> Jen wrote in Chapter 27 summary in 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184119>:
> 
> << and for hearing about the golden cup. >>
> 
> If the killings had been a secrecy measure rather than a temper
> tantrum, he would have killed the escapees even after he calmed down.

Pippin:
It isn't his secrets he's protecting, IMO, but his pride. He wants to
erase the shame of being robbed. Once he calmed down, he would
remember that only Bella knew the cup was his. But the anger, IMO, is
part of his new personality, the one imposed on him by the blood
magic. He did not used to kill in anger, because he did not used to
feel shame. He killed when it was strategically necessary, or, as in
Lily's case, to simplify. 


Catlady:
> The authorial voice agrees with you, but it seems to me that
Voldemort greatest desire is not to live forever, but to hurt and kill
people,

Pippin:
Voldemort leaves the large-scale killing and hurting to others when he
goes in search of the Elder Wand, which, according to Ollivander, he
wants not only because he thinks it will kill Harry but because it
will make him invincible. 

Here's what Jo had to say about the taboo on Voldemort's name:

http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_muggleneet-anelli-2.htm


What prompted people to start referring to Voldemort as You-Know-Who
and He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named?

JKR: It happens many times in history ? well, you'll know this because
you're that kind of people, but for those who don't, having a taboo on
a name is quite common in certain civilizations. In Africa there are
tribes where the name is never used. Your name is a sacred part of
yourself and you are referred to as the son of so-and-so, the brother
of so-and-so, and you're given these pseudonyms, because your name is
something that can be used magically against you if it's known. It's
like a part of your soul. That's a powerful taboo in many cultures and
across many folklores. On a more prosaic note, in the 1950s in London
there were a pair of gangsters called the Kray Twins. The story goes
that people didn't speak the name Kray. You just didn't mention it.
You didn't talk about them, because retribution was so brutal and
bloody. I think this is an impressive demonstration of strength, that
you can convince someone not to use your name. Impressive in the sense
that demonstrates how deep the level of fear is that you can inspire.
It's not something to be admired.

ES: I meant, was there a specific event?

JKR: With Voldemort? It was gradual. He was killing and doing some
pretty evil things. In the chapter "Lord Voldemort's Request," when he
comes back to request that teaching post in book six, you get a real
sense that he's already gone quite a long way into the dark arts. By
that time a lot of people would be choosing not to use his name.
During that time his name was never used except by Dumbledore and
people who were above the superstition.

Pippin;
I think that Jo is saying it was a superstition during the first
Voldemort war. That fits with Lupin not being able to figure out what
Harry might have done to bring the Death Eaters on them in DH. 

It took me a while to see what Jo was getting at. It's not about being
superstitious or not superstitious. It's about keeping an open mind.
Just because something was believed as a superstition in the past
doesn't mean it couldn't ever be true. 

Catlady:
> I believe that Tom M. Riddle / Lord Voldemort was bad because he was
> born bad. I believe he was born with a specific defect in his brain
> that made him a psychopath, unable to feel any concern (never mind
> love!) for other people and thus coming to believe that all
> expressions of concern he saw other people doing were a big fake,
> which he also learned to fake.

Pippin:
I believe we don't know what causes people to become psychopaths, or
what causes some psychopaths to become murderers. Riddle's own name
suggests that Rowling intended to leave this a mystery, as it is in
real life. Even if psychopaths are born with a defect, we don't know
whether it is genetic or caused by the prenatal environment, which
surely wasn't ideal either in Tom or his uncle Morfin.

My understanding is that psychopaths do understand that most people
feel concern for others. Psychopaths know that other people feel,
their mirror neurons work.  But they don't *care*. Voldemort certainly
understands that Harry's concern for Sirius and Ginny is real and he
understands how Ginny and Hepzibah suffer from their loneliness. But
he doesn't want to *be* the friend they need, he just wants to profit
from their trust. 

Children are an underclass in every society, and orphans are an
underclass of children -- there was plenty for
Voldemort to feel  resentful about before he came to
Hogwarts. Then he discovered that far from being accepted as the
superior being he believes he is, he's in an underclass *again*.
Naturally the world must pay for its disrespect.

Catlady: 
> Either way, it kind of conflicts with the Potter ouevre's alleged
> moral that people have a choice of doing good or evil. 

Pippin:
How do you see  being unable to feel remorse or connection to others
as forcing Voldemort to become a murderer? Voldemort gained nothing by
killing that he could not have achieved by other means, except the
pleasure of killing itself, and he could have got that by killing
animals, as his uncle Morfin did. 

Catlady: 
> Asking Voldemort to repent or feel remorse was asking him to do
> something he was physically unable to do. Rowling's excuse is that
the drop of Harry's blood inside Voldemort mystically gave Voldemort
the ability to repent.

Pippin:
How do we know it wouldn't? The real moral of the Potterverse, IMO, is
that in the absence of facts, it's difficult to keep an open mind, but
 one should strive to do it. Voldemort is defeated because he won't
open his mind to the possibility that Snape betrayed him, that he is
not the master of the wand, that death is not the end of pain, that he
might, if he looked for it, discover that he has gained the capacity
to feel remorse as he gained the capacity to feel shame.

In any case, how would Harry know that remorse was not possible? Think
of all the impossible things that Harry had done in the previous 24
hours. He escaped from Gringotts, rode a dragon, broke into Hogwarts,
recovered the lost diadem of Ravenclaw, became master of all three
hallows, spoke with the dead,  survived the Avada Kedavra curse for
the second time, visited the next world...am I forgetting anything? 

Who is Harry to say what can or cannot be done? Who are any of us?

Pippin




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 24 19:19:39 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:19:39 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place (not about the EW, promise!)
In-Reply-To: <g8s43l+71tj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8sc8b+hqn7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184173

Pippin wrote:
> <snip> I wonder if the dragon's blindness is from a conjunctivus
curse, which Sirius says is used to control dragons. <snip>

Carol responds:
Interesting thought. The dragon, of course, is only partially blind,
not wholly blind, which would fit with conjunctivitis. But I'm not
sure that such spells would be needed given the even crueller
behavioral conditioning that the Goblins use to control the poor
beast. The partial blindness could be caused by long confinement
underground. After many years, perhaps centuries, of imprisonment in
the dark tunnels with no opportunity to hunt for prey (the Goblins
would have given it enough food to keep it alive while keeping it
chained to prevent its eating *them*), the dragon wouldn't have had
much use for eyesight. It could use its senses of smell and hearing to
detect the presence of food or Goblins or intruders. The food probably
was not particularly nutritious (the dragon's scales have turned "pale
and flaky," hardly a sign of good health). Certainly, it wouldn't have
received the benefit of the natural vitamin D in sunlight, and vitamin
D is directly related to eyesight and eye health.

http://www.action.org.uk/medicalresearch/vitamin_d_eye_infections.php

Carol, wondering how we all would have reacted to the escape on (and
of) the dragon if we hadn't already seen Mary GrandPre's depiction of
the dragon ride




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 24 19:53:53 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:53:53 -0000
Subject: Chapter 27 Discussion / Why LV is bad / How TMR found the CoS / Cup Soul Bit
In-Reply-To: <g8s97n+3bc7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8se8h+u18k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184174

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
 
> Carol, now wondering how Ron and Hermione got back out of the Chamber
> of Secrets without Fawkes to hold on to


zanooda:

They had a broomstick, didn't they :-)? Isn't it the second best thing 
after a Phoenix for flying up the pipes :-)? We didn't have Quidditch 
in DH (and I'm not complaining :-)), but Harry and Ron still were given 
an opportunity to show their skill on broomsticks, while flying both in 
the ROR and from (and maybe even to?) the Chamber of Secrets.






From justcorbly at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 24 22:41:06 2008
From: justcorbly at yahoo.com (justcorbly)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 22:41:06 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
Message-ID: <g8so22+lalr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184175

Somewhere, in DH I believe, one of the characters makes a comment about radio that 
revels, at least to me, that he's pretty unfamiliar with it.

So... is Hogwarts off the grid?  What about all the other houses and buildings that our cast 
of characters inhabit or shelter in?

If there's no use of electricity and all the conveniences that depend on it, why?  Does 
electricity pose a threat to wizards and witches? Are their kitchens powered with wood-
burning ovens?  What about refrigeration?

Are their homes completely and always invisible?  If not, how do they avoid things like 
council taxes or property taxes?  If they don't, how do they get the money to pay?

Do they shop at the local grocery?  Use credit cards?

Are they all in the NHS?

Come to think of it, what's the local school system's response when 12-year-olds 
suddenly drop out of school?  Is Hogwarts on the UK's list of accredited private schools? 
What if a someone like Hermione wants to pursue work at university?

Just asking.  I know that quick answer is "magic", but that's cheating, I think.

justcorbly








From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 24 23:01:35 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 23:01:35 -0000
Subject: Chapter 27 Discussion / Why LV is bad / How TMR found the CoS / Cup Soul Bit
In-Reply-To: <g8se8h+u18k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8sp8f+lnf6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184176

Carol earlier:
>  
> > Carol, now wondering how Ron and Hermione got back out of the
Chamber of Secrets without Fawkes to hold on to
> 
> 
zanooda responded:
> 
> They had a broomstick, didn't they :-)? Isn't it the second best
thing after a Phoenix for flying up the pipes :-)? We didn't have
Quidditch in DH (and I'm not complaining :-)), but Harry and Ron still
were given an opportunity to show their skill on broomsticks, while
flying both in  the ROR and from (and maybe even to?) the Chamber of
Secrets.
>
Carol responds:

This is really odd. I just checked, and you're right that Ron and
Hermione show up not only with Basilisk fangs (that never get used) in
their arms (how dangerous is that?) but also "with a bromstick under
[Ron's] arm" (DH 622). And he drops *that* broomstick, apparently just
outside the RoR. And yet thirty pages later, a pair of broomsticks
show up in the RoR (as "required") when the Trio needed to escape from
the Fiendfyre:

"Harry, Ron and Hermione stopped dead: the fiery monsters were
circling them, drawing closer and closer . . . .

"'What can we do?' hermione screamed over the deafening roar of the
fire. 'what can we do?'

"'Here!' Harry seized a pair of heavy-looking broomsticks from the
nearest pile of junk and threw one to Ron, who pulled Hermione onto it
behind him" (DH Am. ed. 652).

Bit of a deus ex machina, I'm afraid, and Draco and his friends have
no such luck. Draco and Goyle are resecued only because Harry insists
on not letting them die. Crabbe reaps what he sowed.

Anyway, it appears that the RoR provided broomsticks twice, once on
request from Ron and once, by apparent coincidence or luck or in
answer to a silent request by Harry.

Thanks for answering my question, but it all sounds badly thought out
to me (especially having H and R carry armfuls of highly dangerous
Basilisk fangs with only two Horcruxes left to destroy, one of them a
snake who woulc bite them before they stabbed her). And by "badly
thought out," I mean both by the characters (who abandon their broom
and Basilisk fangs in any case) and by JKR.

So my only questions now are whether the RoR answers unspoken requests
in its hiding place form and whether the room is still usable in other
manifestations, such as an escape route to Aberforth's pub, now that
Fiendfyre has destroyed the contents of the hiding place. If so, what
happens when someone needs a place to hide a forbidden object?

Carol, who felt that the last few chapters, except for "The Prince's
Tale" and "The Forest Again," were rushed and hard to follow




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sun Aug 24 23:43:30 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 23:43:30 -0000
Subject: Chapter 27 Discussion / Why LV is bad / How TMR found the CoS / Cup Soul Bit
In-Reply-To: <g8sp8f+lnf6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8srn2+j5ja@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184177

> Carol responds:
> 
> 
> Thanks for answering my question, but it all sounds badly thought
outto me (especially having H and R carry armfuls of highly dangerous
> Basilisk fangs with only two Horcruxes left to destroy, one of them
a snake who would bite them before they stabbed her).

Pippin:
Considering that they've already had one means of destroying horcruxes
snatched away from them, that Voldemort now knows that they are after
his horcruxes and may succeed in creating more,  and that they expect
Voldemort's forces will be able to drive them out of Hogwarts very
shortly, collecting the fangs from the chamber seems to me a good idea.

That they were carrying them in their arms suggests that they simply
hadn't had time to think of a way to transport them more safely. It's
likely they can't be Summoned, in which case dumping them into the
beaded bag would be a very bad idea. How would you carry them?

 In the event, they aren't needed (although they might be, in the
future. Some other dark wizard might decide to make a horcrux
someday.) But Hermione isn't to know that Crabbe will cast Fiendfyre,
or that Neville will be given access to the Sorting Hat, which as far
as Hermione knows must be sealed in the Headmaster's office. And the
reader is not supposed to guess either.

Pippin 
who thinks that the endings of all JKR's books are hard to follow. I
don't know how many times I had to read the end of PoA before it
started to make sense. 





From scarah at gmail.com  Mon Aug 25 00:00:12 2008
From: scarah at gmail.com (tommy_m_riddle)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 00:00:12 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g8so22+lalr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8ssmc+ipmc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184178

justcorbly:
> So... is Hogwarts off the grid?  What about all the other houses 
and buildings that our cast 
> of characters inhabit or shelter in?
> 
> If there's no use of electricity and all the conveniences that 
depend on it, why?  Does 
> electricity pose a threat to wizards and witches? Are their 
kitchens powered with wood-
> burning ovens?  What about refrigeration?

Sarah:
I think it's more that witches and wizards pose a threat to 
electricity.

Hermione in GOF:
"All those substitutes for magic Muggles use - electricity, 
computers, and radar, and all those things - they all go haywire 
around Hogwarts, there's too much magic in the air.  No, Rita's using 
magic to eavesdrop, she must be. ... If I could just find out what it 
is ... ooh, if it's illegal, I'll have her ..."

Sarah:
Molly seems to just cook with magic.  Hermione once did an essay for 
Muggle Studies that was on "Why Muggles Need Electricity" or 
something to that effect.  Arthur is interested in electricity, but 
can't pronounce it.  Wizards don't seem to need it.

What I always wanted to know is how Kingsley was able to handle a 
high level desk job so efficiently.  He used the word "firelegs" a 
year earlier, and now he suddenly knows Windows 95?

justcorbly:
> Are their homes completely and always invisible?  If not, how do 
they avoid things like 
> council taxes or property taxes?  If they don't, how do they get 
the money to pay?

Sarah:
I don't think they're always invisible, but the postman doesn't know 
where the Burrow is.  No idea about taxes, but how to you tax someone 
if the postman can't find their house?

justcorbly:
> Are they all in the NHS?

What, so they could get absurd archaic treatments such as stitches?
  :)  Now why would they want to do that?

justcorbly:
> Come to think of it, what's the local school system's response when 
12-year-olds 
> suddenly drop out of school? 

Sarah:
I'm not the best person to give a "real world" answer to this, but 
they're 11, not 12, and I think that's when they'd be going on to 
secondary school anyway.  We see in the books that Dudley is going on 
to Smeltings the same year Harry is going to Hogwarts.

Sarah




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 25 00:19:50 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 00:19:50 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g8so22+lalr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8str6+f3eh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184179

justcorbly wrote:
>
> Somewhere, in DH I believe, one of the characters makes a comment
about radio that revels, at least to me, that he's pretty unfamiliar
with it.
> 
> So... is Hogwarts off the grid?  What about all the other houses and
buildings that our cast of characters inhabit or shelter in?
> 
> If there's no use of electricity and all the conveniences that
depend on it, why?  Does electricity pose a threat to wizards and
witches? Are their kitchens powered with wood-burning ovens?  What
about refrigeration?

Carol responds:

Steve (bboyminn) has posted fairly extensively on these topics, so
I'll let him link you to those posts or just sum up what he's said
before. All I know is that Hermione tells Harry that there's too much
magic around Hogwarts for computers or anything electrical
(electronic?) to work at Hogwarts. Personally, I think she just wants
to retain the preindustrial atmosphere, with fireplaces and quill pens
and candelabras. Computers and airconditioning would spoil all that,
don't you think? Even references to pencil cases and matchboxes (not
to mention Slughorn's reference to genes, a Muggle scientific concept)
take us out of that atmosphere, don't you think? Who needs a vacuum
cleaner when you can clean your house with "householdy spells"? And
they seem content with wizarding Wireless (obviously modeled on Muggle
radio), an official newspaper and a few magazines. Who needs TV and
video games when you have, er, Quidditch and books and, er, what else
do underage Wizarding kids who (theoretically) aren't allowed to use
magic have to entertain themselves in summer? I recall Fleur saying
that there's not much to do at the Weasleys' house unless you like
cooking and chickens. I suppose you can always Floo to a neighbor's
house or Diagon Alley. :-)

Justcorbly: 
> Are their homes completely and always invisible?  If not, how do
they avoid things like council taxes or property taxes?  If they
don't, how do they get the money to pay?

Carol:
That one I can answer. Mrs. Weasley says that she doesn't think the
Muggle postman knows where they live. The Blacks' Muggle neighbors
apparently didn't know of their existence even before the Fidelius
Charm was put on the house to hide it from anyone who didn't know the
secret. I think that a combination of Muggle-repelling Charms like
those used to hide Hogwarts or the QWC stadium and Unplottable Charms
so the place can't be mapped would be sufficient to keep tax
collectors away. On the off chance that one shows up anyway (he can't,
of course, phone, fax, or e-mail you), you just hit him with a nice,
strong Confundus charm. 

As for utilities, which you didn't mention, they don't need
electricity or phones, and I suspect that their plumbing and
waterlines are magically constructed, perhaps magically connected to
the city sewer and water systems, again with Muggle=repelling charms
on those lines, or just to magically constructed septic tanks and
magically drilled wells. (Aguamenti isn't going to provide enough
drinking water, and I'm not sure that conjured water lasts any longer
than conjured food.) Anyway, imagine heating and cooking done
magically (a la Mrs. Weasley and the House-Elves) on a stove that
doesn't require fuel because its magical (just magically conjured
flames like the ones the kids use in NEWT Potions class). Ditto for
the fireplaces, which don't require wood. No car payments, either,
because they don't own a car.
> 
> Do they shop at the local grocery?  Use credit cards?

Carol:
Not credit cards. I don't think that the Goblin Market (sorry;
thinking of Christina Rossetti here) would allow credit in any form.
Hogsmeade may have a local grocery; it has a candy store, a post
office, pubs, and restaurants. Witches and Wizards who live in "mixed"
town like Godric's Hollow and Ottery St. Catchpole might use the local
grocery and even attend church on Sundays, mingling with their Muggle
neighbors and only hiding obviously magical objects when a Muggle
neighbor comes calling. (Do you hide your obviously unmodern kitchen
as well? And why is it that most adult Witches and Wizards still have
no clue how Muggles dress?) Steve and others have postulated some sort
of middlemen as liasons to the Muggle community (a good job for
Squibs!) who provide goods and services to Witches and Wizards who
can't, for example, grow their own vegetables like the Weasleys or
butcher their own meat. (You can't conjure food. Hogwarts must get
most of its food from somewhere other than Professor Sprout's magical
herb garden or Hagrid's pumpkin patch.) I don't doubt that *some*
Witches and Wizards are farmers. After all, they have merchants and
tailors and craftsmen and printers and innkeepers and teachers and
Healers and potion makers, the WW equivalent of pharmacists
("chemists" if you're British). Poor old Agatha somebody had an eel
farm and lost it betting on a week-long match (or some such thing) at
the QWT. But someone (Umbridge? Yaxley?) uses "grocer" as a term of
contempt, indicating a Muggle profession. Hermione speaks of her
dentist parents in terms which suggest that dentistry is not a
Wizarding profession. All of which makes it likely that Wizards order
their food and have it shipped by owl from some sort of middle man.
Either that, or there are Wizarding grocers in Basic Alley, which
branches off Diagon Alley between the post office and Flourish and
Blotts. (I'm choosing two of the more mundane services here for my
imaginary alley, if anyone wonders. I wanted to call it Horizont
Alley, but I couldn't connect that with basic needs. And I rejected
Fundament Alley for reasons that I hope don't require explanation!)

Justcorbly: 
> Are they all in the NHS?

Carol:
Don't ask me! I'm American. Seriously, I suspect that St. Mungo's is a
nonprofit hospital that serves all Witches and Wizards (and an
occasional magically injured and Obliviated Muggle) free of charge or
on a sliding scale. Or it operates off the coins in the Fountain of
Magical Bretheren, which presents a bit of a problem once that
artifact is destroyed, combined with donations from rich patrons like
the pre-HBP Malfoys.

Justcorbly: 
> Come to think of it, what's the local school system's response when
12-year-olds suddenly drop out of school?  Is Hogwarts on the UK's
list of accredited private schools?

Carol:
Eleven-year-olds, actually. I suppose that it doesn't matter in an era
when homeschooling is a legal alternative to state-supported schools,
and maybe parents of Muggleborns are presented with fake scholarships
(properly bewitched with the appropriate charms) to foreign private
schools  to which they can claim that they've sent their children.
Children born to Wizarding families wouldn't be on the Muggle radar,
anyway.

Justcorbly: 
> What if a someone like Hermione wants to pursue work at university?

Carol:
That's a problem, I agree, because even a magically forged grade
report from an accredited high school wouldn't help that student to
pass the entrance exams or the university classes once she got in. I
suppose she could study for the university courses at the same time
she studied for her NEWTS (assuming that she wasn't taking as many
courses as Hermione), but Hogwarts itself certainly provides
inadequate preparation for university-level classes in literature,
foreign languages, math, the sciences, and Muggle history, to name
only those subjects that come immediately to my mind. I think that a
bright Muggle-born student would be faced early on with a choice
between Hogwarts and a good public school. (Justin Finch-Fletchley
chose Hogwarts over Eton. Hermione seems not to have given Muggle
education a second thought once she found out that she was a Witch.)
Except those few students who want to go into Muggle Relations, the
choice seems irrevocable. JKR seems to want us to think that Muggle
life and Muggle education is just mundane. Who, she seems to imply,
would choose Chemistry over Potions or Veterinary Medicine over COMC?
And all you need to be a writer is not a degree in English or
journalism but a Quick Quotes Quill and the mind of a Rita Skeeter or
a Xenophilius Lovegood.

justcorbly: 
> Just asking.  I know that quick answer is "magic", but that's
cheating, I think.

Carol:
Ah, well. "Magic" *is* the answer, but it's not necessarily a
straightforward or simple answer, and it requires a good deal of
speculation and inference-drawing to fill in the gaps.

Carol, who doubts that JKR takes her imaginary world, originally
intended for children, quite as seriously as we do




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 25 00:45:50 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 00:45:50 -0000
Subject: Chapter 27 Discussion / Why LV is bad / How TMR found the CoS / Cup Soul Bit
In-Reply-To: <g8srn2+j5ja@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8svbu+m9q1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184180

Carol earlier:
 
> > Thanks for answering my question, but it all sounds badly thought
out to me (especially having H and R carry armfuls of highly dangerous
Basilisk fangs with only two Horcruxes left to destroy, one of them a
snake who would bite them before they stabbed her).
> 
Pippin responded:
> Considering that they've already had one means of destroying
horcruxes snatched away from them, that Voldemort now knows that they
are after his horcruxes and may succeed in creating more, and that
they expect Voldemort's forces will be able to drive them out of
Hogwarts very shortly, collecting the fangs from the chamber seems to
me a good idea.
> 
> That they were carrying them in their arms suggests that they simply
hadn't had time to think of a way to transport them more safely. It's
likely they can't be Summoned, in which case dumping them into the
beaded bag would be a very bad idea. How would you carry them?
> 
>  In the event, they aren't needed (although they might be, in the
future. Some other dark wizard might decide to make a horcrux
someday.) <snip>

Carol responds:

How would I carry them? Very carefully! (Not in the beaded bag, I
agree.) And I'd carry only one, taking great care not to touch it any
more than I would touch the cursed opal necklace. The possibility that
Voldemort might create more Horcruxes never arises; even he probably
knows that he's pushed that particular type of magic to the limit by
dividing his soul in seven pieces, and even with at least one Horcrux
(the diary) destroyed, he wouldn't want to undo the magical power of
the number seven. (He doesn't realize that he's already undone it. Was
the creation of Nagini as Horcrux the point at which he began to go
downhill, I wonder? Yes, he obtains a body, and, yes, the drop of
blood that he was so desperate to obtain is as much a curse in
disguise as Wormtail's silver hand, but maybe his judgment and his
self-control started to come apart at that point?)

Anyway, I'd have created some sort of magical container (something
like Nagini's bubble?) for the one Basilisk fang needed for the tiara,
the Sword of Gryffindor being unavailable. Hermione can conjure a
crystal vial out of the air for Snape's memories; I don't see why she
couldn't conjure some poison-proof container with a handle just as
easily. (I would not have considered killing Nagini with a Basilisk
fang--far too dangerous). And once I obtained a fang, I would not have
dropped it to the floor to kiss my boyfriend (girlfriend if I were
Ron) and left it and the broom on the floor outside the RoR where
anyone could find and use them (or be poisoned by the fang if they
didn't know what it was).

As for the possibility that the Basilisk fangs might be needed someday
for some unknown Dark Wizard who might create a Horcrux in the distant
future, Hermione and Ron aren't thinking in those terms, and the
Basilisk fangs will still be in the CoS waiting to be used when that
distant time comes (if it ever does, considering that Dumbledore
removed all the books on Horcruxes from the Hogwarts library and
they'r now in Hermione's possession. A Dark Wizard graduating from
Durmstrang and creating Horcruxes would be someone else's problem, and
besides, both DD and LV seem to know of only one other Wizard (Herpo
the Foul?) who created a Horcrux, and that was only a single Horcrux.
The likelihood that they might someday need a hastily gathered supply
of Basilisk fange is remote. Better to leave them where they're
inaccessible to anyone who can't say "Open" in Parseltongue. (What
happens to them now that they're dropped on the floor outside the RoR?
They're useless to HRH and a hazard to everyone else.)

> Pippin 
> who thinks that the endings of all JKR's books are hard to follow. I
don't know how many times I had to read the end of PoA before it
started to make sense.

Carol:
Glad we agree on that. 

Carol, who was beginning to think that her own poor, befuddled brain
ws responsible for the confusion




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 25 01:03:36 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 01:03:36 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g8ssmc+ipmc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8t0d8+nusm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184181

Sarah wrote:
> <snip>
> What I always wanted to know is how Kingsley was able to handle a
high level desk job so efficiently.  He used the word "firelegs" a
year earlier, and now he suddenly knows Windows 95?

Carol responds:
I always thought that Kingsley was using "firelegs" on purpose as part
of his pretense that he and Arthur aren't on intimate terms. It gives
Arthur the chance to publicly correct him (in the next breath
whispering that Molly is making meatballs and inviting Kingsley to
dinner).

I suspect that Kingsley, as part of the Muggle Prime Minister's
bodyguard, knows perfectly well what firearms are. Also, he seems to
be one of the few Wizards who can pass easily as a Muggle. Possibly
he's Muggle-born or, more likely, Half-Blood, and, like his friend
Dumbledore, he probably reads the Muggle papers. (Maybe he even
watches television when he has the opportunity. 

As for Windows 98, it's not that difficult to learn to use a computer
as an adult. I'm guessing that Kingsley is about the same age as Snape
and Lupin, and I learned to use Windows 95 and Netscape and e-mail
when I was older than they are in DH. (OMG, I hear everyone thinking,
she must be OLD!!!) Of course, he may very well help things along by
magic, as Ron did in getting his Muggle driver's license.

Carol, who suspects that Kingsley can manage red tape and paperwork at
least as well as most Muggles




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 25 01:39:07 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 01:39:07 -0000
Subject: Chapter 27 Discussion / Why LV is bad / How TMR found the CoS / Cup Soul Bit
In-Reply-To: <g8sp8f+lnf6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8t2fr+s0q0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184182

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
 
> Anyway, it appears that the RoR provided broomsticks twice, once on
> request from Ron and once, by apparent coincidence or luck or in
> answer to a silent request by Harry.


zanooda:

This is an interesting thought. I didn't think before that Ron or 
Harry asked the RoR for the brooms. The brooms were already in the 
RoR when HRH were brought in by Neville - Harry sees a few propped 
against the wall as he enters. I suppose the room provided these 
brooms after some boys who liked flying (Seamus, Michael Corner) came 
to hide there. Ron obviously borrowed one of those brooms to get into 
the Chamber. 

I also didn't think that Harry asked for the brooms. I assumed they 
were just part of the junk assembled the RoR and Harry saw them by 
accident. But maybe you are right and Harry subconsciously wished for 
a broom that would be a natural way for him to escape.


> Carol wrote:
 
> And by "badly thought out," I mean both by the characters (who 
> abandon their broom and Basilisk fangs in any case) and by JKR.


zanooda:

I don't think they abandonned the fangs. After dropping them to kiss 
in the RoR :-), Ron and Hermione picked them up (625-626). I don't 
know what they did with them, but I hope Hermione summonned some 
container to put them in, just as you suggested, and then hid them in 
her bag. If HRH just left the fangs in the RoR, they are probably 
lost (destroyed or just unaccessible), but who needs them now :-)?




From scarah at gmail.com  Mon Aug 25 01:39:20 2008
From: scarah at gmail.com (tommy_m_riddle)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 01:39:20 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g8t0d8+nusm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8t2g8+77gj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184183

> Carol responds:
> I always thought that Kingsley was using "firelegs" on purpose as 
part
> of his pretense that he and Arthur aren't on intimate terms. It 
gives
> Arthur the chance to publicly correct him (in the next breath
> whispering that Molly is making meatballs and inviting Kingsley to
> dinner).

Sarah:
I kind of reckoned it might be on purpose, but I never really figured 
out his motive.  Appearing to be a pureblood if he's not seems kind 
of pointless, since a year later he's installed in an undercover 
Muggle job, which I think most of the purebloods couldn't pull off. 
Arthur doesn't know what plugs are for, let alone how to pronounce 
"eckeltricity," and Muggle artefacts has always been *his 
department.*  If anything, saying something about "firelegs" makes 
him appear even more similar to Arthur.

Carol: 
> I suspect that Kingsley, as part of the Muggle Prime Minister's
> bodyguard, knows perfectly well what firearms are. Also, he seems to
> be one of the few Wizards who can pass easily as a Muggle. Possibly
> he's Muggle-born or, more likely, Half-Blood, and, like his friend
> Dumbledore, he probably reads the Muggle papers. (Maybe he even
> watches television when he has the opportunity. 

Sarah:
I suspect this too.  It doesn't really help explain the "firelegs" 
feint any better for me though.  I guess maybe he just made it up as 
something "wizard business sounding."  He could have asked Arthur 
something about motorbikes though, since that's supposed to be 
Kingsley's assignment.  

Carol:
> As for Windows 98, it's not that difficult to learn to use a 
computer
> as an adult. I'm guessing that Kingsley is about the same age as 
Snape
> and Lupin, and I learned to use Windows 95 and Netscape and e-mail
> when I was older than they are in DH. (OMG, I hear everyone 
thinking,
> she must be OLD!!!)

Sarah:
Yes, but you're a normal adult.  :)  Magic has always seemed to 
actually make wizards somewhat stupider when it comes to mundane 
technology.  In PS/SS, Hermione admires the potion riddle because so 
many adult wizards are magically capable but fail at logic.  And what 
is a computer but a big old micro-ized bucket of logic circuits.  
Almost by definition, wizards should fail at it.  I would like to see 
Arthur try to send an email.  

Carol:
> Of course, he may very well help things along by
> magic, as Ron did in getting his Muggle driver's license.

Sarah:
I wondered about this too.  What I'm not sure about, is can you 
actually do magic *on* eckeltronics?  Can you use magic to manage 
your phone calls and email queue?  Or will that just break it?  You 
could use magic to make people think you did your work when you 
really didn't, but it seems like that would come out eventually.

Sarah




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon Aug 25 14:39:26 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:39:26 -0000
Subject: Chapter 27 Discussion / Why LV is bad / How TMR found the CoS / Cup Soul Bit
In-Reply-To: <g8svbu+m9q1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8ug6u+uo9u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184184

> Carol responds:
> 
> Anyway, I'd have created some sort of magical container (something
> like Nagini's bubble?) for the one Basilisk fang needed for the
tiara, the Sword of Gryffindor being unavailable. Hermione can conjure
> crystal vial out of the air for Snape's memories; I don't see why
she couldn't conjure some poison-proof container with a handle just as
> easily. 

Pippin:


Um, touching the fangs isn't dangerous. Harry pulled one out of his
arm and used it to stab the diary with no ill effects.  The venom,
OTOH, can destroy any magical container it touches, except one.
Hermione was carrying it the only way she could, in the only container
that could safely hold it: a basilisk fang. 

And since basilisk venom destroys even the most powerful magical
container, (that's what a horcrux *is*), it should certainly have
disposed of the shield around Nagini. Whether it would then still have
the capacity to kill the snake herself, I am not sure, which would be
a good reason for having another fang, or two or three -- why leave
them in the chamber for Voldemort? They don't expect to be able to
keep him out of Hogwarts, remember. They're only hoping to hold him
off long enough to find the hidden horcrux and get out. 

Carol:
(I would not have considered killing Nagini with a Basilisk
> fang--far too dangerous).

Pippin:
Um, who says you have to use the fang like a dagger? Why not mount it
on a shaft, and make a spear? 

BTW, if Draco wished for himself and Goyle to be rescued from the
flames, then the Room fulfilled his desire. I suppose Crabbe was too
panicky to wish for anything, or perhaps he wished for something the
Room could not grant, like extinguishing the fire.  

 I like your idea that the Room could have provided the brooms for
Harry, because it explains how Voldemort could think he was the only
one who had discovered the RoR. He could have thought all that junk
was conjured just for him.

Pippin








From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 25 19:28:25 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 19:28:25 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g8t2g8+77gj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8v14p+1hlr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184185

Carol earlier:
> > I always thought that Kingsley was using "firelegs" on purpose as
part of his pretense that he and Arthur aren't on intimate terms. It
gives Arthur the chance to publicly correct him (in the next breath
whispering that Molly is making meatballs and inviting Kingsley to
dinner).
> 
> Sarah:
> I kind of reckoned it might be on purpose, but I never really
figured out his motive.  Appearing to be a pureblood if he's not seems
kind of pointless, since a year later he's installed in an undercover
Muggle job, which I think most of the purebloods couldn't pull off. 
<snip>

Carol responds:
I don't think that Kingsley is trying to appear to be a Pure-Blood.
His status, whatever it may be (and I'm guessing Half-Blood) would be
well-known. what he's concealing, IMO, is his status as an Order
member. Everyone in the MoM knows of Arthur's pro-Muggle sympathies
and, IIRC, his connection to Dumbledore. Kingsley, OTOH, is supposedly
looking for the fugitive Sirius Black. The exchange (pretending to
have information on "firelegs") not only conceals whatever Kingsley
may actually know about that subject but enables him to slip Arthur
the issue of the Quibbler for Sirius without giving away that they're
friends and, more important, fellow members of the OoP. Their tone is
that of acquaintances who happen to work for the same organization but
in different departments (Arthur's the rather lowly Muggle Artifacts
Department). It's all a pose, as revealed by the whispered exchanges
and the magazine hidden among official documents, not to mention
Kingsley's wink and Mr. Weasley's treading on Harry's foot to prvent
him from saying hello to Kingsley. Elsewhere, Bill mentions that
Scrimgeour is becoming suspicious of both Kingsley and Tonks, which
would explain why Kingsley wants to avoid looking like Mr. Weasley's
friend (and vice versa). And, of course, they want to make it look as
if Kingsley is actively searching for a certain fugitive known to
possess a flying motorcycle.

Carol, who thinks that Kingsley used "firelegs" on purpose to get Mr.
Weasley to correct him (evidently Mr. Weasley got that term right in
his report, even if he can't pronounce "electricity" or "plumber")




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 25 20:03:45 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 20:03:45 -0000
Subject: Chapter 27 Discussion / Why LV is bad / How TMR found the CoS / Cup Soul Bit
In-Reply-To: <g8ug6u+uo9u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8v371+9tei@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184186

Pippin wrote:
> 
> Um, touching the fangs isn't dangerous. Harry pulled one out of his
arm and used it to stab the diary with no ill effects.  The venom,
OTOH, can destroy any magical container it touches, except one.
Hermione was carrying it the only way she could, in the only container
that could safely hold it: a basilisk fang. 
> 
> And since basilisk venom destroys even the most powerful magical
container, (that's what a horcrux *is*), it should certainly have
disposed of the shield around Nagini. Whether it would then still have
the capacity to kill the snake herself, I am not sure, which would be
a good reason for having another fang, or two or three -- why leave
them in the chamber for Voldemort? <snip>

Carol responds:

The problem I have with your reasoning is that Basilisk venom,
according to Hermione, is "so destructive that [a] Horcrux can't
repair itself." It's also ""dangerous to carry around with you" (DH
Am. ed. 104). When Harry picked up the basilisk fang to stab the
diary, he had Fawkes with him. He had just been cured of a deadly
wound with that same fang and could have been cured again if he
accidentally touched the venom. But Ron and Hermione were carrying the
fangs loose in their arms. If the venom, destructive enough to destroy
a Horcrux, had touched their skin, especially if they had even a tiny
cut on their hands (quite likely given their recent escape on the
dragon), they would have died (unless the RoR could provide Phoenix
tears). Hermione's statement that Basilisk venom and all the other
means of destroying Horcruxes are extremely dangerous to carry around
is suddenly forgotten, and they're carrying these deadly fangs as if
they were bananas. I'm not at all sure that a Basilisk fang, out of
which the venom can drip, is a safe container. The venom certainly
comes out when the fang stabs something. What if they were to drop one
on their foot? The fangs are "long and thin as sabers" (CoS Am. ed.
318), and one sinks deep into Harry's arm above the elbow as easily as
if he were made of paper. I wouldn't scoop up a handful of sabers even
if they weren't envenomed. I'd put the sabers/fangs in some sort of
container, and I'd take only as many as I needed, which would be one
(for the tiara). They don't know about Nagini's magic bubble yet, and
it's unlikely that they could kill Nagini with a Basilisk fang. I
suspect that they were planning to AK her and hope for the best.

As for not leaving the fangs in the chamber for Voldemort, I suppose
that's a good point, but they don't mention it. In any case, their
concern is the existing Horcruxes and defeating Voldemort, not what
Voldemort will do if he wins the battle. They're not planning to let
that happen.

Carol, who still thinks it's out of character for Hermione not to take
precautions in carrying something as dangerous as Basilisk fangs




From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 26 01:39:39 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 01:39:39 -0000
Subject: The Elder Wand (was: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place)
In-Reply-To: <g8puhk+bt3j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g8vmsr+mrmq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184187

> Carol again:
> 
> I don't think we're ever going
> to agree on this point, 

>  and I still see no time at which the wand failed LV

>  determine that the Elder Wand is failing him? 

>  There is no evidence *on page* of its failure

>  The wand *did not* fail Voldemort, 

Mike:
And what did Voldemort say?

"No, I have performed my usual magic. I am extraordinary, but this 
wand ... no. It has not revealed the wonders it has promised. I feel 
no difference between this wand and [the yew wand]."

"... wondering, why the Elder Wand refuses to be what it ought to be, 
refuses to perform as legend says it must perform for its rightful 
owner..."

<DH, pp 653-6, Am Ed.>

It's simple really, Carol. You are looking for cut and dried, and 
Voldemort was looking for nuanced. You wanted to see "failure", but 
Voldemort wanted the "legend", wanted the "wonders" revealed.

But you were never going to get "failure", just as Voldemort was 
never going to get the "legend" because he *wasn't* the wand's 
master. 

Criticize the plot all you want, as I have myself, but it's canon 
that Voldemort was not the Elder Wand's master and it's canon that he 
finally realized it.

Mike, who agrees that we will probably continue to disagree on this 
point




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Tue Aug 26 13:56:31 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:56:31 -0000
Subject: The Elder Wand (was: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place)
In-Reply-To: <g8vmsr+mrmq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9122f+kbot@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184188

Mike:
> It's simple really, Carol. You are looking for cut and dried, and 
> Voldemort was looking for nuanced. You wanted to see "failure", but 
> Voldemort wanted the "legend", wanted the "wonders" revealed.

Pippin:
The yew wand did everything its master asked of it. Obviously,
Voldemort expected the Elder Wand to do *more* than he asked of it.
Possibly not a realistic expectation, but a real one, nonetheless, IMO.

Pippin
agreeing to disagree at this point





From bawilson at citynet.net  Tue Aug 26 02:03:24 2008
From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson)
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 22:03:24 -0400
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
Message-ID: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAq7J8AJNZvxGJq/KbtzLRq8KAAAAQAAAAoGkes1LiykO9ffopXUe6fgEAAAAA@citynet.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 184189

"Sarah:
I'm not the best person to give a "real world" answer to this, but 
they're 11, not 12, and I think that's when they'd be going on to 
secondary school anyway. We see in the books that Dudley is going on 
to Smeltings the same year Harry is going to Hogwarts."

According to JKR, most Wizardling children are homeschooled.  


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 foxmoth at qnet.com  Tue Aug 26 14:50:58 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:50:58 -0000
Subject: Chapter 27 Discussion / Why LV is bad / How TMR found the CoS / Cup Soul Bit
In-Reply-To: <g8v371+9tei@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9158i+q772@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184190

> 
> Carol responds:
> 
> The problem I have with your reasoning is that Basilisk venom,
> according to Hermione, is "so destructive that [a] Horcrux can't
> repair itself." It's also ""dangerous to carry around with you" (DH
> Am. ed. 104).

Pippin:
The problem I have with your reasoning is that if it could be safely
transported in a magical container, Hermione wouldn't think it was 
dangerous to carry around. 

Carol:
 I'm not at all sure that a Basilisk fang, out of
> which the venom can drip, is a safe container. 

Pippin:
It's safe in the sense that it can't be destroyed by the venom. 

A real serpent's fang would be a *very* leaky bottle, since it has
openings at either end.   A basilisk's fang must be constructed
differently, with the poison reservoir inside it. As these particular
fangs have had five years to drain out, they're not leaking,
or they'd be empty. But if the venom loses potency once it dries,
which seems to be the case, then carrying the fangs in the open air
might seem safer than enclosing them, just in case they *do* leak.  

And if they do, then some of them might be empty. Too bad if you
haven't got any spares, then. <g>

Surely, "as sabers" refers to a curved shape, and not to being sharp
on the edges as well as the point.  Otherwise Harry would have cut his
hand. But perhaps Hermione  put a cushioning charm on the points, just
in case.

Dropping the fangs is a bit of slapstick, obviously. I'm sure Hermione
was carrying them very carefully until she lost her wits in her
surprise, like McGonagall dropping her books. This little joke is
apparently the main reason for having the fangs make an appearance at
all, although they do also serve as a red herring so that the
fiendfyre is more of a surprise.

Carol:
  In any case, their
> concern is the existing Horcruxes and defeating Voldemort, not what
> Voldemort will do if he wins the battle. They're not planning to let
> that happen.

Pippin:
I can't recall anyone who thinks that Voldemort *isn't* going to win
entry to Hogwarts.  Canon? 

Pippin






From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 26 16:31:41 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 16:31:41 -0000
Subject: The Elder Wand (was: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place)
In-Reply-To: <g9122f+kbot@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g91b5d+28hl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184191

Mike:
> > It's simple really, Carol. You are looking for cut and dried, and
 Voldemort was looking for nuanced. You wanted to see "failure", but 
Voldemort wanted the "legend", wanted the "wonders" revealed.
> 
> Pippin:
> The yew wand did everything its master asked of it. Obviously,
Voldemort expected the Elder Wand to do *more* than he asked of it.
Possibly not a realistic expectation, but a real one, nonetheless, IMO.
> 
> Pippin
> agreeing to disagree at this point
>
Carol responds:
Not only an unrealistic expectation but an impossible one--and *not
demonstrated*. I expect Voldemort's words about the wand to have some
basis in fictional fact and I find none, "nuanced" or otherwise.

Carol, also agreeing to disagree as we'll never persuade each other




From justcorbly at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 26 22:21:14 2008
From: justcorbly at yahoo.com (justcorbly)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 22:21:14 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g8ssmc+ipmc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g91vkq+3ti4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184192

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tommy_m_riddle" <scarah at ...> wrote:
>
> justcorbly said:
> > So... is Hogwarts off the grid?  What about all the other houses 
> and buildings 

> Sarah said:
> I think it's more that witches and wizards pose a threat to 
> electricity.
> 
> Hermione in GOF:
> "All those substitutes for magic Muggles use - electricity, 
> computers, and radar, and all those things - they all go haywire 
> around Hogwarts, there's too much magic in the air.
> 

justcorbly says:

Thanks,  I'd forgotten that from Hermione.  Still, that doesn't explain what happens away 
from Hogwarts.  

> Sarah said:
> Molly seems to just cook with magic.  Hermione once did an essay for 
> Muggle Studies that was on "Why Muggles Need Electricity" or 
> something to that effect.  Arthur is interested in electricity, but 
> can't pronounce it.  Wizards don't seem to need it.
> 


Justcorbly says:

Doesn't Molly say, somewhere, that she can move the food around by magic but that it 
needs to be cooked as per usual.  Does anyone recall an instance in which someone 
pointed a finger and zapped up a cup of tea, rather than putting the pot on?

> justcorbly said:
> > Are they all in the NHS?
> 
Sarah said:
> What, so they could get absurd archaic treatments such as stitches?
>   :)  Now why would they want to do that?

Justcorbly says:

Can magic cure a grave illness like cancer?  Dumbledore did not cure himself. And, what 
happens if one of them is out and about in a city and is hit by a bus, seriously injured, and 
rendered unconscious?  Off to a hospital, of course, where the staff would immediately 
look for something to identify next of kin and other contacts.  Maybe they all carry false 
ID's.

justcorbly




From scarah at gmail.com  Wed Aug 27 02:04:15 2008
From: scarah at gmail.com (tommy_m_riddle)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 02:04:15 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g91vkq+3ti4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g92cmv+im43@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184193

> Justcorbly says:
> 
> Doesn't Molly say, somewhere, that she can move the food around by 
magic but that it 
> needs to be cooked as per usual.  Does anyone recall an instance in 
which someone 
> pointed a finger and zapped up a cup of tea, rather than putting 
the pot on?

Sarah:
Finger?  You mean a wand, right?

HBP:
"Oh yes, she arrived the day before yesterday," said Mrs. Weasley, 
rapping a large iron pot with her wand. It bounced onto the stove 
with a loud clang and began to bubble at once. "Everyone's in bed, of 
course, we didn't expect you for hours. Here you are ?"

She tapped the pot again; it rose into the air, flew toward Harry, 
and tipped over; Mrs. Weasley slid a bowl nearly beneath it just in 
lime to catch the stream of thick, steaming onion soup.

Sarah:
The soup was already made before, but it seems only magic is needed 
to apply heat to it.  Mine never bubbled at once, anyway.

GOF:
"It's not as though they haven't got brains, she continued irritably, 
taking the saucepan over to the stove and lighting it with a further 
poke of her wand, "but they're wasting them, and unless they pull 
themselves together soon, they'll be in real trouble.  I've had more 
owls from Hogwarts about them than the rest put together.  If they 
carry on the way they're going, they'll end up in front of the 
Improper Use of Magic Office."

Mrs. Weasley jabbed her wand at the cutlery drawer, which shot open.  
Harry and Ron both jumped out of the way as several knives soared out 
of it, flew across the kitchen, and began chopping the potatoes, 
which had just been tipped back into the sink by the dustpan.

Sarah:
She uses a stove here too, but lights it magically.  And no need for 
a Cuisinart.

I don't know if you consider this cooking, but...

POA:
Lupin tapped the kettle with his wand and a blast of steam issued
suddenly from the spout.

Sarah:
Then in OOTP, Molly uses a cauldron over a fire, which she seems less 
at ease with than the stove.  But Grimmauld Place probably doesn't 
come equipped with one since it's always had elves.  But she probably 
lit the fire with her wand, given that Arthur had no idea how to use 
a match in GOF.
 
> Justcorbly says:
> 
> Can magic cure a grave illness like cancer?  Dumbledore did not 
cure himself. And, what 
> happens if one of them is out and about in a city and is hit by a 
bus, seriously injured, and 
> rendered unconscious?  Off to a hospital, of course, where the 
staff would immediately 
> look for something to identify next of kin and other contacts.  
Maybe they all carry false 
> ID's.

Sarah:
Dumbledore didn't cure himself, because he didn't have a mundane 
illness.  They can mend broken bones in an instant.  Cancer might 
take Poppy, I don't know, a week?

I don't think wizards die from bus accidents too often, since it's 
allegedly so outrageous that Lily and James Potter died in a car 
crash.

There are all kinds of wizards walking around maimed, with Dragon 
Pox, etc, but I don't think any of these are mundane illnesses/
injuries.

The only thing I can think of that seems to be even less treatable in 
the WW than it is in the MW, is bad eyesight.  Unless someone got 
their eyes poked out and replaced with magical ones, that seems to 
work.  The rest of them just wear glasses.

Sarah




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 27 04:06:02 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 04:06:02 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g92cmv+im43@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g92jra+5dpe@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184194

Justcorbly says:
> > 
> > Can magic cure a grave illness like cancer?  Dumbledore did not 
> cure himself. <snip>

Sarah responded:
> Dumbledore didn't cure himself, because he didn't have a mundane 
illness.  They can mend broken bones in an instant.  Cancer might 
take Poppy, I don't know, a week? <snip>

> The only thing I can think of that seems to be even less treatable
in the WW than it is in the MW, is bad eyesight.  Unless someone got
their eyes poked out and replaced with magical ones, that seems to
work.  The rest of them just wear glasses.

Carol adds:
I agree that Dumbledore's injury, the result of a terrible curse, is
not comparable to cancer (though I'd hardly call cancer a mundane
illness). St. Mungo's specializes in magical illnesses and injuries,
ranging from Dragonpox and Spattergroit to Splinching to vicious hexes
and poisonous potions, but I don't doubt that, like Madam Pomfrey,
they can also quickly heal broken bones and noses (unless they're
caused by Dark Magic, as I suspect Mad-Eye Moody's injuries were).
Snape is among the few Wizards we know of who can reverse, or at least
diminish the effects of, Dark Magic (the opal necklace, the cursed
ring, Sectumsempra). I suspect that St. Mungo's has someone like him
on their staff; if not, they could certainly use such a specialist.
Too bad he didn't survive to join them.

What magic doesn't seem to treat or heal or cure is Muggle ailments or
ailments shared by Muggles and Wizards. As you say, many Wizards wear
eyeglasses. Evidently, there's no magical cure for myopia or ambliopia
or astigmatism (or whatever the technical term is for two eyes facing
opposite directions, as in the Gaunt family). They seem to have no
dentists (Hermione speaks of dentistry as a Muggle profession)
although teeth can be shortened and perhaps whitened by magic. (The
Wizards in general don't seem to care how their teeth look.) Professor
Trelawney predicts a bout of flu (evidently an annual occurrence), but
there's no indication that flu is treated magically. Perkins, Mr.
Weasley's co-worker, suffers from lumbago, which presumably can't be
cured by magic, either. I very much doubt, under those circumstances,
that cancer can be treated magically, either. An, unfortunately for
Sirius Black and Tom Riddle and Severus Snape and many other troubled
or psychologically damaged characters, apparently there's no magical
substitute for much-needed psychological counseling.

Magic, JKR says, has its limits. It can't conjure food. It can't bring
back the dead. And it can't, apparently, cure illness caused by
anything other than a magical virus like Dragonpox. Warts and acne,
maybe, if you're careful not to blast your nose off. But not, as far
as I can determine, ordinary Muggle illnesses. (Muggle-borns are
probably vaccinated as children. I don't know what protection
Wizard-born children have against, say, polio or measles or
diphtheria. I think it's something that JKR just didn't think about or
consider important.

Carol, still getting used to her new Muggle eyeglasses and needing to
sit farther away from her monitor




From lszydlowski at hotmail.com  Wed Aug 27 11:03:51 2008
From: lszydlowski at hotmail.com (mmizstorge)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 11:03:51 -0000
Subject: The Elder Wand (was: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place)
In-Reply-To: <g9122f+kbot@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g93can+114p2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184195

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at ...> 
wrote:
>
> Mike:
> > It's simple really, Carol. You are looking for cut and dried, 
and 
> > Voldemort was looking for nuanced. You wanted to see "failure", 
but 
> > Voldemort wanted the "legend", wanted the "wonders" revealed.
> 
> Pippin:
> The yew wand did everything its master asked of it. Obviously,
> Voldemort expected the Elder Wand to do *more* than he asked of it.
> Possibly not a realistic expectation, but a real one, nonetheless, 
IMO.
> 
> Pippin
> agreeing to disagree at this point
>

The thing is that we're asked by the author to believe on the one 
hand that Voldemort is unable to sense when one of his Horcruxes 
have been destroyed and yet on the other hand she expects us to 
accept that he is so sensitive as to be able to detect the slightest 
nuances that his magic is 'off' when he's using the Elder wand. It 
isn't believable that Voldemort can be both insensitive AND 
hypersensitive to the subtleties of magic!




From eggplant107 at hotmail.com  Wed Aug 27 06:03:50 2008
From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 06:03:50 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place
In-Reply-To: <g8hvtp+6svm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g92qo6+mvvt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184196

"Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:

> Maybe there's something to be said for Hagrid's view 
> of dragons as "interestin' creatures"

I certainly wished that dragon well, and even Harry started to agree
with Hagrid, right after the first task in GOF (the second best Potter
novel after DH) when Harry is falling asleep he looks at his little
model of the dragon and thinks dragons are not so bad after all.

> I was glad that they got a nice long laugh, 
> too, at Ron's remark that their break-in to 
> Gringotts might have been noticed. 

I loved that scene too. I never though Harry Potter would turn out to
be a bank robber, but I'm sure glad he did! I would have loved to see
a scene where Bill first heard about this and realized what Harry was
up to all those weeks. You can't keep something that dramatic secret,
it must have electrified the entire anti Voldemort community. 

> There's no indication that the wand has 
> failed him (it hasn't). IMO, the wand is
> perfectly compatible with him, whether 
> or not he's its master, until *it* learns
> that Harry is its true master and chooses
> to betray him. 

The wand worked OK for Voldemort but it should have increased his
already formidable power to unprecedented levels, but it didn't, it
was just ok.

It's interesting that from book 1 JKR kept emphasizing that the wand
chooses the wizard, I didn't understand why she kept saying that. Then
I read book 7, then I understood. By the way I don't often criticize
JKR but I think it would have made a better story if Harry had kept
the Elder Wand, after all he is and will remain its master regardless
of if he uses it or not. And now everybody knows it and so will go
gunning for Harry, he'd better use the most powerful wand he can find
to defend himself.

True this will condemn Harry into leading an interesting life, perhaps
this could be hinted at in the epilogue; Harry could be limping as he
walked in the train platform and he could wave goodbye to his son with
"his good hand". People like us would soon be in deep speculation over
what caused those injuries, great fun, and remember that in GOF when
Harry first considered becoming an Auror he wondered if they all ended
up as scared as Moody. If they are lucky to live long enough they
probably do. 

And get rid of "all was well". That sucked. 

 Eggplant  







From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 27 19:59:06 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:59:06 -0000
Subject: The Elder Wand (was: CHAPDISC:  DH27, The Final Hiding Place)
In-Reply-To: <g93can+114p2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g94bma+u1cf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184197

---  "mmizstorge" <lszydlowski at ...> wrote:
>
> ....
> 
> The thing is that we're asked by the author to believe on the
> one hand that Voldemort is unable to sense when one of his 
> Horcruxes have been destroyed and yet on the other hand she 
> expects us to accept that he is so sensitive as to be able 
> to detect the slightest nuances that his magic is 'off' when
> he's using the Elder wand. It isn't believable that Voldemort
> can be both insensitive AND hypersensitive to the subtleties
> of magic!
>

I don't think that is quite what is being said. If I can use an
analogy, I don't have to be speeding or accelerating heavily to
sense when I am in an extremely powerful car. 

The Elder Wand worked for Voldemort as good as any wand worked
for him, even his own Yew/Phoenix wand. But being an 'as good 
as any' wand was not the reputation and legend of the Elder 
Wand. This was suppose to be a wand of exceptional power, and 
any wizard who had true access to that exceptional power should
have been able to sense it, the same way I sense the underlying 
power of a extremely power car. 

It is perfectly realistic that the Elder wand worked normally 
for Voldemort, but at the same time, did not reveal its 
exceptional power as it would to its true master.

Notice that Harry, the presumed true master of the wand, was
able to easily do what was said to be impossible in repairing
his old wand. While not an act of exceptional force, it was
none the less an act of exceptional magical power. 

I also don't think Voldemort sensing or not sensing the loss of
his soul bits can be equated to sensing or not sensing the 
underlying power of the wand. It's apples and oranges; the two
can't be correlated.

Just a few thoughts.

Steve/bboyminn 





From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 27 22:46:02 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 22:46:02 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g92jra+5dpe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g94lfa+f8ho@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184198

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:

> Professor Trelawney predicts a bout of flu (evidently an annual 
> occurrence), but there's no indication that flu is treated 
> magically.


zanooda: 

In CoS Madam Pomfrey treated colds with Pepperup Potion (which works 
instantly) - maybe it can be used to treat flu as well :-).







From justcorbly at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 27 23:03:34 2008
From: justcorbly at yahoo.com (justcorbly)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 23:03:34 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g92jra+5dpe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g94mg6+5d9a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184199

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:

> Carol said:
> ... St. Mungo's specializes in magical illnesses and injuries...
> What magic doesn't seem to treat or heal or cure is Muggle ailments or
> ailments shared by Muggles and Wizards. 

Justcorbly says:

If wizards are, in fact, less prone to suffer from Muggle ailments and injuries, our first 
inclination might be to say, well sure, they all protect themselves with spells and take lots of 
healthful potions.

What if that's not the case? What if their immunity to Muggle ailments and woes is due to a 
different genetic component? I.e., their just a tad different from other humans.

That difference, too, might be the source of their magical potential.

I suspect this was addressed long ago on the group, but it's intriguing nonetheless.




From bawilson at citynet.net  Thu Aug 28 00:17:13 2008
From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:17:13 -0400
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
Message-ID: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAq7J8AJNZvxGJq/KbtzLRq8KAAAAQAAAATHE0bHdkHE25futzgxQpIAEAAAAA@citynet.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 184200

"Justcorbly says:

Can magic cure a grave illness like cancer? Dumbledore did not 
cure himself. And, what happens if one of them is out and about 
in a city and is hit by a bus, seriously injured, and rendered 
unconscious? Off to a hospital, of course, where the staff would 
immediately look for something to identify next of kin and other 
contacts. Maybe they all carry false ID's."

JKR says that the Healers at St. Mungo's can take care of 
most ordinary Muggle ailments. The Muggle Relations office, 
I'm guessing, has some way of identifying wizards taken to 
Muggle ER's and has ways of spiriting them to St. Mungo's.

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 willsonkmom at msn.com  Thu Aug 28 01:14:41 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 01:14:41 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g8ssmc+ipmc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g94u61+m3rl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184201


> 
> Sarah:
> I think it's more that witches and wizards pose a threat to 
> electricity.
> 
> Hermione in GOF:
> "All those substitutes for magic Muggles use - electricity, 
> computers, and radar, and all those things - they all go haywire 
> around Hogwarts, there's too much magic in the air.  No, Rita's using 
> magic to eavesdrop, she must be. ... If I could just find out what it 
> is ... ooh, if it's illegal, I'll have her ..."

Potioncat:
I always thought, though there's nothing to confirm it in canon, that 
when the Muggleborn kids went home, the electronics would mess up. TV 
reception would be fuzzy, the microwave would burn things. That sort of 
thing.

Mrs. Granger would say, "I don't believe it! We had this microwave 
fixed after you went to school and now it's acting all funny again! Why 
can't they make things to last?"

But in the Snape household it would have been, "Yer rotten kid! Get 
away from the telly before you break it. Now you've made me miss the 
big play!"




From scarah at gmail.com  Thu Aug 28 01:21:10 2008
From: scarah at gmail.com (tommy_m_riddle)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 01:21:10 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g92jra+5dpe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g94ui6+hnsp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184202

> Carol adds:
> I agree that Dumbledore's injury, the result of a terrible curse, is
> not comparable to cancer (though I'd hardly call cancer a mundane
> illness).

Sarah:
I meant that it is mundane in the sense that it is not known to 
result from the paranormal, i.e. not a magical disease.  Maybe fumes 
from a potions lab or something can contribute to magically-caused 
cancer, if so, I bet that would be difficult or more probably 
impossible for wizards to cure.

Carol:
> Professor
> Trelawney predicts a bout of flu (evidently an annual occurrence), 
but
> there's no indication that flu is treated magically.

Sarah:
But Trelawney predicts all kinds of batty unlikelihoods.  However I 
was also going to say the same thing as zanooda, there are colds, but 
they are treated with Pepper-Up potion.

Carol:
> Perkins, Mr.
> Weasley's co-worker, suffers from lumbago, which presumably can't be
> cured by magic, either. 

Sarah:
But since that's a catch-all term for lower back pain, how do we know 
it isn't from a magical cause?

> An, unfortunately for
> Sirius Black and Tom Riddle and Severus Snape and many other 
troubled
> or psychologically damaged characters, apparently there's no magical
> substitute for much-needed psychological counseling.

Sarah:
I don't know if it's a substitute for the therapy part, but they seem 
to have the medication part covered.  There's the Cheering Charm, 
which is only third year magic.  I don't know why the trio didn't try 
this to counteract the effects of the locket, except Hermione would 
probably be the only one to come up with it and she was out of Charms 
class that day since she fell asleep.  There's also the Calming 
Draught, the Draught of Peace, Hate Potion which reveals annoying 
qualities of the target, helping the drinker to get over being in 
love with the target.  I'm looking at you, Snape.

I don't think any of the above characters really wanted to fix 
themselves.  I think Tom reckoned was pretty happy unless his plans 
weren't going right at a particular time, and Sirius and Snape felt 
like they should just accept their angst.

Carol:
> I think it's something that JKR just didn't think about 
or
> consider important.

Sarah:
My hypothesis is she did think about it, and decided that wizards 
just wouldn't be plagued with the illnesses and injuries of Muggles, 
for very long at least.  They have their own.  Eyesight is the 
exception that proves the rule (not *proves* but you know, figure of 
speech).  The reason that comes to my mind for this exception is that 
she just wanted some characters to have glasses, most notably Harry.

Sarah




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 28 01:40:04 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 01:40:04 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g94u61+m3rl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g94vlk+d3mo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184203

Potioncat:
> I always thought, though there's nothing to confirm it in canon,
that when the Muggleborn kids went home, the electronics would mess
up. TV reception would be fuzzy, the microwave would burn things. That
sort of thing. <snip>

Carol responds:
But the Dursleys' TVs worked fine when Harry was around. He even
managed to watch them occasionally. We never see him interfering with
the "eckeltricity," either. No problems with the refrigerator or the
stove, for example, and Dudley's Play Station (anachronism, I know!)
works fine till he throws it out the window (IIRC).

So I don't think it's the presence of magical people, even hundreds of
them, so much as all those wands and magical instruments and the magic
of Hogwarts itself (say the RoR and the various protective spells,
including Muggle-repelling spells) that prevents electricity and
electronics from working at Hogwarts.

Carol, regretfully snipping your imaginative scenarios





From willsonkmom at msn.com  Thu Aug 28 02:06:42 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 02:06:42 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g94vlk+d3mo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9517i+6pkl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184204


> 
> Carol responds:
 
> So I don't think it's the presence of magical people, even hundreds of
> them, so much as all those wands and magical instruments and the magic
> of Hogwarts itself (say the RoR and the various protective spells,
> including Muggle-repelling spells) that prevents electricity and
> electronics from working at Hogwarts.
> 
> Carol, regretfully snipping your imaginative scenarios

Potioncat:
Doh!

Ok, how's this. Eileen and Severus would secretly use their wands to 
cast spells near the telly (with rabbit ears, no doubt.) Tobias didn't 
have a clue, but he always missed the punch line of the jokes, and the 
best plays. Then he'd be so frustrated he go off to the pub. And that's 
how Severus and Eileen had peace in the house.




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Thu Aug 28 18:12:17 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 18:12:17 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g94vlk+d3mo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g96pq1+r5p1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184205

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
>
> Potioncat:
> > I always thought, though there's nothing to confirm it in canon,
> that when the Muggleborn kids went home, the electronics would mess
> up. TV reception would be fuzzy, the microwave would burn things. That
> sort of thing. <snip>
> 
> Carol responds:
> But the Dursleys' TVs worked fine when Harry was around. <snip>
> So I don't think it's the presence of magical people, even hundreds
of them, so much as all those wands and magical instruments and the magic
> of Hogwarts itself (say the RoR and the various protective spells,
> including Muggle-repelling spells) that prevents electricity and
> electronics from working at Hogwarts.

Pippin:
I don't think it's supposed to be pure coincidence that Muggles never
harnessed the power of electricity until the wizards had largely
removed themselves from day-to-day life. I think that the mere
presence of one or two underaged wizards in a home has little effect,
but large concentrations of spell-casting wizards probably would. 

Pippin 
wondering what TV reception was like around Grimmauld Place or St Mungo's
 




From whealthinc at ozemail.com.au  Thu Aug 28 23:51:33 2008
From: whealthinc at ozemail.com.au (Barry)
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 23:51:33 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g94u61+m3rl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g97dm5+dp2a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184206

 > Sarah:
> > I think it's more that witches and wizards pose a threat to 
> > electricity.

The whole magic/electricity business makes no sense in Potterverse.
The WW is entered in central London. Either WW or central London
should not be working. Platform 9 3/4 should prevent Charing Cross
station from working. 

Consistency has to be put aside for the sake of story.
Barry




From kersberg at chello.nl  Fri Aug 29 16:43:51 2008
From: kersberg at chello.nl (kamion53)
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 16:43:51 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g97dm5+dp2a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g99907+m3bl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184207

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Barry" <whealthinc at ...> wrote:
>
>  > Sarah:
> > > I think it's more that witches and wizards pose a threat to 
> > > electricity.
> 
> The whole magic/electricity business makes no sense in Potterverse.
> The WW is entered in central London. Either WW or central London
> should not be working. Platform 9 3/4 should prevent Charing Cross
> station from working. 
> 
> Consistency has to be put aside for the sake of story.
> Barry
>
kamion buts in:
I don't think the presence of Platform 9 3/4 itself would hinder 
King's Cross station and Underground, neither would a large gathering 
of wizards and witches do that.
When they get excited and start throwing spells and hexes all 
together... yeah then be sure the Victoria and Northern Line have 
huge delays. the magical energy that conflicts with electro-magnatic 
energy must be activated.
Activation and release of that energy  could happen in modest bolts 
every time a student or compagnion passes the barriere.
Don't forget King's Cross is a very big system electomagnitic 
speaking.
the powrsystem for the Tube and the train, the escalators, ticket 
books shoplight, etc is all together far bigger then Platform 9 3/4
and it is more likely that King's Cross itself interferes negatively 
with the magical currents neccesairy to have the Platform operating

Of course I don't know what magical energy is, for as much it could 
be an energy analog on electromagnetic energy and in stead of 
orientated in a North South field it could be orientated in a East 
West field, making it undetectable for Muggle science other then 
interfering noise.

Same would be with the TV reception at Nr 11 and nr 13 Grimault Place
as long as everybody is doing his business the reception would be as 
bad as standard.... sorry last time I was in London I could 
experience how shitty the aerial antenna system works, haven't seen 
susch bad reception in Holland since the early sicties..... but as 
soon as someone tests the magical protection father Black had spent 
his money on, the neighbours start bonging their television.

It just depends how active the magic in situ is.
So in theory a Wizard could use a computer or a television as long as 
he doesn't use spells around it just as we Muggles don't play with 
strong magnets near the computer.
But as soon as the videogaming wizard says " Accio Cola, Accio 
Crisps."
his computer crashhes.




From elanor.isolda at googlemail.com  Wed Aug 27 16:33:30 2008
From: elanor.isolda at googlemail.com (elanor_isolda)
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 16:33:30 -0000
Subject: Announcing Aetherica: a new UK fantasy convention
Message-ID: <g93vkq+nggr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184208


We are proud to announce Aetherica, a new fantasy convention to take
place in Chester, England on the weekend of June 19th ? 21st, 2009.

Organised by some of the same people who brought you Sectus 2007, with
additional talent from Accio 2005, the Tolkien Society and the British
SF community, Aetherica will cover Harry Potter, Tolkien and
everything from traditional fairy tales to modern fantasy epics.

The Crowne Plaza Hotel in the medieval city of Chester will play host
to a weekend of diverse fantasy-themed programming, ranging from
presentations and panels to craft workshops and team building
activities. Just as fantasy ranges from fairy tales to complex epics,
So Aetherica will offer everything from in-depth literary analysis to
whimsical games.

Guests of honour include Peter Beagle, a superb author best known for
his novel, The Last Unicorn who has been described as "America's
greatest living fantasist," and Joe Abercrombie, a critically
acclaimed new talent whose books have been labelled as "edgy",
"humorous" and "compelling, with a gritty, real-life feel."

Join us at midsummer 2009, and spend a weekend celebrating all that is
magical.

Current membership rates are:
Adults: ?35 (until November 16th 2008)
Juniors (5-18): ?25
Infants (under 5): ?5
Please see our website (www.aetherica.org/faq) for more details on the
rates and price rises.

For more information about the convention, to join or to book a hotel
room, see www.aetherica.org or drop us a line.

Elanor




From bawilson at citynet.net  Fri Aug 29 22:55:21 2008
From: bawilson at citynet.net (Bruce Alan Wilson)
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 18:55:21 -0400
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
Message-ID: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAq7J8AJNZvxGJq/KbtzLRq8KAAAAQAAAA8V2DnlD3Bk6rlqEBpeA61gEAAAAA@citynet.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 184209

Barry:
"The whole magic/electricity business makes no sense in Potterverse.
The WW is entered in central London. Either WW or central London
should not be working. Platform 9 3/4 should prevent King's Cross
station from working."



Or perhaps Wizards have come up with ways of "insulating" magical enclaves in Muggle spaces.


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 wildirishrose at fiber.net  Sat Aug 30 03:50:27 2008
From: wildirishrose at fiber.net (wildirishrose01us)
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 03:50:27 -0000
Subject: Chapter 27 Discussion / Why LV is bad / How TMR found the CoS / Cup Soul Bit
In-Reply-To: <g8svbu+m9q1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9ag23+ttu6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184210

 
> Carol responds:
> 
> As for the possibility that the Basilisk fangs might be needed someday
> for some unknown Dark Wizard who might create a Horcrux in the distant
> future, Hermione and Ron aren't thinking in those terms, and the
> Basilisk fangs will still be in the CoS waiting to be used when that
> distant time comes (if it ever does, considering that Dumbledore
> removed all the books on Horcruxes from the Hogwarts library and
> they'r now in Hermione's possession. A Dark Wizard graduating from
> Durmstrang and creating Horcruxes would be someone else's problem, and
> besides, both DD and LV seem to know of only one other Wizard (Herpo
> the Foul?) who created a Horcrux, and that was only a single Horcrux.


Marianne responds:

Herpo the Foul?  Or another Dark Wizard?  I've not heard that name 
mentioned or the possibility of another Dark Wizard from another 
school. But there's a lot of things I'm learning about the books from 
this list that I've never considered before or just have forgotten.  In 
what book was another Dark Wizard mentioned?

Marianne
A good mom will let their child lick the mixing beaters.
A great mom will turn the mixing beaters off




From justcorbly at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 30 16:52:30 2008
From: justcorbly at yahoo.com (justcorbly)
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 16:52:30 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g97dm5+dp2a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9btse+i0u4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184211

Barry said:?
> The whole magic/electricity business makes no sense in Potterverse.
> The WW is entered in central London. Either WW or central London
> should not be working. Platform 9 3/4 should prevent Charing Cross
> station from working.
>
> Consistency has to be put aside for the sake of story.

justcorbly says:
While I agree with that, what really motivated my original question was
me wondering why wizards would not want to take advantage of the fruits
of electricity, or of modernity itself? ?Why wouldn't a wizard want
to watch TV, have a refrigerator, use a laptop, use Google and send
email, pop dinner into a microwave, etc.? ?
We can imagine that they simply prefer to use magic to do all those
things. ?But, why would they?
justcorbly


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From ruth.powell at ymail.com  Sat Aug 30 16:31:22 2008
From: ruth.powell at ymail.com (Ruth)
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 16:31:22 -0000
Subject: SPOILERS: School Books
In-Reply-To: <3AAD95D2.8A0734BF@swbell.net>
Message-ID: <g9bskq+dqpu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184212

In message
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/14206
Penny <pennylin at ...> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> 4.  I don't understand why Japanese is underlined in the
> description of Kappas (or the comment "Snape hasn't read
> this either").  Can anyone explain? <snip>


Comment on 4 in the HP books in a lesson covering for Lupin
Snape incorrectly states that Kappas come from Mongolia,
they actually come from Japan.

Ruth





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 30 18:57:06 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 18:57:06 -0000
Subject: Chapter 27 Discussion / Why LV is bad / How TMR found the CoS / Cup Soul Bit
In-Reply-To: <g9ag23+ttu6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9c562+nis6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184213

Carol earlier:
> > 
> > <snip> A Dark Wizard graduating from Durmstrang and creating
Horcruxes would be someone else's problem, and besides, both DD and LV
seem to know of only one other Wizard (Herpo the Foul?) who created a
Horcrux, and that was only a single Horcrux.
> 
> 
> Marianne responds:
> 
> Herpo the Foul?  Or another Dark Wizard?  I've not heard that name
mentioned or the possibility of another Dark Wizard from another
school. But there's a lot of things I'm learning about the books from
this list that I've never considered before or just have forgotten. 
In what book was another Dark Wizard mentioned?
>
>
Carol responds:

I'm not sure what you mean about another Dark Wizard being mentioned,
so forgive me if I don't give you the answer you're looking for.
Obviously, Voldemort is neither the first nor the last Dark wizard
(Grindelwald was another, but he didn't create a Horcrux). LV is
variously described as the greatest Dark Wizard in a century and the
greatest Dark Wizard of all time, obviously indicating that there were
others. And Slytherin, who hatched the Basilisk and hid it in the
Chamber of Secrets, was obviously another. Although "Dark Wizard"
isn't specifically defined, Snape in his DADA speech speaks as if Dark
Wizards are those who routinely practice the Dark Arts/Dark Magic (he
says that an Inferius is "a corpse that has been reanimated by a Dark
wizard's spells," HBP Am. ed. 460. Presumably Voldemort isn't the
first Wizard to create one, though he may be the first to create an
army of them.)

Herpo the Foul, mentioned in Fantastic Beasts, was an ancient Greek
Dark Wizard, a Parselmouth, and the creator of the first Basilisk. I
suspect that he was also an ancestor of Salazar Slytherin (and,
consequently, of Tom riddle/Voldemort. JKR said on Pottercast that the
first Horcrux was probably created by Herpo the Foul, though she
doesn't state it as a fact, just a conjecture on her part:

"SU: (laughs) Oh, yeah. (JN: Yes.) Oh, but Jo, those Horcruxes,
though, I tell ya. There's so much to ask still about those. Okay, we
have to know. Who created the first Horcrux? Was it Grindelwald?
Salazar? Who did that?

"JKR: Do you know what? I got a feeling it was Herpo, (SU: Oh!) which
is H-E-R-P-O. (SU: Herpo the Foul?) I think I called him Herpo the
Foul. Exactly, yeah. Yeah. But, you know, wizards would have been
looking for ways to do exactly what Voldemort did for years. And some
of the ways they would have tried would've killed them. So, I imagine
it- well, they're huge parallels- splitting the atom would be a very
good parallel in our world. Something that people imagine might be
able to do be done, but couldn't quite bring it off and then people
started doing it, with sometimes catastrophic effects. So that's how I
see the Horcrux."

http://pottercast.the-leaky-cauldron.org/transcript/show/166?ordernum=1

In HBP, DD tells Harry, "As far as I know--as far, I am sure, as
Voldemort knew--no wiaard has ever done more than tear his soul in
two" (ie., create one Horcrux), HBP 500. I thought that the (obviously
Dark) Wizard that they both knew about (and whose accomplishment was
the subject of the books on Horcruxes that DD removed from the
library, too late to preven Tom Riddle from creating the diary
Horcrux), was Grindelwald, but I was obviously wrong. It's also clear
that Slytherin didn't make one. That leaves Herpo the Foul as the only
other named Dark Wizard from earlier times, and, as I said, JKR
specifically mentions him on the Pottercast segment.

There may be more on Herpo at the Lexicon, but I can't get the site to
work.

Carol, wondering whether the Lexicon has been taken down




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 30 19:33:41 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 19:33:41 -0000
Subject: SPOILERS: School Books
In-Reply-To: <g9bskq+dqpu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9c7al+oic4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184214

Penny wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > 4.  I don't understand why Japanese is underlined in the
description of Kappas (or the comment "Snape hasn't read this
either").  Can anyone explain? <snip>
> 
Ruth responded: 
> Comment on 4 in the HP books in a lesson covering for Lupin Snape
incorrectly states that Kappas come from Mongolia, they actually come
from Japan.

Carol adds:

Either that or the blunder about Kappas being most commonly found in
Mongolia is JKR's own and she covered it up by blaming it on Snape
through the graffiti in Fantastic Beasts. It wouldn't be the first
time; she covered a similar blunder with Marcus Flint by having him
repeat a grade.

At any rate, if Snape, who knows a lot about DADA and Dark magic in
general, is going to make a mistake about a minor Dark creature in
PoA, JKR ought to call attention to it in the same book. Otherwise,
it's pointless. At least when Harry thinks (in SS/PS) that information
on Bezoars could be found in "One Thousand Magical Herbs and Fungi,"
the reader can figure out, on learning that Bezoars come from goats'
stomachs, that Harry is on the wrong track. (Then again, JKR seems to
think from that point forward that "1,000 Magical Herbs and Fungi" is
the Potions text, forgetting completely about "Magical Drafts and
Potions" by Arsenius Jigger. Logically, "1,000 Magical Herbs and
Fungi" must be the Herbology text.)

Be that as it may, there's not even an implicit correction of Snape's
supposed blunder in PoA, and the mistake serves no plot purpose, which
leads me to think that the mistake is JKR's own. Kappas do occur in
Japanese folklore, but JKR might have mixed up her Asian countries.
Apparently, geography, like math and history, isn't one of her strong
suits: she mentions the no-longer extant country of Assyria in one of
her books. 

I realize that Pippin disagrees with me on this point, but it's one of
those areas in which it's impossible to prove that a viewpoint is
right or wrong. I can, however, point to additional instances of JKR's
covering up her own mistakes and inconsistencies. Why not do so
humorously at Snape's expense, since he's the one who provides the
misinformation within the story? I'm sure she had fun in doing so.
Unfortunately, having Snape "correct" a student by providing incorrect
information undermines Snape's credibility as a DADA authority (at
least for those who read FB), yet he does turn out to be a Dark Arts
expert later in the books. (We can argue that minor Dark creatures
aren't his forte, they're Lupin's, but that doesn't undo the damage to
his credibility in my view.)

Carol, wishing that JKR had simply noted the mistake for correction in
later editions rather than foisting it onto a character!




From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk  Sat Aug 30 20:05:25 2008
From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 20:05:25 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g9btse+i0u4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9c965+mq39@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184215

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcorbly" <justcorbly at ...> wrote:

Barry:?
> > The whole magic/electricity business makes no sense in Potterverse.
> > The WW is entered in central London. Either WW or central London
> > should not be working. Platform 9 3/4 should prevent Charing Cross
> > station from working.

> > Consistency has to be put aside for the sake of story.
 
justcorbly:
> While I agree with that, what really motivated my original question was
> me wondering why wizards would not want to take advantage of the fruits
> of electricity, or of modernity itself? ?Why wouldn't a wizard want
> to watch TV, have a refrigerator, use a laptop, use Google and send
> email, pop dinner into a microwave, etc.? ?
> We can imagine that they simply prefer to use magic to do all those
> things. ?But, why would they?

Geoff:
Because by using magic, they wouldn't have to get a TV licence or 
become a customer of one of the power companies. Why use email when 
you've got an owl as long as Owlsoft Explorer doesn't lose your message 
into cyberspace? And with the way that fuel and electricity prices are rising 
here in the UK, it's a good deal more economical to use magic. I suspect 
that the advantage is weighted on the side of the Wizarding World.

Just in passing, I think Barry meant Kings Cross in the comment quoted 
above. Charing Cross is a mile and a half or more from platform 9 and 
three whatsits and should be clear of the twilight zone.... 




From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 30 21:59:30 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 21:59:30 -0000
Subject: Voldemort's Rationality / The Taboo and the Trace
In-Reply-To: <g8qrkl+8br5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9cfs2+kh4h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184216

> And SSSusan replied in 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/184124>:
> 
> He's [Voldy] IRRATIONAL. He's always been someone who frightens
> even his closest followers, but I wonder if even they had always
> believed that he really would do ? or even if Voldy always *would*
> have done ? something like he did when he got the news about the
> cup and started AKing everyone in sight. 

Mike:
Doesn't it make you wonder if we should call the Death Eaters 
"followers" any more? I mean since his return in GoF. The DEs 
themselves seem to sense that things are different this time. 
Though they all still want that title of "Most Trusted", there 
seems to be an air of 'don't screw up' rather than 'what can I 
do to impress the boss', about the DEs now. Not counting Bella,
she's definitely an aberration in every sense of the word.

Not that some of them aren't looking to do the right thing in 
Voldemort's eyes. But it seems to come more from a fear of being 
punished if they don't, than the expectation of reward if they do. 
IMO, Voldemort set the tone in GoF when he said he "I confess 
myself disappointed", and when he told Avery while Crucio-ing him 
that he wanted "thirteen years' repayment" before he forgives 
them. I don't think by DH he or his DEs think he's gotten that 
thirteen years worth back, yet.



> Catlady wrote:
> 
> I agree that killing one's followers because of a temper tantrum
> is not an effective technique for having a large number of
> followers or deeply loyal followers. - <snip>

Mike:
The only response that comes to mind is to say, 'Ya think?'


> Catlady continued:
> But I think it was part of Voldy's personality at least since
> he turned into a snake-man. Tom may have been equally eager to
> massacre, but he used self-control for the sake of
> self-preservation. 

Mike:
I think having Tom kill his father and grandparents in the summer 
after his fifth year was meant to show us that murder was always 
considered a viable option for this character. So yeah, Rita, 
Voldemort would not have advertised this option when he was still in 
his recruitment stage. 

Once in, I'm sure all the DEs were aware of this codicil in their DE 
contract. They knew that death was a possibility for treason, or just 
plain screwing up too badly. And they wouldn't be warning off any 
potential recruits, either. There's safety in numbers.



> Catlady wrote:
> BTW Diary!Tom's quote is 'a name I knew wizards everywhere would
> one day fear to speak'. And only Britain (and maybe Ireland) knew
> of him, but 'feared to speak' was literal. I don't know if that
> is because LV and all other wizards and possibly Rowling have a
> habit of not saying the name of what they fear. Maybe not - maybe
> it is because LV himself took steps during his first reign of
> terror to make people fear to say his name, by punishsing some of
> the ones who did. He could had had the same Taboo in the first
> Voldie War as he did in the second, and sent DEs to respond to
> the Taboo's signal by massacring the people who said it. If so,
> it was remarkably stupid of Dumbledore if he didn't know there
> was a Taboo. If he did know, it was remarkably stupid of him to
> encourage the Order members not to fear saying the name.

Mike:
I know that JKR said in an interview that she remembered the 
superstition about speaking the Kray Brothers names from back when 
they were the notorious serial murderers. Whether she wanted to 
convey that same kind of superstition in the WW about 'Voldemort', is 
anyones' guess. I think the idea about the "Taboo" came later, but it 
fit in nicely with what she had set up earlier with his name.

I also don't think that Voldemort could have set up the Taboo in the 
first war. I have no canon for backing me up, but I think things like 
the Hogwarts Quill, the Trace and the Taboo - magic that applies 
universally over all of Britain and has this 'all seeing' sort of 
quality - could only be established by a governing body like the 
Ministry of Magic. 

I liken it to a powerful radio transmitter with a two-way feature to 
it. There has to be some sort of base station from which to receive 
this kind of magic, and then made interactive to inform the listeners 
of the location and the offence. Since Voldemort had never taken 
control of the MoM in VW1, he couldn't have set up this kind of 
magical base station without it being detected by the Ministry, 
giving itself away. That's just the way I read it, YMMV.

Which brings me to the Trace. I don't understand why JKR couldn't 
have introduced this term earlier in the series. She showed the 
results of it as early as CoS with Dobby and the cream pudding. 
Dumbledore somewhat explained it in HBP. And yet Harry was still 
oblivious to the term until DH? I don't get it. Does anyone think the 
use of this term or explaining the magic earlier would have given 
away something too soon? Was there some advantage to the plot/story-
line that necessitated holding this term back?

Mike




From whealthinc at ozemail.com.au  Sun Aug 31 11:53:54 2008
From: whealthinc at ozemail.com.au (Barry)
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 11:53:54 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g9c965+mq39@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9e0oi+4jcg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184217

>>> Platform 9 3/4 should prevent Charing Cross
Thanks Geoff, that should be Kings X. From Australia, it's easy to
confuse them.

> > me wondering why wizards would not want to take advantage of the
fruits of electricity, or of modernity itself?  
To my mind, JKR has not situated Potterverse in modern times at all.
As I've said in previous posts, it seems almost medieval - at latest
WW2. It's cartoonish with respect to how a British PM would react, the
use of fighter planes, etc. It might be to give it a timelessness. But
I wonder if the lack of mention of iPods, mPods and zPods means modern
kids will lack interest in HP?

Barry




From justcorbly at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 31 15:52:52 2008
From: justcorbly at yahoo.com (justcorbly)
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 15:52:52 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g9e0oi+4jcg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9eeok+e269@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184219


Barry said:

> To my mind, JKR has not situated Potterverse in modern times at all.
> As I've said in previous posts, it seems almost medieval - at latest
> WW2.

Justcorbly says:

First, sorry about the empty post immediately preceding this one. I was using the beta 
editor and it obviously demonstrated why it is still in beta.

Rather than try to remember the long and oh-so-wise post that went missing, I'll just 
summarize with these points:

1.  There's a lot to be said for Barry's insight.  My initial impression was of a world that 
came close to being a caricature of 1950's England. The Dursley's seem to me exaggerated 
fifties stereotypes; at times their characterization is almost over-the-top. Except for the 
flavor of the music played by the bands that show up a few times to entertain the kids,  it's 
as if the 1960's never happened.

2. I think JKR deliberately glosses over the intersections between wizards and the world of 
Muggles.  First, because doing that isn't necessary to her narrative.  Two, because those 
intersections must certainly be more numerous and more problematic than we are led to 
surmise by the novels.

3. One of those intersections would be between Muggle parents of wizards and everyone 
else in their world.  Do Hermione's parents simply lie all the time?  Does she?  Or does she 
never come home for a visit?  Hermione and her parents have relatives, friends, etc., who 
will naturally ask questions about her.  What kind of answers do they get? Surely, 
Hermione must turn up at the odd wedding, funeral, holiday dinner, etc.  it seems to me 
that people like Hermione, and their families, must live secret double lives as complex as 
that of any undercover intelligence operative. (I don't accept the answer that "It's Magic!"  
That's too easy and facile.  If wizards could fix everything via magic, they would have no 
problems or conflicts and JKR would have no plot.)

4. Owls are no substitute for email.  For one, they're slow.  Secondly, an owl can't 
simultaneously  deliver one message to multiple recipients. And how come Muggles 
haven't noticed all those owls flying around with little scrolls in their beaks?

5. Getting back to electricity...  Harry and his friends could have used cellphones on more 
than one occasion.  :-)

Justcorbly






From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Sun Aug 31 16:57:14 2008
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 31 Aug 2008 16:57:14 -0000
Subject: Weekly Chat, 8/31/2008, 1:00 pm 
Message-ID: <1220201834.11.57303.m52@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184220

Reminder from: HPforGrownups Yahoo! Group
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/cal

Weekly Chat
Sunday August 31, 2008
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  2008 
 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: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpforgrownups/attachments/20080831/7923e768/attachment.html>

From scarah at gmail.com  Sun Aug 31 18:08:36 2008
From: scarah at gmail.com (tommy_m_riddle)
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 18:08:36 -0000
Subject: Is There Alternating Current in Harry's World?
In-Reply-To: <g9eeok+e269@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9emn4+3kbu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184221

Sarah:
I think the reason for not using technology is just cultural too.  
What is on television that they would want to watch?  The pureblood 
wizards seem to consider mundane sports laughable.  The twins' 
packaged daydreams are probably better than Beverly Hills: 90210.  I 
guess they could watch History Channel and laugh at all the coverups 
and say things like "Egyptian tomb archeology: you're doing it wrong."

Kitchen appliances are seemingly just not needed.  And the internet 
is very new technology.  When the books started in 1991 I think there 
was only like Compuserv, and it really wasn't all that interesting.  
Though by book 7/1997 I guess Arthur could use it to find out how 
airplanes stay up, but he doesn't realize that.

justcorbly:
> Except for the 
> flavor of the music played by the bands that show up a few times to 
entertain the kids,  it's 
> as if the 1960's never happened.

Sarah:
The Wyrd Sisters?  I actually thought they were supposed to be less 
modern than they were in the movie.  And for some reason I pictured 
Bill and Fleur's wedding band as doing jazz and big band type numbers.

justcorbly:
> 3. One of those intersections would be between Muggle parents of 
wizards and everyone 
> else in their world.  Do Hermione's parents simply lie all the 
time?  Does she?  Or does she 
> never come home for a visit?

Sarah:
Yeah, they probably just make up a name of a boarding school and say 
that's where she is.  Like the Dursleys do, except that Hermione's 
fake school is probably more impressive-sounding.

She does go home, but in later years she starts cutting out early 
most of the time to go hang with the Weasleys.

justcorbly:
> And how 
come Muggles 
> haven't noticed all those owls flying around with little scrolls in 
their beaks?

Sarah:
They haven't noticed the letters but they've noticed the owls.

PS/SS:
'[Vernon] didn't see the owls swoop ing past in broad daylight, 
though people down in the street did; they pointed and gazed open-
mouthed as owl after owl sped overhead. Most of them had never seen 
an owl even at nighttime.'

'"And finally, bird-watchers everywhere have reported that the 
nation's owls have been behaving very unusually today. Although owls 
normally hunt at night and are hardly ever seen in daylight, there 
have been hundreds of sightings of these birds flying in every 
direction since sunrise. Experts are unable to explain why the owls 
have suddenly changed their sleeping pattern." The newscaster allowed 
himself a grin. "Most mysterious. And now, over to Jim McGuffin with 
the weather. Going to be any more showers of owls tonight, Jim?"'


justcorbly:
> 5. Getting back to electricity...  Harry and his friends could have 
used cellphones on more 
> than one occasion.  :-)

Sarah:
Yes, but they were usually either at Hogwarts where the phones 
wouldn't work, or like camping somewhere in the countryside where 
they might not have a signal.  And there's nowhere to charge it.  Ron 
can't even handle a regular phone, I'm not sure what he'd do with a 
cell phone.  But he can use the Deluminator, which apparently, that's 
what it was for.




From scarah at gmail.com  Sun Aug 31 22:02:11 2008
From: scarah at gmail.com (tommy_m_riddle)
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 22:02:11 -0000
Subject: SPOILERS: School Books
In-Reply-To: <g9c7al+oic4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9f4d3+930s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184222

> Carol adds:
> Either that or the blunder about Kappas being most commonly found in
> Mongolia is JKR's own and she covered it up by blaming it on Snape
> through the graffiti in Fantastic Beasts. It wouldn't be the first
> time; she covered a similar blunder with Marcus Flint by having him
> repeat a grade.

Sarah:
I don't see a mistake here.  The reason is that it's an ongoing theme 
that Harry disagrees with pretty much everything Snape has to say on 
the subject of Defence.

In HBP, Harry disagrees with Snape on how to defend against 
dementors.  Like Harry, I had not realized there was even more than 
one possible strategy.

In OOTP, Harry never does manage to learn Occlumency, not that he 
tried very hard.  But Snape did not really explain very well what to 
do in a manner that either Harry or I could understand.  I would have 
been interested to see how the instruction methods might differ had 
anyone else attempted to teach Harry this.

I suppose it is characterization.  Snape is innately qualified to 
keep a classroom quiet, but he's no born educator.  The only time he 
manages to teach Harry anything at all is when he's not trying to.




From ruth.powell at ymail.com  Sat Aug 30 21:23:14 2008
From: ruth.powell at ymail.com (Ruth)
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 21:23:14 -0000
Subject: Letters 
In-Reply-To: <9gegdq+pe40@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g9cdo2+ciqh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 184227

In message
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/20884
rowanbrookt at ... wrote:
> > Would it have come on my 11th birthday (the 16th of
> > October) and then I would wait until September the
> > next year before I went to Hogwarts. Or would the
> > letter arrive in the summer just before September.


In most English schools the cut off date is August 31st,
any student entering 1st year would have to be 11 by
August 31st or sometime in late August at any rate.

Ruth