Epilogue (was Re: Ron and Parseltongue)

[montavilla47]

No: HPFGUIDX 183441

> Montavilla47:
> I figured out that Snape was the awful boy fairly early. Around HBP, anyway,
> 
> when I really put effort into figuring things out at all.
> 
> Lynda:
> I figured it out earlier than that. Around GOF, think. Since I read a lot
> and my entire family is into the HP books, print versions, audio versions
> and especially since our selection of audios is limited to three of the HP
> books and a couple by other writers, the books get a lot of play. My
> selection of print books is far larger. I just packed up over a hundred for
> a yard sale in a couple of weeks.

Montavilla47:
Good for you for getting it early on.  Once you let yourself make that 
leap from James to Snape, it seems pretty sure that it's going to
turn out to be him.  But, I must say, it did take me a long, long time
to figure out from there that Snape and Lily might actually like 
each other.  (Because of the James/"awful boy" connection, the image 
of the "boy" was older in my head.  I thought I was being quite
audacious in my story when Snape is only thirteen.  And it was very
fun coming up with a reason for Snape to be meeting Petunia at
that time.) 

> Montavilla47:
> Well, I'm aware that teens can be angsty, but that doesn't mean I want to
> listen to them angst. And it's not like Dumbledore's actions of a hundred
> years ago have anything to do with Harry.
> 
> Lynda:
> No, but I know more than a few teens who would have a similar reaction. And
> I'm used to adults not liking to deal with teenage angst. I'm in a fortunate
> spot. No teens in the home (ever--I don't have kids) but I work with special
> needs kids, and if you want angsty. . .so I do deal with it, but I get to
> leave it at work.

Montavilla47:
I'll yield to you on the angsty teen thing.  You'd think I'd remember my own
angstiness from my teen years.  But, as I recall, I was a perfect ray of 
sunshine. :)
 
> Montavilla47:
> Well, the only time I can think of that they were *that* silly was in OotP,
> when they decide to hurry off to rescue Sirius, when--as soon as
> Umbridge was out of the picture--they were free to use her fireplace
> to contact Arthur and Molly--or even floo directly to 12 Grimauld Place,
> if they were determined to go to the Ministry.
> 
> Lynda:
> I don't think what they did was silly. Yes, they could have used the
> fireplaces to contact others. In DH, that is. But the were rightly worried
> about the safety of their family and friends, who were being watched they
> knew, by the Deatheaters.

Montavilla47:
Let me clarify.  I meant that they were silly in OotP to spend several
hours riding the thestrals to London, when they could have told the
thestrals to take them back to the castle (which might have taken 
five minutes at the most).  Ron and company had already routed
the Inquisators, so there was no reason they couldn't simply use
Umbridge's fireplace to either contact Arthur and Molly (as they 
members of the Order and the kids knew their address) or, floo
directly to 12 Grimauld Place and be in London within ten minutes.

In DH, the silliness was partly not consulting the adults (like Bill,
the CURSEBREAKER), and not stocking the tent with some food.  
The not-consulting I can forgive quicker than the food.  
 
> Montavilla47: (regarding Draco)
> But I'm not even talking about a big change. I'm talking about getting off
> the fence. Otherwise, what's the point of setting him up with a choice to
> begin with?
> 
> Lynda:
> But, that decision, to get off the fence could have led to a big change. I'm
> agreeing with you here. I would have liked to have seen that, even hoped for
> it, but I did not really expect it.

Montavilla47:
I'm glad we agree. :)

> Montavilla47:
> Do you really believe that? That a disarming spell becomes Dark because
> it's used by a Dark Wizard?
> 
> Lynda:
> Here's where I need to clarify my idea. I think that the goodness or
> evilness in a spell is in the intent of the spellcaster. 

Montavilla47:
Thank you.  I seriously stared at the screen for about half an hour,
saying to myself, "She *can't* really think that, can she?"

> Montavilla47:
> I disagree. By holding that moment back until the very end, that
> subplot took on more weight than it should have. Percy really had
> nothing to apologize to his brothers for--the argument wasn't with
> them but with his father. They were only involved because they
> insisted on taking sides.
> 
> Lynda:
> They hadn't gotten along with Percy for years before he left the family. I
> don't think their pretty constant references to him in a derogatory fashion
> throughout the earlier books was simple sibling rivalry. Never did, really
> (I did not like Percy from SS--thought he was--well a git) so I tend to
> think that his return to the family fold was at just the right time and the
> right place as well. There was time to apologize to his dad, but not the
> twins. Not then.

Montavilla47:
I think this is something we'll just need to disagree about.  I just don't see
that Percy needed to apologize to the twins at all.  

> Montavilla47:
> If you mean Harry wouldn't have survived the AK in the woods, then
> you're wrong about that being due to the Power of Love. That was due
> to the Power of Blood. It was Harry's blood in Voldemort's veins that
> kept him alive.
> 
> If it was the original AK in Godric's Hollow, then it that was ultimately
> due to Snape's love for Lily--and Lily's blood. While it was love for
> Harry that caused Lily to stand in front of him, it wasn't her love that
> saved him. It was the choice she had, because of Snape's love for her,
> that made the difference. (As we see when the Bulgarian Mother is
> killed protecting her children.)
> So, yes, it was the Power of Love at work there. But it was a Power
> of Love only indirectly connected to Harry himself.
> 
> Lynda: I'm going to disagree with you here. The Power of Blood was
> important, but the Power of Love even moreso. It's the key to the books.

Montavilla47:
According to Dumbledore, Harry survived that AK (or was in a position
to survive it, since he also had the choice to die) because Voldemort
used Harry's blood in the ritual to restore his body, thus extending
Lily's blood protection to Voldemort.  That's blood, not love.

I suppose Harry's decision to live again was from his love of his 
friends, who were still fighting.  In which case, I think you can
make a case for the Power of Love extending to others, since
Voldemort isn't able to hurt people quite as badly as he did before.

> Montavilla47:
> They didn't really have a turnaround. When Narcissa "helps" Harry, she's
> not doing it to help him. She's simply lying so that she can get into the
> castle.
> 
> Lynda:
> She's doing it to make sure Draco is safe, which is another notch on the
> belt for the Power of Love. Selfish love, maybe, but she's doing it out of
> love.

Montavilla47:
You know, that's another of those things I don't really understand--like
when spells are dark and when they aren't.  Why is Narcissa's love 
qualified by being "selfish"?  

Narcissa is willing to suck up to Snape and she's willing to lie to 
protect her son.  Molly is willing to KILL to protect her daughter. Why
is there this implication that Molly's love is pure and good,
while Narcissa's is somehow tainted?