CHAPDISC: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Chapter 15, The Goblin

[a_svirn]

No: HPFGUIDX 181847

> Chapter 15, The Goblin's Revenge
> 
> 
> Questions for Discussion:
> 
> 1. The chapter opens with the burial of Moody's eye. Might this
> be viewed as foreshadowing of the death of the trust among the
> trio at the close of the chapter?

a_svirn:
I never thought of it. What strikes me, though, is this curious 
preoccupation with what is considered in canon "proper" burial 
ceremonies. OK for Dobby, but the Eye's burial is no less grotesque 
than that of Aragog. And why not use magic? It is as though the 
author is at pains to point out that Dumbledore's funeral was 
*im*proper in some way. 

 
> 3. Harry's belief about the importance of identifying the
> thief and his hypothesis about Hogwarts being a likely place
> to locate a Horcrux are also rejected. Were the weeks of
> wandering and wondering worse for the trio than the risks
> of following these leads?

a_svirn:
I am not sure Harry's conviction can be called a "hypothesis". After 
all he had no idea *where* in Hogwarts, and none of them came up with 
the obvious suggestion of interviewing the Ravenclaw's ghost. As for 
the thief I think it was perfectly reasonable to for Harry to try to 
puzzle out his identity. Besides, it wasn't like he had anything 
better to do. They were stuck as far as the Horcruxes were concerned. 

> 4. Ron's intuition about the danger of speaking "Voldemort"
> is repeatedly met with skepticism and derision as well. What
> themes about faith, trust and open-mindedness can be articulated
> based on these scenarios in the chapter?

a_svirn:
Well, it *did* sound like a superstition. And all role models in 
Harry's life – Sirius, Lupin and most of all Dumbledore used 
Voldemort's name. For Harry to suddenly stop using it would be like 
giving ground. 

 
> 5. What – besides the corrosive effects of the Horcrux – could
> account for the paralysis created by Harry, Ron and Hermione
> not taking each other's instincts seriously?

a_svirn:
Danger? Privations? Being isolated, not knowing what was happening to 
their friends and families? Feeling out of their depth, unequal to 
their task? Any of the above would be daunting, but the combination 
is really overwhelming. 
> 
> 6. If food is the first of five principal exemptions to Gamp's
> Law of Elemental Transfiguration, what could the other four
> exemptions be? And what could be the basis for these exemptions
> – the direct interaction between the element and the physical
> body of a human?

a_svirn:
I think the whole thing is nonsense. If I can turn a table into a 
pig, why cannot I have pork chops? That Gamp business is among 
Rowling's sloppier inventions. 
> 
> 7. Can the Weasley's ability to provide ample food while still
> living in relative Wizarding poverty point to possibilities for
> the other four exemptions?  (Ever so much more intriguing than
> questions about the uses for dragons blood)

a_svirn:
I don't think the Weasleys live in poverty. They are not affluent, 
but they make ends meet. 

> 
> 8. Did you, at Phineas Nigellus Black's revelation that
> Snape "punished" Ginny, Neville and Luna by sending them
> on a field trip with Hagrid, marvel at Harry still not
> grasping Snape's possible (probable? obvious?) loyalty
> towards Dumbledore's cause??? Why or why not?

a_svirn:
I don't see how Harry could possibly grasp anything of the sort. He 
had seen Dumbledore's murder with his own eyes after all. Besides, 
his own memorable detention in PS was by no means a walk on the 
beach. 
> 
> 9. The characterization of the Goblins as a separatist, self-
> interested race is very reminiscent of the dwarf races in both
> Tolkien's Lord of the Rings and Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia.
> Do any other fictional or real-world equivalents or parallels
> come to mind?

a_svirn:
The Jews of the anti-Jewish propaganda. Insulated, avaricious, 
spiteful, blood-thirsty, and dishonest. And yet – in charge of the 
Gentile's finances. 

a_svirn, thanking Dananotdayna for interesting questions.