From foxmoth at qnet.com  Thu May  1 01:08:00 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 01:08:00 -0000
Subject: ChapDisc: DH 18, The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <fvagn1+ii1u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvb55g+tl6r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182748

> Alla:
> 
> So, if there is a possibility that Voldemort MAY find out,let's 
> INVITE him and BE SURE that he will find out? I do not get it.

Pippin:
First, I accept Zara's canon that Dumbledore didn't think Voldemort
would know about the wand. Sorry 'bout that. So, right, Dumbledore can
be pretty sure that Voldemort will try to attack. But then what?

Suppose Dumbledore thinks Voldemort is 99% certain to spot Harry
leaving Privet Drive in time to intercept him. That means there's only
one chance in a hundred that the Order  could extract Harry without
being attacked.  


That isn't worth very much. Why *not* trade it for something
useful, such as a substantial increase in Snape's credit with Voldemort? 

Of course, I don't know what Dumbledore actually estimated the odds to
be, but do you follow my reasoning now? 

Pippin




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Thu May  1 02:00:27 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 02:00:27 -0000
Subject: ChapDisc: DH 18, The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <fvb55g+tl6r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvb87r+os9i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182749

> Alla:
>
> So, if there is a possibility that Voldemort MAY find out,let's
> INVITE him and BE SURE that he will find out? I do not get it.

Pippin:
First, I accept Zara's canon that Dumbledore didn't think Voldemort
would know about the wand. Sorry 'bout that. So, right, Dumbledore can
be pretty sure that Voldemort will try to attack. But then what?

Suppose Dumbledore thinks Voldemort is 99% certain to spot Harry
leaving Privet Drive in time to intercept him. That means there's only
one chance in a hundred that the Order could extract Harry without
being attacked.  <SNIP>


Alla:

Do I follow the hypothetical scenario that you described? Totally. Do 
I see canon support for this scenario? No, I am afraid not really. 
How do you deduce  that Dumbledore is being sure that Voldemort is 
99% certain  that he can spot Harry leaving Privet Drive in time to 
intercept him? We are talking about Dumbledore being sure of this 
**without Snape giving Voldemort any information yet**, right?

I am not even talking about Dumbledore estimating any odds actually, 
I am just talking about Dumbledore just knowing that Order's plan is 
bound to fail. 


Alla:
> No, sorry, I can see no legit purpose for Dumbledore to give out
this
> secret, or to be precise for him to order Snape to give it out.

zgirnius:
An observation. I do not believe that Albus HAD the information to
give out. <SNIP>


Alla:

Sure, Snape does have this information, not Albus, Albus just 
suggests that Snape would give it to Voldemort. The correct date and 
time of Harry's departure that is.

Zgirnius:
If the Order had any sense, they would change any plans
made before Albus's murder, since they would have to presume Snape
had that information on the basis of Albus's oft stated complete,
ironclad, etc. trust of Snape. More likely, the Order did not even
HAVE a plan before Albus's murder, because they figured Albus had
one. Behind Albus and Snape's back, the Order made a new plan, and
laid the false trail for Yaxley/other Ministry infiltrators to find. 
<SNIP>


Alla:

Oh I don't know about that. Albus'portrait does not say after all ? 
you find out correct date of Harry's departure and give it to 
Voldemort. It just says you will give it to Voldemort. I read it that 
Albus is already perfectly aware of what that date is. Moreover, 
when  Snape suggests that plan to Dung, he does not ASK him about the 
date, doesn't he? It tells me that he knows the date already and IMO 
from Albus and that means that this is an old plan, IMO of course.
"You will have to give Voldemort the correct date of Harry's 
departure from his aunt  and uncle's said Dumbledore. ************
"You will suggest to the Order of Phoenix," Snape murmured, that they 
use decoys. Polyjuice potion. Identical Potters. It is the only thing 
that might work. You will forget that I have suggested this. You will 
present it as your own idea. You understand?"


 Now SHOULD Order change all the plans after Albus' death? OF COURSE 
any person with drop of intelligence would have done what you 
described.  But since Order never was able to devise any strategy 
without looking at Albus first, I just have hard time believing it. I 
do wonder how they even accepted this plan, seven Potters I mean. IMO 
of course.


Zara:

<SNIP>
And if the answer is yes, I do not
see how Dumbledore could have acted differently. Snape's failure to
get the right date would have been suspicious, and Voldemort would
have known where to double check whether Snape knew the right date,
and whether he had attempted to get it.
<SNIP>

Alla:

 In order for me to adopt the assumption that the answer is yes, I 
would love to see Voldemort actually ASKING Snape to get the date, 
you know?

Sure, Dumbledore THINKS it may raise suspicions if Snape does not 
know the date. Dumbledore THOUGHT many incorrect things, so I am 
afraid I cannot take it as a given. As far as I am concerned, 
Voldemort may not even bothered with asking anybody to find out a 
date and just either kept watch or chose much more convenient 
location to take another shot Harry.

And that brings ups to part of Pippin's post I cut:


Zara:
So instead Dumbledore ordered Snape to meet Voldemort's reasonable
and fact-based expectations, and tried also to prevent the giving of
the date from turning into a disaster, by having Snape suggest the
Polyjuice trick to the Order.


Alla:

That's a huge jump I am asked to make.  I just do not see what should 
lead me to believe that date would have known had the Snape not given 
it.

Could it have been known? Sure, but I do not even think that the odds 
that it would have known been that high. But after all, I never 
thought that Voldemort had a chance to learn prophecy had Snape not 
opened his mouth.


And here is the whole thing with Dumbledore telling Snape to give the 
date to increase his standing or his credibility in Voldemort's eyes 
falls right apart in front of me. I do not see the support for Snape 
not delivering the date AND falling out of Voldemort's good graces.

Because you see, I will  of course never like or respect Dumbledore 
so casually putting his comrades in the line of fire **knowing that 
it does not have to be so**, BUT what I am trying to do is at least  
see SOME logic, some **dire necessity** that it could not have been 
avoided at all, or something like that.

For example, every time I am thinking of Dumbledore leaving Harry 
with Dursleys, I hope he will burn forever in whatever imaginary hell 
exists in Potterverse, BUT I understand the *blood protection* thing. 
I mean, I do not think that it was enough reason, I do not believe it 
was shown in details, I still think he should have checked on Harry, 
BUT I can see good faith reason for Dumbledore who is not a monster 
to do so. I  mean, relatively good faith reason, since it is also 
tied up with what I believe Dumbledore the most royally screwing 
Sirius over, but at least some sort of good faith.

Another example is the Tower of course. I find Dumbledore ordering 
Snape to kill him and not caring about Snape's soul, being well, 
screwy, to put it mildly. BUT sure, there is some sort of logic that 
Snape who killed leader of Light, well will be in good graces of 
Voldemort.


Here the reason  for betraying the order being Snape getting in 
Voldemort's better graces or Voldemort not being suspicious of him, 
well I am afraid does not wash with me unless Dumbledore either 
completely crazy or just plain evil. And I know JKR did not mean for 
him to be completely evil ( boy do I have to remind myself of it 
often), so I have to go with crazy old paranoic.

I find it crazy because as I described above I do not see how 
Voldemort would have just let Snape out of his good graces when he 
would not know the date  and I mean, if we go with this logic ? that 
everything goes in order to make Snape even more informed in 
Voldemort's eyes, what exactly is off-limits, eh?

Please, let's make Snape tell Voldemort the safe houses of the Order, 
oh oh please let him inform Voldemort that there is a very good way 
to make Harry come to him, let's catch Ginny Weasley and Harry is 
almost bound to come flying to save her, etc. Is there ANY 
information which is off-limits for passing to Voldemort if it helps 
increasing Snape's informative standing?

Because if it is not, it smells evil to me.

JMO,

Alla
 






From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Thu May  1 02:47:24 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 02:47:24 -0000
Subject: ChapDisc: DH 18, The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <fvb87r+os9i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvbavs+gua3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182750

Alla wrote:
> <snip> Please, let's make Snape tell Voldemort the safe houses of
the Order, oh oh please let him inform Voldemort that there is a very
good way to make Harry come to him, let's catch Ginny Weasley and
Harry is  almost bound to come flying to save her, etc. Is there ANY
information which is off-limits for passing to Voldemort if it helps
increasing Snape's informative standing?
> 
> Because if it is not, it smells evil to me.

Carol responds:

I think the fact that LV doesn't have this information shows that
there *are* limits, either to Dumbledore's orders or to what Snape is
wiling to do or both.

Their goal is to protect Harry until he can face Voldemort. (Snape, of
course, doesn't know that Harry can survive this confrontation.)
Naturally, they're not going to give LV information that he doesn't
need just to sustain or increase Snape's credibility. But giving LV
information about a specific plan that LV knows must exist (the blood
protection is about to expire, and Harry has to leave some time before
his seventeenth birthday) is essential if Snape is to become
headmaster and carry out the rest of the plan.

Giving him specific information about the safe houses is not. Notice
how vague Snape is when LV asks where the Order is going to hide Harry
next. He says "At the home of one of the Order. the place, according
to the source, has been given every protection that the Order and
Ministry together could provide" (5). 

So Snape not only doesn't specify which Order member's house Harry
will be taken to, he also doesn't indicate that there will be seven
safe houses (eight counting the one for the Dursleys'). He states that
there's probable little chance of capturing Harry once he's there and
turns the direction of the conversation to the timing of the
Ministry's fall--very, very deft, Severus!

At any rate, there are clearly limits on the amount and types of
information that Snape gives LV--only as much as necessary to maintain
the illusion that he is telling LV everything he knows about the
matter at hand.

As for ginny Weasley, there's no reason whatever to bring her up and
every reason not to do so, for both her sake and Harry's.

BTW. Zara's idea that the plan is the Order's, not Dumbledore's, makes
sense to me. It certainly can't be *Portrait!*Dumbledore's because
Snape is the only person communicating with the portrait. So, either
it's Dumbledore's old plan, in which case he would surely have
suggested the Poly-juiced Potters to begin with, or it's the Order's
plan, cobbled together without DD's help and reported to Snape by his
source, presumably Mundungus.

Maybe Portrait!DD saw just how flawed that plan was and suggested the
seven Potters as the only possible way to keep it from becoming a
debacle. That's what Snape seems to imply to Confundungus, at any
rate: "You will suggest to the Order of the Phoenix that they use
decoys. Polyjuice Potion. *It is the only thing that might work*"
(688). The "only" way that the plan "might" work. It doesn't sound to
me as if DD suggested it, or as if either he or Snape has much faith
in a plan that can only possibly be saved from certain disaster by
having Snape Confund Mundungus and plant the suggestion of the
Polyjuiced Potters.

As to why DD wanted Snape to reveal the time and date, at least in
part and perhaps solely to maintain Snape's credibility, I've already
discussed that in another post.

Carol, who thinks that everything started falling apart when DD put on
that ring




From leekaiwen at yahoo.com  Thu May  1 07:39:30 2008
From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen)
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 15:39:30 +0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] What if Bellatrix found the Elder Wand?
In-Reply-To: <fvadug+d8p1@eGroups.com>
References: <fvadug+d8p1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <481973B2.2040302@yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182751

SSSusan:
> I think this is a fascinating question.

I agree.

> If she truly was as powerful, THEN would her desire 
 > for power, for more power, to be the one with
 > supreme power, override her lusting and
> longing for Voldy? Would she still share or give 
 > the wand away? Or would she keep it and try to
 > control him?

I see two different definitions of "power" colluding (or colliding) 
here. In the first sense, of strength, I think Bella's lust for power is 
quite apparent. In the second, of control and domination over others, I 
don't see Bella's lust as matching Riddle's. Bella relished evil for 
evil's sake, and she would likely have enjoyed Total Domination 
initially, mostly only insofar as it enabled her lust for evil toward 
others. But I think she ultimately would have become at first bored with 
all the administrative overhead of being Supreme Mugwump, and ultimately 
annoyed at how the business of running the world kept intefering with 
her desires to just go run amock.

Supreme Mugwumpesse Bella: So, I think I'll go AK those Mudbloods we 
rounded up last week.
First Lieutenant Voldy: Sorry, you're scheduled to tour the MoM this 
morning.
SM: Oh, that's right. This afternoon then.
Voldy: No can do -- the monthly Azkhaban Board meeting starts at two.
SM: Tomorrow?
Voldy: DE inspections in the morning, and you're spending the afternoon 
reviewing proposals for the new Dark Mark design.
SM: (exasperated) So what's the *point* of being SM if I never get to 
have any fun?

Riddle, on the other hand, was a psychotic whose egomania *demanded* 
Total Domination; anything less was utterly intolerable to him. Bella's 
evil was, in a sense, more pure than Riddle's -- evil for evil's sake. 
Riddle's motivation, on the other hand, seems to have been more about 
power and domination than it was about the pure joy of evil.

That's not to say Bella wouldn't have been tempted by the idea of 
Supreme Mugwumpness, and might even have challenged Voldy if she'd had 
the means. But I think her reign would have been much more chaotic than 
Riddle's and quickly imploded.

--C




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Thu May  1 16:14:21 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 16:14:21 -0000
Subject: ChapDisc: DH 18, The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <fvbavs+gua3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvcq8t+4qls@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182752

Carol responds:
<SNIP>
I think the fact that LV doesn't have this information shows that
there *are* limits, either to Dumbledore's orders or to what Snape is
wiling to do or both.

Their goal is to protect Harry until he can face Voldemort. (Snape, of
course, doesn't know that Harry can survive this confrontation.)
Naturally, they're not going to give LV information that he doesn't
need just to sustain or increase Snape's credibility. But giving LV
information about a specific plan that LV knows must exist (the blood
protection is about to expire, and Harry has to leave some time before
his seventeenth birthday) is essential if Snape is to become
headmaster and carry out the rest of the plan.

Giving him specific information about the safe houses is not. Notice
how vague Snape is when LV asks where the Order is going to hide Harry
next. He says "At the home of one of the Order. the place, according
to the source, has been given every protection that the Order and
Ministry together could provide" (5).
<SNIP>
At any rate, there are clearly limits on the amount and types of
information that Snape gives LV--only as much as necessary to maintain
the illusion that he is telling LV everything he knows about the
matter at hand.

As for Ginny Weasley, there's no reason whatever to bring her up and
every reason not to do so, for both her sake and Harry's. <SNIP>


Alla:

Yes, I know that Voldemort does not have that particular information, 
but it is not quite my point. My point is that IF the underlying 
reason for giving ANY information to Voldemort will be to improve 
Snape's standing in Voldemort's eyes, then where do we draw the line 
without becoming evil?

For example, you argued that giving the information about the plan is 
essential to Snape becoming the Headmaster, while giving information 
about safe houses is not. How so?

The purpose in both instances is essentially the same, no? The 
purpose, I mean which Voldemort thinks is the purpose. For him ? the 
purpose is to catch Harry Potter, so he will allegedly trust Snape 
more if he knows how Potter will be transported AND he will allegedly 
trust Snape more if he knows WHERE Potter will be transported, no? He 
can attack in any place he chooses, be it moment of transportation or 
when Harry and his guard arrive at safe house.

What I am trying to say is that I see no difference between giving 
one type of info to Voldemort and NOT giving another.

What I am also saying that personally I do not see any correlation 
between Snape's standing being improved and giving that information. 
For all I know Snape's standing is already as good as it can get. For 
all I know Voldemort trusts ANY of his fellow DE only as much as he 
so desires, no matter what they do and Snape is way ahead already by 
killing Dumbledore.

What I am saying is that for me to swallow the idea that Dumbledore 
is betraying the Order to make sure that Snape is fine and dandy with 
Voldemort, there better be some ironclad reason that he is, well not 
OR there better be some other reason for Dumbledore doing what he did.

You also argued that Ginny Weasley is not needed to be bring into the 
mix, well sure I agree. But I seem to remember strong agreement on 
the list that Snape at least told Voldemort that Sirius is back in 
England (or some other PART of his story, not sure) and again where 
exactly do we draw the line?

Sirius was a person whom Harry loved dearly; Ginny is the person whom 
Harry loves dearly. Who is to say that Dumbledore would not decide 
one day that to improve Snape' standing he needs to tell Voldemort 
that there is a potential captive in the school who can be kidnapped 
and Harry is sure as heck to come to rescue her and could be attacked?

Where exactly we drew the line to decide which innocent lives could 
be sacrificed to improve Snape's standing (which I do not see NEEDS 
improvement) and which are not?

JMO,

Alla





From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Thu May  1 16:37:39 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 16:37:39 -0000
Subject: ChapDisc: DH 18, The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <fvcq8t+4qls@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvcrkj+u7s5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182753

> Alla:

> What I am also saying that personally I do not see any correlation 
> between Snape's standing being improved and giving that 
information. 
> For all I know Snape's standing is already as good as it can get. 
For 
> all I know Voldemort trusts ANY of his fellow DE only as much as he 
> so desires, no matter what they do and Snape is way ahead already 
by 
> killing Dumbledore.

Magpie:
I don't see that either. How much better does Voldemort need to see 
Snape after he's killed Dumbledore himself and there's now no reason 
for him to an insider in the Order? It's one thing to feed Snape 
information to convince Voldemort that he's a helpful spy on the 
Order, but he's no longer that in DH anyway and has no big reason to 
have insider information. I can't imagine who else would have been 
Headmaster at Hogwarts anyway.

Plus there's the fact that nobody in the Order knows it's a trap. 
Only Dumbledore knows this. Had everybody known it was really a trap, 
that the decoys were not just a layer of protection but that they 
would without doubt all be being chased by DEs who will kill the 
escort and capture (and probably later kill) the fake Harry, would 
they have offered up so many kids to the plan? How many Weasleys are 
Molly and Arthur devoting to this mission without knowing what the 
real mission is?

-m




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Thu May  1 17:25:14 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 17:25:14 -0000
Subject: ChapDisc: DH 18, The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <fvb87r+os9i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvcudq+qq4p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182754


> Alla:
> 
> Do I follow the hypothetical scenario that you described? Totally.
Do  I see canon support for this scenario? No, I am afraid not really. 
> How do you deduce  that Dumbledore is being sure that Voldemort is 
> 99% certain  that he can spot Harry leaving Privet Drive in time to 
> intercept him? We are talking about Dumbledore being sure of this 
> **without Snape giving Voldemort any information yet**, right?
> 
> I am not even talking about Dumbledore estimating any odds actually, 
> I am just talking about Dumbledore just knowing that Order's plan is 
> bound to fail. 

<snip>

> Because you see, I will  of course never like or respect Dumbledore 
> so casually putting his comrades in the line of fire **knowing that 
> it does not have to be so**, BUT what I am trying to do is at least  
> see SOME logic, some **dire necessity** that it could not have been 
> avoided at all, or something like that.
> 

Pippin:
I have canon that it isn't done casually:

"You never killed if you could avoid it!" 
"True, true," said Dumbledore, and he was like a child seeking
reassurance. --DH 35

Unless I'm supposed to think that Harry and Dumbledore are  insane or
lying to each other, it's canon that Dumbledore would not send people
to their deaths lightly, and not unless the alternatives were worse. 

Now, reasonable people can disagree on what, if anything, is worse
than death. And I think one of the things JKR is showing us is that
the problem with even the most benign and enlightened of despotisms is
that  the despot gets to  decide what's benign and enlightened. Tough
luck if you think otherwise. He won't kill you for it -- but he ain't
gonna change his mind.

If JKR wanted us to think that Dumbledore could have found a way to
avoid more deaths  if he'd tried harder or thought about it more, IMO,
she'd have had someone say so. But even Aberforth doesn't say that. He
doesn't say that if Harry thinks about it he might find a way to fight
Voldemort that doesn't involve so much personal risk. He just asks
whether someone who cared about Harry wouldn't have told him to go and
hide rather than place himself in danger for the sake of a greater good. 

Harry says he knows he might have to die, that he's known all along.
Harry didn't feel betrayed because  he'd have to sacrifice his life,
he felt betrayed because (as he thought) Dumbledore *knew* he'd have
to sacrifice his life and didn't tell him. 

Dumbledore's mania for secrecy is criticized, his desire to protect
people from making poor decisions by not letting them make any
decisions at all is roundly denounced. Dumbledore was definitely
dangerous to know. But if we were supposed to think that he was mad or
bad, I don't think Dead!Dumbledore would have said "good-bye for the
present" -- sorry to disappoint you, but Dumbledore is not going to be
burning in any imaginary hells, not unless Harry expects to end up
there as well!

It seems wrong that the mighty wizard who can do so many things that
seem impossible can't find a better way. That's what mighty wizards
are for. But, in the immortal words of a Larry Niven character whose
name I have forgotten, "There doesn't got to be a way." That is where
these books part company with escapism. 

In the Potterverse, there doesn't got to be a way that Fudge could
have reached out to the Giants or banished the dementors without
alienating his supporters. There doesn't got to be a way Dumbledore
could have survived the ring curse. There doesn't got to be a way that
Snape could have saved Charity Burbage. There doesn't got to be a way
to make the House-elves embrace the idea of freedom, there doesn't got
to be a way to make the Slytherins less selfish or the Gryffindors
less arrogant, why with all these harsh realities to be accepted
should I think there was a way to get Harry away from Privet Drive
without Voldemort knowing? 

Voldemort has always been able to find out anything he wanted to know.
 That he wanted to know when Harry would be leaving Privet Drive is
made clear from the start. The first order of business when Snape and
Yaxley arrive at Malfoy Manor is their reports on this subject, and as
I very much doubt that anybody but Voldemort determines the agenda at
DE meetings, Yaxley and Snape obviously already know that Voldemort
desires this information above all. 

Snape has already represented himself as having "a source we
discussed" inside the Order -- if he then failed to produce correct
information, Voldemort would indeed be suspicious, and that would
jeopardize Snape's missions as prospective headmaster, protector of
the students, deliverer of the sword and conduit of vital information
for  Harry, none of which Snape will be likely to accomplish if
Voldemort is keeping him close, like Lucius, to torment him for
failure or  to observe him for signs of disloyalty.

Moody says "if we're lucky" Voldemort will have swallowed the fake
bait, but explains that with You Know Who out there and half the
ministry on his side, the polyjuice plan is needed. He's underplaying
the possibilities of Voldemort not taking the bait and participating
in the attack, but he knows it might be coming. He wasn't completely
unprepared. And he cuts the conversation short when Harry tries to
poke holes in the plan -- is that because he thinks the plan is
perfect as is, or because he knows it isn't and doesn't want his
people dwelling on how much could go wrong?

One of the problems, I think, is that, as Harry notes to himself, the
Moody we know best isn't the real one.  The real Moody isn't as
cleverly devious as Barty Jr. The real Moody thinks being devious is
dishonorable (ironically we know this from fake Moody's ferret
bounce.) A person like that would be ill-equipped to come up with a
plan that would have a truly decent chance of fooling Voldemort, and
Moody probably knows it.  

Alla:
> Another example is the Tower of course. I find Dumbledore ordering 
> Snape to kill him and not caring about Snape's soul, being well, 
> screwy, to put it mildly. 

Pippin:
Where does it say Dumbledore doesn't care about Snape's soul? He says,
"You alone know whether it will harm your soul to help an old man
avoid pain and humiliation" -- in other words, whether allowing a
doomed  old man to die with dignity and in the service of the cause
for which he dedicated most of his life would be an act of supreme evil. 

Dumbledore is not saying, do this evil thing because I'm willing to
commit you to hell in order to avoid a few hours or minutes of
suffering. He's saying, I don't think this would be an evil thing, and
if you agree, do me this favor.

I don't think the anguished moment we see in Flight of the Prince is
Snape's remorse for killing Dumbledore. I think it  was for that one
moment that Snape experienced *James'* death through Lily's eyes:
"Kill me like you killed him." It was fleeting,  like Harry's
momentary sympathy for Snape in OOP. But I think it was there.

Pippin





From juli17 at aol.com  Thu May  1 18:03:32 2008
From: juli17 at aol.com (julie)
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 18:03:32 -0000
Subject: HP as escapist children's literature (was Harry's DADA skill)
In-Reply-To: <fv8pjf+jhcb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvd0lk+onqs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182755

 
> 
> Pippin:
> I can only speak for myself, but I think we adult readers are meant 
to
> become disenchanted, not just with the Potterverse but with what we
> might call the consensus  universe of modern fantasy:  archaic 
social
> structures,  one-dimensional characters and most of all the escape
> from moral complexity. No Tolkien characters  ever had to look at 
what
> they'd done and ask if they were  any better than Sauron --  either
> they are, or they no longer care. 
> 
> Now, JKR isn't saying that escapism is wrong, IMO, but at least I
> think she'd like her adult readers to understand that it *is* 
escapism
> -- that life in such a place would not be nearly as nice as we like 
to
> imagine it would be, not if the populace  bore any resemblance to
> actual human beings. 
> 
> I think that like Terry Pratchett JKR has taken the world of magical
> heroes and tried to imagine how it would work if it were populated 
by
> real people instead of one-dimensional archetypes. 
> 
> But JKR takes it further. Pratchett heroes can be Machiavellian,
> cowardly, manipulative, clueless, close-minded etc, but always for
> comic effect, never to the point where the reader starts to lose
> respect for them.
> 
>  JKR dared to cross that line, and so we have  choices: 
> 
> a)We can lose our respect for the heroes, and with it all delight in
> their victory and the world they saved.
> 
> b)We can read with the innocent heart of a child, making no more
> demands  than a child would make. To a child, IMO, Harry's crucio is
> Harry's crucio -- it's neither a commentary on the permissibility of
> torture in the real world, nor an unforgivable thing for which there
> has to be some consequence. To the child, IMO, the story does not 
need
> to say whether Harry made a mistake and learned better, or whether 
he
> was right in the first place. Harry came out all right, and so he 
must
> have made whatever the child thinks the right choices would be,
> because that's the way it works in stories.
> 
> c) We can put moral blinkers on and overlook  behavior that would
> otherwise be egregious (and it's scary how easily we adults can do
> this when it's a character we want to admire.) Children, of course,
> are notoriously less willing to pretend that the emperor's not 
naked.
> 
> Or, and this is what I believe what JKR is hoping we will do
> 
> d)We can forgive. 
> 
>  We have the opportunity to be like Dumbledore and hand out second
> chances knowing full well that our mercy might be abused, knowing 
that
> we might be fools, not even knowing whether there's any chance of
> repentance or remorse. That's not easy.
> 
> But that's the way it is for grownups. Children in their innocence
> believe that  doing the right thing is easy for good people, and 
only
> hard for bad ones.  Adults understand that to be good often requires
> doing what is hard, and that sometimes despite our best intentions, 
we
> may fail. But for the adult, IMO, that doesn't make us bad -- it 
only
> makes us human.
> 
> Pippin
>

Julie:
Interesting analysis. The thing for me is, I don't think JKR
was trying to *say* anything when it comes to most of the 
moral issues in the HP saga. Of course her beliefs are inserted
here and there, as most all fiction reflect the personality
and mindset of their authors. 

I think this is where I got tripped up in DH. I thought JKR
was trying to say something about morality, ethics, the state
of society, etc--all those tricky complexities that make up 
the human condition--and I mean with deliberation, not just as
a side product of her own views naturally being relfected in
the saga. But JKR herself said she was not writing a morality
play, but was simply telling a story that came to her and
demanded to be told. (Really, I should have listened to her!)

This doesn't take away the entertainment value of the stories,
or dismiss the moral issues that do naturally come up along
the way, but it does allow for the fact that many of the issues
are dealt with inconsistently (e.g. the morality of casting the
Unforgivable curses), brought up and subsequently ignored (e.g.
House Elf rights, unity of the Houses), and that quite often
morality is decided on a situational basis. It was never JKR's
intent to send moral messages, and I don't even think it was
her intent for us--adult readers or otherwise--to "get" certain
messages out of HP, like a sense of disenchantment with the
Magic World. Rather this disenchantment is a natural byproduct
of her personal interpretation of that world (and there is 
nothing wrong with the message coming from how the story 
developed in the telling rather than as a message very 
deliberately delivered via a story constructed for just that
purpose).

I hope that makes sense! And it's just my interpretation (and
based in part on JKR's interviews when she replied one too
many times with a surprised "Really?" to questioner/reader
interpretations of various HP scenes/characters/plotlines). 

The more general inconsistencies of character and story are
a different matter, and I think how much that bothers you 
depends on your own personality. I am a planner, a list-maker,
and a logical thinker, so for me it is hard to understand 
how JKR could not keep better track of the people, things,
and situations within her made-up world. It seems just a 
bit too sloppy for me. But my sister doesn't really notice
or care about such things, being that she is a much more
spontaneous and action-oriented person (a Gryffindor to my
Ravenclaw I suppose :) So I can see how JKR (a self-avowed
Gryffindor!) could be less concerned with such detail and
more concerned with simply telling a story.


Julie, still fond of HP and the Magical world, and more
willing to accept what we got rather than what I wanted.





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Thu May  1 18:14:04 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 18:14:04 -0000
Subject: ChapDisc: DH 18, The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <fvcq8t+4qls@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvd19c+9g98@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182756

Carol earlier:
> <SNIP>
> I think the fact that LV doesn't have this information shows that
there *are* limits, either to Dumbledore's orders or to what Snape is
willing to do or both.
> 
> Their goal is to protect Harry until he can face Voldemort. <snip>
> Naturally, they're not going to give LV information that he doesn't
need just to sustain or increase Snape's credibility. But giving LV
information about a specific plan that LV knows must exist (the blood
protection is about to expire, and Harry has to leave some time before
his seventeenth birthday) is essential if Snape is to become
headmaster and carry out the rest of the plan.
> 
> Giving [LV] specific information about the safe houses is not.
Notice how vague Snape is when LV asks where the Order is going to
hide Harry next. .
> <SNIP>
> At any rate, there are clearly limits on the amount and types of
information that Snape gives LV--only as much as necessary to maintain
the illusion that he is telling LV everything he knows about the
matter at hand.
<SNIP>
> 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Yes, I know that Voldemort does not have that particular
information, but it is not quite my point. My point is that IF the
underlying reason for giving ANY information to Voldemort will be to
improve Snape's standing in Voldemort's eyes, then where do we draw
the line without becoming evil?
> 
> For example, you argued that giving the information about the plan
is essential to Snape becoming the Headmaster, while giving
information about safe houses is not. How so?
<snip>
> 
> What I am trying to say is that I see no difference between giving
one type of info to Voldemort and NOT giving another.
> 
> What I am also saying that personally I do not see any correlation 
between Snape's standing being improved and giving that information. 
<snip>
> 
> What I am saying is that for me to swallow the idea that Dumbledore
is betraying the Order to make sure that Snape is fine and dandy with
Voldemort, there better be some ironclad reason that he is, well not
OR there better be some other reason for Dumbledore doing what he did.
> 
> You also argued that Ginny Weasley is not needed to be bring into
the mix, well sure I agree. But I seem to remember strong agreement on
the list that Snape at least told Voldemort that Sirius is back in 
England (or some other PART of his story, not sure) and again where 
> exactly do we draw the line?
<snip>
> Where exactly we drew the line to decide which innocent lives could
be sacrificed to improve Snape's standing (which I do not see NEEDS
improvement) and which are not?

Carol responds:

How much information to give and what to withhold (where to draw the
line) is a tricky question for any double agent (or triple agent or
whatever Snape is). I'm sure that he tells *Dumbledore* (living or
portrait) everything that he learns from LV and the DEs, but the other
way around is tricky. Snape, pretending to be LV's spy, has to reveal
what appears to be key information or LV will suspect that he's loyal
to DD and kill him. Even after DD's death, it's essential for Snape to
be (or seem to be) LV's right-hand man and *keep* the position he
earned by killing DD. (We can see Yaxley jockeying for that position,
which was Lucius Malfoy's before it was Snape's. Bellatrix, too, wants
LV's approval. Do we want to see *her* as headmistress of Hogwarts?)

With regard to Sirius Black, telling LV that he's back in England
(actually Scotland; Snape sees him at Hogwarts) *seems* to be
important information, but he doesn't at that point know and therefore
can't reveal where Black is hiding. (Nor can he reveal it later when
Sirius is at HQ protected by the Fidelius Charm.) Even Lucius Malfoy's
seeing Black in dog form on Platfrom 9 3/4 (which Snape sneeringly
informs Black about) in no way actually harms Black, except for making
it necessary (in DD's view) for him to stay hidden in 12 GP. Had he
shown up at the MoM to fight without his presence in England being
previously known, Bellatrix would still have recognized "the animagus
black" and would still have fought him. In the long run, Snape's
information made no difference. He only claimed that it did to
convince Bella of his loyalty to LV.

The information Snape gives to LV *seems* important, but it isn't. And
that is what DD trusts Snape to do. "Do not think that I underestimate
the constant danger in which you place yourself, Severus. To give
Voldemort what appears to be valuable information while withholding
the essentials is a job which I would entrust to nobody but you:
(684). And yet not even Snape knows all about Dumbledore's plans. DD
withholds information, chiefly about the Horcruxes, from him, too. 

Snape does not just give Voldemort whatever information is available.
He has to choose carefully which seemingly important bits to reveal.
In the case of the plan to rescue Harry from 4 Privet Drive, he has to
sound (as he is) well-informed and he has to seem to be revealing
everything, which is why DD has him give even the seemingly most
important information, the time and the date. But Snape does not
identify the safe house to which Harry will be going, much less that
there are seven (or eight) such houses. Instead, he says that the safe
house will be so well-protected that they will need to get to Harry
before he reaches the house, a deft move that eliminates the necessity
of revealing the location.

I wouldn't want to be Snape walking on eggshells to avoid revealing
the crucial elements while revealing everything else, nor would I want
to be Dumbledore, ordering him to do so in order to make sure that
Snape is placed in the key position of headmaster, the only person who
can maintain something like order at Hogwarts while having access to
DD's portrait and the Sword of Gryffindor, which only he can deliver
to Harry. He *has* to reveal key information (and even "appear to play
his part" in the chase when it occurs, though Snape, with his new
penchant for saving lives if he can rather than watching people die,
nearly blows his cover with a Sectumsempra intended for a DE's hand).
They are both doing what they can to keep Harry safe through the
Polyjuiced Potters plan, "the only thing that might work" to save what
appears to be Mad-eye's mad plan from disaster.

As for DD "betraying the Order," I think that the DEs would have found
out the date and time in any case by watching the house and would have
touched their Dark marks to summon Voldemort and the other waiting
DEs. Instead, Snape reveals the information in advance to maintain his
crucial position as right-hand man, but conceals the element that he
himself has suggested to Mundungus, the decoys. Mad-eye says much the
same thing: ". . . {Volemort would be mad not to have a Death eater or
two keeping an eye out. . . . [T]hey [the DEs] know the rough position
of the place. Our only chance is to use decoys. Even You-Know-Who
can't split himself into seven" (29-30).

Imagine if they'd tried to escort Harry to a safe house using the same
plan as in OoP, Harry (trunk, Hedwig and all) on a broom with the
guard circling him. The one or two watching DEs wouldn't need Snape's
information about time and place. They'd just summon LV, who'd summon
more DEs, who would have no hesitation about killing Order members,
and Harry would be in danger of being caught in the crossfire.
(Sidenote: If DD could easily send Harry's trunk and Hedwig's cage on
to the Weasleys' house in HBP, why couldn't the Order do the same thing?)

So the plan itself, which must originally have been to get Harry out
of the house early with an Order escort, using brooms rather than a
Ministry-monitored means of transportation, was seriously flawed and
would almost certainly have been disastrous. Portrait!Dumbledore's
Polyjuice plan, passed on to the Confunded Mundungus by Snape, is the
only possible means of preventing that disaster. Snape, on DD's
orders, keeps the decoys and the location of the safe house(s) secret,
but reveals the date and time, which the watching DEs would have
discovered, anyway.

Where is the betrayal? Portrait!DD and Snape, as far as I can see, are
making the best of a very bad situation.

Carol, who doesn't think we can blame Portrait!DD for a faulty plan
that could not have been his or for having Snape reveal what would
have been found out, anyway




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Thu May  1 20:32:47 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 20:32:47 -0000
Subject: The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore/ some spoilers for Song for Arbonne
In-Reply-To: <fvcudq+qq4p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvd9df+515q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182757

Pippin:
<SNIP>
Dumbledore's mania for secrecy is criticized, his desire to protect
people from making poor decisions by not letting them make any
decisions at all is roundly denounced. Dumbledore was definitely
dangerous to know. But if we were supposed to think that he was mad or
bad, I don't think Dead!Dumbledore would have said "good-bye for the
present" -- sorry to disappoint you, but Dumbledore is not going to be
burning in any imaginary hells, not unless Harry expects to end up
there as well!

Alla:

Quite frankly, I do not care what we are supposed  to think about 
Dumbledore, I have my well formed opinion of him and it is what it 
is. As I mentioned before, I do forgive him, but certainly not with 
such eagerness as Harry did and certainly not for everything. I think 
some of his actions were mad or bad, or both, but I am aware that 
this was not author's intention. She just did not convince me.
So, yes I know she did not want him to burn, I sometimes do.

As I am sure you know since I mentioned it quite a few times here 
that I am in love with Guy Gavriel Kay's book "A Song for Arbonne". 
There is a character in that book, who is basically in charge of the 
country during medieval times since her husband died. If you read 
this book, I can just tell you that I believe that this is the leader 
from whom I believe Dumbledore should have taken leadership lessons. 
And believe me, her country faced very tough times expecting to be at 
war and being at war, and she had to make VERY tough decisions.

But see the difference is that never for a second I had any doubt 
that she cared about people whom she rules first and foremost and 
only in that light 

There are several decisions she has to make there which to me smell 
of manipulating people and trust me, all of those decisions are for 
the greater good for real. Those decisions are of different 
importance though. In one instance she flat out refuses to manipulate 
two people, even though it would have made  a point to their enemy to 
demonstrate their unity. In another instance she is shown to be 
thinking over the plan, which sort of requires manipulation but going 
along with it.

There is a third decision which to me is the most important one and 
as we end up learning she makes it with no hesitation, but I 
sincerely doubt that if you read the book that this decision was made 
out of most dire necessity ever and it indeed eventually saves their 
country. And heeee, she keeps it a secret indeed till this is all 
over.
She is shown to care about people, to know their psychology very 
well, unlike Dumbledore IMO and she is shown to be unwilling to hurt 
people without dire necessity of winning the war.

Yes, I think Dumbledore should have taken lessons from Signe, doubt 
that it will help. But I for example sincerely doubt that she would 
have let Sirius sit in that house, knowing that he will go crazy 
without having something to do and so many other things.

That's what I was hoping Dumbledore will end being shown - yes, 
person who made many tough decisions, but all of those decisions 
being made while caring about people, valuing life, agonizing over 
them. Yeah, right. In much agony he is while telling Snape to inform 
Voldemort about the Order, NOT.


Pippin:
<SNIP>
If JKR wanted us to think that Dumbledore could have found a way to
avoid more deaths if he'd tried harder or thought about it more, IMO,
she'd have had someone say so.<SNIP>

Alla:

I think by showing those scenarios, she made me think so, yes. 

Pippin:
<SNIP>
In the Potterverse, there doesn't got to be a way that Fudge could
have reached out to the Giants or banished the dementors without
alienating his supporters. There doesn't got to be a way Dumbledore
could have survived the ring curse. There doesn't got to be a way that
Snape could have saved Charity Burbage. There doesn't got to be a way
to make the House-elves embrace the idea of freedom, there doesn't got
to be a way to make the Slytherins less selfish or the Gryffindors
less arrogant, why with all these harsh realities to be accepted
should I think there was a way to get Harry away from Privet Drive
without Voldemort knowing?
<SNIP>

Alla:

So  the assumption  is that even if Dumbledore would not tell Snape 
to betray the date to Voldemort, he would have found out anyways? I 
cannot make such assumption. 
And not that I find all those situations to be relevant, but out of 
curiosity how does it work? Fudge being stupid and not reaching out 
to other races, means that there was just no way to do it? I see it 
as Fudge making a wrong choice and not doing it, not that he just 
could not do it.


Pippin:
Where does it say Dumbledore doesn't care about Snape's soul? He says,
"You alone know whether it will harm your soul to help an old man
avoid pain and humiliation" -- in other words, whether allowing a
doomed old man to die with dignity and in the service of the cause
for which he dedicated most of his life would be an act of supreme 
evil. 

Alla:

Yes, I know what he said. But the thing is when we first heard about 
murder splitting the soul, there was no indication that the person 
alone knows whether it will be so or not, isn't it?

I took this as piece of rhetoric, which Dumbledore most likely knew 
was a lie. IMO of course.






From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Thu May  1 21:38:36 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 21:38:36 -0000
Subject: The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore/ some spoilers for Song for Arbonne
In-Reply-To: <fvd9df+515q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvdd8s+d3re@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182758

Alla wrote:
> 
> Quite frankly, I do not care what we are supposed  to think about
Dumbledore, I have my well formed opinion of him and it is what it 
is. <big snip>

Carol responds:

Just a sidenote here. I agree with you that an author's intentions are
less important than the reader's interpretation. Intentions, even when
we know them, are not always successfully carried out. It's what's on
the page and how we interpret it on a careful reading, that matters.
And different careful readings will produce different results.

As for me, I *don't* have a "well-formed opinion" of Dumbledore.
(Snape, yes.) I'm still coming to terms with the revelations in DH but
a little more prone to forgiveness than you are, I think.

Sidenote to Pippin: Do you think that our Muggle-loving Dumbledore
read and was influenced by Plato's "Republic"?

Alla wrote:
> That's what I was hoping Dumbledore will end being shown - yes, 
person who made many tough decisions, but all of those decisions 
being made while caring about people, valuing life, agonizing over 
them. Yeah, right. In much agony he is while telling Snape to inform
Voldemort about the Order, NOT.

Carol responds:
Which brings up a distinction that I don't see being made in this
discussion between (well,, I've tried to make it but to no effect)
between the living Dumbledore of books one through six and parts of
"The Prince's Tale" and the Portrait!Dumbledore of the rest of "The
Prince's Tale." Can the portrait of a dead man agonize over decisions
involving life and death? He's very definitely concerned for Snape to
keep his cover (expressed twice, IIRC) but anxiety for the success of
his plan and for Harry's and snape's safety, both essential to it, is
different from agonizing over the possible deaths of other Order
members (who are, nevertheless, voluntarily risking their lives, with
the exception of Mundungus, who's being coerced by Mad-eye, not by
Portrait!DD).

I'm not trying to excuse Dumbledore from the responsibility to
consider the danger in which he's placing people by having Snape
reveal the date and time of the escape (which I still think that LV
would have found out, anyway). I'm just wondering, for the sake of
this discussion, how much like the real DD the portrait is. I do note,
though, that Portrait!DD and other portraits cry for joy over Harry's
victory, but, still, isn't it a bit much to hold a mere portrait to
human standards of empathy and compassion? Just asking, not arguing.

Alla:
> 
> So  the assumption  is that even if Dumbledore would not tell Snape
to betray the date to Voldemort, he would have found out anyways? I 
cannot make such assumption. 

Carol responds:
You don't think that Mad-eye was right that LV would have had DEs
watching the neighborhood, knowing that the charm was about to break,
just in case the Order decided to break it early? He did, after all,
have a group of two or three DEs watching a house they couldn't see,
12 GP, for signs that Harry or other "Undesirables" might be hiding
there. I think it's a safe assumption, myself.

Alla:
> And not that I find all those situations to be relevant, but out of
curiosity how does it work? Fudge being stupid and not reaching out 
to other races, means that there was just no way to do it? I see it as
Fudge making a wrong choice and not doing it, not that he just could
not do it.

Carol:
First, I'm not agreeing with Pippin that Fudge and the giants was an
equivalent situation. I just want to make an observation. I've always
thought that Fudge *did* send an ambassador to the Giants, an MoM
employee named Walden Macnair, recommended for the job by Fudge's good
friend, Lucius Malfoy. What Fudge didn't know was that his ambassador
wasn't working for him at all: both Malfoy and Macnair were working
for Voldemort. (I don't have any proof for this theory, only the
Fudge/Malfoy and Malfoy/Macnair connections, and the fact of Macnair's
being, like Rookwood before him, both a DE and a Ministry employee.
I've also wondered who the other DE was; Hagrid never tells HRH and
presumably doesn't know.) At any rate, if I'm right, Fudge's mistake
wasn't choosing not to send an embassy to the giants; it was sending
the wrong ambassador.

> Pippin:
> Where does it say Dumbledore doesn't care about Snape's soul? He
says, "You alone know whether it will harm your soul to help an old
man avoid pain and humiliation" -- in other words, whether allowing a
doomed old man to die with dignity and in the service of the cause for
which he dedicated most of his life would be an act of supreme evil. 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Yes, I know what he said. But the thing is when we first heard about
murder splitting the soul, there was no indication that the person
alone knows whether it will be so or not, isn't it?
> 
> I took this as piece of rhetoric, which Dumbledore most likely knew
was a lie. IMO of course.

Carol responds:
Of course, it's a matter of interpretation again, but I agree with
Pippin. Murder splits the soul, but mercy killing which also saves the
soul of a seventeen-year-old boy (more or less--Draco's birthday might
not have occurred yet, but it's days away if it hasn't) is different
from the outright murder that Draco or the DEs would have committed.
Snape's other motivations, which include protecting Harry and helping
DD to defeat Voldemort, also prevent his act from being murder. It's
more a coup de grace since Dumbledore this time around falls into the
category of someone that Snape can't save (between the potion and the
DEs, he's going to die in any case) and having Snape rather than
someone else kill him furthers the cause of the fight against Voldemort.

I agree that it's a terrible burden to place on Snape, but I don't
think that Dumbledore was lying about Snape's soul. I think that
Snape's motivations for honoring DD's request, along with everything
else he did to atone for his earlier role in the deaths of Harry's
parents, ensured his redemption. At least his soul, even if it was
damaged, remained inside his body, where it had some chance of
healing, in contrast to LV's permanently maimed soul. I read Snape as
fully redeemed and happier after death than he ever was in life.

Another thing, too. "King's Cross" shows Dumbledore as healed of the
injury to his hand (the result of his own stupidity and selfish desire
to undo his wrongs to his sister). In "the Forest Again," Sirius Black
appears to be healed of the torments of Azkaban and Remus Lupin
appears to be free of the ravages of lycanthropy. Our glimpse of the
afterlife, "the next great adventure" (even though Harry didn't choose
to "go on") seems to show that death heals the wounds inflicted by
life. Unless, of course, you have mangled your soul and have only a
fragment of it left and die unredeemed and unrepentant like Voldemort,
in which case, you are likely to spend eternity as a whimpering,
tortured child wrapped in filthy rags and left under a bench.

I really don't think that DD was lying to Snape in this instance or
that he was unconcerned about the state of Snape's soul. YMMV.

Carol, wondering what the afterlife is like for Peter Pettigrew and
Gellert Grindelwald






From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk  Thu May  1 22:44:48 2008
From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 22:44:48 -0000
Subject: HP as escapist children's literature (was Harry's DADA skill)
In-Reply-To: <fvd0lk+onqs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvdh51+ks2n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182759

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "julie" <juli17 at ...> wrote:

 Julie:
> Interesting analysis. The thing for me is, I don't think JKR
> was trying to *say* anything when it comes to most of the 
> moral issues in the HP saga. Of course her beliefs are inserted
> here and there, as most all fiction reflect the personality
> and mindset of their authors. 
> 
> I think this is where I got tripped up in DH. I thought JKR
> was trying to say something about morality, ethics, the state
> of society, etc--all those tricky complexities that make up 
> the human condition--and I mean with deliberation, not just as
> a side product of her own views naturally being relfected in
> the saga. But JKR herself said she was not writing a morality
> play, but was simply telling a story that came to her and
> demanded to be told. (Really, I should have listened to her!)
 
> This doesn't take away the entertainment value of the stories,
> or dismiss the moral issues that do naturally come up along
> the way, but it does allow for the fact that many of the issues
> are dealt with inconsistently (e.g. the morality of casting the
> Unforgivable curses), brought up and subsequently ignored (e.g.
> House Elf rights, unity of the Houses), and that quite often
> morality is decided on a situational basis. It was never JKR's
> intent to send moral messages, and I don't even think it was
> her intent for us--adult readers or otherwise--to "get" certain
> messages out of HP, like a sense of disenchantment with the
> Magic World. Rather this disenchantment is a natural byproduct
> of her personal interpretation of that world (and there is 
> nothing wrong with the message coming from how the story 
> developed in the telling rather than as a message very 
> deliberately delivered via a story constructed for just that
> purpose).

> The more general inconsistencies of character and story are
> a different matter, and I think how much that bothers you 
> depends on your own personality. I am a planner, a list-maker,
> and a logical thinker, so for me it is hard to understand 
> how JKR could not keep better track of the people, things,
> and situations within her made-up world. It seems just a 
> bit too sloppy for me. But my sister doesn't really notice
> or care about such things, being that she is a much more
> spontaneous and action-oriented person (a Gryffindor to my
> Ravenclaw I suppose :) So I can see how JKR (a self-avowed
> Gryffindor!) could be less concerned with such detail and
> more concerned with simply telling a story.

Geoff:
But this is surely just like the real world. JKR has presented a 
microcosm of reality, reflected and seen from a different angle.

I have said in past posts when considering the Christian content of
 JKR's writing and that of JRRT and CSL that something of their belief 
will show through. We are inconsistent about moral and ethical 
issues and I suspect that we are all guilty of double standards when 
it suits us because we are fallible humans but those views still 
remain even if deep down. 

I was leading a Bible study today and we remarked on the number 
of times we look at ourselves and and our surroundings and ask 
"How did we get here? What happened to our high hopes and 
aspirations of our younger and more idealistic(?) days?" Have we 
deliberately drifted away from those aims or have we just let life 
chip away and soften our long-held and long fought for views?

To me, JKR's world is the better for being "realistic" in that sense. The 
white hats have shades of grey in their headgear and the black hats 
have little flecks of white . Sorry to digress into Christian things again 
but the study I was leading today was about Peter and I said that I am
always glad that Peter fell over his own feet and opened his mouth at 
the wrong time and occasionally said something which was absolute 
rubbish because I can then identify with him and his battle to reach 
towards perfection in his faith.

If the HP characters were squeaky clean and their moral, ethical and 
everyday approach to everything was beyond reproach and Harry was, 
as Draco sarcastically calls him "Saint Potter", would we even *want*
 to read about them? Perfection is something we will never achieve in 
this life; that is what makes people such intriguing  personalities when 
we see how they are either trying to go by this route or have given up 
and let the world carry them in its flow.

I think I would like to meet your sister; I feel that we have the same 
approach to JKR's books.




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Thu May  1 23:07:52 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 23:07:52 -0000
Subject: The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore/ some spoilers for Song for Arbonne
In-Reply-To: <fvd9df+515q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvdig8+iu28@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182760

> 
> Alla:
> 
> So  the assumption  is that even if Dumbledore would not tell Snape 
> to betray the date to Voldemort, he would have found out anyways? I 
> cannot make such assumption. 

Pippin:
You *can't* make it? You are saying there is *no* way Voldemort could
have gotten that information if Snape hadn't given it to him? On what
do you  base such a conclusion?

But suppose we agree there is *some* chance he would find out anyway.
 Suppose you and your security detail have a one in a hundred chance
of sneaking past an ambush without a shootout, but you could trade
that chance for an extra bodyguard.  You'd be insane not to make the
trade, both for your sake and the sake of your guards, right? 

Now maybe the odds of getting caught are more remote. Maybe they're 
good enough that the extra bodyguard wouldn't be worth it for one
time. But if you expect you'll be ambushed again in the future, you'd
have to put that into the equation too. 

And if your guards couldn't know what you'd done, would that change
things? Would that give you the right  not to do it, and put their
lives at greater risk?

Dumbledore chose the extra bodyguard and that bodyguard saved Lupin's
life.  Is there something there to agonize about? I don't think so.
It's not that he thought the Order's lives weren't worth saving, he
was acting, IMO, in the way he thought would save their lives.

I think the green goo scene proves that Dumbledore's detachment does
not come from callousness. But his motivation for saving people is
very different from Harry's. Harry had great empathy for the
downtrodden -- because he'd been there. But Dumbledore never was. 

DD's family was dysfunctional and his early life was marked by
tragedy, but Dumbledore was never a prisoner, never a slave, never a
victim, never a pauper, always one of those well-cared for children of
privilege, always certain he was destined for great things. He knew,
intellectually, that people don't like being locked up, that other
people suffer without emotional support,  but for him
solitude and isolation were a thing he chose because he liked them.
They were less of a trial, IMO, than trying to relate to people who
were basically functioning on a different plane.  

IMO, Dumbledore wanted to help the underprivileged because it assuaged
his feelings of guilt and helplessness over Ariana's fate, not his
own, and that's one of the reasons Harry became the better man.

Alla:
> And not that I find all those situations to be relevant, but out of 
> curiosity how does it work? Fudge being stupid and not reaching out 
> to other races, means that there was just no way to do it? 

Pippin:
No way to do it without the risk that he'd be forced out of office,
yes. Dumbledore says as much. It's a wrong choice in that Dumbledore
thinks Fudge should hold the good of the people he serves dearer than
the office he holds, but it's not wrong in terms of Fudge's estimate
of the probable consequences.


> Alla:
> 
> Yes, I know what he said. But the thing is when we first heard about 
> murder splitting the soul, there was no indication that the person 
> alone knows whether it will be so or not, isn't it?

> 
> I took this as piece of rhetoric, which Dumbledore most likely knew 
> was a lie. IMO of course.

Pippin:
It can't be a lie.

If every killing resulted in a torn soul, there couldn't have been any
doubt over who had killed Ariana. True, Dumbledore didn't want to
know, but Aberforth sure as hell did and he was in as much doubt as
his brother.  Besides, most of canon hinges on the idea that there's
no surefire magical way to identify a murderer -- which probably means
that the only soul a wizard can assess the state of is his own. So
there's no data IMO - all wizards can know for sure is that *some*
killings tear the soul, because some wizards have torn their souls by
acts of murder and made horcruxes. 

Pippin










.






From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Thu May  1 23:40:22 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 23:40:22 -0000
Subject: Harry's DADA skill was Re: Albus and Gellert/Voldemort's Power
In-Reply-To: <fv5fgc+4n1b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvdkd6+9jiu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182761

> Pippin:
> In further defense of Harry's "O" in DADA, though Lupin did coach
> Harry until he could produce an incorporeal patronus, Harry managed
> the corporeal patronus all on his own, unlike any of the other DA
> members, including Hermione.
> 
> Hermione never shows Harry's  interest or self-direction in DADA. She
> does not master an anti-boggart spell on her own,   and as Snape
> observes, she can quote the DADA text but doesn't expand on it. In
> fact Dumbledore relies on her tendency to go strictly by the book to
> slow Harry down when he doesn't want Harry to learn about the Elder
> Wand too quickly. Her grasp of DADA is a bit like Harry's grasp of
> Potions in HBP --  as good as what's provided, but not better. 
> 
> Pippin

While I agree with your second paragraph, I have a quibble with
the first.

When Harry takes his D.A.D.A. O.W.L., he is asked by the 
examiner to try a Patronus (for an extra point), presumably
because Harry's ability to do so has been talked about (by
Amelia Bones or others).  Which does make it seem pretty
darn special.

But, Hermione can also cast a corporeal Patronus at that
point, as she's already done so in the D.A. sessions.  Now,
whether Hermione could produce one while facing a 
Dementor is another question, but she wouldn't be required
to do so in the exam.

However, as far as we can tell (and I've always interpreted
it this way), the examiners ask Harry only, not Hermione nor
any other student taking the test.  

So, had Hermione been requested to produce a Patronus,
she could and would have, and, presumably, would have
gotten her "O" in D.A.D.A. along with Harry.

Montavilla47




From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Fri May  2 00:15:11 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 00:15:11 -0000
Subject: HP as escapist children's literature (was Harry's DADA skill)
In-Reply-To: <fv5m8k+7ask@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvdmef+rtgn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182762

> >Julie: 
> > I don't call the Harry Potter series "escapist children's
> > literature" as an insult (and I'm not debating its merits
> > in comparison to other escapist children's literature). I
> > just think that is what it turned out to be, despite some
> > impressions midstream that led me to see more potential
> > pyschological and emotional depth than was actually delivered.
> > And I would rather view the series as what it is than keep
> > trying to invest all manner of deep meaning (and/or intent) 
> > where it doesn't (IMO) exist. 
> 
> Potioncat:
> Yeah. It's pretty darned good escapist children's literature. (That's 
> books escaping children would read while on the lam, correct?)
> 
> I began reading the HP to my 3rd child after years of reading Boxcar 
> Children, Animorphs, and the Bailey School Kids books. Oh, what a 
> relief! Although I did enjoy the first six or so Bailey School books.
> 
> I like the language and the twists of HP. The adult characters do 
> have to be absent at important moments, but they aren't idiots---and 
> they're well written enough to be interesting. Another relief!
> > 
> > Julie,  (And I suppose there
> > is always fanfic for some of those wishes ;-)
> 
> Potioncat:
> I do hope so! yes indeed. I do hope so!


Montavilla47:
I guess it does depend a lot on what you are comparing the HP
books to.  A lot of children's literature doesn't bother to do half
the stuff JKR does in her book.  One book might have funny puns
and snappy dialogue, but it's unlikely to also have a tight plot, 
an inventive universe, and compelling (as opposed to "engaging")
characters as well.

It's when I compare the series with high fantasy that I feel let
down.  With the exception of Susan, whose fall from grace
takes place almost entirely off-page, I can't think of a single
character in the Chronicles of Narnia who disappoints.  Even
the minor characters, like the interchangeable lords in 
Voyage of the Dawn Trader have interesting moments and 
finishes.

Or the Prydain Cycle, which isn't nearly as rich as HP, but
still manages to make the most of every character who
appears (many of who make repeat appearances over the
five books).  

And, of course, there's His Dark Materials, which has an
even richer universe (three of them, actually), compelling
characters, and a great end, although not (as far as I
remember) much of a sense of humor.  :)

It's been ages since I read The Dark is Rising, but I 
remember the characters being compelling. I couldn't
get enough of Paul--and I didn't.  He was a very minor
character.  But I didn't end up feeling disappointed with 
him the way I did about Lupin.

Maybe that's because there wasn't a point in the 
climax of The Dark is Rising when a flute player would
have come in handy.

Montavilla47




From danjerri at madisoncounty.net  Fri May  2 00:44:09 2008
From: danjerri at madisoncounty.net (Jerri/Dan Chase)
Date: Thu, 1 May 2008 19:44:09 -0500
Subject: Secret Keeper: was:ChapDisc: DH 18, The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore
References: <1209535274.2448.47363.m42@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <001501c8abed$cebde750$4cae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>

No: HPFGUIDX 182763

With regard to JKR's statements, Pippin said:
>Forex, if you read the secret keeper answer on the web, it says
>absolutely nothing that is contradicted by later canon. The status of
>the secret remains as it was when the secret keeper dies. That's
>*true* --the secret remains known to those who knew it already.
>
>But the language is ambiguous -- *when* the secret keeper dies the
>status of the secret remains the same. What happens *after* the 
>secret
>keeper dies, ah, that would be telling <g>.

This one I find a bit of a stretch.  After all, it isn't as if this 
question was sprung on her in an interview.  She put the question on 
her web site as one of three for people to vote on, then had time to 
consider when it looked like it was going to win.

Of course, this is my pet, first problem with DH.  She put the secret 
keeper question on her web site and chose to answer it when she could 
have avoided it.  She either gave an intentionally misleading answer 
or couldn't keep her ideas straight on this very important issue for a 
year.

I completely understood how she could change her mind about things 
mentioned in early interviews, like the "character who works magic 
late in life", or how questions about Snape or DD could lead her to 
give answers that seem in retrospect misleading.  But with the 
questions on her own web site, she had lots of time to consider both 
the question and answer.  No one put her back to the wall.

Just my take on this issue.

Jerri





From frankd14612 at gmail.com  Fri May  2 00:59:16 2008
From: frankd14612 at gmail.com (Frank D)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 00:59:16 -0000
Subject: ChapDisc: DH 18, The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <fvd19c+9g98@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvdp14+hfns@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182764

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
>
> Our only chance is to use decoys. Even You-Know-Who
> can't split himself into seven" (29-30).

Frank D: How ironic. He already did, via Horcruxes.
 
Carol:
>Imagine if they'd tried to escort Harry to a safe house using the same
>plan as in OoP, Harry (trunk, Hedwig and all) on a broom with the
>guard circling him. The one or two watching DEs wouldn't need Snape's
>information about time and place. They'd just summon LV, who'd summon
>more DEs, who would have no hesitation about killing Order members,
>and Harry would be in danger of being caught in the crossfire.
>(Sidenote: If DD could easily send Harry's trunk and Hedwig's cage on
>to the Weasleys' house in HBP, why couldn't the Order do the same thing?)

Frank D: Why couldn't Harry just don the Invisibility Cloak? Is the
answer simply that the book wouldn't have turned out the way JKR
wanted it to? Or is there a more material reason? Just want to know.





From nirupama76 at yahoo.com  Fri May  2 02:02:37 2008
From: nirupama76 at yahoo.com (nirupama76)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 02:02:37 -0000
Subject: James and Sirius - "Coolness"
In-Reply-To: <fuvqdr+7cej@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvdsnt+ksl6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182765

> > > Barry wrote:
> > > So it depends on what JKR means by 'cool'. 
> > 
> > Carol responded:
> > 
> > <snip> 
> > I wanted to focus on your comment
> > about what JKR thinks is "cool."
> > <snip>
> > 
> > What does JKR think is "cool"?
> > Lupin, IIRC, says that [Sirius] and James were "the height of
> > cool." I don't want to second-guess JKR, but if Lupin is right,
> > if most of the students (except, probably, the Slytherins)
> > regarded a pair of "arrogant little berks" as "cool," their
> > judgment is (IMO) sadly lacking. (I know that Mike disagrees
> > with me; possibly JKR does as well.) <snip>
> 
> Mike:
> You're right on at least one count, I disagree with you about 
James 
> and Sirius. 
> 
> But I don't know about JKR, I don't think she wanted *us* to think 
> James and Sirius were "cool". I think she did her best (mostly in 
> SWM) to demonstrate that the Marauders were arrogant and that at 
> least James and Sirius were bullies. And I don't think JKR likes 
> bullies. I think JKR tried valiantly, though not always 
successfully, 
> to paint Draco as a bully so we would not like him, either. I say 
not 
> successfully because there were a LOT of Draco fans amongst her 
> readership, as there were many (including me) Marauder fans.
> 
> If you don't want to, I'll second-guess JKR on this subject. Sure 
> these guys are arrogant, arrogance is integral to coolness, imo. 
One 
> won't be "the height of cool" unless one is at least slightly 
> arrogant. 
> 
<snip>

Niru writes:

I agree with Mike. "Coolness" as percieved by the average teenager 
does appear to require some arrogance. My belief is that James and 
Sirius *were* actually percieved as "cool" by a majority of the 
student population (not everybody mind you). Reasons: 
(1) They were intelligent. Lupin says in PoA that they were probably 
the most intelligent students in the school. They did manage an 
Animagus transformation on their own and probably contributed at 
least half of the efforts that went into making the Marauder's map.
(2) James was good at Quidditch
(3) Sirius was handsome (and believe me looks will excuse a lot from 
many members of the female population - at least the teenage 
variety).
(4) They probably played some pranks and provided people with a 
laugh (although the targets of the pranks probably weren't laughing 
unless they had a very good sense of humour and the prank wasn't 
terribly degrading).

I'm not excusing the behavior seen in SWM (and for that matter Harry 
himself doesn't) but somehow I don't think they were running around 
bullying everybody left, right, and center all the time.

On the point of them being "not so popular" because of only hanging 
out with each other... I've actually seen this happen a lot. When I 
was in school most of the intelligent/talented kids tended to form 
their own groups and hang out together. They were still popular with 
the rest of the student population but they didn't really let anyone 
into their "inner circle" so to speak.

Mike wrote:
> I look at Lily's recriminations in SWM in a new light after DH. 
She's 
> coming to the defense of her friend, she's throwing everything at 
> James that she can think of. "... hexing who annoys you just 
because 
> you can ..." <SWM, OotP> Well, Lily dear, *anyone can* hex others, 
> you're wizards and witches. And it happens all the time and 
continues 
> to happen in Harry's time at Hogwarts. Also, you don't hex your 
> friends, you hex those that "annoy" you - what's so abominable 
about 
> that? I think Lily's upset because this time it's her pal 
Snivellus. 
> But mostly I discount Lily's strictures because she ended up 
marrying 
> this "arrogant toerag" only a few short years later. How much did 
she 
> believe these recriminations and how much of it was her lashing 
out 
> at the guy that was picking on her friend?

Niru writes:

I don't think Lily's strictures should be discounted. Lily was 
particularly angry in SWM because Snape was the target. However, 
Lily would have come to anyone's defense (or so I think). She ended 
up marrying the "arrogant toerag" because -
(1) he changed. James did deflate his head a bit (as Sirius and 
Remus say in OotP). I read this as "he mellowed and became a bit 
less arrogant and flamboyant". And he probably did this *because* of 
Lily's strictures. He probably realised that if he wanted Lily, he 
needed to change, to "grow up" if you want to see it that way. (This 
is in direct contrast to Snape who ignored Lily's strictures to him 
and ended up losing her and effectively ruined his own life).
(2) she saw beyond the "arrogant toerag" thing and realised that 
James wasn't quite so bad after all. This probably happened after he 
changed though.

Mike wrote:

> Does arrogance define them? I don't think so, I think their 
talents 
> define them. The fact that they could become Animagi at such a 
young 
> age and hide it right under the crooked nose of Albus Dumbledore 
> (read: they did it on their own) when it's supposed to be a 
dangerous 
> transformation if done wrong, speaks to their talents. Their 
talents 
> must be apparent to all the other young wizards. They are above 
> average, maybe way above average, in the one thing that other 
witches 
> and wizards on a whole look up to; magical abilities. That, above 
all 
> else, is what makes them "cool".
> 

Niru writes:

The intention behind why they became animagi is what makes me think 
well of James and Sirius (I will never think well of Peter). They 
did it for Lupin. They did it to ease the pain he was going through. 
They did it to keep him company at his worst moments. They did *not* 
walk away from Lupin when they discovered he was a werewolf. How 
many people would have done that? Certainly not the vast majority of 
the population. This is one of the main reasons that causes me to 
look beyond James and Sirius' arrogance and think that behind the 
struting they were genuinely good people.

<snip>
> Besides, there is one thing that nobody has explained to me that 
> would make me re-evaluate my position on the Marauder's marauding 
> with a werewolf: What about all the other werewolves? They aren't 
> bound up or confined like Lupin was in his Hogwarts days. In fact, 
> the adult Lupin is sent out to spy on them by Dumbledore. What 
does 
> the WW as a whole do about these other werewolves. Are there 
> precautions taken? Don't they know to take these precautions 
during 
> the full moon? How exactly is Lupin's condition different from all 
> the other werewolves that cause him to have to be locked up? Sure, 
he 
> can't be allowed to transform in the dorm. But why does he have to 
be 
> locked up in the Shack when we never hear of any other werewolves 
> having to be locked up on full moon nights?

Niru writes:

I'm interested in how it would cause to re-evaluate your opinion! :) 
I think Remus was sent to the Shack to transform mainly for his 
own "good". (1) Obviously he can't transform in the school. It is 
too dangerous. But he has to close enough so that he leave and be 
back ASAP. (2) He could have been let loose in the forest but I 
guess there's no saying how far he would have gone in wolf form. 
Maybe far enough to make it slightly dangerous to walk back as a 
human. (3) So he shouldn't inadvertently hurt someone. Remus can't 
help himself when he's in wolf form. If he bit someone at that time, 
he couldn't have helped it. But the human Remus would never have 
forgiven himself for something like that.
So did "marauding" negate point (3). Not entirely. It was dangerous 
to go around with a fully-grown werewolf but James and Sirius had 
animagus forms large and powerful enough to control a werewolf. 
Secondly his mind was more human in their comapny. But Remus could 
have got away of course and that's why it was extremely dangerous. 
But they were young and when we are young most of us think we are 
indestructible.

<snip>
> Mike, who will continue to defend his Marauder buddies, cuz JKR 
has 
> allowed me to think of them as real people by transporting me 
> successfully into the Potterverse.

Niru writes:

Yep. Me too. I still don't like what they did in SWM but I think the 
Marauders (bar Peter) were genuinely good people.

- Niru




From nirupama76 at yahoo.com  Fri May  2 02:15:55 2008
From: nirupama76 at yahoo.com (nirupama76)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 02:15:55 -0000
Subject: ChapDisc: DH 18, The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <fu41jp+nvs5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvdtgr+2bru@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182766

Niru wrote:
> > I'm going off at a tangent here. But this is the 2nd or 3rd time 
I've 
> > heard of the "five" years. Is this in DH? (I don't have the book 
> > handy). 
> 

zanooda wrote:

> Yeah, it's from Rita's book: "... Dumbledore delayed, for some 
five 
> years of turmoil, fatalities, and disappearances, his attack upon 
> Gellert Grindelwald" ("The Life and Lies ...", p.359 Am ed.). As 
for 
> your question, I believe that it's not five years from the time DD 
and 
> GG parted ways, but five years from the time GG started taking 
over 
> Europe and the wizarding community turned to DD in the hope that 
he 
> would interfere - probably from 1940 to 1945. Hope this helps,

Niru again:

Yes, it helps. Thank you. And it makes sense. The numbers simply 
don't add up otherwise. :)

- Niru




From kaleeyj at gmail.com  Fri May  2 02:24:58 2008
From: kaleeyj at gmail.com (Bex)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 02:24:58 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe
In-Reply-To: <fvabl2+t7kk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvdu1q+5vls@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182767

> LauraW:
> > Is there any reason to believe that Lily modeled her Patronus after
> > James?  What if she learned to do the Patronus charm first and
> > James chose the stag to woo her?  In several scenes that we see,
> > James is trying to get Lily's attention while she seems uninterested.
> 
Oryomai:
> Nothing says it couldn't have happened that way.  The way I personally
> interpret it is tying Lily to James.  Also, I don't think that you can
> "pick" your Patronus -- it's whatever happens.  We've heard  about
> James as a stag since PoA and suddenly Severus' love of Lily is
> represented by a doe.  The reader has a connection of Stag=James for
> years before the Lily part comes along.  James is a much more
> developed character than Lily in the series...with the exception of DH
> the only thing we really know about her is that she died for Harry.  I
> feel that it fits more to have the representation establish Lily to
> James.  This is just my personal interpretation of it of course.


Quick correction:
We do not know what James' /Patronus/ was. His /Animagus/ form was a
stag, and per JK, you don't choose that. 

It's possible that Lily's Patronus being a doe is mere coincidence in
the WW (what the characters themselves are aware of), meaning that
she's always produced a doe patronus, and she just happened to marry a
fella who can transform himself into a stag. I can see James using
this: "See? We're meant for each other!"

But in the *story* (plotline, themes, and literary devices), JK made
Lily's Patronus be the feminine equivalent of James' physical
manifestation to let the reader make the link. (It's dessssstiny!)


~Bex








From nirupama76 at yahoo.com  Fri May  2 03:34:00 2008
From: nirupama76 at yahoo.com (nirupama76)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 03:34:00 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe
In-Reply-To: <fvad99+eoua@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fve238+olrj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182768

<snip>
Carol:
> Carol, who can't help thinking of Mary Poppins every time Hermione
> opens her beaded bag

Niru:

LoL! It didn't occur to me until you mentioned it. Hmm... wonder if 
JKR got the idea from there too. :)

- Niru





From nirupama76 at yahoo.com  Fri May  2 03:47:13 2008
From: nirupama76 at yahoo.com (nirupama76)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 03:47:13 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe
In-Reply-To: <fv9ppg+o8pg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fve2s1+qumq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182769

> > 5.  Why did it have to be Ron who destroyed the Horcrux?  Wouldn't 
> > Harry have been able to destroy it just as effectively?  
> 
> aussie:
> Voldemort was connected with Harry. If Harry's emotions were tested 
> by the Horcrux, voldemort may have become aware of the quest Harry 
> was on earlier and the cup and tiarra would have been impossible to 
> touch.
> 

Niru writes:

Somehow I don't think Voldemort would have sensed the destruction of 
the Horcrux if Harry *had* done it. He (Voldemort) was so far steeped 
in evil that he had lost all connection with the severed pieces of his 
soul. In DH, he didn't even seem to be aware that Harry was accessing 
his mind and viewing things as they were happening. He *could* have 
tried to access Harry's mind as he did in OotP but methinks that old 
Voldy got a huge scare from his experience trying to possess Harry and 
wasn't at all keen to experience it again. Actually as I'm thinking 
about this now, isn't it quite something that Voldemort possessed 
Harry in OotP and *still* didn't figure out that Harry was a Horcrux? 
That shows that he's really lost connection to those missing pieces of 
his soul. Anyway I digress.

I think Ron had to be one to weild the sword since he retrieved it 
from the pond under conditions of valour, chivalry, etc. Harry is 
right in his estimate of the incalculable power of certain acts. 

- Niru (not intending to be argumentative but getting carried away 
with Voldemort's connection or lack thereof with his soul pieces).




From icrr2 at bellsouth.net  Fri May  2 03:26:19 2008
From: icrr2 at bellsouth.net (Charlie Ake)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 03:26:19 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe
In-Reply-To: <fv9ppg+o8pg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fve1kr+scm8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182770

5. Why did it have to be Ron who destroyed the Horcrux? Wouldn't
Harry have been able to destroy it just as effectively?


Harry had to let Ron destroy the Horcrux. He no doubt felt Ron was
truly sorry about leaving and not being able to return as soon as
he (Ron) cooled off. Harry also knowing Ron's feeling that he is
always in Harry's shadow, always "never good enough", was smart
enough to see this action would boost Ron's self esteem, besides
being a big welcome back present.

If one were to look deeper into the thoughts of Harry I'm sure one
would find Harry thinking "Ya, Ron you kill this one, LV is mine!"

Charlie A.




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Fri May  2 04:04:37 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 04:04:37 -0000
Subject: Harry's DADA skill was Re: Albus and Gellert/Voldemort's Power
In-Reply-To: <fvdkd6+9jiu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fve3sl+prdr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182771

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "montavilla47" 
<montavilla47 at ...> wrote:
 
> So, had Hermione been requested to produce a Patronus,
> she could and would have, and, presumably, would have
> gotten her "O" in D.A.D.A. along with Harry.



I'm not so sure that Harry got an "O" in DADA *only* because he could 
produce a Patronus for a bonus point. I believe that he would have 
gotten an "O" without any Patronus, actually. Just compare Harry's 
DADA exam with his other exams, where he got "E"s. 

He had trouble with at least one question or made at least one 
mistake on each "E" exam - he mixed up incantations for Color-change 
and Growth charms (Charms), he forgot the definition of Switching 
spells (Transfiguration) and he got bitten by a Fanged geranium 
(Herbology). OK, we don't know about COMC, but Potions exam felt 
difficult to Harry and even if his potion turned out to be good, I 
doubt that it was "perfect"

The DADA exam was the only one where he had no problem at all with 
any of the theoretical questions, and his spells were 
called "perfect" (OK, it's about one of them, but I'm sure that the 
rest of them were excellent as well :-)). Prof. Tofty praised Harry 
*before* asking him to summon a Patronus - "oh, bravo!" and "very 
good indeed!". I really think he would have given Harry an "O" even 
without any "bonus points".

Why didn't Hermione get an "O" as well? I don't know. She just made 
some small mistake, I guess, like Harry on his "E" exams. Maybe she 
had trouble with her Riddikulus spell again :-).


zanooda




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Fri May  2 04:38:46 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 04:38:46 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe
In-Reply-To: <fvdu1q+5vls@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fve5sm+2o02@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182772

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

> We do not know what James' /Patronus/ was. His /Animagus/ form was a
> stag, and per JK, you don't choose that. 


zanooda:

I would really like to know how common it is for an Animagus to have 
the same Patronus and Animagus form. I was surprised that McGonagall's 
Patronus was a cat. Is her "double cat" a rule or an exception? Is this 
a random thing? Practically no hope to ever find out ... ;-(.




From jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com  Fri May  2 08:57:51 2008
From: jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com (Jayne)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 08:57:51 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe
In-Reply-To: <fve5sm+2o02@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvel2f+cubb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182773

--- > --- > zanooda:
> 
> I would really like to know how common it is for an Animagus to have 
> the same Patronus and Animagus form. I was surprised that 
McGonagall's 
> Patronus was a cat. Is her "double cat" a rule or an exception? Is 
this 
> a random thing? Practically no hope to ever find out ... ;-(.
>
Maybe then Sirius's was a dog !!! We never know his patronus , do we ?
Would Lupin's be a wolf ?

Jayne
Just de lurking again





From hpfgu.elves at gmail.com  Fri May  2 10:16:55 2008
From: hpfgu.elves at gmail.com (hpfgu_elves)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 10:16:55 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe
In-Reply-To: <fvel2f+cubb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvepmn+is8g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182774

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jayne" <jaynesmith62 at ...> wrote:
>
> --- > --- > zanooda:
> > 
> > I would really like to know how common it is for an Animagus to have 
> > the same Patronus and Animagus form. I was surprised that 
> McGonagall's 
> > Patronus was a cat. Is her "double cat" a rule or an exception? Is 
> this 
> > a random thing? Practically no hope to ever find out ... ;-(.
> >
> Maybe then Sirius's was a dog !!! We never know his patronus , do we ?
> Would Lupin's be a wolf ?
> 
> Jayne
> Just de lurking again

Exmoor Elf:
Jayne, this is completely OT, but your cover has been blown; you are 
not a lurker. Since message 182000, you have contributed 22 posts....

Admit it! You are a fully paid-up member of the posting squad....
:-)






From foxmoth at qnet.com  Fri May  2 14:20:20 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 14:20:20 -0000
Subject: Secret Keeper: was:ChapDisc: DH 18, The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <001501c8abed$cebde750$4cae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>
Message-ID: <fvf7v5+vieu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182775

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jerri/Dan Chase" <danjerri at ...>
wrote:
>
> 
> This one I find a bit of a stretch.  After all, it isn't as if this 
> question was sprung on her in an interview.  She put the question on 
> her web site as one of three for people to vote on, then had time to 
> consider when it looked like it was going to win.
> 
> Of course, this is my pet, first problem with DH.  She put the
secret  keeper question on her web site and chose to answer it when
she could  have avoided it.  She either gave an intentionally
misleading answer  or couldn't keep her ideas straight on this very
important issue for a  year.

Pippin:

Oh, it was definitely misdirection. But misdirection is fair, being
misleading isn't. It's a beautiful job, too, IMO.

She talks strictly about what happens to the information the
secret-keeper himself has, "it dies with them" and "Everybody in whom
they confided will *continue* (emphasis mine) to know the hidden
information, but nobody else." 

One might infer carelessly that there's no new secret-keeper but did
she say that? 

Never.

As we know now, the new secret keepers could tell new people about the
secret. But those new people could not be said to  *continue* to know
 <veg>.

Then JKR changes the subject to how the spell works, and gives us
information that only now, in the light of DH, tells us something
useful -- why James and Lily did not want to be their own secret-keepers.

"Even if one of the Potters had been captured, force fed Veritaserum
or placed under the Imperius Curse, they would not have been able to
give away the whereabouts of the other two. The only people who ever
knew their precise location were those whom Wormtail had told
directly, but none of them would have been able to pass on the
information."

Even if James and Lily were captured, they could not have been forced
to  give Harry away -- unless one of them was the secret-keeper.  


Pippin






From carylcb at hotmail.com  Fri May  2 15:55:36 2008
From: carylcb at hotmail.com (clcb58)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 15:55:36 -0000
Subject: 10-year anniversary of the Battle of Hogwarts
Message-ID: <fvfdho+jif8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182776

Happy Victory Day everyone!

(Voldemort was defeated on May 2, 1998)




From jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com  Fri May  2 16:03:15 2008
From: jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com (Jayne)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 16:03:15 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe
In-Reply-To: <fvepmn+is8g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvfe03+hdq4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182777

--- > Exmoor Elf:
> Jayne, this is completely OT, but your cover has been blown; you are 
> not a lurker. Since message 182000, you have contributed 22 posts....
> 
> Admit it! You are a fully paid-up member of the posting squad....
> :-)
>Okay I admit it!!!!

Jayne
LOL




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri May  2 16:16:30 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 16:16:30 -0000
Subject: Harry's DADA skill was Re: Albus and Gellert/Voldemort's Power
In-Reply-To: <fvdkd6+9jiu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvfeou+cn9j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182778

Montavilla wrote:

> When Harry takes his D.A.D.A. O.W.L., he is asked by the examiner to
try a Patronus (for an extra point), presumably because Harry's
ability to do so has been talked about (by Amelia Bones or others). 
<snip>
> 
> But, Hermione can also cast a corporeal Patronus at that point, as
she's already done so in the D.A. sessions.  Now, whether Hermione
could produce one while facing a Dementor is another question, but she
wouldn't be required to do so in the exam.
> 
> However, as far as we can tell (and I've always interpreted it this
way), the examiners ask Harry only, not Hermione nor any other student
taking the test.  
> 
> So, had Hermione been requested to produce a Patronus, she could and
would have, and, presumably, would have gotten her "O" in D.A.D.A.
along with Harry.

Carol responds:
While I agree that Hermione and the other DA members could also have
cast a corporeal Patronus under exam conditions (not necessarily
against a Dementor) and it seems unfair that only he is asked to cast
a Patronus, he has already earned an O at that point (presumably with
a perfect 100), and the Patronus is only worth a single bonus point--a
nice little extra for the record, but an O is an O, and his mark will
not be affected.

Hermione, however, has never learned to deal with her Boggart. Lupin
gave only one day to that lesson, and Hermione never got her turn. She
failed that part of her third-year DADA exam, and she evidently failed
it again in her OWL. (Harry does not seem to have retaught the DA
Riddikulus, a simple third-year spell not likely to be used aginst
DEs, and we know that he did not have a Boggart for use in Patronus
practice.) So while Hermione was perfect in everything else, it seems
likely that she failed to banish her Boggart, earning her an E. An E
is an E, and E's don't earn students a chance for a bonus point. Nor
would a single point have raised her E to an O, which apparently
requires getting every spell right.

Carol, wondering whether the students who missed their OWLs or NEWTs
in HBP and DH ever got a chance to take them (and whether the
Muggle-borns who missed their seventh year in DH had a chance to come
back)

Carol, basing her response on Hermione's third year and on Harry's not
having a Boggart to use for Patronus practice 




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri May  2 16:42:54 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 16:42:54 -0000
Subject: ChapDisc: DH 18, The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <fvdp14+hfns@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvfgae+6s9n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182779

Carol earlier, quoting Mad-eye:
> >
> > Our only chance is to use decoys. Even You-Know-Who can't split
himself into seven" (29-30).
> 
Frank D responded:

How ironic. He already did, via Horcruxes.

Carol again:

Nice catch! Although, of course, it's his soul, not his body, that's
split into seven (eight, counting Harry's soul bit). But lots of JKR's
lines have a different or double meaning on a rereading ("We're
identical!" breaks my heart). Another is Moody's ("If one of us dies"
from OoP, which looks like an unintentional prediction of his own fate
in DH.)
>  
> Carol earlier:
> >Imagine if they'd tried to escort Harry to a safe house using the
same plan as in OoP, Harry (trunk, Hedwig and all) on a broom with the
guard circling him. <snip>
> 
> Frank D: Why couldn't Harry just don the Invisibility Cloak? Is the
answer simply that the book wouldn't have turned out the way JKR
wanted it to? Or is there a more material reason? Just want to know.
>
Carol responds:

The same reason that he couldn't wear it for the escape from 4 Privet
Drive in OoP: It would blow off. That's why Moody put a
Disillusionment Charm on him instead. Why they didn't use one his time
on all the Harrys, I don't know. Maybe because some of them were on
Thestrals, and it would be obvious where they were sitting, just as
Harry was sitting in the sidecar of the flying motorcycle, and his
location would be obvious. Even if the broom riders could be concealed
by Disillusionment Charms, they'd be endangered by spells aimed at
their escorts (who would be as unable to see them as the DEs. (Maybe
that's why the Order members circled around near-invisible Harry in
OoP--to keep him with them?

Carol, agreeing that JKR's wanting events to turn out a certain way
(e.g., Mad-eye and Hedwig dying and Harry's wand going off on its own)
was part of the reason for the Polyjuiced Potters plan




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Fri May  2 17:22:45 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 17:22:45 -0000
Subject: HP as escapist children's literature (was Harry's DADA skill)
In-Reply-To: <fvdmef+rtgn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvfil5+uojt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182780

>
> > >Julie: 
> > > I don't call the Harry Potter series "escapist children's
> > > literature" as an insult (and I'm not debating its merits
> > > in comparison to other escapist children's literature). I
> > > just think that is what it turned out to be, despite some
> > > impressions midstream that led me to see more potential
> > > pyschological and emotional depth than was actually delivered.
> > > And I would rather view the series as what it is than keep
> > > trying to invest all manner of deep meaning (and/or intent) 
> > > where it doesn't (IMO) exist. 

Pippin:
Ahh, now I think I'm finally beginning to understand something.
Throughout the series, we only got insight into the adults' emotions
when the adults were acting childishly, and to me, DH is no different
in this respect than I thought it would be. But I can see where people
who hung around hoping that it *would* be different, that DH!Harry
would finally  relate to the older characters as a fellow adult, were
sorely disappointed, especially if that's what you thought the climax
of the series would be.

As Dumbledore says, youth cannot be expected to understand adult
thoughts and feelings. So IMO JKR does not attempt to explain them on
the page, which would only confuse or frustrate or frighten her child
readers.  They are revealed, IMO, but only through action. I don't
have a problem with this at all, but I can see why it would be
frustrating if you thought it was going to end otherwise.

To me, it's not that she couldn't be bothered to write adult feelings,
or didn't care, or is cavalier about situations that we would find
agonizing. It's that adults can imagine these things for themselves,
(surely we know the characters well enough by now) and children don't
need to be burdened with them.

I didn't think there was anything dull about Lupin's finish, or
Dumbledore's and certainly not Snape's -- his death scene is straight
out of Beowulf, and you can't get more epic than that.
 

Pippin






From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri May  2 17:43:03 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 17:43:03 -0000
Subject: James and Sirius - "Coolness"
In-Reply-To: <fvdsnt+ksl6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvfjr7+ql8t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182781

Niru wrote:
> 
> I agree with Mike. "Coolness" as percieved by the average teenager 
> does appear to require some arrogance. 

Carol responds:
"Perceived as." Right. My point, which was lost in the snipping, was
that *Harry's* perception of "coolness" changes as the series
progresses. And he's under no delusion that James's and Sirius's
behavior in SWM is cool. He's deeply distressed by his father's
behavior, even when he sees it for the second time in "The Prince's Tale."

Niru:
My belief is that James and Sirius *were* actually percieved as "cool"
by a majority of the student population (not everybody mind you). 

Carol:
I don't think that we can determine whether it was a majority. I think
we're safe to say that they were generally popular with the
Gryffindors and unpopular with the Slytherins, but James's popularity
with Hufflepuffs and Ravenclaws probably fluctuated with the Quidditch
season, much as Harry's does (when the Prophet isn't shaping the
public view of him). As for Sirius, handsome is as handsome does. He
doesn't seem to have any friends outside his little circle or to pay
any attention to anyone except James. He's even rude to Remus, not
wanting to bother to help him study Transfiguration because *he* knows
that subject already. (Remus, OTOH, hasn't studied to become an
Animagus, so he doesn't share that advantage.)

Reasons: 
> (1) They were intelligent. Lupin says in PoA that they were probably
the most intelligent students in the school. They did manage an 
Animagus transformation on their own and probably contributed at 
least half of the efforts that went into making the Marauder's map.

Carol responds:
No one is questioning their abilities, especially in Transfiguration.
But I'm not sure that we can fully trust Lupin's less than objective
judgment here, especially since he's trying to justify James's conduct
in the SWM to Harry. were they really the most intelligent students in
the school? I think they had a pretty close contender in Severus
Snape, who certainly outperformed them in Potions. And no one,
teachers or students, knew that MWPP were working on the Marauder's
Map or that three of them had become Animagi, so that couldn't be a
factor in their perceived "coolness." James's prowess at Quidditch, in
contrast, was highly visible, as was his high opinion of himself.
Ditto for Sirius's good looks and haughty disdain for everyone,
including Wormtail and sometimes Remus, who wasn't James.

Besides, intelligence is not always a route to popularity, as both
Severus and Hermione illustrate. 

Niru:
> (2) James was good at Quidditch
> (3) Sirius was handsome (and believe me looks will excuse a lot from
many members of the female population - at least the teenage  variety).

Carol:
Exactly. Of course, being good at Quidditch isn't going to make you
popular with students from Houses whose team you've recently beaten.
Even Cedric, who is handsome and talented and a Prefect yet kind and
generally liked (not admired from a distance or perceived as "cool"
but liked) undergoes brief spells of unpopularity (a pretty boy
without a brain) when Quidditch comes into the picture.

Niru:
> (4) They probably played some pranks and provided people with a 
laugh (although the targets of the pranks probably weren't laughing 
unless they had a very good sense of humour and the prank wasn't 
terribly degrading).

Carol:
Probably played some pranks? SWM aside, they were by Sirius's own
confession frequently in detention for such amusing stunts as doubling
the size of Bertram Aubrey's head, as the boxes of old detention cards
that Harry has to sort through in HBP testify, and I don't think we're
supposed to doubt Lily's accusation that James hexes people who annoy
him in the corridors, as opposed to occasional duels with enemies in
the corridors like Harry and Draco--interestingly, Harry starts acting
like James in HBP when he gets hold of Snape's old Potions book (not
knowing, of course, that it's Snape's, but thinking that it might be
his father's), hexing the Squib Filch with Langlock, hitting Crabbe
with the toenail hex just because he's Crabbe ("because he exists"?),
and contemplating using an unknown spell labeled "for enemies" on
McLaggen.

Niru: 
> I'm not excusing the behavior seen in SWM (and for that matter Harry
himself doesn't) but somehow I don't think they were running around 
bullying everybody left, right, and center all the time.

Carol responds:
Then Lily, who likes James, is falsely accusing him in public of
hexing anyone who annoys him just because he can? (Other people,
probably the majority of students in his year including Lily herself,
can but don't.) When Lily yells at him to leave Severus alone, he
says, "Ah, Evans, don't make me hex you." And why would Lily agree
with Severus in "the Prince's Tale" that James was "an arrogant
bullying toerag" if he wasn't? The very first thing that James does at
age eleven on the Hogwarts Express is judge a fellow eleven-year-old
by the House he wants to get into, insult that House in words echoed a
generation later by Draco Malfoy regarding Hufflepuff ("I'd go home,
wouldn't you?") and trip him as he leaves the train compartment.

"The height of cool"? Not by my standards, and not by Harry's, either.

Niru:
<snip> She ended 
> up marrying the "arrogant toerag" because -
> (1) he changed. James did deflate his head a bit (as Sirius and 
Remus say in OotP). I read this as "he mellowed and became a bit less
arrogant and flamboyant". And he probably did this *because* of 
> Lily's strictures. He probably realised that if he wanted Lily, he 
> needed to change, to "grow up" if you want to see it that way. <snip>
> (2) she saw beyond the "arrogant toerag" thing and realised that 
James wasn't quite so bad after all. This probably happened after he
changed though. <snip>

Carol:
Or maybe James learned what Lily already knew, that being "an arrogant
little toerag" is not "the height of cool." And he did stop hexing
people, other than Severus Snape, who gave as good as he got. So, yes,
he grew up and his head deflated. He seems to have realized that
bullying others is neither admirable nor amusing. And, of course,
marriage and fatherhood taught him the meaning of responsibility.
(whether he deserved his appointment as Head Boy, over the head of the
ineffectual Gryffindor Prefect Remus Lupin, we don't know. Perhaps
working with Lily in a position of responsibility and trying to
impress her by doing a good job in that position, helped him to get
his priorities straight.

BTW, I think I oversnipped. You said something about popular or "cool"
kids running around with others like themselves, but James and Sirius
run around with Remus and Peter, in part, I suppose, because they're
all dormmates. It's "cool" to have a werewolf as a roommate, and
Peter, the drooling hanger-on, is safer as part of the group than as
an outsider.

If James and Sirius really wanted to run around with someone as clever
as themselves, they should have befriended Severus Snape instead of
making an enemy of him before they even got to know him. He may not
have been handsome or athletic, but he was their match in intelligence
and inventiveness, as they would have known had they ever seen his
Potions book.

Carol, who does not think that bullying or arrogance is "cool,"
whether the arrogant bully is James Potter or Draco Malfoy





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri May  2 17:59:11 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 17:59:11 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe
In-Reply-To: <fve1kr+scm8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvfkpf+q75q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182782

Charlie A. wrote: 
> Harry had to let Ron destroy the Horcrux. He no doubt felt Ron was
truly sorry about leaving and not being able to return as soon as he
(Ron) cooled off. Harry also knowing Ron's feeling that he is always
in Harry's shadow, always "never good enough", was smart enough to see
this action would boost Ron's self esteem, besides being a big welcome
back present.
> 
> If one were to look deeper into the thoughts of Harry I'm sure one
> would find Harry thinking "Ya, Ron you kill this one, LV is mine!"

Carol responds:

Ron had retrieved the Sword of Gryffindor (as Harry failed to do) and
he had saved Harry's life. That alone earned him the right to use the
Sword to destroy the Horcrux. I don't think that Harry was thinking
about giving Ron his turn to prove that he was good enough or that he
was thinking about Voldie being his. He simply knew that Ron's act of
valor and chivalry had retrieved the sword, and the sword was now his,
not Harry's, to use against the Horcrux. (As Rufus Scrimgeour had
pointed out, the sword "may present itself to any worthy Gryffindor"
under certain conditions; it was not Harry's despite DD's will and
despite Harry's once having pulled it out of the Sorting Hat, DH Am.
ed. 127.) Yes, destroying the Horcrux does prove to Ron once and for
all that he's not second best despite Harry's being the Chosen One and
that he has no reason to fear that Harry will take Hermione away from
him, but Harry has no way of knowing that it will force Ron to do
battle with his demons. He simply knows that Ron has earned the right
to use it and that it's "supposed to be [Ron]" who uses it.

Carol, glad that Harry understands, at least in this instance, that he
doesn't have to do everything himself and that some things are better
done by others




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri May  2 18:13:48 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 18:13:48 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe
In-Reply-To: <fve5sm+2o02@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvflks+as0m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182783

zanooda wrote:
> 
> I would really like to know how common it is for an Animagus to have
the same Patronus and Animagus form. I was surprised that McGonagall's
 Patronus was a cat. Is her "double cat" a rule or an exception? Is
this a random thing? Practically no hope to ever find out ... ;-(.
>
Carol responds:

I don't know the answer, and I'm not sure that JKR does, either,
considering that she sometimes seems to mix up the two, as here
(Snape's/Lily's Patronus form matches James's Animagus form) and in
some of her interview responses.

I can't think of any character besides McGonagall for whom we know
both the Animagus and Patronus form, for one thing because there are
so few Animagi. Would Wormtail's Patronus (and he must have had one if
the original Order used them to communicate) have been a rat?
Charming. (Don't get me wrong; I like pet rats. But Peter is a common
street rat.) Would DD's Animagus form have been a Phoenix? Was Sirius
Black's Patronus form a dog? We just don't know.

However, we do know that a Patronus is a kind of protective spirit,
sometimes representing someone else (DD's represents Fawkes, if Fawkes
counts as a someone; Harry's Patronus represents James, Snape's
changed Patronus represents Lily; Tonks's changed Patronus represents
Lupin). I can't imagine Tonks's Animagus, if she had one, being a
werewolf, or Snape's being a doe! Rita Skeeter's, however, might well
be a mosquito to match her name and he beetle Animagus (a mosquito
Animagus probably wouldn't survive very long; it would be squished the
moment it landed on someone's arm!)

Carol, who thinks that Ron's Animagus form would be an otter, to match
Hermione's Patronus

 




From kaleeyj at gmail.com  Fri May  2 23:06:01 2008
From: kaleeyj at gmail.com (Bex)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 23:06:01 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <fvflks+as0m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvg6op+apr5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182784

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
>
> zanooda wrote:
> > 
> > I would really like to know how common it is for an Animagus to have
> the same Patronus and Animagus form. I was surprised that McGonagall's
>  Patronus was a cat. Is her "double cat" a rule or an exception? Is
> this a random thing? Practically no hope to ever find out ... ;-(.
> >
> Carol responds:
> 
> I don't know the answer, and I'm not sure that JKR does, either,
> considering that she sometimes seems to mix up the two, as here
> (Snape's/Lily's Patronus form matches James's Animagus form) and in
> some of her interview responses.
> 
> I can't think of any character besides McGonagall for whom we know
> both the Animagus and Patronus form, for one thing because there are
> so few Animagi. Would Wormtail's Patronus (and he must have had one if
> the original Order used them to communicate) have been a rat?
> Charming. (Don't get me wrong; I like pet rats. But Peter is a common
> street rat.) Would DD's Animagus form have been a Phoenix? Was Sirius
> Black's Patronus form a dog? We just don't know.
> 
> However, we do know that a Patronus is a kind of protective spirit,
> sometimes representing someone else (DD's represents Fawkes, if Fawkes
> counts as a someone; Harry's Patronus represents James, Snape's
> changed Patronus represents Lily; Tonks's changed Patronus represents
> Lupin). I can't imagine Tonks's Animagus, if she had one, being a
> werewolf, or Snape's being a doe! Rita Skeeter's, however, might well
> be a mosquito to match her name and he beetle Animagus (a mosquito
> Animagus probably wouldn't survive very long; it would be squished the
> moment it landed on someone's arm!)
> 
> Carol, who thinks that Ron's Animagus form would be an otter, to match
> Hermione's Patronus
>


Well, "Patronus" is a derivative of "patron", and in turn, "pater" -
both pointing to protectors or, in the case of "pater", literally,
"father". Patrons in Roman history were protectors - sometimes former
masters of freed servants who still had some rights over them. And of
course, the first thing any Catholic would think of when hearing the
word patronus is "Patron saint", who is seen as a special guardian of
an individual or a group.

So it makes sense that Harry's Patronus takes the form of his father -
someone Harry would consider his protector (that boy just doesn't seem
to get the depth of Lily's sacrifice - *shakes Harry voodoo doll*). I
expect that if Harry had been allowed to move in with Sirius, his
Patronus would probably have become something representing his godfather.

Animagi forms depend on *your* personality traits. Patroni generally
reflect people who mean a great deal to you. (Snape's doe, Tonks'
wolf, Hermione's otter (which is very, very similar to a weasel...).

So if we assume DD's Patronus is a phoenix, and Lily's is a doe, then
 McGonagall and Lily and DD are the exceptions to the rule - their
patroni represent themselves. At least we think so - perhaps DD's
really represents Fawkes. And McG and Lily's could represent anyone
they knew. I think that McG's "double cat" syndrome is probably the
exception rather than the rule.

Arthur's weasel - could represent his family (like his father), or
perhaps his immediate family - clearly his sons would be willing to
fight to the death for him.

Cho's swan: I read this as representing her mother - very gentle and
graceful.

Ron's terrier: Terriers are tough, very energetic, and brave,
especially considering their size - they aren't the biggest dogs in
the park, but they sure think they are. Very energetic... I wonder if
this could represent the twins? Or, brave and tough beyond all
expectations - perhaps Molly?

Shacklebolt's is a Lynx, and Ernie, Luna, and Seamus have a boar, a
hare, and a fox, though we don't know which one is whose. Ah, well,
speculation is more fun...


I imagine that Lily's Animagus is probably something bold, daring, and
yet playful - a raccoon comes to mind (my mind, anyway, half buzzed on
Nyquil to fight the cold I caught in 80-flipping-degree weather).

Draco's Patronus would almost certainly be something representing
Snape - if not before the end of HBP, certainly afterward.

Sirus Black's Patronus... Sirius looked out for himself, that I can
tell - he was not dependent on anyone for protection, and when he was,
he was not happy about it. Perhaps his Patronus *would* represent
himself. In fact, that could explain Lily's for sure - from what we've
seen of her, she was very independent - she was her own protector. As
for McG, I'm not so sure.



Anyone else have some thoughts?

~Bex




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Fri May  2 23:22:45 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 23:22:45 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe
In-Reply-To: <fvflks+as0m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvg7o5+bc6j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182785

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

> I can't imagine Tonks's Animagus, if she had one, being a
> werewolf, or Snape's being a doe! 


zanooda:

I agree, but there is another question: can *anyone* become an 
Animagus then? Did JKR say anything about this? It certainly looks 
like the case in the books, but it would be much more logical if 
being an Animagus was an innate ability, which just requires some 
training to get it right. 

If anyone with enough talent could learn how to turn into an animal, 
there should have been more Animagi, right? It seems like a very 
useful (and cool :-)) ability. OK, maybe many people wouldn't want to 
risk trying it, fearing that something would go wrong, but highly 
talented people, like DD, for example, certainly would want to learn 
how to transform. And if Wormtail was able do it without any side-
effects, then so would have DD, no doubt. However, DD is not an 
Animagus. Maybe you just have to be born with this ability and 
develop it later?

I just want to say, what if some people just have it in them and 
others don't? Then it would be kind of logical for the natural 
Animagi to have Patronuses that represent their Animagus form. Like 
you, I don't see Snape transform into a doe or Tonks transform into a 
werewolf, but maybe they don't have animagi ability in them. As for 
the Animagi that we know, I can easily imagine Sirius's Patronus 
being a dog and James's Patronus being a stag, and even PP having a 
rat Patronus - why not?

But of course if we know for sure that *any* wizard can learn to 
become an Animagus, my theory won't work :-).



> Jayne wrote:

> Maybe then Sirius's was a dog !!! We never know his patronus, 
> do we? Would Lupin's be a wolf?


zanooda:

Well, Lupin is not an Animagus, so he doesn't fit in here :-). I 
personally think that Lupin wouldn't have a Patronus that even 
slightly resemble a wolf :-). Lupin hates being a werewolf, and 
Patronus is supposed to represent happiness, hope etc. Lupin wouldn't 
have a Patronus that reminds him of his misery, IMO.
 




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Sat May  3 13:27:58 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sat, 03 May 2008 13:27:58 -0000
Subject: Secret Keeper: ... Truth and Choices
In-Reply-To: <001501c8abed$cebde750$4cae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>
Message-ID: <fvhp8u+ussr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182786

---  "Jerri/Dan Chase" <danjerri at ...> wrote:
>
> > With regard to JKR's statements, Pippin said:
> > Forex, if you read the secret keeper answer on the web, it
> > says absolutely nothing that is contradicted by later canon.
> >  ...

> Jerri:
> ... After all, it isn't as if this question was sprung on her
> in an interview.  She put the question on her web site ...for
> people to vote on, then had time to consider when it looked 
> like it was going to win.
> 
> ... She either gave an intentionally misleading answer or 
> couldn't keep her ideas straight on this very important issue
> for a year.
> 
> I completely understood how she could change her mind about 
> things mentioned in early interviews, ....  But with the 
> questions on her own web site, she had lots of time to 
> consider both the question and answer.  

bboyminn:

Here's the thing, when JKR speaks or writes, she is not under
absolute solemn oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth. Like all people, when she speaks, she
generalizes and summarizes, and emphasizes what is relevant
to the moment. That's how we all speak and write. No one 
can effectively or functionally go through their lives as if
they were under solemn oath every minute of the day. 

True, she made the question of the Secret Keeper available for
people to vote on, but she also confesses surprise that THAT
was the question people wanted answered. So, at that moment,
not wanting to give away future plot details, she told 
selective truth or partial truth. Everything she said was 
true as far as she took it, but just because she is willing
to give an explanation, does not, by any means, mean she is
compelled to give a complete thorough detailed explanation.

Was it misleading? Yes, but it certainly wasn't wrong or a lie.
It was, as I said, merely selective truth, as was necessary at
the moment.

That fact that she told selective truth tells me that she
considered her answer very carefully. As others have said, she
answered the question regarding 'what happens WHEN the Secret
Keeper dies', but did not feel compelled to tell us 'what
happens AFTER the Secret Keeper dies'. That is a subtle
distinction, but a very real distinction that allows her to
answer truthfully without giving away a future plot point.

Further, you are only 'mislead' because you chose to take
the answer as absolute and complete truth, and as I've already
said many times, people never speak in absolute complete 
truths even when they are under solemn oath.

It's all in how you choose to look at it.

Steve/bboyminn




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sat May  3 17:26:13 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sat, 03 May 2008 17:26:13 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe
In-Reply-To: <fvg7o5+bc6j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvi77l+5lvt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182787


> 
> zanooda:
> 
> If anyone with enough talent could learn how to turn into an animal, 
> there should have been more Animagi, right? It seems like a very 
> useful (and cool :-)) ability. OK, maybe many people wouldn't want
to  risk trying it, fearing that something would go wrong, but highly 
> talented people, like DD, for example, certainly would want to learn 
> how to transform.

Pippin:

It could be like  pro sports or grand opera --  anybody with enough
talent can do it, but it could take years and years of specialized
training and a  risk of permanent injury to assess whether you have
enough talent or not.  And if you don't,  then all that training would
be a waste. Peter was only able to learn it with a great deal of
help--we don't know how many people try to become animagi and fail, or
hurt themselves or other people, but present day Lupin is appalled at
the risk they ran.


I can see why Dumbledore wouldn't bother with it, especially since
accordin to Jo there's no guarantee you'd become a useful animal.
Suppose you turn into a goldfish or a slug? 

I think that it must be rare for the patronus and the animagus form to
be the same, because otherwise people could use their patronus to
predict what their animagus form would be. 

Pippin





From danjerri at madisoncounty.net  Sat May  3 19:59:21 2008
From: danjerri at madisoncounty.net (Jerri/Dan Chase)
Date: Sat, 3 May 2008 14:59:21 -0500
Subject: DD as Animagus
References: <1209815798.4313.53811.m46@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <002101c8ad58$9e4db840$74ae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>

No: HPFGUIDX 182788

zanooda said:
>And if Wormtail was able do it without any side-effects, then
>so would have DD, no doubt. However, DD is not an Animagus.

I don't think we know if DD was an Animagus or not.  When, at the end 
of PoA, Hermonie told Sirius that Peter couldn't be Scabbers she says: 
(US hardback, page 351)

"We did Animagi in class with Professor McGonagall.  And I looked them 
up when I did my homework - the Ministry of Magic keeps tabs on 
witches and wizards who can become animals; there's a register showing 
what animal they become, and their markings and things . . . and I 
went and looked Professor McGonagal up on the register, and there have 
been only seven Animagi this century, and Pettigrew's name wasn't on 
the list -"

However, even assuming that if DD was an Animagus, he would be 
registered (and that if Hermonie had seen his name on the list she 
would have mentioned it), note the words "this century".  JKR has said 
things that place DD's age at well over 100 years old.  Therefore, if 
he had become an Animagus as a young wizard, and registered himself 
with the ministry, it would have been done in the previous century.

I believe that DD was an Animagus, but I do not think we have been 
told that either.  The issue is one of the open issues that seemed a 
perfect set up for a disclosure in one of the last two books, but the 
disclosure never came.

Jerri






From bgrugin at yahoo.com  Sat May  3 20:46:07 2008
From: bgrugin at yahoo.com (bgrugin)
Date: Sat, 03 May 2008 20:46:07 -0000
Subject: DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <002101c8ad58$9e4db840$74ae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>
Message-ID: <fviiuf+7p19@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182789

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jerri/Dan Chase" <danjerri at ...>
wrote:

> I believe that DD was an Animagus, but I do not think we have been 
> told that either.  The issue is one of the open issues that seemed a 
> perfect set up for a disclosure in one of the last two books, but the 
> disclosure never came.
> 
> Jerri
>


MusicalBetsy here:

I'm just curious - why do you think DD was an Animagus?  I don't
remember anything in the books that even hints at it, except for what
looked like a phoenix flying away from the white tomb at DD's funeral,
but obviously, since DD's truly dead, that wasn't him.




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sat May  3 21:39:22 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Sat, 03 May 2008 21:39:22 -0000
Subject: Doe Patronus (was Re: CHAPDISC: Harry Potter and the Deathly silver doe
In-Reply-To: <fvac9d+rn2h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvim2a+dsdr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182790

 
> Carol responds:> 
> Regarding Oryomai's observation about the doe Patronus reflecting
> Lily's relationship to James, I wondered about that, too. It's
> certainly not how Harry sees the doe (blindingly bright and 
beautiful
> and providing him with powerful protection), nor do I think that's 
the
> way snape would see it (it's a representation of his idealized 
Lily).
> JKR, perhaps, thought of James and Lily as a matched pair rather 
than
> Lily as James's ideal mate. At any rate, I know that the symbolism 
of
> a stag is easily researched, but I haven't found anything on the
> symbolism of a doe. (Bambi's mother comes to mind, but who knows
> whether that's what JKR was thinking of.)


Potioncat--writing a long, me too post:

Lily's Patronus is Bambi's mother?  Carol, I read the same post, had 
the same sudden connection then saw that you had already posted the 
same idea. The only other reference I remember about Bambi was a 
rather derisive remark about a big bad wizard producing Bambi as a 
Patronus. 

Harry Potter has been compared to many different myths, fables, 
religious events--but HP as the retelling of Bambi? Actually, it sort 
of works. A mother sacrifices herself for her son. His father, a 
great stag, protects him from a distance. Bambi was treated like a 
celebrity the moment he met his new friends. His two best friends are 
Thumper, the know it all (Hermione) and Flower the skunk who is a bit 
shy about his condition. (Ron) (Skunks are in the same family as 
weasels). There's a fire, and in the end, Bambi stands tall with his 
own rack of antlers.  I guess if you've read one coming-of-age book, 
you've read them all. (I don't know how to spell the long word Carol 
uses, but I would use it if I could.)

Here's what I found out about deer symbolism:

Deer symbolize gentleness, grace, swiftness, abundance, intuition, 
introspection, alternative paths to a goal, messages from guides, 
love, safety, serenity, sun, fertility and the warrior aspect (stag). 
They are connected to Artemis, Aphrodite, Athene, Diana, Elaphaia, 
Dionysus, Apollo, Vayu, Lu-Hsing, Cernunnos, Cocidius and Shou-Hsien.
(attributed to Wyldcat's Pagan Place)

Many of us expected that if Snape's Patronus reflected Lily, it would 
be something that was innocent and gentle. Many of us expected a 
unicorn. Oddly enough when I looked up unicorn, it was often 
described as deer-like. So a doe for Lily as Snape's Patronus makes 
perfect sense. If Harry is right and Lily's Patronus is also a doe, 
what does the doe represent for Lily? 

It isn't canon, but I think James's Patronus is a stag. When DD saw 
Harry's Patronus in PoA, he said something about Prongs being back. 
Since he didn't know about James being an Amimagus, he must have 
recognized it as a version of James's Patronus. 

I believe JKR chose the doe because it met the need to reflect Lily, 
while also pairing nicely with James's stag. After all, to the 
reader, James and Lily are an eternal pair. 






From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Sat May  3 23:06:31 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sat, 03 May 2008 23:06:31 -0000
Subject: DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <fviiuf+7p19@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvir5n+6hpu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182791

---  "bgrugin" <bgrugin at ...> wrote:
>
> ---  "Jerri/Dan Chase" <danjerri@>
> wrote:
> 
> > I believe that DD was an Animagus, but I do not think we 
> > have been  told that either.  The issue is one of the open
> > issues that seemed a perfect set up for a disclosure in one
> > of the last two books, but the disclosure never came.
> > 
> > Jerri
> >
> 
> 
> MusicalBetsy here:
> 
> I'm just curious - why do you think DD was an Animagus?  I 
> don't remember anything in the books that even hints at it,
> ...

bboyminn:

Well, you are right, it is never addressed directly or 
indirectly in the books, but Dumbledore was supremely brilliant,
and he was the transfiguration teacher, and Animagus is a
form of transfiguration.

If seems the pieces are there to make it likely someone so
talented, and especially knowledgable and interested in
Transfiguration would have pursued it. 

Still, there is no proof, and it's not relevant to Harry's
story, and I personally think it likely that Dumbledore was
animagus, but that fact just never entered into the story.

For what it's worth.

Steve/bboyminn




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Sun May  4 01:01:35 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 01:01:35 -0000
Subject: DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <002101c8ad58$9e4db840$74ae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>
Message-ID: <fvj1tf+tcng@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182792

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jerri/Dan Chase" <danjerri at ...>
wrote:

> I believe that DD was an Animagus, but I do not think we have been 
> told that either.  


zanooda:

Anything is possible, of course, but I just refuse to believe that DD
could do something as exciting as turning into an animal (or more
likely a bird - JMO), but he was never shown doing it. It's just not
fair :-)! Especially in a series of books where some characters being
Animagi is often an important part of the plot. 




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Sun May  4 01:19:42 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 01:19:42 -0000
Subject: Doe Patronus (was Re: CHAPDISC: Harry Potter and the Deathly silver doe
In-Reply-To: <fvim2a+dsdr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvj2ve+ehlg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182793

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


> It isn't canon, but I think James's Patronus is a stag. When DD saw 
> Harry's Patronus in PoA, he said something about Prongs being back. 
> Since he didn't know about James being an Amimagus, he must have 
> recognized it as a version of James's Patronus.


I am quite ready to believe that James's Patronus was  also a stag,
but unfortunately, we don't have any proof :-). DD did say the words
you cite ("Prongs rode again last night"), but this happened only at
the end of the book, *after* Sirius told DD about them being Animagi
(p.428), so it doesn't prove anything. Even if DD knew that James's
Patronus was a stag, he didn't make a connection at the Quidditch
match, and he didn't even talk to Harry after the game.
 




From gav_fiji at yahoo.com  Sun May  4 09:14:41 2008
From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood)
Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 09:14:41 -0000
Subject: DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <fvj1tf+tcng@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvjuq1+j85j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182794

> > Jerri:
> > I believe that DD was an Animagus

> zanooda:
> Anything is possible, of course, but I just refuse to believe 
> that DD could do something as exciting as turning into an animal 
> (or more likely a bird - JMO), but he was never shown doing it.

Goddlefrood:

During the course of the OWLs in book 5 a wasp is noted as flying 
around in the examination room for no particular reason. If you 
care to think of Dumbledore as an Animagus, that he was this wasp 
is something to think on. Keeping a close eye on his proteges, 
maybe?




From leekaiwen at yahoo.com  Sun May  4 11:33:02 2008
From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen)
Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 19:33:02 +0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <fvjuq1+j85j@eGroups.com>
References: <fvjuq1+j85j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <481D9EEE.1040903@yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182795

Jerri:
> I believe that DD was an Animagus

Goddlefrood:

> During the course of the OWLs in book 5 a wasp is noted 
 > as flying around in the examination room for no particular
 > reason.

It would certainly seem odd that neither DD nor Riddle -- the two 
greatest wizards of modern times  -- appear to have mastered animagism. 
  With animagism being otherwise so important to the plotline, this 
couldn't have been an accidental oversight. Has JKR ever been asked 
about this?

As a corollary, I've missed it somewhere, but why can witches only 
transform into a single animal? Has there never been one who has 
mastered multiple forms?

CJ




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sun May  4 12:48:19 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 12:48:19 -0000
Subject: DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <481D9EEE.1040903@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <fvkbaj+ms40@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182796

> Jerri:
> > I believe that DD was an Animagus
> 
> Goddlefrood:
> 
> > During the course of the OWLs in book 5 a wasp is noted 
>  > as flying around in the examination room for no particular
>  > reason.

Potioncat:
We've had such great fun looking for clues and foreshadowings, that 
sometimes we've missed simple moments for what they were.

I think Harry was a boy, like many boys, who was distracted from a 
task by a buzzing insect. Most of also missed the sad moment when 
Alice gave gum wrappers to Neville. It was a mother with dementia 
givng a gift to her son, and not a mother trying to send a coded 
messge.


> CJ
> It would certainly seem odd that neither DD nor Riddle -- the two 
> greatest wizards of modern times  -- appear to have mastered 
animagism. 
>   With animagism being otherwise so important to the plotline, this 
> couldn't have been an accidental oversight. Has JKR ever been asked 
> about this?

Potioncat:
But that would be like saying we're surprised that a brain surgeon 
wasn't also a heart surgeon. It's a choice somewhere along the line, 
of what you want to do. I'm sure either of them could have become an 
Animagus, but both of them were studying other types of magic.

Besides, Riddle probably knew he'd be something that crawls under a 
rock, and didn't want to bother.


> CJ
> As a corollary, I've missed it somewhere, but why can witches only 
> transform into a single animal? Has there never been one who has 
> mastered multiple forms?


Potioncat:
I can't remember if JKR has directly said one and only one, but she 
has said you can't control what animal you become. Her wording has 
always made me think there is only one.




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Sun May  4 14:11:42 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 14:11:42 -0000
Subject: DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <481D9EEE.1040903@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <fvkg6u+bt8n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182797

---  Lee Kaiwen <leekaiwen at ...> wrote:
>
> Jerri:
> > I believe that DD was an Animagus
> 
> Goddlefrood:
> 
> > During the course of the OWLs in book 5 a wasp is noted 
>  > as flying around in the examination room for no particular
>  > reason.
> 
> It would certainly seem odd that neither DD nor Riddle -- the
> two greatest wizards of modern times  -- appear to have 
> mastered animagism. 
>
bboyminn:

Well, first we don't know with absolute certainty that either
of the wizards was not an animagus. Of course, I readily 
admit that we don't necessarily have a hint that they were
animagus either.

Still, let's ask ourselves what the purpose of being an
animagus is? It is nothing more than 'cool' to be able to
turn into an animal, or is it, as I suspect, a method of
stealth and concealment? 

If it is primarily a method of stealth and concealment, then
let us also consider that both Dumbledore and Voldemort had
other, probably superior, methods available to them. It seems
that Dumbledore could do a Disillusionment Charm, or similar,
that was so perfect that he was completely and totally 
invisible. 

Perhaps, when it came to deciding whether or not to become an
animagus, Dumbledore assessed his current skill level and 
saw no need to spend the time and energy, and further to take
the risk, to accomplish this very cool but for him very
unnecessary task.

Personally, as I've already said, I think the transfiguration
magical aspect of it would have been enough that he would have
certainly been curious about it, and would have certainly
investigated it. But whether he did it or not remains just
speculation. I think he did become animagus just to investigate
the magic of it, but having done so, saw no real further
need for it. Again, admittedly pure speculation on my part.

Still, we have reasons both for and against it, and as the 
story stands and given Dumbledore's other prestigious skills,
I don't see any need for it to come into the story. 

So, I'm torn, while I can make reasonable arguements either
way, I lean toward 'yes', but on the other hand, can't deny
that once investigated, Dumbledore saw it as nothing more
than a cool but pointless gimick.

What a waste of parchment.

Steve/bboyminn

>...
> 
> As a corollary, I've missed it somewhere, but why can witches
> only transform into a single animal? Has there never been one
> who has mastered multiple forms?
> 
> CJ
>

bboyminn:

I assume you mean, why can witches and wizards only transform
into a single animal?

I think it is just the nature of the magic. First, they can
probably transform into many animals, but not with the same
level of maintained self-awareness nor the same level of 
speed as is found in the spontaneous at-will animagus 
transformation and UNtransformation. Second, I think the 
animal represents some deep psychological aspect of the person.
Unlike a patronus though, that can change with mood, animagus 
represent a deeper more unchanging aspect of a person. 

For what it's worth.

Finally, I surprised no one has commented on McGonagall's
TRIPLE Patronus in the Battle of Hogwarts. That seems pretty
cool trick, and one that could come in very handy when attacked
by a large group of Dementors. 

Whatever...

Steve/bboyminn




From leekaiwen at yahoo.com  Sun May  4 14:14:28 2008
From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen)
Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 22:14:28 +0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <002101c8ad58$9e4db840$74ae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>
References: <1209815798.4313.53811.m46@yahoogroups.com> <002101c8ad58$9e4db840$74ae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>
Message-ID: <481DC4C4.1010002@yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182798

Jerri/Dan Chase :

> "... and there have been only seven Animagi this century

So who were they? Of the five mentioned in canon -- McGonagall, Sirius, 
James, Rita Skeeter, and Pettigrew -- only McGonagall was registered. 
"Only seven Animagi this century" would imply it's an extremely rare 
gift. OTOH, the fact that three of the four marauders became animagi on 
little more than a whim would seem to indicate it's not. Do we know any 
other animagi?

CJ




From zgirnius at yahoo.com  Sun May  4 14:46:56 2008
From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara)
Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 14:46:56 -0000
Subject: DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <481D9EEE.1040903@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <fvki90+soqv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182799

> CJ:
> As a corollary, I've missed it somewhere, but why can witches only 
> transform into a single animal? Has there never been one who has 
> mastered multiple forms?

Zgirnius:
This is discussed in Fantastic Beasts. People can Transfigure into 
other animals using more "regular" Transfiguration, but it is 
dangerous because it is hard for them to maintain a human memory and 
personality under those conditions. The Animagus transformation is 
somehow different, allowing the witch to still entirely retain her 
human self, and it is the one that is only to one particular, and 
initially not known, animal. I think the idea is that when 
transformed into an animal that is "like" the true inner self, that 
true inner self can be preserved in a way it is not with a random 
animal.

For an example of this in the books - I doubt Krum was a shark 
Animagus. He transformed part of his body using transfiguration in 
otder to breathe underwater. I imagine he could have gone all the 
way, but then the danger mentioned in FB would kick in (and he would 
lose the use of his hands/wand, with no way to hold it).




From danjerri at madisoncounty.net  Sun May  4 14:51:26 2008
From: danjerri at madisoncounty.net (Jerri/Dan Chase)
Date: Sun, 4 May 2008 09:51:26 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Digest Number 10266
References: <1209902660.4598.26311.m46@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <002a01c8adf6$75859d30$28ae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>

No: HPFGUIDX 182800


>> MusicalBetsy asked me:
>>
>> I'm just curious - why do you think DD was an Animagus?  I
>> don't remember anything in the books that even hints at it,
>> ...
>
> bboyminn replied:
>
> Well, you are right, it is never addressed directly or
> indirectly in the books, but Dumbledore was supremely brilliant,
> and he was the transfiguration teacher, and Animagus is a
> form of transfiguration.
>
> If seems the pieces are there to make it likely someone so
> talented, and especially knowledgeable and interested in
> Transfiguration would have pursued it.

Jerri now:
bboyminn summed up my reasons pretty well.  I don't think JKR has ever 
said, and I know that the books don't "say" one way or the other. 
But, given the type of person DD was, and his skills, interests, 
powers, etc. it seems like a natural sort of thing for him to do. 
Also, I think it is assumed if not stated that DD was McG's 
transfiguration teacher, and so might well have taught her.

However, one reason JKR might not have wanted to bring up the subject 
is that it might raise one more issue in DD's death on the tower.  It 
seems clear that no wand is needed for an Animagus to transform. 
While we now know, post-DH, that DD was already dying on the tower, in 
HBP we were not supposed to know that for sure.  And the two most 
suggested forms for a DD Animagus that I saw were phoenix and 
bumblebee, either of which would have allowed DD to fly away from the 
tower top.  If we had known for sure that DD was an Animagus and that 
his animal form could fly, then it would have added even more 
confusion to the tower top death.  (Including more assumptions that 
Snape had used some other non-verbal spell that gave green light, 
faking the AK and just knocking DD off the tower, and that DD had 
transformed on the way down.)

But, until JKR denies that DD ever became an Animagus I will continue 
to assume that DD was one, as it fits his personality so well for him 
to try and fits his skill level so well for him to succeed.

Jerri 





From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Sun May  4 14:58:56 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 14:58:56 -0000
Subject: DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <481DC4C4.1010002@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <fvkivg+2m5a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182801

> Jerri/Dan Chase :
> 
> > "... and there have been only seven Animagi this century

CJ: 
> So who were they? <SNIP> Do we know any 
> other animagi?


Alla:

I totally dig the reasoning for DD being animagi, I think he could be 
that diverse a wizard, but I do not really care one way or another, 
but I love love to imagine that Snape indeed was an animagi, hehe. I 
imagine him being of the same species as Rita dear was, but him I 
imagine as cockroach. Suits him sooo well in my mind. I used to think 
of his as bat, but cockroach is nastier. Hate cockroaches :)

But this is of course total speculation. I mean, good faith 
speculation definitely, but speculation.


I do not believe any other twentieth century animagi are listed, but 
I am pretty sure few wizards from the past were animagi (wizarding 
cards).






From leekaiwen at yahoo.com  Sun May  4 15:00:50 2008
From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen)
Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 23:00:50 +0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <fvkg6u+bt8n@eGroups.com>
References: <fvkg6u+bt8n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <481DCFA2.5030004@yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182802

bboyminn:

> If it is primarily a method of stealth and 
 > concealment, then let us also consider that
 > both Dumbledore and Voldemort had other, probably
 > superior, methods available to them.

But it being a method of stealth and concealment would seem to me to 
argue *for* DD being an animagus. His obsession with secrecy would 
rather *compel* him to learn this art as well, no matter how many other 
"superior" methods he already knew.

CJ




From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Sun May  4 15:25:36 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 15:25:36 -0000
Subject: DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <481DC4C4.1010002@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <fvkkhg+s4fk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182803

> Jerri/Dan Chase :
> 
> > "... and there have been only seven Animagi this century

CJ: 
> So who were they? Of the five mentioned in canon -- McGonagall, 
Sirius, 
> James, Rita Skeeter, and Pettigrew -- only McGonagall was registered. 
> "Only seven Animagi this century" would imply it's an extremely rare 
> gift. OTOH, the fact that three of the four marauders became animagi 
on 
> little more than a whim would seem to indicate it's not. Do we know 
any 
> other animagi?

Magpie:
I think we don't know, and it's nobody Hermione knew. The fact that 
there's only seven registered seems to indicate more that Wizards don't 
like to register. None of the Marauders did and neither did Rita. So of 
the six we know, only one of them registered. It doesn't seem to be a 
gift so much as a hard process at which you have to work. It's not just 
a talent where you do it easily.

I think it might also indicate that it's not a very respected talent. 
That is, it's not a skill most Wizards want to put in the work to 
aquire. Maybe becoming an animal is considered sort of vulgar. We never 
hear any of the kids we know show an interest in it at all and it's not 
taught in school that we're told. Except for McGonagall everybody 
became an animagus seemingly for some practical reason. And even she is 
only really shown transforming to spy on somebody.

-m




From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Sun May  4 15:33:00 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 15:33:00 -0000
Subject: DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <481DCFA2.5030004@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <fvkkvc+3q4e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182804

> bboyminn:
> 
> > If it is primarily a method of stealth and 
>  > concealment, then let us also consider that
>  > both Dumbledore and Voldemort had other, probably
>  > superior, methods available to them.
> 
> But it being a method of stealth and concealment would seem to me 
to 
> argue *for* DD being an animagus. His obsession with secrecy would 
> rather *compel* him to learn this art as well, no matter how many 
other 
> "superior" methods he already knew.

Magpie:
Not necessarily. It's an argument for why he should have considered 
it but as canon does not say he was (which by default means that he 
wasn't) it doesn't make an argument that he actually was. There's no 
guarantee one's animagus form is stealthy. James would have had a far 
easier time spying as himself even without his Invisibility cloak 
most of the time than turning into a large stag.

We've got a lot of information on Dumbledore and no hint that he's an 
animagus. Sure he could have been, just as he could have been Stubby 
Boardman or could have been a serial killer. It's something you can 
work in around the canon we have or create with the canon we have, 
but it's not there.

-m




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sun May  4 15:57:55 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 15:57:55 -0000
Subject: DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <481DCFA2.5030004@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <fvkme3+8kvn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182805

CJ:
> But it being a method of stealth and concealment would seem to me to 
> argue *for* DD being an animagus. His obsession with secrecy would 
> rather *compel* him to learn this art as well, no matter how many
other  "superior" methods he already knew.
> 

Pippin:

Wizards seem impressed despite themselves with the Muggle ability to
make  huge objects fly through the air -- they probably wonder why all
Muggles aren't pilots. But to us it's a highly specialized art,
impressive, but by the same token dangerous-seeming and more trouble
than it's worth to learn for most people, even those with an interest
in aviation. Just as there are plenty of airplane enthusiasts and
aeronautical engineers who aren't pilots, we can assume there are
loads of transfiguration specialists who aren't animagi. 

It is considered an impressive magical feat -- McGonagall's
transformation generally earns her a round of applause when she
demonstrates it for her class. But Voldemort and Dumbledore both know
far more impressive magic. 

Animal forms are ill-adapted to magic, they can't talk (except snakes)
and they can't use wands -- for wizards like Dumbledore and Voldemort
who live by their wandwork and powers of persuasion,  I imagine being
transformed into an animal, even one with human intelligence, would
feel like being gagged with both hands tied behind your back.

Pippin






From leekaiwen at yahoo.com  Sun May  4 16:14:55 2008
From: leekaiwen at yahoo.com (Lee Kaiwen)
Date: Mon, 05 May 2008 00:14:55 +0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <fvkkvc+3q4e@eGroups.com>
References: <fvkkvc+3q4e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <481DE0FF.10701@yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182806

bboyminn:

> If it is primarily a method of stealth and concealment...

Me:

> But it being a method of stealth and concealment would 
 > seem to me to argue *for* DD being an animagus.

Magpie:

> There's no guarantee one's animagus form is stealthy.

Oh, I agree, of course. I was just turning over bboyminn's supposition 
to see how it looked from the other side. bboyminn, speculating that 
animagism *was* a a method of stealth, thought it argued against DD as 
an animagus; I, OTOH, see it doing the opposite.

But you're right, of course; despite seeing McGonagall's cat hanging 
around the Dursleys' at the beginning of PS, and, later, Sirius watching 
over Harry in dog-form, I don't think there's sufficient canon to 
justify concluding that stealth was the *primary* point of animagism.

> We've got a lot of information on Dumbledore and no hint that 
 > he's an animagus.

Absolutely. For me, the question of whether he was is less interesting 
than the question of why JKR left it hanging. Given the central role 
animagism played in the plot, it would seem to be a natural question 
fans would ask, and perhaps even important enough to warrant addressing 
in canon itself either way.

CJ




From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Sun May  4 16:57:07 2008
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 4 May 2008 16:57:07 -0000
Subject: Weekly Chat, 5/4/2008, 1:00 pm 
Message-ID: <1209920227.8.31352.m53@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182807

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

Weekly Chat
Sunday May 4, 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/20080504/02118456/attachment.html>

From catlady at wicca.net  Sun May  4 21:35:01 2008
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 21:35:01 -0000
Subject: Coolness // Portraits
Message-ID: <fvla65+e1p3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182808

Carol wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182695>:

<< Harry learns that Luna and Neville are much "cooler" than they
appear to be, brave and loyal and valuable in themselves, however
"dotty" and eccentric or forgetful and chubby they may be." 
big big snip
Harry, I think, comes to realize that "coolness," in the sense that
the Marauders were "cool," isn't nearly as important as loyalty,
friendship, and dedication to a cause. >>

I didn't comment on this before because what is there to say? I'm sure
JKR intentionally put the scene where Harry wants to stay with his
friends Neville and Luna rather than go with Romilda as a parallel to
the stinksap scene, and that she intended it as a little sermonette on
not judging people by their appearance ('don't judge a book by its
cover'), and 'character' being more important than 'coolness'. Sure,
she needed to introduce Romilda before Romilda plays her role in the
plot, but she could have introduced her some other way.

Steve bboyminn wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182731>:

<< Let's take a hypothetical person and say they have their first
historic living portrait painted when they are age 30, say after some
big historic discovery. Next, once they have established a long and
lustrious career, they have another living portrait painted at age 70. >>

It is not at all clear to me whether the portraits are painted at all,
let alone at different ages of the person. Maybe they just magically
appear at the moment of the person's death, Completed paintings, with
frames, hanging on the walls of important magical institutions to
which the person was important. 

For the portraits of dead Headmasters to appear in the Headmaster's
Office at Hogwarts, it could be a spell on the Headmaster's Office to
cause it to generate the portrait (in which case, somehow it must know
when each past or current Headmaster dies) or it could be a spell that
was cast on the person when he or she became Headmaster. Does Hogwarts
have, presumably not in the Headmaster's Office, portraits of all its
dead teachers? With Binns as the latest portrait in the History of
Magic office, and Quirrell in the crowded DADA corridor?

Are all the paintings who speak and interact portraits? Sir Cadogan
and the drunken monks were people, not genre pieces? It's easy enough
to imagine that that old family homes of old wizarding families are
among the institutions on whose walls portraits magically appear (but
why did Mrs Black appear as a senile loony rather than as the elegant
grande dame she surely had been at one time, or the beautiful young
woman strongly resembling Bellatrix?), and families who find a certain
portrait exceptionally tiresome might donate it to Hogwarts. But what
about group scenes, such as the drunken monks? Does being in one
picture mean they were all killed at the same time?




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sun May  4 22:08:03 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 22:08:03 -0000
Subject: DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <fvkme3+8kvn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvlc43+5n8l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182809

Pippin wrote:
<snip> 
> Animal forms are ill-adapted to magic, they can't talk (except
snakes) and they can't use wands -- for wizards like Dumbledore and
Voldemort who live by their wandwork and powers of persuasion,  I
imagine being transformed into an animal, even one with human
intelligence, would feel like being gagged with both hands tied behind
your back.

Carol responds:

Just a comment here. While snakes are the only animasl identified as
having their own recognizable language which some wizards and witches
can speak, usually as an inherited ability (Salazar Slytherin's
descendants), I'm not sure that they're the only animals who can speak
to wizards, at least, to Animagi. It appears that Sirius in dog form
was somehow able to communicate with the half-Kneazle cat, Crookshanks
(yes, Crookshanks seems to have understood human speech, but Padfoot
also understood *Crookshanks.*) Similarly, Wormtail/Scabbers on his
way to Voldemort seems to have found out from his "filthy little
friends" (rats and possibly other small animals) about the shadow that
lived in an Albanian forest and possessed small creatures like
themselves).

I agree that animal forms would be ill-adapted to perform magic. Most
animals couldn't hold a wand. Also, of course, large animals are
conspicuous. Someone pointed out that James couldn't just transform
any time he wanted to like Sirius (a large animal, but one that's
commonly domesticated) or McGonagall or Wormtail or Rita. Imagine
turning into a stag in a London alley (so the Muggles won't see you)
and then wandering the streets of London in that farm. A cow or other
large farm animal would present similar problems. Other forms would be
just as useless. Being a dolphin would be wonderful if you wanted to
swim the English Channel--bit of a dangerous way to travel from
England to America though, and completely useless on land. About the
only really good Animagus form (other than cat, dog, rat or certain
forms of insects--though *most* people would probably be less happy
than Rita skeeter to find that they turned into a beetle) would be a
bird of some sort. How nice to be an owl in the WW, for example.

At any rate, maybe the reason that the WW has so few Animagi
(registered or otherwise) is a combination of related factors. It's
difficult, time-consuming magic. Not everyone can learn it and not
everyone is motivated to learn it (Rita, perhaps, by natural
snoopishness; WPP by the desire to run around with a werewolf).
Similarly, you don't know what you'll become and consequently may not
want to waste years of your life learning to acquire a form that may
be loathsome or useless. Imagine becoming an elephant or a whale or a
goldfish or, as JKR says in separate interviews, a slug or a warthog.
And if your Animagus form, unlike your Patronus, reveals your inner
self, do you really want to know, and want others to know, what that
form is? It's possible that more than one witch or wizard with an
aptitude for Transfiguration (as opposed to Charms or DADA or Potions
or Divination), with sufficient time and motivation to learn the
skill, discovered that his or her time had been wasted. If I turn into
a giraffe, which, given my body build, is most likely what I'd turn
into, what good would it do me? Since I don't care to be placed in a
display in the London Zoo, I think I'll just keep my human form, thanks.

Another sidenote: Alla likes to think that Snape would turn into a
cockroach, but since the only cockroach mentioned in the books, IIRC,
is either somebody's Boggart (with JKR miscounting the number of
students in the class) or a temporary shape that Lupin turns the
Boggart into to conceal his full moon Boggart from the students, I
don't see any canonical support for that idea, nor do I think that
Snape's personality, even in its most unpleasant form, would take that
shape. I can see him as a bat (highly useful for spying at night, and
he wouldn't need LV to teach him how to fly) or as some form of
snake--not a pit viper like Voldemort would be (Nagini is among other
things a kindred spirit if not almost a second self to LV), but a
cunning, nonpoisonous serpent, either a black one (to match his black
robes) or one that mimics the colors of a poisonous snake. And snakes
have been associated with healing in mythology--the caduceus of
Hermes, for example, which even today symbolizes medicine. Phineas
Nigellus, in some ways the quintesssential Slytherin, might well have
had a snake form of some sort, as well. After all, there are many
kinds of snakes, and not all of them are dangerous.

Carol, wondering where everyone was last night when she really needed
the group for entertainment!




From k12listmomma at comcast.net  Sun May  4 23:36:01 2008
From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma)
Date: Sun, 4 May 2008 17:36:01 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: DD as Animagus
References: <fvj1tf+tcng@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <004201c8ae3f$9daecb30$6401a8c0@homemain>

No: HPFGUIDX 182810

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jerri/Dan Chase" <danjerri at ...>
> wrote:
>> I believe that DD was an Animagus, but I do not think we have been
>> told that either.
>
>
> zanooda:
> Anything is possible, of course, but I just refuse to believe that DD
> could do something as exciting as turning into an animal (or more
> likely a bird - JMO), but he was never shown doing it. It's just not
> fair :-)! Especially in a series of books where some characters being
> Animagi is often an important part of the plot.


Shelley:
I absolutely believe that DD "could have been" an Animagus, as already 
stated by others, he was brilliant enough to do so. The question in my mind 
is why would he "want to". We see Rita doing it to spy on people. We see the 
Marauders doing it to be with Remus, and for sneaking around. We are never 
told why McGonagall turns into a cat, other than possibly to demonstrate her 
talents in Transfiguration. It seems to me that it's not a matter of talent, 
but a matter of interest of learning, and where one spends their focus or 
energies of study. Dumbledore, if the record serves right, was busy studying 
the uses of Dragon's blood, and so if he was, turning into a dragon would 
have been a useful Animagus for collecting small samples of blood from live 
dragons, although we are never told "where" DD got the Dragon's blood that 
he was doing research on, or even if it needed to be fresh to be of use. 




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sun May  4 23:52:50 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 23:52:50 -0000
Subject: DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <481DE0FF.10701@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <fvli8i+4rk9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182811


Magpie:
> > We've got a lot of information on Dumbledore and no hint that 
>  > he's an animagus.

CJ: 
> Absolutely. For me, the question of whether he was is less
interesting than the question of why JKR left it hanging. Given the
central role  animagism played in the plot, it would seem to be a
natural question  fans would ask, and perhaps even important enough to
warrant addressing  in canon itself either way.
> 


Pippin:
But the question isn't "hanging", since it's never raised in canon.
It's the obligation of a mystery writer to explain the intentional red
herrings, but she doesn't have to explain why everything that didn't
happen in the story didn't happen. JKR did not create the details of
her world to satisfy fannish curiosity but because she needed them to
tell the story of a boy who does not know who he is. Animagism is
important to the plot, but no more so than legilimency, polyjuice,
horcruxes or parseltongue -- they are all devices that allow JKR to
explore the central question of the books: who is Harry Potter, and
more generally, how do we know who we are.

I suspect Dumbledore was made Transfigurations Master in order to hype
the Marauders' achievement in concealing their activities from him --
but to make DD an animagus himself would  make that achievement even
more incredible, and also raise the question of why he couldn't have
kept company with Lupin while he was transformed  (it might, IMO,
raise  questions of propriety for McGonagall to do so, and in any
case a cat could not control a werewolf.)

Canons, whether true or feigned, are full of errors in chronology,
improbable coincidences and unexplained events, all of which give rise
to extra-canonical theories. These would never catch on if they
weren't emotionally appealing, at least to their creators, but the
chronicler can't possibly anticipate them all nor make room in the
record to contradict them.  

Pippin






From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Mon May  5 01:13:24 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Mon, 05 May 2008 01:13:24 -0000
Subject: DD as Animagus
In-Reply-To: <fvki90+soqv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvlmvk+30ap@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182812

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

> People can Transfigure into other animals using more "regular" 
> Transfiguration, but it is dangerous because it is hard for 
> them to maintain a human memory and personality under those 
> conditions. 


Besides, how is someone supposed to turn back into a human after
"regular" transfiguration? A wizard would need his wand to transfigure
himself back, and he wouldn't be able to use it in the animal form,
unless he has turned into an ape. So what, someone else must transform
him back? Or does he have to wait until the spell wears off (if it
ever does)? 

There is no point in "regular" human transfiguration at all, IMO.
Animagus transformation is another matter - it can be done at will,
and the the wand is not required. If I was a witch, I would certainly
try it :-). Even if I turned out to be some useless animal, it would
be interesting to see the world from another perspective. I guess I'm
just curious this way :-).


zanooda




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Mon May  5 01:29:31 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Mon, 05 May 2008 01:29:31 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapter 6-8 post DH look
Message-ID: <fvlntr+p28v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182813

"So who d'you think's got it now?" asked George.
"I hope it's our side," said Ron sounding slightly nervous.
"If it is, DUmbledore's probably keeping it," said Fred>" - p.100

Alla:

And we enter chapter 6 and I just want to say how very true this 
observation sounds to me. Dumbledore is keeping *it* indeed all right.


"Because I hated the whole lot of them: my parents, with their pure-
blood mania, convinced that to be a Black made you practically 
royal... my idiot brother, soft enough to believe them... that's him."
*******
*******
*******
"From what I found out after he died  and tried to back out. Well, 
you don't just hand in your resignation to Voldemort. It's a lifetime 
of service or death" - p.111-112.

Alla:

Those two quotes that sticked together even though there are almost 
full two pages between them remind me that I indeed did not doubt 
from the moment I read them that Sirius loved his brother.

I believe that when he says that his idiot-brother was soft enough to 
believe them, that's regret talking, and regret for Regulus that he 
was soft enough to believe him.

And it looked like Sirius bothered to find out, not just somebody 
informed him about Regulus' death. If he made inquiries, I take it to 
mean that he cared about his brother, sigh.

Although this is one of the questions that I still want to know, who 
told this story to him, about how Regulus died that is.


This chapter also introduces the Tapestry. Were you surprised to find 
out that all pure blood families were interrelated?

If I remember correctly, I was surprised, but not shocked.


"I don't like being back here," he said, staring across the drawing 
room. "I never thought I'd be stuck in this house again" - p.114

Alla:

Sigh.



The only thing that jumped at me from Chapter 7 was this tidbit.

"Will it be Aurors who catch them?"
"Oh no, this is too trivial for aurors, it'll be ordinary Magical law 
Enforcement Patrol - ah, Harry this is Perkins" - p.135

Alla:

So, what are cases that are good for Aurors and which ones are being 
kicked to those guys?

High profile cases only? Do those guys even do anything fighting 
related?

Are they allowed to use any curses at all? I wonder



Chapter 8 introduces Umbridge dear. What were your first reaction to 
her? I mean, she is not very pleasant, but did you foresee that she 
will be such a problem?

And the quote that jumped at me is this one :

"We have no record of any witch or wizard living in Little Whinging 
other than Harry Potter," said Madam Bones at once. "That situation 
had always been closely monitored, given... given past events" - p.143

Alla:

They monitor where every wizard lives?????? Or they just monitor 
every wizard who lives near Harry Potter?





From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Mon May  5 03:26:01 2008
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Mon, 05 May 2008 03:26:01 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe
In-Reply-To: <fve2s1+qumq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvluo9+3odf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182814

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nirupama76" <nirupama76 at ...> 
wrote:
>
> > > 5.  Why did it have to be Ron who destroyed the Horcrux?  
Wouldn't 
> > > Harry have been able to destroy it just as effectively?  
> > 
> > aussie:
> > Voldemort was connected with Harry. If Harry's emotions were 
tested 
> > by the Horcrux, voldemort may have become aware of the quest 
Harry 
> > was on earlier and the cup and tiarra would have been impossible 
to 
> > touch.
> > 
> 
> Niru writes:
> 
> Somehow I don't think Voldemort would have sensed the destruction 
of 
> the Horcrux if Harry *had* done it. He (Voldemort) was so far 
steeped 
> in evil that he had lost all connection with the severed pieces of 
his 
> soul. In DH, he didn't even seem to be aware that Harry was 
accessing 
> his mind and viewing things as they were happening. He *could* 
have 
> tried to access Harry's mind as he did in OotP but methinks that 
old 
> Voldy got a huge scare from his experience trying to possess Harry 
and 
> wasn't at all keen to experience it again. ...
> 
> I think Ron had to be one to weild the sword since he retrieved it 
> from the pond under conditions of valour, chivalry, etc. Harry is 
> right in his estimate of the incalculable power of certain acts. 
> 
> - Niru (not intending to be argumentative but getting carried away 
> with Voldemort's connection or lack thereof with his soul pieces).
>
aussie:
It's just that JKR seemed to go to great lengths to not have Harry 
destroy any of the Horcruxes personally (with one exception):

Diary = Harry (but before Voldemort had returned to human form -GOF)
Ring = DD
Locket = Ron
Cup = Hermione
Tiarra = Crabbe
Snake = Neville

Voldemort did know the diary was destroyed and punished Lucius for 
that, but was unaware that any of the other Horcruxes were even in 
danger until the Cup was stolen.

Such a dramatic meeting of souls (harry and Voldy's Horcux) would 
ahve been felt without any conscious effort on Tom's part.

aussie: 




From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Mon May  5 07:01:13 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Mon, 05 May 2008 07:01:13 -0000
Subject: Coolness // Portraits
In-Reply-To: <fvla65+e1p3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvmbbp+1067f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182815

Catlady wrote:

>I'm sure
> JKR intentionally put the scene where Harry wants to stay with his
> friends Neville and Luna rather than go with Romilda as a parallel to
> the stinksap scene, and that she intended it as a little sermonette on
> not judging people by their appearance ('don't judge a book by its
> cover'), and 'character' being more important than 'coolness'. Sure,
> she needed to introduce Romilda before Romilda plays her role in the
> plot, but she could have introduced her some other way.

Montavilla47:

I agree with you, Catlady, but I must say that I felt the sermonette got
watered down because it was Romilda judging Luna and Neville as 
uncool, and Romilda seemed to have absolutely no "cool" cred.

As I recall, she was in second or third year, unattractive, and annoying.
Unless we were supposed to see Luna and Neville as such hopeless
losers* that kids three or fourth years younger could look
down on them, I don't see that there was any reason for Harry to 
ditch them, even if they hadn't fought in the MoM.

I mean, they were in his secret club the year before.  That alone
should trump whatever dubious cache Miss Never-Rated-a-
Mention-in-the-Series-Before held.

*I personally wouldn't consider Neville, who managed to 
get a date to the Yule Ball before Harry or Ron, to be any
kind of a loser.  Nor would I view Luna as one, but I realize
that Americans may have different views about wearing 
radish earrings than the British.

Montavilla47





From foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon May  5 22:01:25 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Mon, 05 May 2008 22:01:25 -0000
Subject: Coolness // Portraits
In-Reply-To: <fvmbbp+1067f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvo03l+5cnm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182816


> 
> Montavilla47:
> 
> I agree with you, Catlady, but I must say that I felt the sermonette got
> watered down because it was Romilda judging Luna and Neville as 
> uncool, and Romilda seemed to have absolutely no "cool" cred.
> 
> As I recall, she was in second or third year, unattractive, and annoying.
> Unless we were supposed to see Luna and Neville as such hopeless
> losers* that kids three or fourth years younger could look
> down on them, I don't see that there was any reason for Harry to 
> ditch them, even if they hadn't fought in the MoM.

Pippin:
The point is not that Harry is so noble that he won't ditch his uncool friends in order to 
hang with cooler strangers. The point is that Harry has changed his idea of what's cool 
*and* no longer cares whether Neville and Luna are supposed to be cool, although he 
thinks they are.

Romilda, a fourth year, points up the immaturity of Harry's previous behavior -- it was, of 
course, vain.

Pippin
thinking that vanity is a major theme of HBP, and that Romilda was indeed vain and silly 
not to recognize that Neville and Luna were cool even by her unenlightened standards.
 




From kaleeyj at gmail.com  Tue May  6 00:30:46 2008
From: kaleeyj at gmail.com (Bex)
Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 00:30:46 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapter 6-8 post DH look
In-Reply-To: <fvlntr+p28v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvo8rm+ftom@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182817

OOTP:
> "Because I hated the whole lot of them: my parents, with their pure-
> blood mania, convinced that to be a Black made you practically 
> royal... my idiot brother, soft enough to believe them... that's 
> him."
> *******
> *******
> *******
> "From what I found out after he died  and tried to back out. Well, 
> you don't just hand in your resignation to Voldemort. It's a 
> lifetime of service or death" - p.111-112.
> 
Alla:
<snip>
> And it looked like Sirius bothered to find out, not just somebody 
> informed him about Regulus' death. If he made inquiries, I take it 
> to mean that he cared about his brother, sigh.
> 
> Although this is one of the questions that I still want to know, who 
> told this story to him, about how Regulus died that is.

Bex:
Well, Regulus died before Sirius was thrown into Azkaban, but after
Sirius had left the house. Perhaps he heard word through other members
of the family? I see this quote as Sirius heard Regulus had joined the
DE's, then found out he died, and filled in the blanks himself - I
don't think he got any details. Methinks Sirius is superimposing his
impressions of Regulus as a child on the events to get to this assumption.


Alla:
> This chapter also introduces the Tapestry. Were you surprised to 
> find out that all pure blood families were interrelated?


Bex:
Not a bit. The mentality of "pure-blood" that we were seeing from CoS
and on kept hinting about - to keep the blopod pure, the pure-bloods
had to intermarry.

I was surprised to see how closely related they were - Sirius being
first cousins with Narcissa and Bellatrix gave me a cold shudder.


OOTP: 
> "I don't like being back here," he said, staring across the drawing 
> room. "I never thought I'd be stuck in this house again" - p.114
> 
Alla:
> Sigh.

Bex:
Agreed. He was certainly tortured enough being forced to hide - why
force him to hide *there*? I suppose Albus was simply trying to
displace the fewest number of people in the house with the largest
number of enchantments, and #12 is right convenient to Kings Cross (20
minutes on foot). But couldn't they have found *somewhere* for poor
Snuffles?

OOTP:
> "Will it be Aurors who catch them?"
> "Oh no, this is too trivial for aurors, it'll be ordinary Magical 
> law Enforcement Patrol - ah, Harry this is Perkins" - p.135
Alla:
> So, what are cases that are good for Aurors and which ones are being 
> kicked to those guys?
> 
> High profile cases only? Do those guys even do anything fighting 
> related?

Bex:
Well, Aurors are probably involved in the more dangerous cases, where
someone is intending to do serious harm. Willy Widdershins is just
having a lark, not trying to really cause harm. In legal terms, I
think the magical law enforcement dept is called in for misdemeanors
(graffiti, window-smashing)- Aurors would be brought in for felonies
(stealing cars, arson).

Alla: 
> Are they allowed to use any curses at all? I wonder

Bex:
Possibly certain restraining spells and basic defense charms - in the
above examples, MLE would be packing the equivalent of nightsticks and
possibly tasers in a bad part of town - they would still be allowed to
use the "big guns" in a life or death situation (where their life is
at stake), but the department never expects them to walk in on a
situation where they'd be needed.

Alla:
> Chapter 8 introduces Umbridge dear. What were your first reaction to 
> her? I mean, she is not very pleasant, but did you foresee that she 
> will be such a problem?

Bex:
Ugh. I knew from JK's detailed description of her and the amount of
attention paid to her that she'd be important. I expected Harry to
have to answer to her as his MoM Probation officer or something similar.

OOTP:
> "We have no record of any witch or wizard living in Little Whinging 
> other than Harry Potter," said Madam Bones at once. "That situation 
> had always been closely monitored, given... given past events" - p.143
> 
> Alla:
> 
> They monitor where every wizard lives?????? Or they just monitor 
> every wizard who lives near Harry Potter?
>
Bex:
Probably not. The MoM most likely has a record of all the wizarding
communities, but for the most part, since OWLs are so smart, they
don't need to *monitor* everyone's whereabouts. Little Whinging,
however, is an exception due the *one* certain wizard who resides there.

What surprised me is that there is no record of Figgy in the area.
Clearly shows what Fudge thinks of Squibs. Seems like if the person
had even a REMOTE chance of doing something magical with a wand* and
they lived near Harry Potter, the MoM would want to keep a close eye
on them. The Ministry obviously thinks that there is no chance a Squib
could ever do magic.


Bex
*my mind was not is a very PG rated place after writing that line -
sorry ;)





From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Tue May  6 02:08:40 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 02:08:40 -0000
Subject: Coolness // Portraits
In-Reply-To: <fvo03l+5cnm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvoej8+gv88@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182818

> > Montavilla47:
> > 
> > I agree with you, Catlady, but I must say that I felt the sermonette got
> > watered down because it was Romilda judging Luna and Neville as 
> > uncool, and Romilda seemed to have absolutely no "cool" cred.
> > 
> > As I recall, she was in second or third year, unattractive, and annoying.
> > Unless we were supposed to see Luna and Neville as such hopeless
> > losers* that kids three or fourth years younger could look
> > down on them, I don't see that there was any reason for Harry to 
> > ditch them, even if they hadn't fought in the MoM.
> 
> Pippin:
> The point is not that Harry is so noble that he won't ditch his uncool friends in order to 
> hang with cooler strangers. The point is that Harry has changed his idea of what's cool 
> *and* no longer cares whether Neville and Luna are supposed to be cool, although he 
> thinks they are.
> 
> Romilda, a fourth year, points up the immaturity of Harry's previous behavior -- it was, 
of 
> course, vain.
> 
> Pippin
> thinking that vanity is a major theme of HBP, and that Romilda was indeed vain and silly 
> not to recognize that Neville and Luna were cool even by her unenlightened standards.
>

Montavilla47 (again):
Yes, I get that, but I think the message would have been stronger had
the person urging Harry to ditch his "uncool" friends had actually
been someone Harry would have thought in a million years *was*
cool, rather than someone in his house that Harry had never noticed
before.

I don't know who that "cool" person might have been, since there's 
nobody left in the upper years that Harry admires after the twins 
have left and he's broken up with Cho.  That moment in OotP, when 
Harry is embarrassed to be with Neville and Luna seemed based on 
Harry's specific crush on Cho rather than a general discomfort at 
being with either Neville or Luna.

Harry always seemed suspicious of people who were attracted to
popular people--and there's no student he really looks up to in
the whole series.  So, the whole concept of "cool" was something
he seemed to dismiss and distrust.

It's a little like that moment when Ron has supposedly changed 
his views on elf-slavery and yet he's essentially taking the 
same attitude he's had all along:  that elves should be respected
and allowed to make their own decisions, even if that decision
is to clean up after humans.

Likewise, Harry sits with the same people he sat with a year 
earlier.  Had Romilda Vane come up to him that year earlier
and offered to have him sit with her friends, he probably would
have still dismissed her, just as he did with Colin Creevey in
CoS.

In other words, it doesn't seem to me that Harry's views of
"coolness" have changed.  He would *never* have found
Romilda's obvious interest in him to be cool.  

Montavilla47








From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Tue May  6 04:12:46 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 04:12:46 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapter 6-8 post DH look
In-Reply-To: <fvlntr+p28v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvolru+fs7v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182819

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" 
<dumbledore11214 at ...> wrote:

> Although this is one of the questions that I still want to 
> know, who told this story to him, about how Regulus died that is.


zanooda:

But this story is not true - I mean, Regulus was not killed by the 
DEs, right? So it's not like someone who really knew what happened 
told Sirius. No one knew the truth except for Kreacher, and Kreacher 
didn't tell anybody. 

But I agree that Sirius found out somehow that Regulus had second 
thoughts about being a DE (this part of the story, as Sirius knows 
it, is very close to the truth), and maybe then he (Sirius) just 
assumed that Regulus was killed by the DEs. 

I have no idea who could have known about Regulus's change of heart 
to tell Sirius. Is it possible that Regulus talked to someone on our 
side? I don't know. Maybe Regulus did some research on Horcruxes, and 
someone noticed? Or maybe, being young and inexperienced, he couldn't 
hide his feelings in front of other DEs and they guessed? Then, when 
he disappeared and was presumed dead, the DEs would think that he was 
eliminated because of his doubts. Some of them (Bella?) could have 
told Sirius about it later in Azkaban.

Anyway, you are right that it would be interesting to find out the 
whole story. I would like to think that it was Snape who told DD, and 
DD told Sirius, but unfortunately, Snape wasn't yet on our side when 
Regulus died ;-(.

 
> Alla:
 
> So, what are cases that are good for Aurors and which ones are 
> being kicked to those guys?


zanooda:

Aurors are supposed to be "Dark wizard catchers". There is no dark 
magic in regurgitating toilets :-)!  

 
> Alla:
 
> They monitor where every wizard lives?????? Or they just monitor 
> every wizard who lives near Harry Potter?


zanooda:

They monitor the situation around Harry, I guess.






From falkeli at yahoo.com  Tue May  6 14:14:39 2008
From: falkeli at yahoo.com (hp_fan_2008)
Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 14:14:39 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe
In-Reply-To: <fv4sdj+l6rj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvpp4f+n0n4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182820

> Questions
>  
> 1.  Phineas Nigellus learns critical information about Harry's 
> location, which Hermione carelessly provides while the beaded bag is 
> open.  Has Phineas really been hanging out in that cramped bag all 
> this time?  Why is he willing to do this?
>  

I think there are 2 versions of him, each can go into the other to be
in the other frame. So most of the time, Phineas Nigellus is in both.

> 3.  How long do you think Snape stayed behind the trees to watch?  
> Did he leave when the sword was recovered, or might he have seen the 
> destruction of the locket?  How might Snape have interpreted this 
> action, given that he was unaware of the nature of the Trio's mission?

I think he was under orders from Dumbledore to make sure they get it,
once he has information on where they are. This included watching
until the sword was removed from the lake. It also would have meant
rescuing Harry from the lake, had Ron not done it. In addition, I
think Snape was hoping to get more information on what DD had been
talking to Harry about all last year - and thought that this may be a
chance to get a clue.

>  
> 5.  Why did it have to be Ron who destroyed the Horcrux?  Wouldn't 
> Harry have been able to destroy it just as effectively?  If Harry had 
> wielded the sword, do you think the locket would have found a way to 
> torment him instead?

It didn't have to be Ron. However, since Harry had already destroyed a
horcrux (the Diary), it couldn't be Harry. Ron was there, so he did it.

> 8.  What, if anything, do you make of the fact that the sword of 
> Gryffindor was used only to destroy Horcruxes with a significant 
> Slytherin connection (the locket, the ring and Nagini)?  

Was the ring connected with Slytherin? We don't know enough
information about the family tree, it's possible that Slytherin never
owned the Stone of Resurrection - and that some descendant of his
married a descendant of Cadmus Peverel.

                  HP fan 2008




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue May  6 15:49:39 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 15:49:39 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapter 6-8 post DH look
In-Reply-To: <fvolru+fs7v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvpumj+suur@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182821

zanooda wrote:
<snip> I would like to think that it was Snape who told DD, and 
> DD told Sirius, but unfortunately, Snape wasn't yet on our side when 
> Regulus died ;-(.

Carol responds:

Are you sure that Snape wasn't yet on the good side when Regulus died?
He went to Dumbledore some time after Harry's birth, possibly the
following fall, given the weather. That would have been about a year
before Godric's Hollow, the time during which young Snape spied for DD
"at great personal risk."

The date of Regulus's death is "some fifteen years" before Harry sees
the tapestry in the Blacks' house, and Harry has just turned fifteen.
So both events--Severus's repentance and Regulus's death--occurred
roughly fifteen years before, a little more or a little less than fifteen.

Or young Snape could have told DD about Regulus's change of heart
(assuming that Regulus made it known to anyone, which he may not have
had time or reason to do)) and informed DD of it, indicating that he
disappeared afterward and was presumed dead. DD might have wondered
why Reggie didn't show up for his last year of school.

Or the change of heart could just be an assumption on Sirius's part,
the reason why the tapestry shows him as dead. (The tapestry, being
magical, would know, just as the Weasleys' clock knows where all the
Weasleys are.)

Carol, who thinks that JKR just didn't check her canon facts, just as
she didn't check them for Draco's Hand of glory or Sirius's letter,
and it's just an inconsistency (sigh!)




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue May  6 16:15:53 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 16:15:53 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapter 6-8 post DH look
In-Reply-To: <fvpumj+suur@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvq07p+am75@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182822

Carol earlier:
> Or young Snape could have told DD about Regulus's change of heart
(assuming that Regulus made it known to anyone, which he may not have
had time or reason to do)) and informed DD of it, indicating that he
disappeared afterward and was presumed dead. DD might have wondered
why Reggie didn't show up for his last year of school. <snip>

Carol again:

I meant, Spy!Snape could have told DD about Reggie's disappearance and
presumed death some months after it happened, after Severus's
conversion to the good side and after DD noted Regulus's nonappearance
at school. He would assume that the two boys, both Slytherins and just
two years apart, had known each other at school.

But how anyone except Regulus's parents, who had access to the
tapestry (Orion died soon afterward and Walburga went mad) and
Kreacher, who knew what happened but couldn't reveal it, knew that
Regulus was actually dead, I don't know. Even LV didn't know it. 

Severus, however, would know approximately when he had disappeared,
and perhaps he and DD arrived at the conclusion that he must have
gotten cold feet. Why else would a gung ho young recruit who had
eagerly offered the family House-Elf for LV's use, have suddenly
disappeared from their ranks? If Aurors had killed him (unlikely given
that he was a schoolboy) it would have been in the Daily Prophet.

I wonder, BTW, whether there was any death notice or indication of his
disappearance in the paper at all. If so, maybe that's where Sirius
and Lupin got their idea that he died only days after quitting LV's
service. (And I do think that it was only days. Once he found out what
a Horcrux was--not how to create one or destroy one, only that it was
a container for part of a Dark wizard/murderer's soul that kept the
Dark wizard from dying--he made up his mind to sacrifice himself and
have Kreacher steal and destroy the Horcrux, substituting the fake one
in which Regulus had placed his note. As for how he found out what a
Horcrux was, I can only assume that LV had used the term "Horcrux" in
Kreacher's hearing and that the definition of the term was somewhere
in the Black family library.)

Carol, imagining all the query slips that she would have attached to
JKR's manuscripts if she'd been the copyeditor







From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Tue May  6 18:38:02 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 18:38:02 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapter 6-8 post DH look
In-Reply-To: <fvpumj+suur@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvq8ia+9b70@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182823

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

> Are you sure that Snape wasn't yet on the good side when Regulus 
> died?


zanooda:

No, I'm not sure :-). I was basing this assumption on the Black 
family tree, and I have no idea how reliable it is - I heard there 
were some inconsistencies there. Anyway, the family tree says that 
Regulus died in 1979. As Harry was born in 1980, and Snape turned 
only in 1981, I thought he (Snape) couldn't be the one to inform DD 
about Regulus's fate, at least at that time.


> Carol wrote:
 
> The date of Regulus's death is "some fifteen years" before 
> Harry sees the tapestry in the Blacks' house, and Harry has 
> just turned fifteen.


zanooda:

I agree that in the book itself it's rather vague :-).


> Carol wrote: 

> Or the change of heart could just be an assumption on Sirius's part,
> the reason why the tapestry shows him as dead. (The tapestry, being
> magical, would know, just as the Weasleys' clock knows where all the
> Weasleys are.)


zanooda:

I think that the change of heart is more likely something that Sirius 
knew, and Regulus being killed by the DEs is the assumption :-). If 
Regulus disappeared, and was presumed dead (when the tapestry showed 
it), why would Sirius think that the DEs killed him? He would just 
think that LV sent his brother on some mission where he died, still 
being a devoted follower of the Dark Lord. Sirius's believe that 
Regulus died because he tried to back out has to come from somewhere.




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Tue May  6 19:02:38 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 19:02:38 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapter 6-8 post DH look
In-Reply-To: <fvq07p+am75@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvqa0e+sj1b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182824

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

> I meant, Spy!Snape could have told DD about Reggie's 
> disappearance and presumed death some months after it 
> happened, after Severus's conversion to the good side 
> and after DD noted Regulus's nonappearance
> at school.


zanooda:

You are right, and it's probably what has happened. And Sirius had 
plenty of time to find out about all this from DD, because he went to 
Azkaban only after the Potters died, and Snape turned to the good 
side one year previously.


> Carol wrote:
 
> But how anyone except Regulus's parents, who had access to the
> tapestry (Orion died soon afterward and Walburga went mad) and
> Kreacher, who knew what happened but couldn't reveal it, knew that
> Regulus was actually dead, I don't know. 


zanooda:

Why do you think that only the parents had access to the tapestry? 
Didn't the Bella and Cissy ever visit :-)? Seriously, they should 
have been in touch. And, BTW, who buried Walburga? Was it Kreacher? 
Or the Malfoys (the Lestranges were already in Azkaban)? I hope she 
is not still in the house, like Norman Bates's mother :-).




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Wed May  7 03:48:11 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 03:48:11 -0000
Subject: Coolness // Portraits
In-Reply-To: <fvoej8+gv88@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvr8pr+e786@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182825

> > Pippin
> > thinking that vanity is a major theme of HBP, and that Romilda was
indeed vain and silly  not to recognize that Neville and Luna were
cool even by her unenlightened standards.
> >
 > 
> Montavilla47 (again):
> Yes, I get that, but I think the message would have been stronger
had the person urging Harry to ditch his "uncool" friends had actually
> been someone Harry would have thought in a million years *was*
> cool, rather than someone in his house that Harry had never noticed
> before.

Pippin:
If you got the message, why would you think it needed to be stronger?
Especially right at the beginning of the book? Themes usually develop
over the course of the work -- if they're elaborated at the beginning
the author has no place to go. 

Harry found it easy to reject vanity when Romilda appeared like a
character in a morality play, obvious and unattractive. But when the
vanity of coolness tempted him in the form of the Prince's book, he
did indeed ditch his friends for it, and deny its more unattractive side. 

When it turned out to be dangerous, he felt as if "a beloved pet had
suddenly turned savage" (quoting from memory) --

and  we understand not only that Harry has fallen victim to vanity,
but also how James and Sirius could have been so blind to Peter's
faults. He flattered their vanity, made them feel clever and important
and the height of cool, just as the Prince's book did for Harry.

As a side note, over the series there are other students Harry looked
up to besides The Prince: the three other tri-wizard champions and
Percy. Fleur, Percy, and Krum are all shown to be more or less vain;
only Cedric is disarmingly modest. 

Montavilla:
> It's a little like that moment when Ron has supposedly changed 
> his views on elf-slavery and yet he's essentially taking the 
> same attitude he's had all along:  that elves should be respected
> and allowed to make their own decisions, even if that decision
> is to clean up after humans.

Pippin:
Sure, that's what he believed in theory. But in practice he thought
Hermione was mad to demand respect  for Kreacher.

  JKR uses this technique a lot: she has her heroes make a correct but
easy decision to illustrate a principle, then throws them a curve
later on. For example, in PS/SS Harry has no problem seeing that Ron
is a better sort than Draco but chooses wrongly between Quirrell and
Snape. 

Pippin





From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Wed May  7 15:50:21 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 15:50:21 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapter 6-8 post DH look
In-Reply-To: <fvq8ia+9b70@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvsj3t+bfgg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182826

 > zanooda:
> 
> I think that the change of heart is more likely something that
> Sirius knew, and Regulus being killed by the DEs is the
> assumption :-). If Regulus disappeared, and was presumed dead, 
> why would Sirius think that the DEs killed him?
> <snip> 
> Sirius's believe that Regulus died because he tried to back out
> has to come from somewhere.

Mike:
I think the whole Regulus backing out story must have come from his 
parents, or at least Walburga. Sirius was aware that his parents 
became disillusioned with LV after an initial period of sympathy to 
the cause. "They got cold feet when they saw what [LV] was prepared 
to do to get power, though." <OotP, p.112, US> How did Sirius know 
that, unless he had *some* sort of contact with his parents after he 
left home? 

I got the feeling that Sirius's break with his parents wasn't as 
complete as we might have presumed from Sirius's words. I think he 
kept up with what was going on to some degree through other family 
members, say Uncle Alphard. So after his parents got their "cold 
feet", which might have coincided with Regulus's disappearance, 
Sirius got the word that his parents no longer trusted this LV fella.

I picture Regulus being all aggitated in front of his mother, asking 
queer little questions like 'what's a core-crux?' and generally 
mumbling things like 'I'll show him'. Possibly, when Walburga brings 
up Reggie's DE position or duties (in a way that only a mother can 
bring it up), Reggie has an outburst or two, ranting that LV isn't 
who he pretends to be. Or something to that affect. Possibly that's 
where Walburga gets the idea that LV is prepared to kill *anyone*, 
ANYONE, that gets in his way or that he has no further use of.

In any case, I don't see it as all that mysterious nor as a failure 
on JKR's part to maintain continuity in this part of the story. 
Sirius's mother is still around as a witness, and Sirius has clearly 
maintained some kind of communication with someone that knows what's 
going on in his family. 

The rest of it, the part about Reg being killed by DEs, was obvious 
conjecture on Sirius's part by the way it was phrased. We didn't need 
to learn the truth two books later to know that Sirius didn't really 
know why his brother was dead or how he died. And I agree with Alla, 
the subtext of Sirius's comments showed me that Sirius cared deeply 
for his brother and was mostly mad at his parents for steering him in 
the wrong direstion. IMO, Sirius blamed Regulus's death first and 
foremost on his parents, on their "pure-blood mania".

Mike, who thinks JKR did a good job in hiding Reggie's death, but 
still could have used more clues on how he found out about Horcruxes




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Wed May  7 18:33:46 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 18:33:46 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapter 6-8 post DH look
In-Reply-To: <fvsj3t+bfgg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvssma+6urr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182827

Bex:
Well, Regulus died before Sirius was thrown into Azkaban, but after
Sirius had left the house. Perhaps he heard word through other members
of the family? I see this quote as Sirius heard Regulus had joined the
DE's, then found out he died, and filled in the blanks himself - I
don't think he got any details. Methinks Sirius is superimposing his
impressions of Regulus as a child on the events to get to this 
assumption.
<SNIP>

Alla:

I am not sure I agree with that, meaning that I am not sure that 
Sirius would just fill in the details by picturing the story that 
never happened, you know? He may as well picture something else, why 
this particular scenario?

zanooda:
<SNIP>
But this story is not true - I mean, Regulus was not killed by the
DEs, right? So it's not like someone who really knew what happened
told Sirius. No one knew the truth except for Kreacher, and Kreacher
didn't tell anybody.
<SNIP>
Anyway, you are right that it would be interesting to find out the
whole story. I would like to think that it was Snape who told DD, and
DD told Sirius, but unfortunately, Snape wasn't yet on our side when
Regulus died ;-(.


Alla:

Well of course it is not true that is why it is so interesting for me 
to find out, who had such overactive imagination to come up with 
story of Regulus' death, which is so false except change of heart 
part, you know?

You mean Snape told Dumbledore this lie? Or you mean Snape told 
Dumbledore the truth and Dumbledore told Sirius a lie? Not that I put 
past Dumbledore telling Sirius a lie, it is not like he did not do 
much worst things to him (strictly my opinion of course), but why? 
For what purpose?

Carol:
<SNIP>
Or young Snape could have told DD about Regulus's change of heart
(assuming that Regulus made it known to anyone, which he may not have
had time or reason to do)) and informed DD of it, indicating that he
disappeared afterward and was presumed dead. DD might have wondered
why Reggie didn't show up for his last year of school. <SNIP>

Alla:

So Snape told DD about change of heart part, although I would still 
wonder how it got to Snape, but how did the story acquired a 
different ending? Who told whom about trying to get out part and 
where did "steal the horcrux to save house elf" part go?



Mike:
I think the whole Regulus backing out story must have come from his
parents, or at least Walburga. Sirius was aware that his parents
became disillusioned with LV after an initial period of sympathy to
the cause. "They got cold feet when they saw what [LV] was prepared
to do to get power, though." <OotP, p.112, US> How did Sirius know
that, unless he had *some* sort of contact with his parents after he
left home? <SNIP>

Alla:

I do not know Mike, what you just wrote makes perfect sense to me on 
one hand, since parents must have at least knew that Regulus did not 
want to do it anymore, but on the other hand, if Sirius was in 
contact with them, wouldn't the portrait at least had some kind words 
to say about him?

I mean, seriously he not just had a row with his parents, he left the 
house, I would imagine that getting in touch with them would require 
some reconciliation before they ever speak to each other?

And even if Sirius was in contact with other family members and 
learned from them, would those family members go to the house at all?

Mike:
<SNIP>
The rest of it, the part about Reg being killed by DEs, was obvious
conjecture on Sirius's part by the way it was phrased. We didn't need
to learn the truth two books later to know that Sirius didn't really
know why his brother was dead or how he died.

Alla:

See I did not read it as conjecture, but as hearing it from somebody, 
but you are probably right.







From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Wed May  7 19:09:12 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 19:09:12 -0000
Subject: Coolness // Portraits
In-Reply-To: <fvr8pr+e786@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvsuoo+gqb6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182828

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at ...> wrote:
>
> > > Pippin
> > > thinking that vanity is a major theme of HBP, and that Romilda was
> indeed vain and silly  not to recognize that Neville and Luna were
> cool even by her unenlightened standards.
> > >
>  > 
> > Montavilla47 (again):
> > Yes, I get that, but I think the message would have been stronger
> had the person urging Harry to ditch his "uncool" friends had actually
> > been someone Harry would have thought in a million years *was*
> > cool, rather than someone in his house that Harry had never noticed
> > before.
> 
> Pippin:
> If you got the message, why would you think it needed to be stronger?

Montavilla47:
Because I also got it--and stronger--in PS/SS when Harry chose
the scruffy, uncool Ron over the sleek, seemingly popular Draco.
(Although, again, it wasn't much of a choice, since Harry disliked
Draco immediately.)

Pippin:
> Especially right at the beginning of the book? Themes usually develop
> over the course of the work -- if they're elaborated at the beginning
> the author has no place to go. 
> 
> Harry found it easy to reject vanity when Romilda appeared like a
> character in a morality play, obvious and unattractive. But when the
> vanity of coolness tempted him in the form of the Prince's book, he
> did indeed ditch his friends for it, and deny its more unattractive side. 

Montavilla47:
Very interesting insight, Pippin.  And it makes a lot of sense.  Except
that Harry doesn't really ditch his friends for the Prince's book.  He 
and Ron remain tight throughout the book and the only tension
between them comes from Harry's support for Hermione during the
Ron/Hermione break-up.  

As for Hermione, she's "sniffs" at Harry's use of the book and provides 
dire warnings about the Prince's character.  Although, of course, she 
turns out to be right, she's the one who creates any distance in her 
friendship with Harry, while Harry is running after her to comfort her 
about Ron, and making sure that she isn't left lonely.

Pippin:
> When it turned out to be dangerous, he felt as if "a beloved pet had
> suddenly turned savage" (quoting from memory) --
> 
> and  we understand not only that Harry has fallen victim to vanity,
> but also how James and Sirius could have been so blind to Peter's
> faults. He flattered their vanity, made them feel clever and important
> and the height of cool, just as the Prince's book did for Harry.

Montavilla47:
Again, that makes perfect sense, except that Peter and the Prince's 
book don't function the same at all.  Peter, as you say, flattered
James and Sirius by admiring them.  The Prince, however, doesn't
even know that Harry exists, and any affection Harry feels for him
is based on what Harry gleans as the Prince's sense of humor,
intelligence, and creativity.

Pippin:
> As a side note, over the series there are other students Harry looked
> up to besides The Prince: the three other tri-wizard champions and
> Percy. Fleur, Percy, and Krum are all shown to be more or less vain;
> only Cedric is disarmingly modest. 

Montavilla47:
I would say that of those students you mention, Harry only shows
respect for Cedric.  He views Fleur with suspicion or dismissive 
humor towards her womanly charms, which are a trap he must avoid 
(noting how often Ron falls for them).  Harry admires Krum's playing 
skills  during the Quidditch match, but it's Krum that compliments 
Harry's  flying skills, while Harry is continually noticing Krum's 
clumsiness,  gruffness, and surliness.

And, as for Percy, Harry remarks that Percy had always been his
least favorite Weasley, and often notes Percy's stuffy, pompous
manner.

> Montavilla:
> > It's a little like that moment when Ron has supposedly changed 
> > his views on elf-slavery and yet he's essentially taking the 
> > same attitude he's had all along:  that elves should be respected
> > and allowed to make their own decisions, even if that decision
> > is to clean up after humans.
> 
> Pippin:
> Sure, that's what he believed in theory. But in practice he thought
> Hermione was mad to demand respect  for Kreacher.

Montavilla47:
No, he believed it in practice.  The first time he meets Dobby in 
person, he spontaneously gives the elf a Christmas gift, just 
because it will please.  In GoF, he tells Hermione that the 
relationship  between an elf and her master has to be respected, 
no matter politically incorrect it may appear.  In OotP, he goes 
around the dorm after Hermione has hidden her hats, uncovering 
them so that the elves have a choice about their own destinies.

That's more practice than he does in DH by making an off-hand
remark about warning the elves.  A remark that never gets followed
up on by an actual warning, because he's too busy making out with
Hermione.
 
Pippin:
>   JKR uses this technique a lot: she has her heroes make a correct but
> easy decision to illustrate a principle, then throws them a curve
> later on. For example, in PS/SS Harry has no problem seeing that Ron
> is a better sort than Draco but chooses wrongly between Quirrell and
> Snape. 

Montavilla47:
Again, thank you for pointing out that technique, because it helps
make sense of JKR's writing.  But, I'm afraid that Harry *doesn't* 
choose between Snape and Quirrell.  Quirrell's never presented as 
any kind of a choice (since, as a good mystery writer, JKR is 
busy hiding him in plain sight).

Harry never considers *any* one other than Snape as the person
trying to steal the stone.  

But, without trying to be too critical about it, I think that JKR
ended up using the technique of having her heroes make a 
correct but easy decision to illlustrate the principle early on
only to have them the correct and easier decision later on.

For example:

In PS/SS Harry makes the decision to risk his life to keep
Voldemort from getting the Stone.

In GoF, Harry makes the decision to go down fighting (rather 
than prolonging his life) to prevent Voldemort from making 
him look cowardly.

In OotP, Harry makes the decision to risk his life to save the 
life of one person.

In DH, Harry makes the decision to give his life to save 
thousands of lives.

In terms of Neville:

In PS/SS Harry learns, by Neville receiving the key 10 house 
points, that Neville's bravery is key to success.

In GoF, Harry learns that Neville's family tragedy is equal to
or even worse than his own, because it had no end.  Moreover,
as we can see in glimpses, Neville's home situation continues
to be stress-filled (although arguably better than Harry's).

In OotP, Harry learns that Neville overcomes his lack of skill
in a subject by dogged, persistent work and a refusal to quit.
This is reinforced by Neville's performance in the MoM, when
he becomes the last member of the Sextet to stay at Harry's
side, fighting to very end.

So, when Harry decides to sit with Neville and Luna at the
beginning of HBP, instead of going off with the unattractive,
pushy, unpleasant stranger, it's such a no-brainer that it 
hardly counts as a moral message--and yet there seems to
be no other reason for that moment to exist.

****

I do see what you're saying about Harry falling for the 
Prince, though.  But I'm not sure that I took the moral
that was intended from that story.  

I suppose that Harry did create a bit of distance from
Ginny (as her criticism about him following directions
from a book!) had more weight than Hermione's 
objections.  But, that apparently didn't matter once 
Harry and Ginny kissed--and Ginny even defended 
Harry's use of Sectumsempra.

Was the moral that Harry's innocent use of the book
to improve his potions' marks was vanity that led to
the danger of nearly killing Draco?  With the final
blow being the knowledge that Death Eater, 
Dumbledore killing Snape was the Prince in disguise?

That seems the obvious moral message to me, but it's
muddied by a few things:

1. Using the potion book to impress Slughorn wasn't
innocent.  It was extremely wrong in my opinion for
Harry to conceal what he was doing.  But simply not
using the notes would have been silly, as they were 
much better than the original text.  

2. Likewise, the use of the spells was both beneficial
and dangerous.  Although Hermione initially protests
the use of Muffliato, by DH, she's using it as a routine
protection spell.

3. At the end of HBP, any closeness Harry feels 
towards Snape is seen as a negative, since Snape just
killed Dumbledore.  However, as many people 
suspected, Snape was on the side of the angels ever
since Voldemort began to threaten his friend.  So, 
the admiration and goodwill that Harry feels towards
the Prince is a good thing and helps Harry believe Snape
at the vital moment.  

The book ultimately turned out to be a positive
thing.  So, the simple moral message that the 
book reflected the evil, twisted thoughts of a 
future Death Eater is too easy a judgment.  Likewise,
the judgment that it showed the carefree, humorous 
outlook of a "cool" teenager is also too easy.

Consequently, I don't really know what the author's
purpose is in the story arc of the Prince's book.  I have 
strong feelings about it as a reader (along with the
lack of an office portrait, I weep for the loss of the
Prince's notes!)  But, was I supposed to side with
Hermione about the book being bad, but maybe not
"evil?"  Am I supposed to think it was a beloved
pet that suddenly turned savage?  

I totally see Harry giving in to vanity by using the 
book.  But I never see an awareness on Harry's part
 that it was *vanity* that was the problem--rather than
the book itself, which was morally ambiguous and
ought, as it a book and not a person, to be morally
neutral.

Again, I know this rant seems negative, but my 
honest opinion is that this is the real strength of 
the books.  What the books say often seems to 
differ from what the author is trying to say.  And
I don't care what that says about JKR as a writer
(genius, amazing, good, competent, indifferent,
maddening, or hack).  What it says to me is that
the most interesting art is that which doesn't 
present a clear message, but, like dissonant
music, forces the audience to create its own
resolution.

Montavilla47






From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Wed May  7 19:35:28 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 19:35:28 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapter 6-8 post DH look
In-Reply-To: <fvssma+6urr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvt0a0+afv4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182829

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" 
 
> > zanooda:

> > I would like to think that it was Snape who told DD, and
> > DD told Sirius
 
> Alla:
 
> You mean Snape told Dumbledore this lie? Or you mean Snape told 
> Dumbledore the truth and Dumbledore told Sirius a lie?


zanooda:

I'm talking *only* about "the change of heart" part of the story here,
the rest of it I consider just a logical assumption. I think that
Snape could have known about Reggie's doubts. I suppose Regulus
behaved suspiciously, being unable to conceal his uneasiness (he was
just 17, after all), maybe asking strange questions, you know? Then he
suddenly disappears and is presumed dead, and Snape (and not only him)
suspects he was punished for his betrayal. 

After Snape becomes a spy he gives DD information on the DEs, or maybe
DD asks him specifically about Regulus's fate. Snape tells the story
how he knows it - that Regulus seemed to be on the verge of backing
out, and then he died, most probably on LV's orders. 

I think everybody knew that Regulus was dead - the tapestry would
confirm that, and the parents would try to find out what happened to
him, at least from Bella. If it was not known that he was dead, LV
would have thought he was a deserter and sent the DEs to find and kill
him.

So there are no lies here, not from Snape, and not from DD. There is
the truth about the first part, and the assumption (the wrong one)
about the second part. And don't forget that Snape telling the story
is just a theory, we don't know what really happened :-).






From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Wed May  7 19:55:49 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 19:55:49 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapter 6-8 post DH look
In-Reply-To: <fvsj3t+bfgg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvt1g5+pom2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182830

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

> I think the whole Regulus backing out story must have come from his 
> parents, or at least Walburga. 


zanooda:

Maybe, but I think that even if the parents found out about Regulus's
change of heart, it was not his intention. Didn't he even forbid
Kreacher to tell anyone in the family what happened to him, in order
to protect them? I don't see him telling his parents about his
discoveries. Maybe they got suspicious (Kreacher said Reggie looked
"disturbed in his mind"), but they couldn't be sure what troubled him,
IMO, because he wouldn't want them to know and wouldn't ask them any
of those "queer" questions.




From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Thu May  8 05:39:24 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 05:39:24 -0000
Subject: Animagus Transformation / Snape's Animagus (was DD as Animagus)
In-Reply-To: <fvlc43+5n8l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvu3mc+ie25@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182831

> Carol responds:
> 
> <snip> 
> At any rate, maybe the reason that the WW has so few Animagi
> (registered or otherwise) is a combination of related factors. 
> <snip>
> Similarly, you don't know what you'll become and consequently may
> not want to waste years of your life learning to acquire a form
> that may be loathsome or useless. Imagine becoming an elephant or
> a whale or a goldfish or, as JKR says in separate interviews, a
> slug or a warthog.

Mike:
The beauty of freeing yourself from taking JKR's interviews as canon 
is that in this kind of discussion, you are disencumbered by her 
conflicting interviews vs. your canon interpretation. Unless I've 
misremembered, nowhere in the books does it say that one has no 
choice in the form ones Animagus takes.

I know that James and Sirius were the type that would try to learn 
the Animagus transformation on a lark. But given the difficulty 
attributed to this particular feat, the purpose for which they were 
attempting it, and having to also teach an coach Peter through it, I 
seriously doubt they would have put forth all that effort if they had 
no way of knowing or controlling the form they would take. IOW, I 
believe that there is some portion of control as to what kind of 
animal one would become.

It seems that ones personality does take a part in the transformed 
animal form. Sirius seems to have many of the traits of mans best 
friend. Likewise James as a proud, strutting stag and Peter a 
snivelling, squeeky rat. For that matter, Rita does buzz around 
trying to pick up tidbits here and there and Minerva seems at times 
to have the indifferent personality of a feline. So that quality does 
play out to a degree in canon.

But if James had no way of controlling if he were to turn into a 
strutting peacock, do you think he would have spent the better part 
of three years figuring out how to become an Animagus? Similarly, 
would Rita put herself through that ordeal if there was a chance she 
would have turned into a crocodile?


> Carol:
> And if your Animagus form, unlike your Patronus, reveals
> your inner self, do you really want to know, and want others
> to know, what that form is?

Mike:
That's another good reason for believing that one has some degree of 
control of the form one takes. IOW, why would anyone attempt this 
transformation, knowing the dangers and difficulty involved, if one 
had no choice whether ones form would be useful, or worse, insulting?



> Carol:
> Another sidenote: Alla likes to think that Snape would turn into
> a cockroach, <snip>

Mike:
I think Alla was speaking a little tongue in cheek, don't you?

But this brings up another question, which I'm pretty sure was 
discussed previously, but I'm still wondering about. If, when Krum 
fished the beetle/Rita out of Hermione's hair he tried to squash it 
in his hand, could he? Can you kill a witch/wizard in her/his 
Animagus form as easily as you could kill a real animal of that 
species? What do y'all think? I think not, that there must be some 
sort of magical protection, but I'm not sold on that position after 
Hermione captured Rita in that jar.


> Carol:
> nor do I think that Snape's personality, even in its most
> unpleasant form, would take that shape. I can see him as a bat
> (highly useful for spying at night, and he wouldn't need LV to
> teach him how to fly) or as some form of snake

Mike:
Going strictly by personality, bat would be a good bet. Objectively, 
again on personality only, I see Severus as an Octupus. Extremely 
smart, able to change his colors at will (moving between LV's and 
DD's man), gets into and out of tight spots almost at will (some, 
like Bella or Sirius, would say able to slither out), and though 
would prefer to avoid confrontation, can give as good as he/it gets 
when in a fight.

However, given my premise of some control stated above, my guess is 
that Snape would take on the form of an owl, preferable an eagle owl. 
This would make him unobtrusive in the WW, able to move about swiftly 
yet silently and, taking Carol's premise that other animals have 
their own communication abilities, Snape could learn valuable things 
from other owls that they can't communicate to humans. All 
speculation of course, but fun. :-)

Mike, who would prefer a cheetah as his Animagus form, but would 
probably be stuck with being a common house cat if his theory doesn't 
hold water




From jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com  Thu May  8 09:57:09 2008
From: jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com (Jayne)
Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 09:57:09 -0000
Subject: Animagus Transformation / Snape's Animagus (was DD as Animagus)
In-Reply-To: <fvu3mc+ie25@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvuipl+1duo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182832

---

> > Mike,
 who would prefer a cheetah as his Animagus form, but would 
> probably be stuck with being a common house cat if his theory doesn't 
> hold water
>
Sorry Mike. That is my Animagus as it is my favourite animal, but a 
lepoard would be okay so maybe I will let you have it (VBG )

Jayne
Feeling generous on this beautiful warm day 




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Thu May  8 12:44:54 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 12:44:54 -0000
Subject: Animagus Transformation / Snape's Animagus (was DD as Animagus)
In-Reply-To: <fvu3mc+ie25@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvusk6+mqdg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182833

 
> Mike:> 
> I know that James and Sirius were the type that would try to learn 
> the Animagus transformation on a lark. But given the difficulty 
> attributed to this particular feat, the purpose for which they were 
> attempting it, and having to also teach an coach Peter through it, 
I 
> seriously doubt they would have put forth all that effort if they 
had 
> no way of knowing or controlling the form they would take. IOW, I 
> believe that there is some portion of control as to what kind of 
> animal one would become.

Potioncat:
Disregarding JKR's interviews, using only canon interpretation, I 
disagree.

In the first place, the Marauders and Rita all display the attributes 
of their individual Patronuses. Of course, JKR is having fun writing 
them, I'm sure---but it is canon.

Of course some wizards/witches would risk the spell. The type of 
person with the guts to try such a difficult spell would be the type 
to have a self esteem that would not doubt the nobility of their 
propective Animagus. I'd love to see the moment Pettigrew finally 
transformed. The reactions must have been a riot!
> 

>Mike 
> But if James had no way of controlling if he were to turn into a 
> strutting peacock, do you think he would have spent the better part 
> of three years figuring out how to become an Animagus? Similarly, 
> would Rita put herself through that ordeal if there was a chance 
she 
> would have turned into a crocodile?

Potioncat:
But that's the animals "we" would assign to them. Not what they 
expected to be. I wonder what Rita was hoping for? It couldn't have 
been a beetle, the fact that she turned it to her favor says 
something about her character. (Not much, but something.)
 
> Mike: 
> However, given my premise of some control stated above, my guess is 
> that Snape would take on the form of an owl, preferable an eagle 
owl. 


Potioncat:
Again, believing there is no choice in Animagus, I think Snape would 
be a Hebridean Black dragon. Dangerous, solitary and bat-like.





From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Thu May  8 13:52:23 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 13:52:23 -0000
Subject: Animagus Transformation / Snape's Animagus (was DD as Animagus)
In-Reply-To: <fvu3mc+ie25@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvv0in+99f2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182834

James:
> It seems that ones personality does take a part in the transformed 
> animal form. Sirius seems to have many of the traits of mans best 
> friend. Likewise James as a proud, strutting stag and Peter a 
> snivelling, squeeky rat. For that matter, Rita does buzz around 
> trying to pick up tidbits here and there and Minerva seems at times 
> to have the indifferent personality of a feline. So that quality 
does 
> play out to a degree in canon.
> 
> But if James had no way of controlling if he were to turn into a 
> strutting peacock, do you think he would have spent the better part 
> of three years figuring out how to become an Animagus? Similarly, 
> would Rita put herself through that ordeal if there was a chance 
she 
> would have turned into a crocodile?

Magpie:
Yes. I mean, I see no reason why not. Especially with James, since 
and his friends were becoming animagi to hang out with Remus so it 
didn't matter what form they took. Rita, too, was presumably hoping 
for a better way to spy on people. She was lucky that her form was as 
useful as it was, but many forms might have been useful. Even ones 
that were limited could be a help to her.

If you could choose what you became, I doubt Peter would have chosen 
a rat or James a stag. I think Wizards are used to not being able to 
choose this sort of thing. There's practically a dozen things about 
them that they can't control but reveal their inner selves. Which 
goes along, imo, with the rest of the world-building. Characters' 
choices show who they are, but so do lots of other things. Who a 
person really is is fairly unchanging and clear. 

-m





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Thu May  8 16:55:13 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 16:55:13 -0000
Subject: Animagus Transformation / Snape's Animagus (was DD as Animagus)
In-Reply-To: <fvu3mc+ie25@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvvb9h+v0n6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182835

Carol earlier:
> > 
> > <snip> 
> > At any rate, maybe the reason that the WW has so few Animagi
(registered or otherwise) is a combination of related factors. 
> > <snip>
> > Similarly, you don't know what you'll become and consequently may
not want to waste years of your life learning to acquire a form that
may be loathsome or useless. Imagine becoming an elephant or a whale
or a goldfish or, as JKR says in separate interviews, a slug or a warthog.
> 
> Mike:
> The beauty of freeing yourself from taking JKR's interviews as canon
is that in this kind of discussion, you are disencumbered by her 
conflicting interviews vs. your canon interpretation. Unless I've 
misremembered, nowhere in the books does it say that one has no choice
in the form ones Animagus takes. <snip>

Carol responds:

True. But unlike some of her interviews, these don't conflict with
canon, either. I'm inclined to believe, simply because we see only one
Animagus form per Animagus, in contrast to an apparently infinite
variety of Metamorphmagus forms for Tonks (Okay, I'm not sure that she
could transform into a man, and I'm not sure what would happen if she
tried to transform while she was pregnant, but she certainly can
choose her hair, her nose, her age, and apparently even her body build
and other features. That's very different from the single,
recognizable, animal form--complete with missing toe for
Scabbers--that we see with animagi.)

Mike:
> It seems that ones personality does take a part in the transformed 
animal form. Sirius seems to have many of the traits of mans best
friend. Likewise James as a proud, strutting stag and Peter a 
snivelling, squeeky rat. For that matter, Rita does buzz around 
trying to pick up tidbits here and there and Minerva seems at times 
to have the indifferent personality of a feline. So that quality does
play out to a degree in canon.

Carol:
I think it does more than "play out to a degree in canon." I think
that it's the determining factor. In contrast to the Patronus, which
is a protective spirit and often seems to reflect someone other than
the caster, I think the Animagus form reflects the essence of the
Animagus's personality. Rita Skeeter *is* an annoying, buzzing insect
at heart, a pest. Dear little Peter really *is* a rat in the worst
sense of the word. (Sorry, poor little Squeaky, whom I helped bury
last week. No offense intended to good little ratties!) Sirius
actually has a "barking laugh." He seems more himself as a
dog--happier, freer--than as a man. I'm not sure about McGonagall--I
think that in SS/PS, JKR simply associated witches with cats and
thought that it would be cool to have a cat transform into a woman.
But, yes. The Animagus form reflects the personality. I would go so
far as to say that the personality *determines* the Animagus form. I
very much doubt that Peter *chose* to transform into a rat, given the
connotations associated with rats (dirty, sneaking, etc.), and he must
have felt secretly that his Animagus form reflected on his physical
inferiority and inferior status in the group, but once they found uses
for him, such as pushing the knot on the Whomping Willow, which
arrogant Prongs with his rack of antlers and hoofed feet and large
body couldn't do, he may have felt better, hiding any rattish
sentiments and jealousies even from himself. (Just speculating, of
course!)

Carol: 
> But if James had no way of controlling if he were to turn into a 
strutting peacock, do you think he would have spent the better part 
of three years figuring out how to become an Animagus? Similarly, 
would Rita put herself through that ordeal if there was a chance she
would have turned into a crocodile?

Carol:
I'm quite sure that it never occurred to James that he would turn into
anything other than some magnificent animal. Interesting that his
Animagus form was only useful for running around in the forest with a
werewolf (and the streets of Hogsmeade late at night). Unlike Sirius's
and Peter's, it wouldn't have been useful as a disguise. Deer, after
all, are shot by hunters. Hm. I wonder if that's symbolic, too. He was
a lot more vulnerable than he thought he was.

As for Rita, her name and nature give away what she'll turn into. She
might have feared that she'd turn into a mosquito, but I'm pretty sure
that she knew or sensed that she would turn into something that would
enable her to pry and spy. Like WPP, she was highly motivated.

Carol:
> > And if your Animagus form, unlike your Patronus, reveals your
inner self, do you really want to know, and want others to know, what
that form is?
> 
> Mike:
> That's another good reason for believing that one has some degree of
control of the form one takes. IOW, why would anyone attempt this 
transformation, knowing the dangers and difficulty involved, if one
had no choice whether ones form would be useful, or worse, insulting?
<snip>
 
Carol:
I think that, knowing the dangers and the risk of becoming something
that you don't want to be (Let me think? What's skinny and has bad
vision? Whatever it is, I'll keep my human form, thanks!), not to
mention that you're supposed to register, informing the Ministry of
what kind of animal you turn into, including the markings, most people
would be deterred from making the effort. BTW, "what kind of animal
you turn into," complete with markings, seems to indicate that every
Animagus is distinct and that there is only one per customer. If you
could choose between a rat and anything else, why would you choose a
rat? And even a stag, despite being magnificent, is not a very useful
Animagus form.

Mike: 
> But this brings up another question, which I'm pretty sure was 
discussed previously, but I'm still wondering about. If, when Krum 
fished the beetle/Rita out of Hermione's hair he tried to squash it in
his hand, could he? Can you kill a witch/wizard in her/his Animagus
form as easily as you could kill a real animal of that species? What
do y'all think? I think not, that there must be some sort of magical
protection, but I'm not sold on that position after Hermione captured
Rita in that jar. <snip fun stuff on Animagus!Snape>

Carol responds:
I think that their sole protection consists of turning back into
themselves. Scabbers/Wormtail caught in a rat trap could probably
rescue himself from a rat trap (with some pain and difficulty) by
transforming into Peter, but if Prongs were shot by a hunter,
good-bye, Prongs.

Remember the fox that Bellatrix kills? "Only a fox. I thought,
perhaps, an Auror.) So even if the fox had been an Auror Animagus, it
would have been killed, but it would apparently have transformed back
into its (his or her) human self as it died because the Animagus spell
would have ended.

Carol, who would be among the majority of Witches and Wizards who
choose not to make the experiment




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Thu May  8 17:19:41 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 17:19:41 -0000
Subject: Animagus Transformation / Snape's Animagus (was DD as Animagus)
In-Reply-To: <fvusk6+mqdg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvvcnd+oq40@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182836

Carol:
<HUGE SNIP>
Alla likes to think that Snape would turn into a
cockroach, but since the only cockroach mentioned in the books, IIRC,
is either somebody's Boggart (with JKR miscounting the number of
students in the class) or a temporary shape that Lupin turns the
Boggart into to conceal his full moon Boggart from the students, I
don't see any canonical support for that idea, nor do I think that
Snape's personality, even in its most unpleasant form, would take that
shape.
<SNIP>

Alla:

Well, that's the beauty of speculation, isn't it?  I do not believe I 
need much canon support for  this speculation.

There are animagi in canon, I believe that Snape's personality is 
just as nasty as I consider cockroach to be. That's enough for me to 
speculate, in my mind he is cockroach if I choose to imagine so. 

Just the same if I choose to imagine Dumbledore as animagus, I would  
imagine a lion or tiger or phoenix. It just feels right to me.


Mike:
<SNIP>
I think Alla was speaking a little tongue in cheek, don't you?
<SNIP>

Alla:
Well, yes and  no. Of course I picked the nastiest form of all 
possibilities and the one , which can be squashed so nicely or 
stepped on , but I can certainly see bat or octopus, not dragon of 
course, sorry Potioncat. Way too majestic and beautiful for Snape, 
sorry. In my mind he does not deserve to be a dragon. I mean I cannot 
stop you from imagining him being one of course, just as nobody can 
stop me from imagining him being a cockroach, but just expressing my 
disagreement  with your vision .

But going back to cockroach, as I stated before, just as Rita can spy 
in her incest  form, I think cockroach is also good for spying so 
this is my good faith basis for choosing this form for Snape, even if 
it is not whole reason.


Potioncat:
Disregarding JKR's interviews, using only canon interpretation, I
disagree.

In the first place, the Marauders and Rita all display the attributes
of their individual Patronuses. Of course, JKR is having fun writing
them, I'm sure---but it is canon.
<SNIP>

Alla:

Here I agree with your vision. I mean I take interviews into 
consideration, but even without them, dog to me is who Sirius is 
indeed, I think revealing your inner self to the extent cannot be 
controlled. IMO of course.







From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Thu May  8 17:28:24 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 17:28:24 -0000
Subject: Animagus Transformation / Snape's Animagus (was DD as Animagus)
In-Reply-To: <fvvcnd+oq40@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvvd7o+4n72@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182837

\> Alla:
<SNIP>
>\> But going back to cockroach, as I stated before, just as Rita can 
spy 
> in her incest  form.....


Alla:

I of course meant insect. Ugh.




From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Thu May  8 18:13:20 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 18:13:20 -0000
Subject: Animagus Transformation / Snape's Animagus (was DD as Animagus)
In-Reply-To: <fvvcnd+oq40@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvvfs0+be72@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182838

> Alla:

> But going back to cockroach, as I stated before, just as Rita can spy 
> in her incest  form, I think cockroach is also good for spying so 
> this is my good faith basis for choosing this form for Snape, even if 
> it is not whole reason.

Magpie:
Best. Typo. Ever. :-D

Re: Snape, I'd go with a big black spider going with the way people 
tend to get associated with things in canon. Physically it connects to 
his teenaged self's movements (I believe they're described as jerky and 
spider-like), which have smoothed out with age, but I can imagine teen!
Snape being a scuttling spider while grown!Snape has become a more 
impressive hunter--repellent to some, but efficient, powerful and with 
amazing powers. Plus, of course, his house is "Spinner's End" and that 
in itself links to Snape spinning tales to different people as a spy. 

I wouldn't go with cockroach because I'd want to get some "sting" in 
there. And I associate them with survival and Snape, in the end, was on 
a bit of a suicide course for Lily (the Malfoys have some cockroach 
qualities though!). And I'd go for spider over bat, despite his robes 
billowing in a bat-like way so he swoops and him looking like he's kept 
out of the sun.

Snape:

http://www.jimstonefreelance.com/black_widow_spider.jpg

-m

-m




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Thu May  8 20:53:28 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 20:53:28 -0000
Subject: Animagus Transformation / Snape's Animagus (was DD as Animagus)
In-Reply-To: <fvvcnd+oq40@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvvp88+4o03@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182839

I just lost a whole post thanks to Yahoo!mort, which is unfairly
picking on HPfGu this morning but leaving the other groups in peace.
<grumble>

Carol:
> <HUGE SNIP>
> Alla likes to think that Snape would turn into a cockroach, but
since the only cockroach mentioned in the books, IIRC, is either
somebody's Boggart (with JKR miscounting the number of students in the
class) or a temporary shape that Lupin turns the Boggart into to
conceal his full moon Boggart from the students, I don't see any
canonical support for that idea, nor do I think that Snape's
personality, even in its most unpleasant form, would take that shape.
> <SNIP>
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Well, that's the beauty of speculation, isn't it?  I do not believe
I need much canon support for  this speculation.
> 
> There are animagi in canon, I believe that Snape's personality is 
just as nasty as I consider cockroach to be. That's enough for me to 
speculate, in my mind he is cockroach if I choose to imagine so. 
<snip>

Carol again:
I'm attempting to reconstruct my lost post, so I hope that I'm not
forgetting anything.

First, Alla, I understand your feelings about Snape. I really do. The
character that I would most like to crush under my shoe and squish
into a jelly is Barty Crouch Jr. How *dare* he Crucio that spider in
front of Neville, deliberately prolonging its agony for his own
sadistic enjoyment, after having helped to Crucio Neville's parents
into insanity, knowing the effect that it would have on Neville and
using Neville's anguish as an excuse to "comfort" him and give him the
book that he hoped would help Harry survive the Second Task, with no
benevolent intentions toward Harry? Squishing this piece of vermin
like a cockroach is too good for him!

And yet, feelings aside, I don't imagine for a moment that Barty Jr.'s
Animagus form would be a cockroach, loathsome though I think he is. He
was exceedingly clever, posing for almost a year as the paranoid
ex-Auror he was keeping in the ex-Auror's own trunk. If I were to
assign Barty Jr. an Animagus form, it would be a chameleon.

By the same token, I would assign the other character I loathe,
Dolores Umbridge, the form so frequently associated with her: a toad.
Much as I would love to squish her underfoot, I don't see any
characteristics of a cockroach (living in squalor, mating
promiscuously, whatever cockroaches do besides crawl out of sinks in
the middle of the night, shudder!) associated with her.

By the same token, even if I hated Snape instead of pitying the
promising boy who ruined his own life and contributed to the death of
the only person he loved through his own mistakes and half-pitying,
half-admiring the bitter but supremely courageous man who spent his
adult life atoning for them, I wouldn't associate him with a cockroach.

And while I would consider the idea of his having a bat Animagus form
and understand the reasoning behind Magpie's spider hypothesis, I
think that the associations with snakes (and Slytherin) are more
pervasive than the rest (the spider imagery appears, IIRC, only in SWM
and the web-spinning implications of "Spinner's End"). His very name,
Snape, suggest "snake," and the sibilant initials SS recall the
initials of the Parselmouth founder of Slytherin House, Salazar
Slytherin and are themselves suggestive of the hissing of a snake.
Bellatrix accuses Snape (probably with good reason) of "slithering out
of action" in DE-related activities, and Harry thinks of Snape, the
supposed murderer of Dumbledore, as a snake in the grass.

Given all that, combined with Snape's ambiguous loyalties and
motivations for most of the series and the ambivalence of Western
culture toward snakes (treachery and trickery on the one hand; healing
and cleverness on the other), as well as the need to conceal himself
and move quickly, I think that a snake, most likely the toad eating
black snake, would be the perfect Animagus form for Snape:

http://www.wettropics.gov.au/st/rainforest_explorer/Resources/Images/animals/snakes/RedBelliedBlackSnake.jpg

> Potioncat:
> Disregarding JKR's interviews, using only canon interpretation, I
disagree.
> 
> In the first place, the Marauders and Rita all display the
attributes of their individual Patronuses. Of course, JKR is having
fun writing them, I'm sure---but it is canon.
> <SNIP>

Carol:
Erm, you meant "their individual Animagus forms," right?
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Here I agree with your vision. I mean I take interviews into 
consideration, but even without them, dog to me is who Sirius is 
indeed, I think revealing your inner self to the extent cannot be 
controlled. IMO of course.

Carol:
On this point, we all agree. Sorry, Mike! <grin>
 
> Carol, picturing Snape's snake Animagus swallowing Umbridge's toad
Animagus and smiling coldly afterwards






From iam.kemper at gmail.com  Thu May  8 21:01:26 2008
From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (kempermentor)
Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 21:01:26 -0000
Subject: Animagus Transformation / Snape's Animagus (was DD as Animagus)
In-Reply-To: <fvvfs0+be72@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <fvvpn6+rk0u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182840

Mike:
an octopus

Potioncat:
a Hebridean Black dragon

Alla:
a cockroach

Magpie:
a big black spider


Kemper now:
Harry's perspective describes a bat-like figure flying to the
perimeter wall.  But it's dark.  

Combining the bat-like imagery and the snake like imagery though out
the series and ignoring any spider imagery entirely, I think Snape's 
animagus would be a winged snake.  Not Quetzalcoatl, with his colorful
plumage... No.  Just your average fiery, flying serpent called a
seraph.  Fiery meant the serpent had a poisonous bite or tongue. 
Which is fair to say of Snape. 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/seraph

Of course seraph have angelic meanings as well which could also be
relevant.  Angels don't have to be compassionate.

Kemper




From freddykruegerre at yahoo.com  Thu May  8 11:47:13 2008
From: freddykruegerre at yahoo.com (Athena)
Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 11:47:13 -0000
Subject: The Death Eaters
Message-ID: <fvup81+srn5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182841

Hello, long time lurker. This is my first post. I have to say
that from my e-mails from this group Carol and Magpie are very
deep thinkers and I applaud their analysis of the series.

I've posted this elsewhere and pretty much nobody really cares
about what I have to say on this specific topic, I am hoping
that this group is different than the others.

"I have to say that two very specifically named and described
Death Eaters have like ZERO PLAY in HBP, or DH and it really
irritates me to no end. I speak of course about the LeStrange
brothers, Rodolphus and Rabastan. Why if JK wasn't going to
use them at all did she bother naming or even creating them
in the first place? I mean the scene in GOF would have played
the same if it were only Bella and Barty on trial. Was it really
necessary to create two characters that we know nothing and I
mean nothing about? Granted Rodolphus gets mentioned ONCE in
DH, but Rabastan is nowhere to be found. If JK found it that
important to give Bella and Barty a co-conspirator on the
Longbottom affair, then Rodolphus would have served that
purpose 100% but to add Rabastan to the fray, and not use
him later, felt like a slap in the face of all us fans of
Lord Voldemort and his merry band of Death Eaters! If they
truly were The Dark Lord's most faithful then I believe that
they deserved more mentions than Yaxley, and Dolohov. The
Carrow's got more play than the ones that Voldemort mentions
as the most faithful. I can only hope that with this encyclopedia
that Rowling is releasing that the brothers LeStrange will get a
biography, perhaps a backstory...."

Granted my LeStrange obsession comes from reading a fanfiction
in which Rodolphus was paired with Hermione, and treated her
amazingly well. I have always imagined that Rodolphus did love
his wife, I can imagine the hurt he must have felt knowing that
he was a trophy husband. I can see him leaning on Rabastan for
support and advice. At the same time battling his own decision
to follow the man that for all intents and purposes stole his
wife from him. These brothers really needed more information.
All we know about them is that their father possibly was in
school with TMR, they were with Snape and MWPP in school. And
were Slytherin. It would have been better plotting at least in
my eyes if JK had included them in more of the action. Even a
mention of Rabastan dueling someone like Bill Weasley while his
brother dueled Charlie. Maybe I am over thinking things here.
But I firmly believe that the most compelling DE's are the
LeStrange brothers. I believed that so firmly that when a RPG
came along I happily played their half sister (actually since
there weren't enough players I played pretty much the entire
LeStrange family, Bella included). There are so many characters
that JK could have used in so many ways and yet I focus on the
ones we know least about...

Anybody have any thoughts on this subject?

freddykruegerre



From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk  Thu May  8 23:18:15 2008
From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 23:18:15 -0000
Subject: "Zero players" (was Re: The Death Eaters)
In-Reply-To: <fvup81+srn5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g001no+o4i3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182842

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

Athena: 
> "I have to say that two very specifically named and described
> Death Eaters have like ZERO PLAY in HBP, or DH and it really
> irritates me to no end. 

<Snip>

> Anybody have any thoughts on this subject?
> 
> freddykruegerre

Geoff:
My initial reaction is to point out that there are people on the Light 
side who are in the same position of virtually doing nothing. 

Look at some of the group who came to Little Whinging to escort 
Harry to Grimmauld Place in OOTP:

Emmeline Vance. What do we know other than that she is murdered 
in HBP?

Sturgis Podmore. Where is he mentioned again other than being 
arrested in OOTP?

Hestia Jones. Do she even get another mention?

And, in DH, we hardly get to know Charity Burbage before she is 
killed by Voldemort.

And then, in the photo of the Order which Moody shows Harry, 
there were a number there who are only named as war losses; 
Edgar Bones, Caradoc Dearborn, Gideon  Prewett, Fabian Prewett, 
Dorcas Meadowes, Benjy Fenwick...

I think that these, like the ones you mention, are merely put there 
by JKR to swell the numbers rather as we have a few pupils other
than the main players to remind us that there are others there. I 
think enough stories were left needing to be wrapped up in the last 
book besides considering all the lot you and I have named above.




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Fri May  9 01:51:33 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 01:51:33 -0000
Subject: Animagus Transformation / Snape's Animagus (was DD as Animagus)
In-Reply-To: <fvvp88+4o03@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g00an5+st1g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182843

 
> Carol:
> > <HUGE SNIP>
> > Alla likes to think that Snape would turn into a cockroach, but
> since the only cockroach mentioned in the books, IIRC, is either
> somebody's Boggart (with JKR miscounting the number of students in 
the
> class) or a temporary shape that Lupin turns the Boggart into to
> conceal his full moon Boggart from the students, I don't see any
> canonical support for that idea, nor do I think that Snape's
> personality, even in its most unpleasant form, would take that 
shape.
> > <SNIP>
> > 
> > Alla:
> > 
> > Well, that's the beauty of speculation, isn't it?  I do not 
believe
> I need much canon support for  this speculation.

Potioncat;
Well, Alla, I can understand. Really I can. Somewhere at the bottom 
of Theory Bay lies a battered rowboat, with the faded letters SICK 
across the...whatever the back of a battered rowboat is called.

SICK stood for Snape Is Cockroach King. All because of the insect-
like descriptions of Snape, the exploding jar of cockroaches and 
Lupin's cockroach/Boggart session. I don't remember how it all came 
together, but as much as I didn't like the idea, I was very much 
afraid Snape would turn out to be a cockroach.

You understand though, he didn't and he wouldn't. ;-)
> 
> Carol:
> Erm, you meant "their individual Animagus forms," right?

Potioncat:
Big hurry, didn't proof well. yes, Animagus forms. Thanks.







From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri May  9 05:37:41 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 05:37:41 -0000
Subject: The Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <fvup81+srn5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g00nv5+io3a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182844

"Athena" < wrote:
>
> Hello, long time lurker. This is my first post. I have to say
> that from my e-mails from this group Carol and Magpie are very
> deep thinkers and I applaud their analysis of the series.

Carol responds:

Thank you very much.
> 
> I've posted this elsewhere and pretty much nobody really cares about
what I have to say on this specific topic, I am hoping that this group
is different than the others.
> 
> "I have to say that two very specifically named and described Death
Eaters have like ZERO PLAY in HBP, or DH and it really irritates me to
no end. I speak of course about the LeStrange brothers, Rodolphus and
Rabastan. Why if JK wasn't going to use them at all did she bother
naming or even creating them in the first place? I mean the scene in
GOF would have played the same if it were only Bella and Barty on
trial. Was it really necessary to create two characters that we know
nothing and I mean nothing about? Granted Rodolphus gets mentioned
ONCE in DH, but Rabastan is nowhere to be found. If JK found it that
important to give Bella and Barty a co-conspirator on the Longbottom
affair, then Rodolphus would have served that purpose 100% but to add
Rabastan to the fray, and not use him later, felt like a slap in the
face of all us fans of Lord Voldemort and his merry band of Death
Eaters! If they truly were The Dark Lord's most faithful then I
believe that they deserved more mentions than Yaxley, and Dolohov. The
Carrow's got more play than the ones that Voldemort mentions as the
most faithful. I can only hope that with this encyclopedia that
Rowling is releasing that the brothers LeStrange will get a biography,
perhaps a backstory...."
<snip>
> 
> Anybody have any thoughts on this subject?

Carol responds:

And I thought that I was the only one who cared about Rabastan, the
forgotten Death Eater! Not that I'm under any delusions about his
being a good guy, but I wondered the same thing--why JKR bothered to
create him. (Even his name doesn't seem to be a real name: Rabastan
seems to be an alteration of Rastaban, which means "head of the snake.")

We never learn which man in the Pensieve trial scene is Rodolphus and
which is Rabastan and neither of them speaks, in contrast to arrogant
Bella and cowardly Barty. Later in GoF, Voldemort says that the
Lestranges should be here and refers to them as his most faithful
followers, but, IIRC, there's only room for two people in that spot,
and he must be referring to Bellatrix and Rodolphus. Similarly, Sirius
refers to the Lestranges as "a married couple" even though he's
talking about the gang that Severus Snape belonged to and they
wouldn't have been married while they were at Hogwarts. (JKR--or
sirius--is forgetting the age difference between Bellatrix and
Severus--either that or the Black family tapestry is wrong in her
birth year--and Sirius is conveniently concealing Bellatrix's maiden
name.) Not a word about Rabastan, yet he went to Azkaban along with
Bella, Rodolphus, and Barty; is, as far as I can tell, as guilty of
Crucioing the Longbottoms as they are, and would have done so for the
same reason that they did, trying to find information on Voldemort's
whereabouts. Bellatrix's "We alone were faithful" seems to apply
equally to all the four.

We do see Rabastan at the MoM in OoP. He's assigned by Lucius Malfoy
to be Crabbe's partner. Either he or Crabbe seems to be the DE whose
head is caught in the bell jar and keeps turning into a baby's and
back again. (Everyone else can be accounted for.) Since we later see
Bellatrix with two male DEs instead of just Rodolphus, her assigned
partner, my theory is that after Crabbe was trapped by the bell jar,
Rabastan joined his brother and sister-in-law with Bellatrix as their
natural leader.

After that, we hear nothing about him. He is certainly among the DEs
arrested after the MoM fiasco, he is almost certainly among those who
escape, but unlike Rodolphus, who is mentioned as being injured in
that fight, we hear nothing of Rabastan, the ever-forgotten DE. And we
don't learn whether Rodolphus recovered. Is he dead? In St. Mungo's?
At home, too injured to join the DEs? He's certainly not with his
darling wife, Bellatrix. We don't know whether either brother fought
at the Battle of Hogwarts, either.

I realize that we don't know the fates of a lot of people on the other
side, either. What happened to Ludo Bagman? To Fudge? To Viktor Krum
after the attack on the Burrow? To dear old Arabella Figg?

But it's strange that JKR suddenly brings in DEs we've never heard of
like Selwyn (she needs him because of the connection with Dolores
Umbridge, but why not mention him earlier?) and others like Mulciber,
Travers, and Dolohov, who have been mentioned before (though Travers
wasn't at the MoM) or Yaxley and the Carrows and Thorfinn Rowle, the
big blond DE, who aren't even mentioned until HBP. Jugson appears out
of nowhere at the MoM and then disappears from the story again. Maybe
JKR is trying to show that the number of DEs is larger than we
originally thought, but still, as you say, why create Rabastan and
Rodolphus, have them arrested for a horrendous crime, and then give
Barty Jr. and Bellatrix all the glory, erm, infamy?

It's also interesting that the MoM crew consists of a combination of
Azkaban escapees and DEs who have successfully kept their cover as
respectable citizens (Avery and Macnair and poor old Nott, for
example, not to mention Lucius Malfoy) and Azkaban escapees like the
three Lestranges and Dolohov. We know that ten escaped the first time
(I could probably come up with most of their names but I'm not going
to try). I don't think that we know how many escaped the second time,
but they seem to have taken Stan Shunpike with them--and Mundungus
Fletcher must have gotten out of jail free at the same time since he's
arrested for impersonating an Inferius in HBP and yet he's Snape's
"source" and a most unhelpful member of the Seven Potters escape
committee in DH.

At any rate, even though I'm no fan of "Lord Voldemort and his merry
band of Death Eaters," but I do still find it interesting to try to
figure out who was in which group, which DE was the baby-headed one,
what happened to him and to poor old Nott, and so forth.

I just had a thought as I was typing. We don't hear anything from
Avery in DH, either. Maybe the entire group of DEs who were involved
in the MoM fiasco, including the Lestrange brothers, is in disgrace
with Voldemort in DH and so their places are taken by the likes of
Yaxley and Travers and even the incredibly stupid Carrows. (Snape, of
course, has his own career trajectory and agenda.)

Carol, who would like to know what happened to the various DEs,
especially Rabastan, but only if JKR has actually given the matter
careful thought




From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Fri May  9 21:02:37 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike Crudele)
Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 14:02:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Animagus Transformation / Snape's Animagus (was DD as Animagus)
Message-ID: <686843.13181.qm@web53012.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182845

> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182833
> > Mike wrote previously: 
> >
> > I seriously doubt they would have put forth all that effort
> > ---<emphasis added> 
> > if they had no way of **knowing "-or-" controlling** the 
> > form they would take.
> > <emphasis off>---
> > IOW, I believe that there is some portion of control as to
> > what kind of animal one would become.
> 
> Potioncat:
> Disregarding JKR's interviews, using only canon 
> interpretation, I disagree.
> 
> In the first place, the Marauders and Rita all display the 
> attributes of their individual [Animagi].

Mike:
Yes, I agree, and I said the same thing in another part of my
post you quoted from, PC. My several respondants seem to think I
was postulating complete control, I wasn't. In the quote above,
please note I said *knowing* *or* *controlling*. Either/or would
satisfy me as far as making the transformation a worthwhile
venture for prospective Animagi. 

I frankly have no idea how someone would control the
transformation, but in any case, I doubt the control is any
great extent. Sirius may only have the choice of what size dog
he becomes, or maybe the breed. James may be stuck as a ruminant
mammal and chose his form within those confines. Peter was going
to be a rodent come hell or high water so rat was the best he
could do. (Actually, I can see Peter unable to change his form
in any way, while James and Sirius, being more powerful wizards,
had a small degree of control.)

I wasn't suggesting that one could have free rein to choose any
form available, only "some portion" of control. If, OTOH, the
only thing available was a way to see in advance what form one
would take, well, that would satisfy me as a precurser to
attempting the process. It's the just going in blindly on a hope
and a prayer that your form *will* make it worthwhile that has
me doubting the value of the process.


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182835

> Carol:
> I think it does more than "play out to a degree in canon." I
> think that it's the determining factor. In contrast to the
> Patronus, which is a protective spirit and often seems to
> reflect someone other than the caster, I think the Animagus
> form reflects the essence of the Animagus's personality.

Mike:
Well, I didn't quantify *what* degree. ;-) And I agree with your
premise, as I said above and in my previous post. I even listed
the known Animagi and acknowledged how their animal form matched
their human personality. I just think there is something more at
play here than *only* personality. Maybe it's force of will, or
degree of magical prowess that allows some witches or wizards to
have the slightest bit of control over their animal form. 



http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182833
> Potioncat:
> But that's the animals "we" would assign to them. Not what 
> they expected to be.

Mike:
I really wasn't thinking about what "we" would assign them. I
was thinking about what they might *expect* to become versus
what they might be *forced* to become. If it was all *forced*
with no piece of *expectation*, I can't see James and Sirius
spending the better part of three years figuring out how to do
it. I think they would have found another way to spend time with
their werewolf buddy.

I understand what you're saying about those wizards with the
"self esteem", and I can't argue with that logic as to who might
go forward with the Animagi project. Maybe we're saying the same
thing in different forms. Maybe your "self esteem" and my "will
power" translate into that small bit of controll I'm looking
for. Maybe that's all that's needed to make the transformation
attempt a viable option for some wizards.


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182840

>>> Mike:
an octopus

Potioncat:
a Hebridean Black dragon

Alla:
a cockroach

Magpie:
a big black spider

Kemper:
Just your average fiery, flying serpent called a seraph.<<<

Mike again:
I like your idea Kemper. The thing is, I don't think an Animagus
can become another magical being. That's why I also ruled out
Potioncat's dragon choice. I think it would be too much to ask
of the transformation to not only become another animal while
retaining your own self awareness, but to also acquire a new or
different magical skill/ability as part of the process. JMO and
YMMV


In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182834
Magpie quoted:

"James:
> It seems that ones personality does take a part in the 
> transformed animal form. Sirius seems to have ..."

Mike:
Though Sirius is my favorite character, James isn't too far
behind. So I'd be honored if James quoted me. ;))



      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ



From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Fri May  9 21:52:13 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 21:52:13 -0000
Subject: Animagus Transformation / Snape's Animagus (was DD as Animagus)
In-Reply-To: <686843.13181.qm@web53012.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <g02h2d+dv8o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182846

> Mike:
> Yes, I agree, and I said the same thing in another part of my
> post you quoted from, PC. My several respondants seem to think I
> was postulating complete control, I wasn't. In the quote above,
> please note I said *knowing* *or* *controlling*. Either/or would
> satisfy me as far as making the transformation a worthwhile
> venture for prospective Animagi. 

Magpie:
I'd do it in a second. Seriously, maybe this is why I have no trouble 
with that particular interview canon. I have no trouble believing 
MWPP went forward for years without any idea or control about their 
animal forms. The unknown could have just made it all the more 
intriguing. It seems like as long as you're okay with yourself to a 
normal degree you'd likely like your animal form, and I really can't 
think of any animal form I'd never want to change into once I found 
it.

Yeah, I if I was a wizard I'd totally be becoming an Animagus as soon 
as I could. I'm more surprised everybody doesn't want to do it.

> Magpie quoted:
> 
> "James:
> > It seems that ones personality does take a part in the 
> > transformed animal form. Sirius seems to have ..."
> 
> Mike:
> Though Sirius is my favorite character, James isn't too far
> behind. So I'd be honored if James quoted me. ;))

Magpie:
Heh. Oops! I am very fond of James (flawed guy he was and I think 
would have been regardless) so you can take that as a compliment from 
me!

-m




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sat May 10 01:16:47 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 01:16:47 -0000
Subject: Animagus Transformation / Snape's Animagus (was DD as Animagus)
In-Reply-To: <g02h2d+dv8o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g02t1v+d755@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182847

Magpie wrote:
> <snip>I have no trouble believing MWPP went forward for years
without any idea or control about their animal forms. The unknown
could have just made it all the more intriguing. <snip>

Carol responds:

Exactly. This is Sirius and James we're talking about. Not only would
they take it for granted that their Animagus forms would be perfectly
adapted for running around with a werewolf on full moon nights, the
risk involved (getting caught, getting trapped in an animal form,
going to class with antlers <eg>) made it all the more exciting.

As Sirius reprovingly tells Harry in OoP when Harry doesn't want to
risk getting Sirius arrested by meeting him in Hogsmeade, "You're less
like your father than I thought. The risk would've been what made it
fun for James" (OoP Am. ed. 305). 

I think that applies to becoming an Animagus (and running with a
werewolf) as well. As for Sirius, as I recall, he later went after
Peter to murder him, got sent to Azkaban, broke out of prison to
commit the murder he'd been arrested for, went on the run with a
stolen hippogriff, came back to England when he was much safer abroad
and lived as a dog in a cave. I don't think that the risk of turning
into something other than a dog (surely he, the handsome Sirius Black,
wouldn't turn into a slug or a louse) would have deterred him. Nor do
I think that the thought of failure ever crossed their minds except as
part of the risk factor that made it all exciting.

Carol, who thinks that determination and the will to succeed, along
with a gift for Transfiguration, enabled them to become Animagi (and
help Peter become one) *because* they were undeterred by the risk




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sat May 10 15:14:05 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 15:14:05 -0000
Subject: The Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <fvup81+srn5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g04e3t+r23k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182848

Athena:
>
> "I have to say that two very specifically named and described
> Death Eaters have like ZERO PLAY in HBP, or DH and it really
> irritates me to no end. I speak of course about the LeStrange
> brothers, Rodolphus and Rabastan. Why if JK wasn't going to
> use them at all did she bother naming or even creating them
> in the first place?

Pippin:
I'm afraid this won't  help your irritation, but I've always
thought it was one of JKR spy jokes. Influenced by the novella and
classic film "The Third Man", journalists covering the real life
Cambridge spy ring referred to "the third man", the then unidentified
spy who  eventually proved to be Kim Philby.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Five

 
 I thought it was very funny that after all our efforts to guess who
JKR's third man might be, and all  the elaborate theories generated to
account for his presence, he turned out to be a Lestrange, just as
everything in canon had hinted. But somehow,  because Sirius said
that the Lestranges were a married couple, we never thought of the
other guy being a Lestrange too, despite canon being overrun with
multiple Weasleys, Riddles, Crouches and even an unrelated Evans.
Funny how people's minds work...

 
Pippin






From freddykruegerre at yahoo.com  Sat May 10 13:50:16 2008
From: freddykruegerre at yahoo.com (Athena)
Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 13:50:16 -0000
Subject: The Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <g00nv5+io3a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0496o+c647@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182849

> Carol responds:
>
> And I thought that I was the only one who cared about Rabastan, the
> forgotten Death Eater! Not that I'm under any delusions about his
> being a good guy, but I wondered the same thing--why JKR bothered to
> create him. (Even his name doesn't seem to be a real name: Rabastan
> seems to be an alteration of Rastaban, which means "head of the snake.")
> <HUGE SNIP>
> > Carol, who would like to know what happened to the various DEs,
> especially Rabastan, but only if JKR has actually given the matter
> careful thought
>


Thank You Carol for your insight. As always and as I had expected it
was thoughtfully presented. I feel as I have said previously that JK
dropped the ball for the Death Eaters, well the entire war and rise of
Voldemort actually. I know the books are from Harry's POV only, well
aside from the first chapter in DH. I really want to see her
encyclopedia released and soon. Personally I have written a family
history of the LeStrange's. In my world their fathers name is Rupert
(To keep with a slightly "Charmed" feel of the world with the "R"
names) and their mothers name is Iris to contrast with the peaceful
Lily Evans Potter. They live at LeStrange Court, because their name
sounds French and Marie Antoinette and other French nobility held
court... But thats my imagination, I really want to know what JK has
to say on the subject. I went to the post-DH webchat with the intent
on getting this very question answered by the creator herself. The
closest I got was someone asking if Bella really loved Roddy or
Voldy... Sigh...  I can't really be mad at JK for ignoring the
LeStranges completely because Roddy is mentioned in DH but Rabby isn't
so that makes me a bit perturbed...

Athena



From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sat May 10 17:31:39 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 17:31:39 -0000
Subject: Coolness // Portraits
In-Reply-To: <fvsuoo+gqb6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g04m5r+nifi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182850

> > Pippin:
> > If you got the message, why would you think it needed to be stronger?
> 
> Montavilla47:
> Because I also got it--and stronger--in PS/SS when Harry chose
> the scruffy, uncool Ron over the sleek, seemingly popular Draco.
> (Although, again, it wasn't much of a choice, since Harry disliked
> Draco immediately.)

Pippin:
The format was the same, but the message was different, IMO. Romilda
Vane is to "vanity" as Draco Malfoy is to "bad faith" -- and it's bad
faith, which is a much more important theme for the series as a whole,
that Harry rejects in the first train scene. We already know what
Draco thinks of people with Muggle backgrounds, so we know that Draco
couldn't make a whole-hearted offer of friendship. Even if Harry had
accepted him, Draco would have been caught, like Snape before him,
between warring loyalties. Draco could have rejected his family and
his old ties as Sirius did, but then he wouldn't have had any
connections of "the right sort" to offer.

 JKR shows us that it's easy to reject bad faith when it presents
itself in such an obvious and unattractive way. Harry is right to
think that he should tell who the right sort are for himself, and
right to reject Draco's offer,  but  wrong if he thinks it's always
going to be that easy.

> Montavilla47:
> Very interesting insight, Pippin.  And it makes a lot of sense. 
Except that Harry doesn't really ditch his friends for the Prince's
book.  He  and Ron remain tight throughout the book and the only
tension between them comes from Harry's support for Hermione during
the Ron/Hermione break-up.  

Pippin:
No, Harry doesn't drop his friends  but then he wouldn't necessarily
have dropped Neville and Luna permanently if he'd gone and sat with
his fan club -- Neville was prepared to be a good sport about it, just
as Ron was about the book. But the book does distance Ron from Harry 
-- Ron's got a choice between being a tag-along and finding something
else to occupy himself  while Harry is spending his free time with the
book, and Ron chooses Lavender (another vain pursuit.)

Montavilla:
> As for Hermione, she's "sniffs" at Harry's use of the book and
provides  dire warnings about the Prince's character.  Although, of
course, she  turns out to be right, she's the one who creates any
distance in her  friendship with Harry, while Harry is running after
her to comfort her  about Ron, and making sure that she isn't left lonely.

Pippin:
Luna would have behaved the same way, IMO, if Harry had decided he
wanted Romilda's company, and Harry would have been as concerned for
Luna's loneliness.  

> 
> Montavilla47:
> Again, that makes perfect sense, except that Peter and the Prince's 
> book don't function the same at all.  Peter, as you say, flattered
> James and Sirius by admiring them.  The Prince, however, doesn't
> even know that Harry exists, and any affection Harry feels for him
> is based on what Harry gleans as the Prince's sense of humor,
> intelligence, and creativity.

Pippin:
But the book is the ticket to successful potion-making, praise and
flattery from Slughorn, and even though Harry knows he doesn't deserve
it, and tells himself it's only important because he needs to get that
memory, he still eats it up, and enjoys very much being able to
outshine Hermione and especially Draco.


> Montavilla47:
> I would say that of those students you mention, Harry only shows
> respect for Cedric.  He views Fleur with suspicion or dismissive 
> humor towards her womanly charms, which are a trap he must avoid 
> (noting how often Ron falls for them).  Harry admires Krum's playing 
> skills  during the Quidditch match, but it's Krum that compliments 
> Harry's  flying skills, while Harry is continually noticing Krum's 
> clumsiness,  gruffness, and surliness.
> 
> And, as for Percy, Harry remarks that Percy had always been his
> least favorite Weasley, and often notes Percy's stuffy, pompous
> manner.

Pippin:
The scene where Harry looks up (literally) to the Tri-wizard champions
is canon. As for Percy, Harry's dislike for Percy's manner doesn't
keep him from feeling that he's been slighted not to be made a prefect
himself. 


> > 
> > Pippin:
> > Sure, that's what he believed in theory. But in practice he
thought Hermione was mad to demand respect  for Kreacher.
> 
> Montavilla47:
> No, he believed it in practice.  The first time he meets Dobby in 
> person, he spontaneously gives the elf a Christmas gift, just 
> because it will please.  In GoF, he tells Hermione that the 
> relationship  between an elf and her master has to be respected, 
> no matter politically incorrect it may appear.  In OotP, he goes 
> around the dorm after Hermione has hidden her hats, uncovering 
> them so that the elves have a choice about their own destinies.

Pippin:
He believed it in practice as long as it wasn't inconvenient for him.
 He wasn't about to respect Kreacher's choice to hate Muggleborns or
be loyal to the Black family. And he wanted to respect the Elves'
choice to remain slaves when he knew it wouldn't cost him anything --
he was very concerned about Hermione offering the Elves their freedom
when he thought it would put them off their cooking.

 That it would be wrong to give the Elves an order they would happily
obey and which would  be in their interest as well as his own, such as
fighting for Hogwarts, is not something that would have occurred to
Ron pre-DH. 

I'd like to add here, that the whole House-elf arc looked more
optimistic  to me after I'd seen the film "Amazing Grace" -- the
British experience with abolitionism is a whole 'nother kettle of
potion from the US. At least according to the movie, the abolitionists
eventually succeeded by  political maneuvers  rather than by a violent
mass uprising, and there was a real life freed slave who inspired the
movement but died before it succeeded. So I think through the lens of
the British experience, DH  ends with the Elves on track to achieve
their freedom if things happen as they did in real life.

> 
> Montavilla47:
> Again, thank you for pointing out that technique, because it helps
> make sense of JKR's writing.  But, I'm afraid that Harry *doesn't* 
> choose between Snape and Quirrell.  Quirrell's never presented as 
> any kind of a choice (since, as a good mystery writer, JKR is 
> busy hiding him in plain sight).
> 
> Harry never considers *any* one other than Snape as the person
> trying to steal the stone.  

Pippin:

Exactly.
Harry  should decide with *everyone* whether they are acting in good
faith or not. Harry is told that Snape is acting in good faith (by
Hagrid) but refuses to consider  it, even though he knows he hasn't
got any clear evidence otherwise. Nor does he ever consider that
Quirrell might be acting in bad faith about the Stone, although it's
clear to him that Quirrell is hiding something about the turban. 

It will, of course, take seven whole books for Harry to learn that
a)Snape was acting in good faith and 
b) blindly accepting the Sorting Hat's evaluation of someone's
character is not making up your own mind.

Montavilla:
> But, without trying to be too critical about it, I think that JKR
> ended up using the technique of having her heroes make a 
> correct but easy decision to illlustrate the principle early on
> only to have them the correct and easier decision later on.
> 
> For example:
> 
> <snip>
> In OotP, Harry makes the decision to risk his life to save the 
> life of one person.
> 
> In DH, Harry makes the decision to give his life to save 
> thousands of lives.

Pippin:
For some it might be easier to give your life for a thousand  than to
risk it for a few. But not for Harry, he *likes* risk. It's the
certainty of the fatal outcome that makes the DH decision hard.
There's  no risk at all, he knows exactly what will happen when he
meets Voldemort. 

It's different from the graveyard because that wasn't a real choice
-- his odds of survival were not going to be increased if he stayed
hiding behind the gravestone, so it wasn't a decision to accept death,
just a realization that he was facing death already and had nothing to
lose by going out bravely. 



Montavilla:

> 
> In terms of Neville:
<snip>
> 
> So, when Harry decides to sit with Neville and Luna at the
> beginning of HBP, instead of going off with the unattractive,
> pushy, unpleasant stranger, it's such a no-brainer that it 
> hardly counts as a moral message--and yet there seems to
> be no other reason for that moment to exist.

Pippin:
Yet all of that stuff about Neville didn't keep Harry from feeling
embarrassed in OOP when Neville was going on about his pet plant and
covering people with stinksap. Yes, Harry already knew that Neville
was brave, but it still bothered him that Neville was overweight and
dorky. The moment is there to show us that Harry has internalized what
Dumbledore was trying to tell him, that bravery is more important, and
cooler, than having the coolest pets or being good looking or having a
following of silly fangirls like Romilda. (Although, to give Romilda
her due, I don't think she realized that it was Neville Longbottom's
bottom she was looking at or recognized Luna behind the spectrespecs.
She, unlike Draco, is embarrassed when she realizes that she's
insulted Harry's friends.  )

I don't think, BTW, that Draco was offering to become a Harry fanboy
--I think he envisioned himself as Harry's patron and protector, as
his father had been for Snape.  


Montavilla:
> Was the moral that Harry's innocent use of the book
> to improve his potions' marks was vanity that led to
> the danger of nearly killing Draco?  With the final
> blow being the knowledge that Death Eater, 
> Dumbledore killing Snape was the Prince in disguise?
> 
> That seems the obvious moral message to me, but it's
> muddied by a few things:
<snip>
> The book ultimately turned out to be a positive
> thing.  So, the simple moral message that the 
> book reflected the evil, twisted thoughts of a 
> future Death Eater is too easy a judgment.  Likewise,
> the judgment that it showed the carefree, humorous 
> outlook of a "cool" teenager is also too easy.


Pippin:
Exactly. The book was neither completely harmless  nor so dangerous
that there was nothing of value in it -- a bit like its author Snape,
if you think of it. Both Harry and Hermione made an easy, all or
nothing judgment, and they were both wrong. 

I think JKR borrows from the form of the morality play partly to
deconstruct it. Just as the world is too complex to divide into good
people and Death Eaters, the human character is too complex to divide
into vices and virtues. There *is* good and evil, but IMO, JKR thinks
that grown ups ought to sort them out for themselves, not rely on
convenient labels, even hers.
 
I wouldn't weep too much for the loss of the Prince's notes. In  my
experience, people with a habit of scribbling in the margins do not
confine their attentions to just one text. If the potions book had
reams about potions with the occasional charm or hex thrown in, what
would Snape's DADA texts look like?  Snape had that whole
library at Spinner's End, which would fall by wizarding law into the
hands of the Ministry. Wonder what they made of it?

Pippin





From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Sat May 10 21:27:05 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 21:27:05 -0000
Subject: Coolness // Portraits
In-Reply-To: <g04m5r+nifi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g053v9+5332@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182851

> Pippin:
(regarding Draco's offer of friendship to Harry)
>  JKR shows us that it's easy to reject bad faith when it presents
> itself in such an obvious and unattractive way. Harry is right to
> think that he should tell who the right sort are for himself, and
> right to reject Draco's offer,  but  wrong if he thinks it's always
> going to be that easy.

Montavilla47:
So, does Harry ever figure that out?  The only time I can think 
where Harry ever begins to trust a shady character (except for 
Dumbledore, I suppose), is when he deals with Croody.  But, 
even then Harry views his help with suspicion.  

Is that what the whole angst over Dumbledore is in DH?  Harry
finally having to figure out for himself whether Dumbledore is
the "right sort" or not?

> > Montavilla47:
> > Very interesting insight, Pippin.  And it makes a lot of sense. 
> Except that Harry doesn't really ditch his friends for the Prince's
> book.  He  and Ron remain tight throughout the book and the only
> tension between them comes from Harry's support for Hermione during
> the Ron/Hermione break-up.  
> 
> Pippin:
> No, Harry doesn't drop his friends  but then he wouldn't necessarily
> have dropped Neville and Luna permanently if he'd gone and sat with
> his fan club -- Neville was prepared to be a good sport about it, just
> as Ron was about the book. But the book does distance Ron from Harry 
> -- Ron's got a choice between being a tag-along and finding something
> else to occupy himself  while Harry is spending his free time with the
> book, and Ron chooses Lavender (another vain pursuit.)

Montavilla47:
Um.  Ron's been a tag-along for four-and-a-half books by that point. 
The only point where he wasn't was during GoF when he and Harry were
mad at each other.  He's also had to occupy himself in the past, when
Harry was, for example, spending several hours a week playing 
Quidditch while Ron was yet to make the team.  These things were not
related to the Prince's book.

And Ron's choice of Lavender had nothing to do with the Prince's
book, although you could say it was a vain pursuit...

...Although JKR doesn't seem to view it as such, according to her
remarks on that storyline.  She appears to view it as something 
Ron needs to go through in order to be on the same maturity level
as Harry and Hermione.

> Montavilla:
> > As for Hermione, she's "sniffs" at Harry's use of the book and
> provides  dire warnings about the Prince's character.  Although, of
> course, she  turns out to be right, she's the one who creates any
> distance in her  friendship with Harry, while Harry is running after
> her to comfort her  about Ron, and making sure that she isn't left lonely.
> 
> Pippin:
> Luna would have behaved the same way, IMO, if Harry had decided he
> wanted Romilda's company, and Harry would have been as concerned for
> Luna's loneliness.  

Montavilla47:
That doesn't really sound like Luna to me.  She never seems to care if 
people ditch her--although she's happier than most people allow 
themselves to show when someone does take an interest in her.

I can imagine Hermione or Ginny sniffing  and making remarks (more
catty than dire) if Harry went off with Romilda.  But not Luna.

Nor do I see Harry as being concerned about Luna's loneliness...
ever.  Even though Luna states many times that she doesn't have 
friends.  Except for taking her to Slughorn's party, which Harry does
on the spur of the moment, he doesn't think about her at all 
until she shows up to help during the invasion of Hogwarts.

And then, he merely notes that she and Neville were the only
ones of the D.A. to keep checking their coins, in hopes that 
there would be a message.   I don't think it could be any 
clearer that Harry simply dropped both Neville and Luna
as companions except when he had need of them.


> > Montavilla47:
> > Again, that makes perfect sense, except that Peter and the Prince's 
> > book don't function the same at all.  Peter, as you say, flattered
> > James and Sirius by admiring them.  The Prince, however, doesn't
> > even know that Harry exists, and any affection Harry feels for him
> > is based on what Harry gleans as the Prince's sense of humor,
> > intelligence, and creativity.
> 
> Pippin:
> But the book is the ticket to successful potion-making, praise and
> flattery from Slughorn, and even though Harry knows he doesn't deserve
> it, and tells himself it's only important because he needs to get that
> memory, he still eats it up, and enjoys very much being able to
> outshine Hermione and especially Draco.

Montavilla47:
But he does that long before he even knows that there's a memory
to be gotten.  So, the memory is irrelevant to Harry's use of the 
book.  And my point is that the book isn't flattering Harry at all. 

And, while Harry obviously enjoys the grades and prizes he's getting,
he despises Slughorn's flattery.  I suppose I'm making your case 
here.... because Slughorn is just as silly and unattractive as Romilda
is.  And yet, here is Harry eating up his praise after being explicitly
warned by Dumbledore.

And yet... there is no bad outcome from this for Harry.  His currying
of Slughorn's favor is ultimately good, since it helps him acquire the 
crucial memory.  In no way does Harry's use of the book or 
relationship with Slughorn contribute to the death of Dumbledore
or Draco's success in bringing Death Eaters into the castle.

So, what, exactly is the problem with giving in to Vanity after all?  
The worst that happens because of it is that Hermione gets sniffy
with him and Snape eventually assigns him to detention.  All that
really means is that he loses out on a few hours he could be 
snogging with Ginny.

> > Montavilla47:
> > I would say that of those students you mention, Harry only shows
> > respect for Cedric.  He views Fleur with suspicion or dismissive 
> > humor towards her womanly charms, which are a trap he must avoid 
> > (noting how often Ron falls for them).  Harry admires Krum's playing 
> > skills  during the Quidditch match, but it's Krum that compliments 
> > Harry's  flying skills, while Harry is continually noticing Krum's 
> > clumsiness,  gruffness, and surliness.
> > 
> > And, as for Percy, Harry remarks that Percy had always been his
> > least favorite Weasley, and often notes Percy's stuffy, pompous
> > manner.
> 
> Pippin:
> The scene where Harry looks up (literally) to the Tri-wizard champions
> is canon. As for Percy, Harry's dislike for Percy's manner doesn't
> keep him from feeling that he's been slighted not to be made a prefect
> himself. 

Montavilla47:
I'm not sure which scene you're talking about.  Is it the one where they
get their photographs taken and the reporter is only interested in 
talking to Harry, ignoring the other three?  

Even if Harry physically looks up to the other champions, he only ever
seems to feel emotional/mental respect when Cedric saves him from
the spider.  And he certainly never thinks of any of them as "cool."  
The most he can say for Cedric is that he's decent and honorable,
which are good qualities, but not the same thing.

The moment in which Harry feels slighted for not being made 
prefect is an odd one to me (although it's actually one of the
moments that I really like Harry).   But, even if the position means
something to him, Percy does not.  

So, again, with the exception of the twins, I don't see that Harry
admires or respects any older students, let alone thinking them
"cool."  

> > Montavilla47:
> > No, he [Ron] believed [in elf self-automony]  in practice.  
>> The first time he meets Dobby in 
> > person, he spontaneously gives the elf a Christmas gift, just 
> > because it will please.  In GoF, he tells Hermione that the 
> > relationship  between an elf and her master has to be respected, 
> > no matter politically incorrect it may appear.  In OotP, he goes 
> > around the dorm after Hermione has hidden her hats, uncovering 
> > them so that the elves have a choice about their own destinies.
> 
> Pippin:
> He believed it in practice as long as it wasn't inconvenient for him.
>  He wasn't about to respect Kreacher's choice to hate Muggleborns or
> be loyal to the Black family. And he wanted to respect the Elves'
> choice to remain slaves when he knew it wouldn't cost him anything --
> he was very concerned about Hermione offering the Elves their freedom
> when he thought it would put them off their cooking.
> 
>  That it would be wrong to give the Elves an order they would happily
> obey and which would  be in their interest as well as his own, such as
> fighting for Hogwarts, is not something that would have occurred to
> Ron pre-DH. 

Montavilla47:
By uncovering the hats, Ron was risking his friendship with Hermione. 
That would have cost him something.  Moreover, even when Hermione
is friends, she is apt to punish Ron and Harry by withdrawing her 
study help, so there's plenty Ron was risking giving the elves a choice
at that point. 

As for whether Ron would have respected Kreacher's choice to hate
Muggleborns or loyalty to the Black family... it's not really the 
same thing, is it?  Respecting someone's right to make their 
own decision is not the same as respecting the decision itself.  

We don't have any canon to say whether Ron did or did not
respect Kreacher's loyalty to the Black family.  Since he never
shows disrespect for it, I'm going to assume he did respect it.
However, respecting that loyalty is not the same as condoning
the actions that came of it, which nobody in the Order 
(including Dumbledore) did.

In DH, IIRC, what prompts Ron's comment is not an order for the 
elves to fight.  Harry asks Tonks, Augusta Longbottom, and Ginny 
to leave the Room of Requirement so they can change it to get the 
diadem. As Ginny runs up the stairs, Harry calls after her to come 
back into the room as soon as they are done.

It's at that point that Ron mentions they've forgotten the elves.  Harry
asks if he means that the elves should fight, and Ron corrects him,
saying that the elves should be *warned* so that there wouldn't be 
"any more Dobbies."

My contention is that this concern is perfectly in line with the Ron
who offered his Christmas jumper to Dobby and threw in a pair
of socks as well.  This is in line with the Ron who uncovered the
hats so that the elves could decide for themselves whether they
wanted freedom (whether or not that freedom meant a less
convenient dinner service at Hogwarts).  It's in line with the Ron
who notices the efficiency of the elves and compliments them on
their service.

It's Hermione who goes from trying to impose her ideas of 
freedom on the elves to suggesting that they be treated kindly.
Ron was treating the elves kindly three years earlier.  


> Montavilla:
> 
> > 
> > In terms of Neville:
> <snip>
> > 
> > So, when Harry decides to sit with Neville and Luna at the
> > beginning of HBP, instead of going off with the unattractive,
> > pushy, unpleasant stranger, it's such a no-brainer that it 
> > hardly counts as a moral message--and yet there seems to
> > be no other reason for that moment to exist.
> 
> Pippin:
> Yet all of that stuff about Neville didn't keep Harry from feeling
> embarrassed in OOP when Neville was going on about his pet plant and
> covering people with stinksap. 

Montavilla47:
I know.  But that only makes me think that Harry was a bit 
short on the uptake about Neville's good points prior to HBP.
When Harry was so embarrassed about being seen with Neville, I 
was frankly a bit embarrassed for Harry being such a snob--
and I choose to believe that it's excuseable because Harry has
a crush on Cho and naturally wants to impress her.

Pippin:
>Yes, Harry already knew that Neville
> was brave, but it still bothered him that Neville was overweight and
> dorky. The moment is there to show us that Harry has internalized what
> Dumbledore was trying to tell him, that bravery is more important, and
> cooler, than having the coolest pets or being good looking or having a
> following of silly fangirls like Romilda. (Although, to give Romilda
> her due, I don't think she realized that it was Neville Longbottom's
> bottom she was looking at or recognized Luna behind the spectrespecs.
> She, unlike Draco, is embarrassed when she realizes that she's
> insulted Harry's friends.  )

Montavilla47:
But, if that's the moment is there for (in addition, I assume to what
you earlier pointed out as its function of giving Harry an easy choice
to be followed up a more difficult one), then it would help to make
Romilda Vane someone who has *anything* to offer Harry in terms
of good company, social status, or general "coolness."

She has no cool pet.  She isn't good-looking.  She isn't older.
She may or may not be popular,  but if she is popular, it's with people
Harry barely notices (and that with contempt).

Pippin:
> I don't think, BTW, that Draco was offering to become a Harry fanboy
> --I think he envisioned himself as Harry's patron and protector, as
> his father had been for Snape.  

Montavilla47:
At least that would be something Harry might actually want from
a friend at that point in his life.  Romilda has nothing to offer 
Harry.

> Pippin:
> I think JKR borrows from the form of the morality play partly to
> deconstruct it. Just as the world is too complex to divide into good
> people and Death Eaters, the human character is too complex to divide
> into vices and virtues. There *is* good and evil, but IMO, JKR thinks
> that grown ups ought to sort them out for themselves, not rely on
> convenient labels, even hers.

Montavilla47:
If that is indeed her intention, then she succeeded with me, because
I can't take any of her labels for granted.  Even Dumbledore, who was
presented as the "epitome of goodness" ended the series looking to
like a cruel and manipulative character.  Oddly enough, though, that
didn't come from his tragic backstory and flirtation with Grindelwald.
It came from the events in DH and the Prince's tale, and the knowledge
that he lied to Harry (and others) several times throughout the books.

Pippin:
> I wouldn't weep too much for the loss of the Prince's notes. In  my
> experience, people with a habit of scribbling in the margins do not
> confine their attentions to just one text. If the potions book had
> reams about potions with the occasional charm or hex thrown in, what
> would Snape's DADA texts look like?  Snape had that whole
> library at Spinner's End, which would fall by wizarding law into the
> hands of the Ministry. Wonder what they made of it?

Montavilla47:
Unless Snape left a will.  I wonder who he left the books to?





From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Sat May 10 23:16:12 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 23:16:12 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapter 9-10 post DH look
Message-ID: <g05abs+qmeh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182852

"Mr.Weasley," said Harry slowly, "if Fudge is meeting Death Eaters 
like Malfoy, if he's seeing them alone, how do we know they haven't 
put Imperius curse on him?" - -p.155


Alla:

Oh don't you worry Harry, there is always a book 7 for puttin 
Imperius on Ministry employees and there were also couple other names 
in book 7 working in the Ministry, weren't they?


"And there's Dumbledore beside me, Dedalus Diggle on the other 
side... That's Marlene McKinnon, she was killed two weeks after this 
was taken, they got her whole family. That's Frank and Alice 
Longbottom-" - p.175

Alla:

Okay, not typing the whole description of who is who on this picture, 
anybody can check the whole quote out.

I wonder, I counted 21 members of the original order, it is a bit 
more than I remembered and that brings me to another math question 
connected to Lupin's overpowered 20:1 remark.

So, 21x20 that makes it 420 Deatheaters. Huh, JKR? Did I miscount?



I have not noticed anything new in chapter 10. Well, Luna is 
introduced. Did you think she will play special role? Were your 
expectations fulfilled?






From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sun May 11 00:09:10 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 00:09:10 -0000
Subject: Coolness // Portraits
In-Reply-To: <g053v9+5332@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g05df6+hp2n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182853

Montavilla47 wrote:
<snip> > And Ron's choice of Lavender had nothing to do with the
Prince's book, although you could say it was a vain pursuit... <snip>

Carol responds:
This remark combined with Pippin's comment on Romilda's last name (I
hadn't previously made the Vane/vain connection, obvious as it seems
now that she's pointed out) leads me to wonder about Lavender's name
and its possible significance. Lavender is both a flower (or aromatic
herb), tying the name in with Lily, Petunia, and Narcissa (any others
I'm forgetting?) and a color like her last name, Brown. BTW, a Google
image search for "lavender color" will show shades of pale purple
ranging from pinkish purple through lilac to bluish purple. Her last
name is another color, the very common and rather boring color brown.
Taken literally, "lavender brown" is an impossible combination, like
"pink black." Is Lavender's name supposed to suggest a combination of
enticing (for Ron) and pretty (the color/flower lavender) and common
or ordinary (the color brown), in contrast to Hermione, who admittedly
grows prettier as the books progress, notably after the shortening of
her teeth (which somehow manages to straighten them at the same time)
but is by no means common in terms of her intellectual abilities and
magical talents?

On a sidenote, Romilda's first name means, of all things, "glorious
battle maid," and some site or other points out that her whole name is
an anagram for "I'm a Dan lover"--one of JKR's little jokes, with Dan
used for Harry as Rupert is the name that Slughorn calls Ron ("your
poor friend Rupert")?

Not that I'm saying anything important here, but the etymologies of
the names usually have some relation to the character.

Montavilla47:
> Nor do I see Harry as being concerned about Luna's loneliness...
ever. <snip>

Carol responds:
I think we see the very moment when he first becomes aware of and
sympathetic toward her loneliness, just at the time when he is
suffering himself from the death of his godfather and even before he
remembers that Luna, too, can see Thestrals. She tells him that people
take her possessions and she's putting up notices in hopes of getting
them back:

"An odd feeling rose in Harry--an emotion quite different from the
anger and grief that had filled him since sirius's death. It was a few
moments before he realized that he was feeling sorry for Luna" )OoP
am. ed. 862).

He asks why people hide her possessions and she replies, "Oh . . . .
well . . .  I think they think I'm a bit odd, you know. Some people
call me 'Loony' Lovegood, actually." 

After hearing these words, Harry's "new feeling of pity intensifie[s]"
(862).

Soon afterwards, she talks about expecting to see her dead mother
someday, and Harry remembers that she, too, can see Thestrals. The
moment is understated, but it's a moment of mutual understanding and
empathy that he shares with no other character. (Neither Hermione nor
Ron yet knows what it feels like to lose a loved one, and he can't
talk about Neville's past with him. Cho's tears and constantly wanting
to talk about Cedric's death are altogether different from this calm
acceptance of death and the afterlife. I don't think that Harry really
understands the importance of this moment or he would not have felt so
bleak and empty as he stood by his parents' graves. And, yet, it's
clear that he has a new respect and affection for Luna that goes
beyond her participation in the MoM battle and her clinging to the DA
because it was "almost like having friends." He can take Luna to
Slughorn's party "as friends" without embarrassment (as long as she's
not wearing her radish earrings and bottlecap necklace) without caring
that the rest of the school views her as odd, and he can genuinely
enjoy her company (and nearly choke on his drink when she talks about
the Rotfang conspiracy). As Ron says, Luna is crazy but in a good way,
and Harry has learned not to judge her by appearances.

I think it would be interesting, though much too time-consuming, to go
through all the Luna scenes in the books and watch Harry's reaction
changing. This scene, though, is the pivotal one, and sufficiently
contrasts with the scene in which Cho (not Romilda) encounters Harry
in the uncool company of Neville and Luna (and Ron's-little-sister
Ginny), all of them covered with Stinksap, to make the point:

"[Cho] closed the door again, rather pink in the face, and departed.
Harry slumped back in his seat and groaned. He would have liked Cho to
discover him sitting with a group of *very cool people* laughing their
heads off at a joke he had just told; he would not have chosen to be
sitting with Neville and *Loony* Lovegood, clutching a toad and
dripping in Stinksap" (187-88). By the same token, when it's time to
"rescue" Sirius Black at the MoM, he would not have chosen Luna or
Neville (or Ginny) to accompany him.

It could not be clearer, at least not to me, that at this point in
Harry's life, the beautiful and popular Cho is "cool" and the nerdy
Neville and Loony Luna are decidedly not.

Harry's gradual discovery that he was wrong about them both is, IMO,
one of the most important, if subtle, lessons on his way to growing
up. And I also think that the reader, at least the sophisticated
reader, is *supposed* to see, as you do, that Harry is wrong about
both Neville and Luna. We're ahead of him, waiting for him to see what
we see.

 Montavilla47:
> I know.  But that only makes me think that Harry was a bit short on
the uptake about Neville's good points prior to HBP. When Harry was so
embarrassed about being seen with Neville, I was frankly a bit
embarrassed for Harry being such a snob--and I choose to believe that
it's excuseable because Harry has a crush on Cho and naturally wants
to impress her. <snip>

Carol responds:
Well, I don't know whether it's excuseable, but the scene certainly
indicates that he has not yet learned to appreciate Neville. In his
case, his bravery in staying with Harry even after his wand and nose
were broken makes the difference. Seeing Neville Crucio'd by Bellatrix
is the turning point at which he actually starts to hand the Prophecy
orb to Lucius Malfoy (cue the cavalry, who arrive just in the nick of
time).

The thing is, we readers understand long before Harry does that
Neville is much "cooler" than Cho. And by the end or OoP, the book in
which we first encounter her, we realize that Luna is "cool," too.

The scene with Romilda occurs *after* Harry realizes, or has started
to realize, their value. Her comment, "You don't have to sit with
*them,*" probably represents the view of the students at large. (Even
Ernie Macmillan in OoP regards Luna as an oddball.) And Neville is
still under the delusion that he's "nobody." 

Most likely, the general perception of Luna never changes, but she's
wholly unbothered by it. And HRH know better, as do the DA members.
Neville, in contrast, has a circle of admirers after he slays the evil
serpent. I don't think, however, that modest, self-effacing Neville
will let his glory go to his head, however genuinely "cool" he has
shown himself to be.

Carol, agreeing that Harry is "slow on the uptake," but that's the
point--he understands their worth eventually and stops judging by
appearances (though with Snape, it takes Nagini and a trip into the
Pensieve for Harry to see the truth)




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sun May 11 00:41:58 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 00:41:58 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapter 9-10 post DH look
In-Reply-To: <g05abs+qmeh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g05fcm+afgt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182854

Alla quoted:
> "Mr.Weasley," said Harry slowly, "if Fudge is meeting Death Eaters
like Malfoy, if he's seeing them alone, how do we know they haven't 
put Imperius curse on him?" - -p.155
 
> Alla:
> 
> Oh don't you worry Harry, there is always a book 7 for puttin 
Imperius on Ministry employees and there were also couple other names
in book 7 working in the Ministry, weren't they?

Carol:
Well, Lucius Malfoy does put the Imperius Curse on Bode (and on Order
member Sturgis Podmore, hiding under the Invisibility Cloak), so I
think this is one of those moments in which Harry is partly right.
And, certainly, the scene foreshadows the Imperius Curse on Pius
Thicknesse in DH. I'd really like to know what was going on outside
Harry's pov and to what degree Malfoy and Umbridge were working
together to manipulate Fudge.
> 
Ala quoting: 
> "And there's Dumbledore beside me, Dedalus Diggle on the other 
side... That's Marlene McKinnon, she was killed two weeks after this
was taken, they got her whole family. That's Frank and Alice
Longbottom-" - p.175
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Okay, not typing the whole description of who is who on this
picture, anybody can check the whole quote out.
> 
> I wonder, I counted 21 members of the original order, it is a bit
more than I remembered and that brings me to another math question 
connected to Lupin's overpowered 20:1 remark.
> 
> So, 21x20 that makes it 420 Deatheaters. Huh, JKR? Did I miscount?

Carol:
I counted 22 (including both Prewett brothers), not including whoever
took the photograph and anyone who was absent that day (or already
killed). But, yeah. Outnumbered twenty to one makes no sense even
after the deaths and disappearances that Moody mentioned. Maybe it
should have been two to one? (I can just see JKR writing out a check
for a thousand pounds to pay her one-hundred pound electirc bill . . .
.) Or is it Lupin who can't count or multiply? ;-)

Alla: 
> I have not noticed anything new in chapter 10. Well, Luna is 
introduced. Did you think she will play special role? Were your
expectations fulfilled?

Carol responds:

Funny, I was just talking about Luna (one of my favorite characters
now) in my previous post. I should have realized from all the excerpts
from the Quibbler that it would be important later. I figured that
Luna herself would be important, too, given that she had a whole
chapter named after her, but I had no idea how, especially since she
was clearly as odd as everyone considered her to be. I expected a
connection with Mr. Ollivander (nothing like the two of them as
prisoners in the Malfoys' basement, however!) based on her silvery
eyes. I was sure that they were related. (Mr. Ollivander doesn't seem
to have an heir--another Pure-Blood family dying out? Too bad Luna
couldn't have been his granddaughter and taken over the family
business!) And Luna, like Harry, can see the skeletal horses that pull
the carriages. I knew that that would be important, too, but I had no
idea how. I didn't, however, anticipate the role that Luna's father
would play in the seventh book, though I should have realized that her
constant references to him and his strange ideas were in the books for
a reason. :-)

Also, we find out who the fifth-year Prefects for each House are in
this chapter. Draco is a Prefect and Harry isn't. I expected trouble
of some sort to come from that (though I'm happy with Ron's selection
as Prefect--too bad he didn't do a better job).

And I think it's important that Sirius accompanies Harry to Platform 9
3/4 in chapter 10. I was sure that no good would come of that,
especially after Draco's sneer about "*dogging*" (OoP Am. ed. 194).

Carol, who appreciates chapter 10 on a post-DH rereading much more
than she did the first time through




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Sun May 11 01:11:49 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 01:11:49 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapter 9-10 post DH look
In-Reply-To: <g05fcm+afgt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g05h4l+i08l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182855

> > Alla:
<SNIP>
>> > So, 21x20 that makes it 420 Deatheaters. Huh, JKR? Did I 
miscount?
> 
> Carol:
> I counted 22 (including both Prewett brothers), not including 
whoever
> took the photograph and anyone who was absent that day (or already
> killed). But, yeah. Outnumbered twenty to one makes no sense even
> after the deaths and disappearances that Moody mentioned. Maybe it
> should have been two to one? (I can just see JKR writing out a check
> for a thousand pounds to pay her one-hundred pound electirc 
bill . . .
> .) Or is it Lupin who can't count or multiply? ;-)
<SNIP>


Alla:

Well, somebody certainly cannot count. Funnily, I think this 
miscalculation for me is the first of its kind. Basically for me it 
is the very first one that grates on me and quite strongly.

Usually bad maths of Potterverse do not pull me out of the story at 
all.

JKR going between thousand number and hundred number for Hogwarts 
students? Sure, in my mind Hogwarts hall is expendable enough, class 
rooms can appear as rooms of requirements, etc. I do not care, I am 
fine with it.

Weasleys ages? I really really do not care, since to me it is such 
minor stuff that no matter what ages are assigned to them, to me it 
does not matter one bit.

And here is probably the best way to show how very indifferently I 
feel about other math inconsistencies in the books. I honestly do not 
remember what other math inconsistencies are there, despite the fact 
that we probably discussed them many times on list.

My answer always was - whatever, could  care less, does not lessen my 
enjoyment of the story.

For some bizarre reason this one pulls me out of the story.

I mean, 420 deatheaters? Oh **please**. Where do we see any 
indication that there are at least 100 DE in existance? And didn't 
she say that all WW of Britain is between 2000 - 3000 people all 
together? Did I dream it up? 

Shouldn't we have seen that huge army somewhere?

I mean, Okay this was supposedly in the first war, but still that 
would mean that a lot of them should have come back to Voldemort, yes?

They really could not have been killed, even majority of them could 
not, since Order was so overpowered.

Alla




From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Sun May 11 16:57:14 2008
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 11 May 2008 16:57:14 -0000
Subject: Weekly Chat, 5/11/2008, 1:00 pm 
Message-ID: <1210525034.11.8514.m50@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182856

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

Weekly Chat
Sunday May 11, 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/20080511/34d54e60/attachment.html>

From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Sun May 11 18:35:51 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 18:35:51 -0000
Subject: ChapDisc: DH 18, The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <fu41jp+nvs5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g07ea7+udko@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182857

> zanooda
> 
> it's from Rita's book: "... Dumbledore delayed, for some five 
> years of turmoil, fatalities, and disappearances, his attack
> upon Gellert Grindelwald" ("The Life and Lies ...", p.359 Am ed.).
>
> <snip>  I believe that it's not five years from the time DD and 
> GG parted ways, but five years from the time GG started taking
> over Europe and the wizarding community turned to DD in the hope
> that he would interfere - probably from 1940 to 1945.

Mike:
I meant to address this, just finally getting to it now. I think 
zanooda is exactly right, the five years is being measured from when 
Gindelwald started his takeover in Europe. Not that JKR's maths is 
anything to bank on. I suppose in her parallel universe, this 
coincides, approximately, with Hitler's wartime efforts. I suppose 
one could postulate that the cover of a Muggle World War was a 
perfect time for a wizarding war. Who would notice a few wizards 
going missing amongst all the turmoil?

What really rankled my bones was Rita Skeeter's insinuations about 
Dumbledore. As many of you know, I'm not the most ardent Dumbledore 
fan. But this dig by Rita got my dander up on Dumbledore's behalf.

How DARE she? How dare she give Dumbledore grief over how *long* it 
took Dumbledore to confront Grindelwald? Who is she, or anyone else 
for that matter, to demand someone go to battle for them? Much less 
how long it took Dumbledore to 'Save the World' from Grindelwald. To 
sit back and bitch about how long it took someone to face death on 
your behalf is the height of incredulity in my mind. In doing so she 
ignores the fact that Dumbledore owes *nothing* to the WW as a whole 
and probably less to the mainland European WW.

What obligation Dumbledore felt as an honorable man and a capable 
wizard is beside the point. What Skeeter is doing here and in her 
writing of the book in general is no less ignominious than all those 
that participated in Hitler's propaganda machine or that New York 
Times writer that won a Pulitzer for ignoring Stalin's starvation of 
millions of Ukranians and Russians in the mid-30s (forgot his name 
and don't really want to remember it). Skeeter is standing by while 
people are being killed, made to live on the run, forced into 
destitution and begging for help on the streets of Diagon Alley, and 
instead giving aid and comfort to Voldemort by denigrating the dead 
leader of the resistance against him.

Did I want to know these backstories? Sure I did, but the way they 
were presented by Skeeter, as if what Dumbledore actually did (save 
the world from a Grindelwald takeover) was not good enough for her, 
makes my stomach turn over.

OK, rant done. I think it needed to be said, and I think JKR intended 
me to draw the parallels to RW history.

Mike,
wishing all the mothers on this list a Happy Mother's Day, whichever 
country you live in. :-)




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Sun May 11 20:05:14 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 20:05:14 -0000
Subject: ChapDisc: DH 18, The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <g07ea7+udko@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g07jhq+irmv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182858

> Mike:
> What really rankled my bones was Rita Skeeter's insinuations about 
> Dumbledore. As many of you know, I'm not the most ardent Dumbledore 
> fan. But this dig by Rita got my dander up on Dumbledore's behalf.
> 
> How DARE she? How dare she give Dumbledore grief over how *long* it 
> took Dumbledore to confront Grindelwald? Who is she, or anyone else 
> for that matter, to demand someone go to battle for them? Much less 
> how long it took Dumbledore to 'Save the World' from Grindelwald. 
To 
> sit back and bitch about how long it took someone to face death on 
> your behalf is the height of incredulity in my mind. In doing so 
she 
> ignores the fact that Dumbledore owes *nothing* to the WW as a 
whole 
> and probably less to the mainland European WW.
<SNIP>


Alla:

Well, yeah, I agree with you, but I see nothing new in her attitude 
exactly. I mean, don't we see this whole attitude take 2 as to how WW 
views Harry and freaking waiting till one kid who already endured so 
much saves them all?

Yes, yes I know Harry is an adult at at the end, but WW demonstrated 
this attitude IMO long time before Harry became such.

I agree with you that in that way Dumbledore owes WW nothing and 
whatever obligation he felt is behind the point. Moreover, while 
Dumbledore certainly entertained what I would call quite despicable 
thoughts about Muggle domination with Grindelwald, he did not really 
DO anything bad in that area, didn't he?

I mean, Ariana notwithstanding of course, Dumbledore changed course, 
etc.

So, while I understand his guilt and obligation that he felt, I think 
he could have absolutely tell the whole WW to go jump in the lake and 
fight their own wars, rather than waiting for him.

And as you know I am very far from being DD biggest fan either, but 
this just reminds me too much of what I felt was so wrong about WW 
attitude's towards Harry.

And god forbid we will hear something out of ordinary about "chosen 
one", god forbid his story will actually demand from us that we wake 
up and realise that evil returned and we should all fight.

Oh, no, we would much rather call the boy crazy delusional, together 
with Dumbledore that is.

I am telling you, I totally love heroes and do not need explanation 
why Harry decided to save WW, but more than once I wished he would 
take his friends and dissappear and leave WW to rot.

Sorry Mike :-), you touched one of my biggest pet peeves, since I 
believe WW did not do one tenth of what they were supposed to do to 
help Harry and his friends, but yes with what you actually said I 
agree.

JMO,

Alla




From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Sun May 11 20:13:14 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 20:13:14 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
Message-ID: <g07k0q+9t1v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182859

"... pulled out the wand beneath his cloak and pointed it at the 
door, which burst open."
"He was over the threshold as James came sprinting into the hall. It 
was easy, too easy, he had not even picked up his wand...."
....
Hold him off, without a wand in his hand!..."
....
"She had no wand upon her either.... How stupid they were, and how 
trusting, thinking that their safety lay in friends, that weapons 
could be discarded even for moments...."
<DH pp. 343-4, US Ed.>

So maybe JKR wanted to make a point; James and Lily were *too* 
trusting of friendship, loyalty, courage, and those things that they 
themselves  seemed to be born with. Was this a logical way to make 
that point? IMO, no. 

I can't see James, who moments before was entertaining Harry with his 
wand and had just dropped it on the sofa he was sitting on, respond 
to the door bursting open without snatching up his wand. This makes 
no sense for a 21-year-old wizard that was raised in the wizarding 
world. Lily, taking Harry up for bed, yeah I could see her not taking 
care to have her wand on her. But not James. This took me right out 
of the story, especially since I knew for the most part what was 
going to happen from then on.

After the things Voldemort had told Harry about his dad in PS/SS and 
in the graveyard of GoF, we and Harry were under the impression that 
James had put up a *good* fight, or at least had represented himself 
well. I don't see how standing in front of Voldemort, wandless, 
waiting to be AKed can be construed, as Voldemort himself said in 
PS: "Yes, boy, your parents were brave... I killed your father first, 
and he put up a courageous fight..." <SS p.294, US> OK, brave, umm 
yeah, I can see that. A kind of thoughtless bravery. But "put up a 
courageous fight"? How? With what?

But that wasn't my question, was it? Did Harry notice? I don't see 
how he couldn't have noticed, Voldemort made a point of noticing it 
twice with James and once with Lily. It was the basis for his 
stricture on trusting. So it must not have mattered. But how could it 
not matter? And how could James be credited by Voldemort himself with 
putting up *any* fight? Is this bad writing, forgeting the previous 
backstory given us, or am I missing something?

Two more things from this chapter and LV reminiscing. I noticed that 
Lily starts crying "Not Harry" before Voldemort tells her to stand 
aside. This seems to indicate that she was aware that Voldemort was 
after Harry. So Dumbledore must have told them at least that. And I 
cannot see him stopping there and the Potters accepting it. IOW, why 
would this evil, powerful, dark lord be after a child? The Potters 
would want to know how that made any sense. Dumbledore must have told 
them something about the prophesy, even Dumbledore's penchant for 
secrecy shouldn't have stopped him from telling James and Lily why 
they were going into hiding to protect Harry.

The second thing is a line after the GH reminiscing is done, but 
while Harry is still in Voldemort's mind:

"The snake rustled on the filthy, cluttered floor, and he had killed 
the boy, and yet he *was* the boy...."  <DH p.345, US>

I'm confused by this line. If we are in Harry's mind while Harry is 
in Voldemort's mind (but about to come out of LV's mind), then I sort 
of see the "he *was* the boy" making sense. But what does the "he had 
killed the boy" mean from anybody's point of view? Who had killed 
what boy? In the preceeding lines, part of LV's reminiscing, 
Voldemort was broken and planning on fleeing from house where the 
*screaming* (very much alive Harry) was trapped. So Harry can't be 
the "killed boy", can he?

Mike, not sure what he's missing here, but knowing he's missing 
something :-?




From k12listmomma at comcast.net  Sun May 11 20:50:45 2008
From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (k12listmomma)
Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 14:50:45 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did Harry Notice?
References: <g07k0q+9t1v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001601c8b3a8$b0561bd0$6401a8c0@homemain>

No: HPFGUIDX 182860

From: "Mike" <mcrudele78 at yahoo.com>

> "... pulled out the wand beneath his cloak and pointed it at the
> door, which burst open."
> "He was over the threshold as James came sprinting into the hall. It
> was easy, too easy, he had not even picked up his wand...."
> ....
> Hold him off, without a wand in his hand!..."
> ....
> "She had no wand upon her either.... How stupid they were, and how
> trusting, thinking that their safety lay in friends, that weapons
> could be discarded even for moments...."
> <DH pp. 343-4, US Ed.>
>
> So maybe JKR wanted to make a point; James and Lily were *too*
> trusting of friendship, loyalty, courage, and those things that they
> themselves  seemed to be born with. Was this a logical way to make
> that point? IMO, no.
>
> I can't see James, who moments before was entertaining Harry with his
> wand and had just dropped it on the sofa he was sitting on, respond
> to the door bursting open without snatching up his wand. This makes
> no sense for a 21-year-old wizard that was raised in the wizarding
> world. Lily, taking Harry up for bed, yeah I could see her not taking
> care to have her wand on her. But not James. This took me right out
> of the story, especially since I knew for the most part what was
> going to happen from then on.
>
> After the things Voldemort had told Harry about his dad in PS/SS and
> in the graveyard of GoF, we and Harry were under the impression that
> James had put up a *good* fight, or at least had represented himself
> well. I don't see how standing in front of Voldemort, wandless,
> waiting to be AKed can be construed, as Voldemort himself said in
> PS: "Yes, boy, your parents were brave... I killed your father first,
> and he put up a courageous fight..." <SS p.294, US> OK, brave, umm
> yeah, I can see that. A kind of thoughtless bravery. But "put up a
> courageous fight"? How? With what?
>
> But that wasn't my question, was it? Did Harry notice?

Shelley now:

See, for me, this is Rowling AGAIN not checking what she had written 
earlier. Harry didn't notice the inconsistency, because ROWLING didn't 
notice the inconsistency!!! She can't have her character recognize a mistake 
that the author didn't realize she was penning.

I think she really did mean for James to put up a fight. All the earlier 
books, before DH, indicate that he did. But, when Rowling got to write that 
part in DH, she forgot to add in those details. That's my take on this. At 
least in my mind, James did put a valiant fight, and I will blatentently 
disregard James being wandless in DH before LV killed him. I think she 
indended him to be wanded all along, and vocally telling LV off before he 
was killed. 




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Sun May 11 21:14:25 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 21:14:25 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g07k0q+9t1v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g07njh+f2u8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182861

---  "Mike" <mcrudele78 at ...> wrote:
>
> "... "
> "He was over the threshold as James came sprinting into the
> hall. It was easy, too easy, he had not even picked up his 
> wand...."
> ....
> ....
> ....
> "She had no wand upon her either.... How stupid they were, 
> ..., thinking ..., that weapons could be discarded even for 
> moments...."
> <DH pp. 343-4, US Ed.>
> 
> So maybe JKR wanted to make a point; James and Lily were 
> *too* trusting of friendship, loyalty, courage, .... Was this
> a logical way to make that point? IMO, no. 
> 
> I can't see James, who moments before was entertaining Harry
> with his wand and had just dropped it on the sofa he was 
> sitting on, respond to the door bursting open without 
> snatching up his wand. ...
> 
> After the things Voldemort had told Harry about his dad in 
> PS/SS and in the graveyard of GoF, ... that James had put up 
> a *good* fight, o... A kind of thoughtless bravery. But "put 
> up a courageous fight"? How? With what?
> 
>
> But that wasn't my question, was it? Did Harry notice? ...
>

bboyminn:

First you are making a mistake; as I have pointed out before.
You are assuming the people, even in fiction, and most
significantly Voldemort, are speaking in absolute truths;
they are not.

When Voldemort is speaking to Harry, he is trying to manipulate
Harry. He is telling Harry things that he thinks will both
strengthen and weaken Harry. In a sense, he is trying to
psychologically disarm Harry. It is pure manipulation; not
truth. Though I think it is based on a grain of truth.

And YES, I do think Harry noticed, but I don't think the
details mattered to Harry. He still saw his father as brave
and heroic, even if he was foolish to not snatch up his 
wand as he ran to the door. 

We can't really count on cool clear logic in a moment of
panic. Yes, I certainly agree that it was odd that James
who seconds before had his wand, now doesn't have it. But
he may have gotten up from the chair and handed Harry to 
Lily. He may have stepped away from his wand for a moment,
and in the panic of being under attack, just rushed to the
door rather than wasting time to go back for his wand.

Either way seems like death to me, but at least going for
the wand opened the door for a chance at staying alive or
defending his family. So, certainly it was a flawed choice.
But in the calm after the storm, it is a lot easier to make
the decisions in hindsight. 

So, again, to your central question, yes, I do think Harry
noticed and is fully aware of the circumstances and the poor
choices that were made in that moment. 

But I can't help but wonder if JKR's point wasn't that their
being disarmed, yet still standing to fight, didn't somehow
enhance the magic that saved Harry.
 
> Mike:
> Two more things from this chapter and LV reminiscing. I noticed
> that Lily starts crying "Not Harry" before Voldemort tells her 
> to stand aside. This seems to indicate that she was aware that 
> Voldemort was after Harry. So Dumbledore must have told them at
> least that. 
> 

bboyminn:

I've always contended that Dumbledore told lots of people about
the prophecy, but that is a far cry from actually telling them
the prophecy. I think he summarized it in a way that he felt
was adequate to the listener's needs in the moment. So, in a
sense he selectively summaried and generalized the prophecy
without revealing exactly what it said.

I think he probably explained to James and Lily that he had
reliable information that Voldemort felt their son was a 
threat to him. He may have even mentioned a prophecy that 
Voldemort was setting great store in. So, Harry was in 
danger and they had to go into hiding. 

Dumbledore doesn't have to tell them that he heard the prophecy
or who he heard it from or under what circumstance or who had
revealed the prophecy to Voldemort. Only that Voldemort was 
aware that a prophecy had been made indicating that Harry would
be a great threat to him in the future. 

There is a very solid concept amoung military leaders that is
'need to know'. Each person is told just what they need to know
to do their job and no more. That is very common, and a 
practice the Dumbledore certainly engaged in. Those who feel
that Dumbledore should have told everybody everything are being
completely unrealistic and exceptionally naive.

> Mike:
>
> The second thing is a line after the GH reminiscing is done, 
> but while Harry is still in Voldemort's mind:
> 
> "The snake rustled on the filthy, cluttered floor, and he had 
> killed the boy, and yet he *was* the boy...."  <DH p.345, US>
> 
> I'm confused by this line. 

bboyminn:

I never really noticed this before, and now that you brought it
up, it is confusing. First, in this instance Harry is not 
seeing through Voldemort's eyes, he is seeing and comprehending
through Voldemort's mind. His thoughts are Voldemort's thoughts.

Voldemort is remembering the incident at Godrics Hollow. At the
end of the Godrics Hollow event, after he has thrown the curse
that was his downfall, Voldemort is thinking that he need to
hide, that he needs to be 'far away...far away....'. Then we
hear Harry moan 'No'. Then this line occurs -

"[italics]The snake rustled on the filthy, cluttered floor, and
he had killed the boy, and yet he[/italics] was[italics] the 
boy...[/italics]"

Harry moans again "No...".

Then we are back in the moment at Bathilda's house but still in
Voldemort's mind. Voldemort looks down and sees something
incredible.

Harry moans again "No...". Someone calls out to Harry "Harry,
it's all right, you're alright!"

Voldemort stoops down and picks up the picture of young
Grindelwald that Harry dropped at Bathilda's house.

Harry says "No...I dropped it...I dropped it..."

Then Harry's mind returns to the tent with Hermione.

The reference in question, to the snake and the boy, seems to
be the transition between the event at Godrics Hollow and the
events at Bathilda's house. Since Voldemort is aware of the
snake on the floor amid the clutter, he is in a sense at 
Bathilda's, but I think in the boy part Voldemort's mind is
both at Bathilda's and back at Godrics Hollow.  

I honestly can't say, I think it is Voldemort realizing sub-
consciously that he had tried to kill Harry and instead a
bit of his own 'self' had been transferred to Harry -- I
killed the boy, I am the boy. 

On a vague subconscious level Voldemort realizes this but 
consciously he is as confused by it as we are. I think it is
JKR attempting to foreshadow our later learning that a piece
of Voldemort's soul is in Harry.

This is sort of an after-realization on Voldemort's part but
not something he understands, not something that makes sense
to him.

Hey...it's just a thought.

Steve/bboyminn 





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sun May 11 22:50:01 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 22:50:01 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g07k0q+9t1v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g07t6p+m167@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182862

Mike quoted:
>
> "... pulled out the wand beneath his cloak and pointed it at the 
door, which burst open."
> "He was over the threshold as James came sprinting into the hall. It
was easy, too easy, he had not even picked up his wand...."
> ....
> Hold him off, without a wand in his hand!..."
> ....
> "She had no wand upon her either.... How stupid they were, and how 
trusting, thinking that their safety lay in friends, that weapons 
could be discarded even for moments...."
> <DH pp. 343-4, US Ed.>

Mike commented: 
> So maybe JKR wanted to make a point; James and Lily were *too* 
trusting of friendship, loyalty, courage, and those things that they
themselves  seemed to be born with. Was this a logical way to make 
that point? IMO, no. 
> 
> I can't see James, who moments before was entertaining Harry with
his wand and had just dropped it on the sofa he was sitting on,
respond to the door bursting open without snatching up his wand. <snip>
> 
> After the things Voldemort had told Harry about his dad in PS/SS and
in the graveyard of GoF, we and Harry were under the impression that
James had put up a *good* fight, or at least had represented himself 
well. I don't see how standing in front of Voldemort, wandless, 
waiting to be AKed can be construed, as Voldemort himself said in PS:
"Yes, boy, your parents were brave... I killed your father first, 
> and he put up a courageous fight..." <SS p.294, US> OK, brave, umm 
> yeah, I can see that. A kind of thoughtless bravery. But "put up a 
> courageous fight"? How? With what?

Carol responds:

I'm with you here. I've read Steve's argument and I agree that
Voldemort is a liar and that he was psychologically manipulating
Harry, but there's no reason for the lie to last for six books and
then be overturned. It's *Lily* who needs to be wandless for her
sacrifice to be a sacrifice (that plus the choice she was given). This
moment of bravely standing up to Voldemort, of "holding him off," is
supposed to be James's moment, when he ceases to be an "arrogant berk"
and a bully and becomes the hero everyone--not just Voldemort, who
could be lying--remembers him as being. And he's reduced to shouting
that he'll hold Voldemort of and then dropping dead? Why would JKR
write it this way, especially given that a lot of readers, including
me, needed a reason to change our minds about James, and all we get is
him playing with his baby son and throwing his wand on the sofa as
Voldemort bursts in? It's not like the case of Snape, whom JKR *has*
to leave ambiguous for most of seven books. Why *not* give James a
chance to at least cast a Stupefy (which Voldie would laughingly
deflect)--some real show of resistance? What a letdown! And what would
be the point of having Voldie lie to Harry twice, once directly and
once by implication, about his father's courageous last stand? There
go the last vestiges of the pedestal on which Harry has placed James,
crumbling to dust. And there go the hopes of many readers who either
liked or wanted to like James. Instead of being a hero, he's a loving
father but also the trusting fool that Voldemort sees him as being.

Mike: 
> But that wasn't my question, was it? Did Harry notice? I don't see
how he couldn't have noticed, Voldemort made a point of noticing it 
twice with James and once with Lily. It was the basis for his 
stricture on trusting. So it must not have mattered. 

Carol responds:
It's true that he repeats the point, and Harry himself (along with
Draco) has accused *Dumbledore* of being too trusting, so you'd think
that Harry would notice. You'd also think he'd notice that what really
happened conflicts with what Voldemort has told him and with what he
must have imagined in his mind when he remembered his parents' last
words. (Interesting that the Dementors gave him only the soundtrack
and not the video of the memory. They would, of course, being lblind
themselves, but it leaves the way open for Harry to imagine the
accompanying action for himself--and for the reader to do likewise.)

But Harry is not the most observant person at the best of times, and
as he's experiencing the horror of Voldemort's memory--which is, of
course, horrible for LV, too, for different reasons) he's lying in a
tent suffering from the wound that Nagini gave him and hallucinating.
He may not remember it clearly when he wakes up (especially since he
learns soon afterward that his wand has been destroyed, which becomes
the focus of his thoughts).

Maybe what mattered to Harry in that memory was his father playing
with Baby!Harry and showing him the pretty lights from his wand. At
any rate, Harry has no hesitation later in summoning up his father as
one of the loved ones he's about to join when he uses the Resurrection
Stone later. So, whether it matters to the individual reader or not,
it doesn't matter to *Harry,* who may not even remember that part of
the memory given the circumstances under which he experienced it.

Mike:
But how could it not matter? And how could James be credited by
Voldemort himself with putting up *any* fight? Is this bad writing,
forgeting the previous backstory given us, or am I missing something?

Carol:
I read it as a flaw in the books, JKR forgetting or neglecting to go
back and reread the earlier versions of the story. As for his last
words, she apparently did have *those* in her notes. But *saying* that
he'll hold Voldemort off and telling Lily to take Harry and run is not
the same as actually putting up a fight. (And, yes, Steve, I do
understand your argument. It just don'w agree with it.) But, as I
said, maybe ostensibly holding Voldemort isn't the most important part
of the memory. Maybe what matters is James's love for his wife and
child. And I'm speaking as someone who's not a fan of James.

Mike: 
<snipping the part about DD possibly telling the Potters the Prophecy
because I don't have any views on that topic at the moment>
 
> The second thing is a line after the GH reminiscing is done, but 
while Harry is still in Voldemort's mind:
> 
> "The snake rustled on the filthy, cluttered floor, and he had killed
the boy, and yet he *was* the boy...."  <DH p.345, US>
> 
> I'm confused by this line. If we are in Harry's mind while Harry is
in Voldemort's mind (but about to come out of LV's mind), then I sort
of see the "he *was* the boy" making sense. But what does the "he had
killed the boy" mean from anybody's point of view? Who had killed 
what boy? In the preceeding lines, part of LV's reminiscing, 
Voldemort was broken and planning on fleeing from house where the 
*screaming* (very much alive Harry) was trapped. So Harry can't be 
the "killed boy", can he?
> 
> Mike, not sure what he's missing here, but knowing he's missing
something :-?

Carol:
that line confused me the first time I read it and continues to
confuse me. I'm not sure whether Harry somehow gets temporarily into
Harry's mind as he loses the soul bit--an accidental Horcrux
communicating with its master as it's created without the bodiless and
agonized Voldemort realizing what's happening, or whether it's Harry
who's "the boy," which doesn't seem likely because of the italics
indicating Voldemort's point of view. Voldemort himself is definitely
confused, caught between the present reality of Bathilda's house and
Nagini and the hair-breadth escape of "the boy" and the agonizing
memory of the back-fired AK. It's even possible that, with his
emotions and memories out of control, he floats for a second, via the
scar connection, into Harry's mind.

As for "killed the boy," I'm sure he thought at the time that he had
actually killed Baby!Harry in his crib. He had, after all. hit him
with a Killing Curse, and no one had ever survived a Killing Curse (or
lived when LV decided to kill them). He doesn't know what has caused
his own transformation to "less than spirit." It must have taken
Vapor!mort awhile to figure out what had happened--Lily's sacrifice
had caused the AK to rebound on the caster like some ultrapowerful
Protego. And even if, on one level, he registers the screaming of the
child as background noise, it might be awhile before he realized, not
being rational at the time, that the child he had "killed" wasn't
dead. It's sort of like Harry thinking that if he could just bring
Snape and Dumbledore together, he could bring Dumbledore back to life.
I suppose the irrationality of this desperate thought is the result of
denial, and Voldemort might well be in a state of denial, too. "I
killed him. He must be dead. And I can't be bodiless and suffering
this pain. This can't be happening.")

Anyway, I agree that it's confusing, mixing up past and present, Harry
and Voldemort, along with the confusion and agony LV felt when it
first happened. Of course, he starts to come out of the trance (Harry
is still in one) when he sees Nagini, drifts back into the memory, and
then sees the photo of Grindelwald that provides the key to the
identity of the golden-haired young thief. (If only Harry hadn't
dropped it!)

Carol, just offering her own responses to this confusing scene





From catlady at wicca.net  Mon May 12 01:34:20 2008
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 01:34:20 -0000
Subject: 20 to 1 / Luna / An Animagus here, and an Animagus there, ee-eye-ee-eye-oh
Message-ID: <g086qs+4lia@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182863

Alla wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182852>:

<< I wonder, I counted 21 members of the original order, it is a bit
more than I remembered and that brings me to another math question
connected to Lupin's overpowered 20:1 remark. So, 21x20 that makes it
420 Deatheaters. Huh, JKR? Did I miscount? >>

If the Order being outnumbered 20 to 1 included opponents acting under
Imperius as well as voluntary Death Eaters, I'd think 420 seemed a bit
too *small*, not too large. And the people who were under Imperius in
the first war would be no more likely to flock to LV's banner in the
second war than any average wizard. Once the Ministry fell in the
second war, there were surely more than 420 people who would have at
least reported any Undesirable they saw.

Carol wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182854>:

<< I expected a connection with Mr. Ollivander (nothing like the two
of them as prisoners in the Malfoys' basement, however!) based on her
silvery eyes. I was sure that they were related. (Mr. Ollivander
doesn't seem to have an heir--another Pure-Blood family dying out? Too
bad Luna couldn't have been his granddaughter and taken over the
family business!)  >>

This is a forbidden "I agree!" post.

Even tho' she's not his granddaughter, I think she should become his
apprentice and inherit the wand-making business, and be a naturalist
only as a hobby in her time off. I believe that her spiritual insight
into people would help her match people to wands that not only would
be powerful for those people, but would influence those people a
little bit to goodness.

Altho' until the end of DH, I was sure she was going to die because
she's too good for this world.

Carol wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182809>:

<< At any rate, maybe the reason that the WW has so few Animagi
(registered or otherwise) is a combination of related factors. It's
difficult, time-consuming magic. Not everyone can learn it and not
everyone is motivated to learn it (Rita, perhaps, by natural
snoopishness; WPP by the desire to run around with a werewolf).
Similarly, you don't know what you'll become and consequently may not
want to waste years of your life learning to acquire a form that may
be loathsome or useless. Imagine becoming an elephant or a whale or a
goldfish or, as JKR says in separate interviews, a slug or a warthog.
And if your Animagus form, unlike your Patronus, reveals your inner
self, do you really want to know, and want others to know, what that
form is? (snip) If I turn into a giraffe, which, given my body build,
is most likely what I'd turn into, what good would it do me? >>

You could take giraffe form when you needed to rescue a frisbee that
had landed on your roof.

I'm sure that a wizarding politician would get a lot of votes if
his/her campaign consisted of going around to block parties etc and
turning into an elephant or a giraffe to give the children rides.

It seems to me that the wizarding folk view that an Animagus whose
form is a large animal thus shows that he/she has a noble soul or at
least a lot of magic power, and therefore turning into a whale might
be an even better campaign platform than turning into an elephant.

Meanwhile, would the whale or dolphin Animagus be able to have a good
career finding and scavenging sunken treasures?

Mike Crudele wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182831>:

<< I know that James and Sirius were the type that would try to learn
the Animagus transformation on a lark. But given the difficulty
attributed to this particular feat, the purpose for which they were
attempting it, and having to also teach an coach Peter through it, I
seriously doubt they would have put forth all that effort if they had
no way of knowing or controlling the form they would take. IOW, I
believe that there is some portion of control as to what kind of
animal one would become. >>

Canon says: "They couldn't keep me company as humans, so they kept me
company as animals," said Lupin. "A werewolf is only a danger to people." 

I'm sure that 'only a danger to people' doesn't mean that a werewolf
can't hunt and eat a prairie dog if he's hungry; I believe it means
that animals don't catch lycanthropy if they are bitten, and that
werewolves don't go crazy with bloodlust when they sense animals the
way they do when they sense humans.

So I don't believe that it mattered to James and Sirius, when they
invented this plan, whether they would become large enough animals to
control a werewolf. I'm sure they never doubted that Remus would never
attack them if he didn't come down with bloodlust. Therefore, there
would be no need to control him as long as they weren't human and
therefore didn't incite bloodlust. (Altho' I have my doubts about
whether the Shrieking Shack is really far enough away from Hogsmeade
to avoid smelling the humans there.) So it would be okay if they
became small-ish animals, such as the strutting peacock you mention in
a later paragraph.

I'm also sure their self-esteem was high enough that they never
doubted that they would become mammals or birds. No possibility that
they might become low-status insects, fish, amphibians, or reptiles.
...Altho' there is room for speculation about how large reptiles
compare to small mammals in status ... I'm sure a cat is higher status
than a hog, and is a honeybee higher status than a rat?

I'm not sure if it occurred to them that they might become tasty bunny
rabbits, but if it did, they would have assumed that their buddy Remus
would never hurt them no matter how tasty they were, just as long as
they weren't human.

"highly exciting possibilities were open to us now that we could all
transform. Soon we were leaving the Shrieking Shack and roaming the
school grounds and the village by night. Sirius and James transformed
into such large animals, they were able to keep a werewolf in check."

I read the above as meaning they didn't think of the group leaving the
shack in animal form until they had spent at least one evening hanging
out in the Shack in animal form, and the novelty wore off.

<< Mike, who would prefer a cheetah as his Animagus form, but would
probably be stuck with being a common house cat if his theory doesn't
hold water >>

Couldn't you get wherever you're going faster by Apparating than even
a cheetah can run?

My first choice was to be a common house cat, but latter I wondered
whether being a raccoon, or better yet a cacomistle, might be better
because they have dextrous hands. But my fear is I would just turn
into a hog, and what fun would that be?

Potioncat wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182833>:

<< believing there is no choice in Animagus, I think Snape would
be a Hebridean Black dragon. Dangerous, solitary and bat-like. >>

I don't think we ever found out whether a magical beast could be an
Animagus form.

Alla wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182836>:

<< if I choose to imagine Dumbledore as animagus, I would imagine a
lion or tiger or phoenix. >>

Do we still think Dumbledore could be a phoenix (if a magical beast is
even possible) after DH revealed his moral depravity?

Tiger will do - they're extremely powerful and dangerous and don't
particularly care about morality.

Real lions are lazy, and let the lionnsses do all the work. Symbolic
lions are vain as well as courageous and powerful, and are the symbol
of Gryffindor House. Albus was vain as well as courageous and
powerful, and one could say he let Harry do all the work, but was he
the true heir of Godric Gryffindor? I think the people who would say
he is are the people who dislike Gryffindor House.

It has often been suggested that the name 'dumbledore' means his
Animagus form would be a honeybee. (Would Aberforth be a honeybee as
well as Albus?) The industrious and productive honeybee, providing
honey for pleasure and beeswax for candles, is a symbol of virtue.
Not-so-virtuous Albus was industrious and productive as he
corresponded with the most learned wizards of Europe and published the
twelve uses of dragon's blood. But keeping the members of the Order of
the Phoenix in the dark was hardly providing them with beeswax.

Magpie wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182838>:

<< Re: Snape, I'd go with a big black spider going with the way people
tend to get associated with things in canon. >>

I'm under the impression that black widow spiders really are female.
Anyway, I was imprinted at an early age by a Freudian interpretation
that spiders are representing female genitalia the same way snakes are
phallic symbols. Not that that doesn't correlate with Snape's potion
cauldron, also a female symbol.

Kemper wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182840>:

<< Combining the bat-like imagery and the snake like imagery though
out the series and ignoring any spider imagery entirely, I think
Snape's animagus would be a winged snake. Not Quetzalcoatl, with his
colorful plumage... No. Just your average fiery, flying serpent called
a seraph. Fiery meant the serpent had a poisonous bite or tongue. >>

There is a boringly real flying snake.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_snake> says << Chrysopelea, or
more commonly known as the flying snakes, is a genus that belongs to
the family Colubridae. Flying snakes are mildly venomous, though they
are considered harmless because their toxicity is not dangerous to
humans.[citation needed] Their range of habitat is mostly concentrated
in Southeast Asia, the Melanesian islands, and India. ... they
actually glide instead of fly. This is done by flattening their bodies
to up to twice their width from the back of the head to the vent. >>




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Mon May 12 02:27:41 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 02:27:41 -0000
Subject: 20 to 1 / Luna / An Animagus here, and an Animagus there, ee-eye-ee-eye-oh
In-Reply-To: <g086qs+4lia@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g089ut+1p1q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182864

Catlady: 
> If the Order being outnumbered 20 to 1 included opponents acting 
under
> Imperius as well as voluntary Death Eaters, I'd think 420 seemed a 
bit
> too *small*, not too large. 

Alla:

Well, yeah, I am sorry for being unclear, but I definitely question 
the correlation 20 to 1 **together** with how many members of the 
order we seem to have.

Those *both* numbers produce to me unbelievably large army of DE, and 
I see no sign of it anywhere in canon.

Catlady:
And the people who were under Imperius in
> the first war would be no more likely to flock to LV's banner in the
> second war than any average wizard. 

Alla:

Indeed, if they were truly under Imperius that would mean that they 
would have no wish to return. The thing is, do we see such people in 
canon? I mean of course we see putting people under Imperius, but do 
we see a character who is shown to be put under Imperius in first war 
and would not want to be associated with DE at all.

We see Luicus dear claiming that he was under Imperius, sure, but I 
don't know about you, but I really really do not believe him. We hear 
that other people **claimed** to be under Imperius, but IMO if the 
only example was Lucius, the author means to show ( not that we have 
to agree with author of course, I definitely do not always do, but in 
this situation I am sort of arguing that what author meant to show 
means no sense to me) that all those others also lied just as Lucius 
did.


So, what I am trying to say is that if my premise is correct and all 
those people were not under Imperius, I see no reason for them not to 
return.

Catlady:
>Once the Ministry fell in the
> second war, there were surely more than 420 people who would have at
> least reported any Undesirable they saw.
<SNIP>


Alla:

Hmmm, I do not know if I agree. I saw plenty scared people, I did not 
see signs that many were helping Voldemort, although even if you are 
right, being eager to commit one cowardly act to me does not make one 
DE yet. Although of course the potential will be there.

JMO,

Alla





From sweenlit at gmail.com  Mon May 12 05:39:04 2008
From: sweenlit at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova)
Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 22:39:04 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <001601c8b3a8$b0561bd0$6401a8c0@homemain>
References: <g07k0q+9t1v@eGroups.com> <001601c8b3a8$b0561bd0$6401a8c0@homemain>
Message-ID: <43e41d1e0805112239i703450f4ma8c483abca50e913@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182865

Shelley:

I think she really did mean for James to put up a fight. All the earlier
books, before DH, indicate that he did.

Lynda:

Do they, though? I don't recall any of the books saying that he pulled a
wand to defend himself and his family. They were at home. They thought they
were protected. I don't think its that she overlooked what she had already
written as it is of hindsight on the part of readers. JMHO of course.

Lynda


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




From lmscallon at yahoo.com  Mon May 12 13:32:17 2008
From: lmscallon at yahoo.com (lmscallon)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 13:32:17 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapter 9-10 post DH look
In-Reply-To: <g05abs+qmeh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g09gt1+t80n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182866

> Alla:
>>
> I wonder, I counted 21 members of the original order, it is a bit
> more than I remembered and that brings me to another math question
> connected to Lupin's overpowered 20:1 remark.
>
> So, 21x20 that makes it 420 Deatheaters. Huh, JKR? Did I miscount?
>


I'm not sure, but wasn't it written that Voldemort had "Large numbers
at his command" meaning that he had many following him, imperius or
otherwise, when he was first in power?  (I may be confusing this with
the movie, unfortunately.) The small number during Harry's time are
only those that are left when he returns.  And right after his return
he is recruiting again, hence Hagrids problems with the giants.  So I
think his numbers were great, but only so many were left (for various
reasons when he returned.

I'm going to have to reread it again.  I guess I'll force myself  :)

lmscallon



From foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon May 12 14:25:31 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 14:25:31 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <001601c8b3a8$b0561bd0$6401a8c0@homemain>
Message-ID: <g09k0r+gou6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182867

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "k12listmomma"
<k12listmomma at ...> wrote:
>
> >
> > So maybe JKR wanted to make a point; James and Lily were *too*
> > trusting of friendship, loyalty, courage, and those things that
they themselves  seemed to be born with. Was this a logical way to
make that point? IMO, no.
> >
> > I can't see James, who moments before was entertaining Harry with
his wand and had just dropped it on the sofa he was sitting on,
respond to the door bursting open without snatching up his wand.

Pippin:
We're watching and hearing the action from Voldemort's point of view.
Voldemort knows that the door has burst open. But James doesn't know
that -- he's in another room, he can't see what happened, all he's 
heard is a loud noise from the front hall. It's Halloween, he has
friends who like to play pranks, and he thinks he's *safe*. He's not
thinking like a bodyguard, the spell is supposed to be taking
care of that.

It's not until he sprints into the hall that he knows what's
happening, and then it's too late to go back for his wand -- he'd be
leading Voldemort straight to Harry and Lily.



k12listmomma:
> > After the things Voldemort had told Harry about his dad in PS/SS
and in the graveyard of GoF, we and Harry were under the impression
that James had put up a *good* fight, or at least had represented
himself well. I don't see how standing in front of Voldemort,
wandless, waiting to be AKed can be construed, as Voldemort himself
said in PS: "Yes, boy, your parents were brave... I killed your father
first,and he put up a courageous fight..." <SS p.294, US>

Pippin:

Remember Neville's big moment in PS/SS?  He tried to stop the Trio
from going after the Stone. We're to understand that he represented
himself very well and put up a courageous fight, although he did
nothing more than *put up his fists* and shout "Try and hit me! I'm
ready." 

 I think JKR knew exactly what she was doing in DH, foreshadowed it
with the scene from PS/SS, and always intended to show James facing
Voldemort without his wand. Isn't that braver than facing him with one?

Of course Harry did not see any incongruity any more than he saw an
incongruity in Dumbledore awarding Neville ten points and the margin
of victory. Harry  understood that bravery and being an effective
fighter are two entirely different things. 
 

Pippin





From foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon May 12 14:56:41 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 14:56:41 -0000
Subject: 20 to 1 / Luna / An Animagus here, and an Animagus there, ee-eye-ee-eye-oh
In-Reply-To: <g089ut+1p1q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g09lr9+l4me@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182868


> Alla:
> 
> Indeed, if they were truly under Imperius that would mean that they 
> would have no wish to return. The thing is, do we see such people in 
> canon? I mean of course we see putting people under Imperius, but do 
> we see a character who is shown to be put under Imperius in first
war  and would not want to be associated with DE at all.

Pippin:
We hear about it from Hagrid. "People who was on his side came back
ter ours. Some of 'em came outta kinda trances. Don' reckon they
could've done if he was comin' back." Later canon makes it clear that
Hagrid doesn't believe Lucius was entranced, so he must be talking
about other people. 

Fake!Moody also says that the Ministry had a lot of problems with the
Imperius during the first war, and Sirius says in OOP that Voldemort
tricks, jinxes and blackmails people into joining him. 

I'm pretty sure Lupin's math is meant to include everyone who was
helping Voldemort against the Order, willingly or not. The marked DE's
were only a small fraction of Voldemort's forces, IMO. 

Pippin






From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Mon May 12 15:16:59 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 15:16:59 -0000
Subject: 20 to 1 / Luna / An Animagus here, and an Animagus there, ee-eye-ee-eye-oh
In-Reply-To: <g09lr9+l4me@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g09n1b+fpvc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182869

---  "pippin_999" <foxmoth at ...> wrote:
>
> 
> > Alla:
> > 
> > Indeed, if they were truly under Imperius that would mean
> > that they would have no wish to return. ... do we see such
> > people in canon? ...
> 
> Pippin:
> We hear about it from Hagrid. "People who was on his side came
> back ter ours. Some of 'em came outta kinda trances. Don' 
> reckon they could've done if he was comin' back." Later canon 
> makes it clear that Hagrid doesn't believe Lucius was entranced,
> so he must be talking about other people. 
> 
> Fake!Moody also says that the Ministry had a lot of problems 
> with the Imperius during the first war, and Sirius says in OOP
> that Voldemort tricks, jinxes and blackmails people into 
> joining him. 
> 
> I'm pretty sure Lupin's math is meant to include everyone who
> was helping Voldemort against the Order, willingly or not. The
> marked DE's were only a small fraction of Voldemort's forces, 
> IMO. 
> 
> Pippin
>

bboyminn:

It is my understanding that there are a couple of core questions
on the table. Let me see if I can summarize them -

First, were people who had been Imperiused in VWI then later
Imperiused in VWII? And how did they feel about that?

Well, I think there might have been a few, but it depends on
whether they were still in positions of power. Further, I
don't think they we too keen on the idea. I'm sure they were
extremely embarassed at the end of the first war at what
they had been made to do. So, they certainly would have no
desire to have that happen again. But if they were still in
positions of power, and has a know sensitivity to being put
under the curse, I'm sure they were. Again, much to their
great embarassment

Second, if we expand on Lupin '20 to 1' comment we come up 
with something like 420, if we take Lupin's statement 
literally rather than figuratively. Next we must give some
consideration to the actuall size of the British wizard
world.

I had always speculated 10's of thousands to a few hundred
thousand, but JKR implied that it was much smaller than that.
I would guess in the range of 4,000 to 6,000 or so. Now the
'20 to 1' comment implies 10% of the local population. I 
would say that it pretty significant. If 10%, especially
a very powerful and influential 10%, decided on revolution,
I think they could take over very quickly.

I live near a town of 15,000. If 1,500 armed and dangerous
people tried to take over with the coerced cooperation of
the police force and city administration, that take over
would occur pretty quickly. Long before the people had time
to marshal a resistance against them. 1,500 against a 
general population of 15,000 puts the 1,500 at a huge
advantage.

So, in a world of 4,000 to 6,000 people scattered across a
large country, 400 would be a substantial force. They don't
have to conquer each individual. They only have to control
the seats of power to effectively control everyone. Looking
at it another way, once they had control, each 'soldier'
would only have to police 10 other people.

So, I conclude that 400 represents a substantial force in
a community so small.

For what it's worth.

Steve/bboyminn




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Mon May 12 15:28:15 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 15:28:15 -0000
Subject: 20 to 1 & the Imperius
In-Reply-To: <g09n1b+fpvc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g09nmf+119m9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182870

---  "Steve" <bboyminn at ...> wrote:
>
>
> >
> 
> bboyminn:
> 
> ...
> 
> Second, if we expand on Lupin '20 to 1' comment we come up 
> with something like 420, .... Next we must give some
> consideration to the actual size of the British wizard
> world.
> 
> ... Now the '20 to 1' comment implies 10% of the local 
> population. ...

bboyminn;

Sorry, obviously 20:1 in NOT 10% but 5%. Yet, my point is
still the same, the numbers are just a little different.

Steve/bboyminn




From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Mon May 12 18:55:06 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 18:55:06 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g07njh+f2u8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0a3qa+i5lj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182871

> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182861
> bboyminn:
> 
> First you are making a mistake; as I have pointed out before.
> You are assuming the people, even in fiction, and most
> significantly Voldemort, are speaking in absolute truths;
> they are not.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> And YES, I do think Harry noticed, but I don't think the
> details mattered to Harry. He still saw his father as brave
> and heroic, even if he was foolish to not snatch up his 
> wand as he ran to the door. 


Mike:
I see your point and I agree. Voldemort will lie whenever it suits 
him and possibly even when the truth would be more to his advantage, 
being the contrarian that he is. 

But there is more at stake here than whether Voldemort is/was lying. 
As Carol correctly pointed out, this was the chance for James to 
redeem himself from the bad press he'd gotten since PoA. It wasn't 
just whether Voldemort lied about James's "courageous fight", it was 
whether James was more than the trusting fool. It was whether James 
actually was as talented as advertised and if he really did give 
Voldy a fight, albeit a losing one. It was whether James was more 
than simply brave, a quality we all expected from a Gryffindor, but 
was actually capable of holding his own against a foe when he didn't 
have that foe outnumbered (cough, SWM, cough). It was whether James 
had really graduated from that brash, bullying young man into a more 
responsible adult. This was the one chance that JKR gave us to see 
James in action after SWM. We know he's going to lose, going to die. 
It's how he dies that's important to his legacy. Not just that he 
died "straight backed and proud", but that he showed something beyond 
that headlong, devil-may-care type of bravery he was born with.


> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182867
> Pippin:
> We're watching and hearing the action from Voldemort's point of
> view. Voldemort knows that the door has burst open. But James
> doesn't know that -- he's in another room, he can't see what
> happened, all he's heard is a loud noise from the front hall.
> It's Halloween, he has friends who like to play pranks, and he
> thinks he's *safe*. He's not thinking like a bodyguard, the spell
> is supposed to be taking care of that.

Mike:
First, a correction, you had quoted me and not Shelley in this post. 
Geez, first James gets credit then Shelley gets credit for my words. 
Hey, at least I'm being quoted by real people now. ;-)

To your point; Pippin, I would think you would most appreciate the 
symbology of this scene. I've always found your analogies and 
allegories to be most insightful. So maybe I should ask you, am I all 
wet when it comes to my reading? Is my desire for a meaningful 
progression from James misguided?

Furthermore, if there is even a possibility that James thought this 
could be a prank by one of his friends, doesn't that prove that these 
are still a bunch of boys playing in a man's world? (colloquialism, 
not a sexist comment here, please) I would find it hard to believe 
that after taking the difficult and extreme step of enacting a 
Fidelious Charm that anyone involved would even think about practical 
jokes of this nature, at this time.


> Pippin:
> I think JKR knew exactly what she was doing in DH, foreshadowed
> it with the scene from PS/SS, and always intended to show James
> facing Voldemort without his wand. Isn't that braver than facing
> him with one?

Mike:
Braver, not in my way of thinking. Facing Voldemort, knowing he is 
more powerful than you and that you are going to die is bravery. 
Facing him without your wand, is resignation to your fate. Not 
bringing your wand in the first place is foolish, just as Voldemort 
noticed. 

With all the gravity of their situation, for a wizard to rush into 
the hall without picking up his wand first points to immaturity not 
bravery, imo. And for every reason you could give me as to why James 
did it, whatever he was thinking, I would still say it shows a lack 
of appreciation for his position. That's both as protector of his 
family and with regard to the life threatening situation re 
Voldemort. And look, all he had to say was "It's him!", that was 
enough. So the possibility that it was Voldemort wasn't so remote in 
his mind either, was it?


> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182861
> bboyminn:
> 
> So, again, to your central question, yes, I do think Harry
> noticed and is fully aware of the circumstances and the poor
> choices that were made in that moment. 
> 
> But I can't help but wonder if JKR's point wasn't that their
> being disarmed, yet still standing to fight, didn't somehow
> enhance the magic that saved Harry.

Mike:
I think Carol answered the question about enhancing the love magic 
best, I'll defer to hers. One thing we know for sure, at least Harry 
brought a wand with him to the final duel with Voldemort.




> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182861
> bboyminn:
> 
> I've always contended that Dumbledore told lots of people about
> the prophecy, but that is a far cry from actually telling them
> the prophecy. I think he summarized it in a way that he felt
> was adequate to the listener's needs in the moment. So, in a
> sense he selectively summaried and generalized the prophecy
> without revealing exactly what it said.

Mike:
Yes, I agree. That's what I envisioned when I brought up the 
question. I really do think that Dumbledore was telling the truth in 
the Weasley's broom shed when he told Harry that they were the only 
two that knew the entire prophecy.

This does answer, or seem to answer the question as to whether or not 
the Potters knew Voldemort was after Harry or them, doesn't it? I 
think Dumbledore must have revealed that there was a prophecy, though 
I agree with your take that DD didn't reveal any more details than 
was necessary to convey the upshot regarding Voldemort's predictable 
response vis-a-vis his interpretation.




> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182861
> bboyminn:
> 
> I never really noticed this before, and now that you brought it
> up, it is confusing. First, in this instance Harry is not 
> seeing through Voldemort's eyes, he is seeing and comprehending
> through Voldemort's mind. His thoughts are Voldemort's thoughts.

Mike:
A quick note here; I think that Harry *does* see through Voldemort's 
eyes. He saw that it was Mr Weasley in OotP, when all that was 
noticed by Nagini/Voldemort was a man. He sees the villages, people 
and other features through Voldemort's eyes when Voldemort is on his 
quest for the Elder Wand. I think there is sufficient proof that 
Harry is actually seeing out of Voldemort'sd eyes through the soul-
piece connection.


<snip of canon>

> bboyminn:
> 
> I honestly can't say, I think it is Voldemort realizing sub-
> consciously that he had tried to kill Harry and instead a
> bit of his own 'self' had been transferred to Harry -- I
> killed the boy, I am the boy.
> 
> On a vague subconscious level Voldemort realizes this but 
> consciously he is as confused by it as we are. I think it is
> JKR attempting to foreshadow our later learning that a piece
> of Voldemort's soul is in Harry.
> 
> This is sort of an after-realization on Voldemort's part but
> not something he understands, not something that makes sense
> to him.
> 
> Hey...it's just a thought.

Mike:
And a good thought it is, Steve. ;-) This is one of the ways I read 
it. That in this moment Voldemort, who has just been reduced to 
fractured soul, has his consciousness follow the soul piece that 
broke off and implanted in Harry. So, his AK killed the boy, he is 
ripped from his body, his being responds to the soul piece finding 
Harry as a repository, then he recognizes the pain. All happening so 
fast that there is no time to process what has really happened.

Of course the problem with this interpretation is that it is all 
preceeded, in real time, by Voldemort being back at Bathilda's place 
and out of the 1981 GH reminiscing mode.

The other thought that occurs, Harry is still visiting Voldemort's 
mind, but is coming out of the trance-like state that is holding him 
there. That was indicated by the non-italicized "No" that Harry spoke 
out loud. <p.345> So maybe it was Voldemort thinking "he had killed 
the boy" but it was Harry's own mind trying to snap out of this 
trance that told him "he *was* the boy". 

Or maybe the connection was so strong at this point in time that, as 
Carol postulated, Voldemort actually briefly, momentarily visited 
Harry's mind.

It's still the "he had killed the boy", coming *after* LV notes the 
screaming Harry and *after* he seems to come out of the reminiscing 
mode and is back at Bathilda's place with Nagini, that remains 
confusing.

Mike




From casa_corse at yahoo.com  Mon May 12 18:33:20 2008
From: casa_corse at yahoo.com (casa_corse)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 18:33:20 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g09k0r+gou6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0a2hg+bt27@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182872

> Mike:
> After the things Voldemort had told Harry about his dad in PS/SS
> and in the graveyard of GoF, we and Harry were under the impression
> that James had put up a *good* fight, or at least had represented
> himself well. I don't see how standing in front of Voldemort,
> wandless, waiting to be AKed can be construed, as Voldemort himself
> said in PS: "Yes, boy, your parents were brave... I killed your
> father first,and he put up a courageous fight..." <SS p.294, US>



I'm very new to this group but I just read this post and wanted to
point out that Voldemort would have said he put up a courageous fight
no matter what. He always wanted to give the impression that he was
always the best. Remember he did it again in the Deathly Hallows, when
he made his way back to the castle with what he thought was Harry's
dead body. He lied there too, to make himself look more powerfull. He
said that Harry ran away in fear rather than try and fight. Well those
are my thoughts on the post,

alice




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Mon May 12 21:57:28 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 21:57:28 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0a3qa+i5lj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0aeg8+5qls@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182873

--- "Mike" <mcrudele78 at ...> wrote:
>
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182861
> > bboyminn:
> > 
> > First you are making a mistake; as I have pointed out before.
> > You are assuming the people, even in fiction, and most
> > significantly Voldemort, are speaking in absolute truths;
> > they are not.
> > 
> > <snip>
> > 
> > And YES, I do think Harry noticed, but I don't think the
> > details mattered to Harry. He still saw his father as brave
> > and heroic, even if he was foolish to not snatch up his 
> > wand as he ran to the door. 
> 
> 
> Mike:
> I see your point and I agree. Voldemort will lie whenever it 
> suits him ...
> 
> ... 
> As Carol correctly pointed out, this was the chance for James
> to redeem himself from the bad press he'd gotten since PoA. 
> ..., it was whether James was more than the trusting fool. 
> .... It was whether James had really graduated from that 
> brash, bullying young man into a more responsible adult. ...
> 

bboyminn:

You are certainly a welcome member of the group and even 
when I don't agree with you, you still bring up interesting
and insightful topics. Too bad, you haven't been around
here for years, it would have really added to the old
discussions.

On one hand, I'm not retracting what I said, but on the other
hand you certainly do have a point. It is about whether James
ever grew up. Whether he ever became a responsible parent,
or whether he remained the hell-raising boy he was for most
of his life.

>From the looks of it, the answer is no. Yes, he got older and,
to some extent wiser, but as Voldemort observes, he was foolish
not to keep his wand with him at all times. I can speculate
that there are 'off screen' contributing factors, but I think
you raise a very important issue and I would dearly love to
hear JKR's take on it. 

It seems there were several areas of redemption that fell short
in the final book. One of the others being the redemption of
Slytherin House. Yes, Slytherins did take part in the battle
against Voldemort, but what about Slytherin students. I really
needed and expected some redemption there.

Now, you raise the issue of James' redemption as a character.
JKR seems to have crafted the scene deliberately, yet, what
could she have been thinking. I can understand her wanting
Harry to have a more realistic and less idealistic view of
his father. But, what James did in that critical moment seems
foolish in the extreme, and seems to indicate that James still
had tons of growing up to do.

That said, I repeat that I think Harry saw and understood. He
knew that James acted foolishly and carelessly, yet, even so,
he was brave and heroic. I think Harry understands and forgives
the mistake. Something that may be easier for a character to
do than for a reader. 

> ...
> 
> 
> 
>
> 
> 
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182861
> > bboyminn:
> > 
> > I never really noticed this before, and now that you brought
> > it up, it is confusing. First, in this instance Harry is not 
> > seeing through Voldemort's eyes, he is seeing and 
> > comprehending through Voldemort's mind. His thoughts are 
> > Voldemort's thoughts.
> 
> Mike:
> A quick note here; I think that Harry *does* see through 
> Voldemort's eyes. He saw that it was Mr Weasley in OotP, ...
> and other features through Voldemort's eyes when Voldemort is 
> on his quest for the Elder Wand. ...
> 
> 
> <snip of canon>
> 

bboyminn:

I wasn't saying that Harry COULDN'T see through Voldemort's
eye, only making the distinction, that in that moment when
Voldemort is reliving the Godrics Hollow event, that Harry
is see INTO Voldemort's mind, not out of Voldemort's eyes as
had happened so many times before.

Later in that same scene after Gordrics Hollow, Harry does 
see what Voldemort sees. He sees the snake on the filthy floor
amid the clutter.

I simply wanted to make people aware that we are seeing
something unique in this moment. Once we get to the '...and
he had killed the boy, and yet he was the boy...' reference,
after that, Harry is seeing what Voldemort sees as usual.


> > bboyminn:
> > 
> > I honestly can't say, I think it is Voldemort realizing sub-
> > consciously that he had tried to kill Harry and instead a
> > bit of his own 'self' had been transferred to Harry -- I
> > killed the boy, I am the boy.
> > 
> > On a vague subconscious level Voldemort realizes this but 
> > consciously he is as confused by it as we are. I think it is
> > JKR attempting to foreshadow our later learning that a piece
> > of Voldemort's soul is in Harry.
> > 
> > This is sort of an after-realization on Voldemort's part but
> > not something he understands, not something that makes sense
> > to him.
> > 
> > Hey...it's just a thought.
> 
> Mike:
> And a good thought it is, Steve. ;-) This is one of the ways 
> I read  it. That in this moment Voldemort, who has just been
> reduced to fractured soul, ... his being responds to the soul
> piece finding Harry as a repository, then he recognizes the 
> pain. All happening so fast that there is no time to process
>  what has really happened.
> 
> Of course the problem with this interpretation is that it is
> all preceeded, in real time, by Voldemort being back at 
> Bathilda's place and out of the 1981 GH reminiscing mode.
> 

bboyminn:

Because of the confusing nature of the line in question, I 
think Voldemort is mentally in two places at once. He has 
mentally returned to Bathilda's but he is also still lost in
the memory of what happened to him. I think the confusion of
two places at once, and the rushing realization that Harry 
Potter has thwarted him again cause sufficient distraction 
that Voldie loses the significants of that thought - '...and 
yet he was the boy...'. 

If he had been paying attension and spent some time trying to
figure out what it meant, he might have succeeded. But that 
anger at being bested by Harry, and the thrill of finding the
handsome boy who robbed Gregorovitch drove it from his mind.

It is really kind of clever on JKR's part, assuming we are
interpreting it right. The answer was right there in 
Voldemort's mind, but he let it slip away. 


> Mike:
>
> The other thought that occurs, Harry is still visiting 
> Voldemort's mind, but is coming out of the trance-like state 
> that is holding him there. That was indicated by the 
> non-italicized "No" that Harry spoke out loud. <p.345> So 
> maybe it was Voldemort thinking "he had killed the boy" but 
> it was Harry's own mind trying to snap out of this trance 
> that told him "he *was* the boy". 
> 

bboyminn:

Very observant. Notice father down near the bottom of the
page, Harry awakens, more or less, reassuring himself that
he is Harry and not Voldemort. Yet, after the 'boy' thought,
we still have a couple of short paragraphs of being in
Voldemort's mind completely. Still, you could be on to 
something.

> Mike:
> Or maybe the connection was so strong at this point in time 
> that, as Carol postulated, Voldemort actually briefly, 
> momentarily visited Harry's mind.
> 
> It's still the "he had killed the boy", coming *after* LV 
> notes the screaming Harry and *after* he seems to come out 
> of the reminiscing mode and is back at Bathilda's place with
> Nagini, that remains confusing.
> 
> Mike
>

bboyminn:

While I can't say you are wrong, I am less willing to concede
this last point. The connection between Harry and Voldemort's
minds has been a big on-going theme. It seems odd that such
a unique shift in the working of the connection, would be 
revealed in such an incredibly subtle and indirect way. 

Previously, Voldemort could inject thoughts and ideas into
Harry mind, but we don't know that he had the same type or
extent of connection that Harry has with him. Note the only
time Voldemort substantially inhabits Harry's mind is when
Voldemort possesses Harry at the Ministry of Magic. He seems
to have access to Harry's thoughts in that moment, but it
is a very unique and special case. 

So, while I can't say it is impossible, I think it unlikely
that in that moment, Voldemort was seeing through or into 
Harry's mind.

Just one man's opinion.

steve/bboyminn 





From jkoney65 at yahoo.com  Mon May 12 23:50:44 2008
From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 23:50:44 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g07t6p+m167@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0al4k+8vcs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182874

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
>
> Mike quoted:
> >
> > "... pulled out the wand beneath his cloak and pointed it at the 
> door, which burst open."
> > "He was over the threshold as James came sprinting into the hall. 
It
> was easy, too easy, he had not even picked up his wand...."
> > ....
> > Hold him off, without a wand in his hand!..."
> > ....
> > "She had no wand upon her either.... How stupid they were, and 
how 
> trusting, thinking that their safety lay in friends, that weapons 
> could be discarded even for moments...."
> > <DH pp. 343-4, US Ed.>
> 
> Mike commented: 
> > So maybe JKR wanted to make a point; James and Lily were *too* 
> trusting of friendship, loyalty, courage, and those things that they
> themselves  seemed to be born with. Was this a logical way to make 
> that point? IMO, no. 
> > 
> > I can't see James, who moments before was entertaining Harry with
> his wand and had just dropped it on the sofa he was sitting on,
> respond to the door bursting open without snatching up his wand. 
<snip>
> > 
> > After the things Voldemort had told Harry about his dad in PS/SS 
and
> in the graveyard of GoF, we and Harry were under the impression that
> James had put up a *good* fight, or at least had represented 
himself 
> well. I don't see how standing in front of Voldemort, wandless, 
> waiting to be AKed can be construed, as Voldemort himself said in 
PS:
> "Yes, boy, your parents were brave... I killed your father first, 
> > and he put up a courageous fight..." <SS p.294, US> OK, brave, 
umm 
> > yeah, I can see that. A kind of thoughtless bravery. But "put up 
a 
> > courageous fight"? How? With what?


Jack-A-Roe:
I think part of the problem with the scene is that we don't know the 
layout of the rooms. Voldemort can see them through the window as 
he's walking up the path. He can see them so well he can see James 
throw his wand down on the sofa. Voldemort pushes open the gate pulls 
his wand and blasts open the door. James has to sprint to the hall. 
How big is the cottage? If it so big that James has to sprint, 
Voldemorts angle as he approached the house should have cut down his 
view. If it is smaller (like I think) than James probably only had to 
take a couple of steps to see into the hall. 

We aren't told what James is doing as he yells. Is he trying to dive 
back into the other room for his wand (which was my initial thought 
as I read the scene) or is he continuing in a bull rush to try and 
tackle Voldemort. 

Why did James go without his wand? Probably because he was startled 
and wanted to see what it was. I'm sure he realized he was without 
his wand by his second or third step. By then (if it's a small house) 
he was already in the hallway.

The viewpoint is Voldemorts. So we are going to get his perspective 
on things and we can't completely trust it anymore than we can 
believe the Harry filter or Snape's cherry picked memories. They are 
all true to that person but probably not the entire truth. (Which I 
think is what Steve has mentioned)

Voldemort calls him brave and courageous because he didn't quit. He 
didn't drop to his knees begging for mercy. The last words James 
spoke were a challenge: "I'll hold him off."


> 
> Carol responds:
> snip>
> This
> moment of bravely standing up to Voldemort, of "holding him off," is
> supposed to be James's moment, when he ceases to be an "arrogant 
berk"
> and a bully and becomes the hero everyone--not just Voldemort, who
> could be lying--remembers him as being. And he's reduced to shouting
> that he'll hold Voldemort of and then dropping dead? Why would JKR
> write it this way, especially given that a lot of readers, including
> me, needed a reason to change our minds about James, and all we get 
is
> him playing with his baby son and throwing his wand on the sofa as
> Voldemort bursts in? 

Jack-A-Roe:
I don't understand why James needed redeeming. We saw him act like 
and were told that he acted like a teenage boy when he was a young 
teenage boy. Part of the problem is that we are adults looking at the 
actions of a teenage boy. Things you do then seem incredibly stupid 
or silly after you've aged/matured. I know I did stupid things (may 
have even owned some parachute pants, etc in the 80's), um, many 
stupid things that I look back at now and wonder what the heck I was 
thinking. I don't consider myself a bad human being. Then again that 
is my perspective on things.

James, off page, redeemed himself enough that he got the girl he 
wanted and also became head boy. Since that really only leaves him 
his 6th year to redeem himself, he must not have been as bad during 
the first 5 years as people are trying to make him out. Otherwise one 
year of good behavior wouldn't have earned him the head boy badge.



> Carol responds:
>> Maybe what mattered to Harry in that memory was his father playing
> with Baby!Harry and showing him the pretty lights from his wand. At
> any rate, Harry has no hesitation later in summoning up his father 
as
> one of the loved ones he's about to join when he uses the 
Resurrection
> Stone later. 


Jack-A-Roe:
I think the scene with the baby Harry was there to show Harry and the 
rest of us that James and Lilly did actually love each other. If I 
remember correctly Harry was worried that they didn't love each other 
after he saw SWM.


> Mike:
> But how could it not matter? And how could James be credited by
> Voldemort himself with putting up *any* fight? Is this bad writing,
> forgeting the previous backstory given us, or am I missing 
something?


Jack-A-Roe:
I think JKR wanted to say that courage and bravery don't necissarily 
mean that you have to cast a dozen spells. Just the fact that he was 
still going to try and fight unarmed was enough.

Personally I really wanted to see James at least get off a few 
curses, but it wasn't meant to be.

Jack-A-Roe, who is back again and hopes make some more consistant 
appearances.







From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue May 13 02:19:40 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 02:19:40 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0aeg8+5qls@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0atrs+3q6k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182875

Steve wrote:
> <snip> Previously, Voldemort could inject thoughts and ideas into
Harry mind, but we don't know that he had the same type or extent of
connection that Harry has with him. Note the only time Voldemort
substantially inhabits Harry's mind is when Voldemort possesses Harry
at the Ministry of Magic. He seems to have access to Harry's thoughts
in that moment, but it is a very unique and special case. 
> 
> So, while I can't say it is impossible, I think it unlikely that in
that moment, Voldemort was seeing through or into Harry's mind.

Carp; responds:
I only postulated it as a possibility, one that seems at least as
plausible as Voldemort temporarily feeling that "he was the boy"
because he can sense the soulbit entering Harry without realizing
what's happening. He certainly has no such connection with his
deliberately created Horcruxes.

In any case, there's at least one other instance of Voldemort knowing
Harry's thoughts. He's not yet at the MoM, but he somehow knows that
Harry is telling Bellatrix that the Prophecy (orb) has been destroyed
and that Harry isn't lying. And he instantly arrives faster than if
he'd been summoned by someone's Dark Mark.

I do agree that he's in and out of the past and the present and that
Harry is (near the end of the scene) in and out of Voldemort's mind,
starting to wake to his own present condition but also aware of
Voldemort's present situation (with the snake at Bathilda's house
having narrowly missed laying hands on "the boy" again). And, as I
also said, it's seeing the photograph of the golden-haired thief that
pulls him into the present and makes him forget everything else--a
parallel, maybe, to Harry's own focus later in the chapter on his own
broken wand. 

Carol, wishing that Voldemort had taken out his rage at losing Harry
by killing Nagini and had never laid eyes on that photograph




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue May 13 04:10:49 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 04:10:49 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0al4k+8vcs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0b4c9+chtu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182876


> Jack-A-Roe:
<snip>
> 
> The viewpoint is Voldemorts. So we are going to get his perspective
on things and we can't completely trust it anymore than we can 
believe the Harry filter or Snape's cherry picked memories. They are 
> all true to that person but probably not the entire truth. (Which I 
> think is what Steve has mentioned)

Carol responds:

Actually, we know that the Pensieve memories are accurate. The only
perspective that distorts them at all is not snape's but Harry's. (To
be sure, Snape has chosen the memories that suit his purpose, but
there's no point in delaying Harry by giving him irrelevant ones.)
Snape's memories, unlike this one of Voldemort's are objective records
in which we see him from the outside. Our only indication of his
thoughts and feelings is his words, actions, and facial expressions.
Dumbledore's memories--and Hokey's and Morfin's and Bob Ogden's--are
all exactly as they happened, seen from the outside. The only example
we have of an altered Pensieve memory is Slughorn's, and the
alterations are obvious to anyone except Harry, who wonders what the
fog was.

Voldemort's memory is different from the Pensieve memories in being
from his own perspective, but it's so detailed that I think it is also
intended to be accurate. (For one thing, it's the only description we
get of the events at Godric's Hollow. The subjective element comes in
when we get his decision not to kill the little boy he scares (his
thoughts at the moment that it happened, not his interpretation after
the fact), hi view of James as foolish and trusting (the reader is
free to agree or disagree), and so forth. But as to the facts of the
memory--James playing with Harry, James leaving his wand on the couch
and calling out to Lily in words that we've already heard in Harry's
Boggart!Demento memory in PoA, Voldemort killing the wandless James
and hearing Lily barricade the door to Harry's room, Voldemort blowing
aside the obstacles, Lily begging him not to kill Harry and Voldemort
telling him to stand aside (again using words we've heard before),
voldemort killing Lily and trying to kill the now frightened
Baby!Harry, Voldemort in agony, not knowing what had happened,
thinking that he'd killed "the boy" and yet hearing him scream and
needing to go far away--I see no reason to question those events any
more than we question what Harry sees and hears, however much we may
sometimes question his interpretation of what he sees and hears. As
Mrs. Figg says about the Dementors in Little Whinging, "And that's
what happened." We know at last, admittedly from LV's perspective
rather than that of the dead Potters or Baby!Harry, what happened. But
I see nothing to question in terms of the words spoken or the actions
taken by anyone involved. the one difference between this memory and
the Pensieve memories is that we're inside Voldemort's mind. But we've
already been there countless times, from OoP onward. (Oddly, the first
GoF dream is presented from Frank Bryce's perspective and the eagle
owl dream from Harry's; once LV has regained his body, the dreams and
visions are always from his perspective--or the snake's when LV is
possessing her--and he often looks down and sees LV's long-fingered
white hands as if they were his own and feels that *he* is speaking in
that high, cold voice.

Even in DH, the scenes that are happening as Harry experiences them
feel to Harry as if he's Voldemort: "H . . . saw the whiteness of his
own long-fingered hand against the door. He knocked. He felt a
mounting excitement. . . . His long-fingered hand had drawn his wand.
. . . He raised the wend. . . ." (232-33). It's as if Harry himself
had killed the German mother. And later, with Gregorovitch, "Harry's
voice was high, clear, and cold, his wand held in front of him by a
long-fingered white hand" (279). In these visions, in which he is so
fused with Voldemort that he can't tell his own voice and hand and
emotions from Voldemort's, he never sees his own face unless it's in a
mirror, just as we can't see our own faces in real life. (Most
interestingly, to me, Harry actually experiences Legilimency as
Voldemort experiences it, entering *Gregorovitch's* mind as if it were
a Pensieve in pursuit of the Elder Wand.

The difference between these moments and Voldemort's relived
experience at Godric's Hollow lies chiefly in that Harry is actually
more Voldemort than himself. It begins, not with the memory but with
the present, with Harry's scar seeming to burst open as he twists in
midair and then he *is* Voldemort, clutching the windowsill with those
long white hands and watching "the bald man and the little woman twist
and vanish"--Polyjuiced Harry and Hermione Disapparating. And then the
memory begins, not with his entering Godric's Hollow confident that
he's about to destroy "the one with the power to defeat the Dark Lord"
but with the agony of being ripped from his body. And here we see
either Harry or Voldemort (I think Harry) wondering, "But if he had no
body, why did his head hurt so badly; if he was dead, how could he
feel so unbearably, didn't pain cease with death, didn't it go . . .
." (342, ellipses in original).

And then we slip (in italicized print) into what is clearly
Voldemort's memory, experienced by Harry without any awareness of his
real self at all, and the narration is different from what we've seen
before, very much Voldemort's view of himself and the world around him
as it was then, and not just the white hands and high voice and
emotions but every sensory detail as it appeared to Voldemort at the
time, even his reaction to Muggle-style Halloween and a child's
reaction to his costume. He's tempted to kill the child. "Beneath the
robe he fingered the handle of his wand." Does Harry feel as if he,
too, is fingering the wand? I think he does. Does he, too, feel
tempted to kill the child and decide, as if of his own free will but
really reexperiencing what Voldemort once thought and felt, not to
kill the child? I think he does. 

We even get his nearly silent footsteps and his view through the
window; he sees clearly what's happening because the Fidelius Charm
has been broken (not by the Potters's deaths as Harry had thought but
by Peter's breach of faith--I wonder if Harry understands at that
point but probably not because he's Voldemort and Voldemort takes the
cause of the broken charm for granted), but he can't hear the words
that the Potters are speaking. We get descriptions of the Potters as
seen by a stranger who nevertheless knows who they are, the tall
black-haired man with glasses and the woman with long dark-red hair.
The gate creaks and then we get a detail that resembles the earlier
visions of a present shared by Harry and Voldemort as Harry
experiences Voldemort's reality, the white hand pulling out the wand
and pointing it, but we also get his thoughts: "It was easy, too easy.
he had not even picked up his wand" (Too easy? should that have been a
hint to Voldemort?). He casts the Killing Curse and green light fills
the room, showing seemingly insignificant details that vividly
recreate the moment as it was lived--the light on the pram pushed
against the wall the banisters "glar[ing] like lightning rods." We get
the details of Lily's death, the complete dialogue, his motivation for
killing her after all ("it seemed prudent to kill them all"), his
pointing the wand into Harry's face, wanting to see it happen, the
curse, and then the return to the thought and feeling that triggered
the memory, Voldemort breakinga dn becoming "nothing but pain and
terror." 

At that point, Harry is starting to come to, starting to realize that
he is not Voldemort and then we have the confusion, which seems to be
Voldemort's, over having killed the boy and yet being the boy but
could be shared by Harry, Harry's "no," Voldemort's return to the
present, seeing the photograph and pulling himself jubilantly into the
present, at which point Harry realizes that he dropped the photograph
and wakes up: He becomes "Harry, not Voldemort." (343-45)

The detail in the memory is, IMO, very telling. It's much more real
and accurate than the usual subjectively and partially recalled Muggle
memory (or Harry's own muddled memories, for that matter). It's almost
as if Voldemort, the great and terrible Legilimens, is using
Legilimency on himself for once, wandering in his own perfectly
recalled memory, but from his own subjective point of view, so that
his thoughts and emotions (to the extent that he feels emotions) and
pain are recalled exactly as they were along with the physical details
of a child in a costume, Hallwoeen decorations, and the green light of
the AK lighting up the pram and the banister.

Subjective? Yes, to a point. Inaccurate? I don't think so.


> Jack-A-Roe:
> I don't understand why James needed redeeming. We saw him act like
and were told that he acted like a teenage boy when he was a young
teenage boy. <snip>

Carol responds:
Maybe for you he doesn't. But some of us wanted to see something of
James beyond the arrogant bullying toerag, to use Lily's name for him.
We wanted to see the brave and powerful James that we'd been led to
expect from the moment that Hagrid and McGonagall mourned him and Lily
in SS/PS. We saw a talented boy who became an Animagus and helped to
create the Marauder's Map, we (barely) glimpsed the young father
playing with his baby son, but we never saw the Order member doing
anything important to help save the WW, never saw him putting up the
courageous fight that Voldemort claimed he had done, never saw him
casting so much as a Stupefy in his family's defense. Instead, he
carelessly tosses his wand on the sofa, trusting to the Fidelius Charm
and Peter Pettigrew. It's sad, or it would be if I liked James, but it
isn't tragic or heroic. And, for me and readers like me, it doesn't
take away the bad taste left by SWM. The arrogant teenage bully, who
torments Severus Snape *after* rescuing him from the werewolf,
transforms offstage into the nice but overly trusting young father.
And Hero!James is reduced to a vain (in the sense of futile) boast
"I'll hold him off!" and the advice to Lily to take Harry and run.
Just where she's supposed to run with no wand and no Invisibility
Cloak, I don't know. She, too, has trusted to the Fidelius Charm and
Peter. At least, thanks to Snape, she has a chance to live, giving her
sacrifice meaning. James's death is just a death, over as quickly as
Cedric Diggory's when Fetal!mort tells Wormtail to "Kill the spare!"

Maybe you don't find it disappointing. I wanted James to really be a
hero, to really be all that Hagrid and Sirius and Lupin painted him as
being. All I see is a clever boy who liked risks, was good at
Quidditch, had an extremely high opinion of himself, genuinely liked
Sirius because they were so much alike, tolerated Wormtail because he
fawned on him, thought that Remus Lupin was "cool" solely because he
was a werewolf, and hexed people who annoyed him, was always in
detention, and attacked Severus Snape (whom he viewed as an instant
enemy simply because Severus wanted to be sorted into slytherin) two
on one with Sirius with no provocation. In short, he gives Percy
competetion in the Big Head Boy department and the Twins competition
in the troublemaker department and Sirius Black competition in the
risk-taking department (though I think that Sirius wins that one) and
Dudley and Draco competition in the bullying department.

Yes, he's a kid, but he's not a kid that I find admirable. I was
hoping to find a (very young) man to take his place and win my
affection as the "arrogant little berk" did not. And, unfortunately
for my hopes and expectations, that brave young man who courageously
fought Voldemort to give his wife time did not materialize.

I can't convince you to see him as I see him, but, as LV says in GoF,
"I confess myself--disappointed."

In James only, BTW. Otherwise, I thought that the Godric's Hollow
flashback, even with the confusion of viewpoints and of past and
present near the end, was brilliantly written and imagined, down to
the smallest detail.

Carol, wondering whether James's blind trust in the fawning but
faithless Wormtail is intended as a contrast to Dumbledore's trust in
Snape, which had a firm foundation in more than Snape's love of Lily 




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Tue May 13 04:25:57 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 04:25:57 -0000
Subject: Lily had a chance to live thanks to Snape WAS :Re: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0b4c9+chtu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0b58l+l35m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182877

>> Carol responds:
>> Just where she's supposed to run with no wand and no Invisibility
> Cloak, I don't know. She, too, has trusted to the Fidelius Charm and
> Peter. At least, thanks to Snape, she has a chance to live, giving 
her
> sacrifice meaning. 
<SNIP of the whole post>


Alla:

I just want to say that I am deliberately snipping your whole post 
since I choose to comment only upon small part of it.

But when I see "thanks to Snape Lily has a chance to live " this 
picture always strikes me as, how to put it, well incomplete. So I 
will 
just add that I think she had a chance to die thanks to Snape first 
and 
foremost.

Alla,

who thinks that nobody who suffered in GH during that horrible night 
owes Snape anything, since what happened there in my opinion cannot 
be 
changed by any good deeds that Snape attempted to make.

That's all I want to say, for now anyways.

JMO,

Alla




From iam.kemper at gmail.com  Tue May 13 04:37:32 2008
From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (kempermentor)
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 04:37:32 -0000
Subject: Lily had a chance to live thanks to Snape WAS :Re: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0b58l+l35m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0b5uc+utdb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182878

 
> Alla,
> who thinks that nobody who suffered in GH during that horrible night 
> owes Snape anything, since what happened there in my opinion cannot 
> be changed by any good deeds that Snape attempted to make.

Kemper now:
Snape repented before that fateful Halloween.
Hasn't he atoned for his sins?

Kemper




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Tue May 13 04:41:31 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 04:41:31 -0000
Subject: Lily had a chance to live thanks to Snape WAS :Re: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0b5uc+utdb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0b65r+m5le@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182879

 
> > Alla,
> > who thinks that nobody who suffered in GH during that horrible 
night 
> > owes Snape anything, since what happened there in my opinion cannot 
> > be changed by any good deeds that Snape attempted to make.
> 
> Kemper now:
> Snape repented before that fateful Halloween.
> Hasn't he atoned for his sins?

Alla:

That's completely different though IMO. Sure, he repented, but that 
will not return Lily or James from the dead, no?

That is why I say that neither one of them **owes** Snape anything.

IMO,

Alla.




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue May 13 05:45:52 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 05:45:52 -0000
Subject: Lily had a chance to live thanks to Snape WAS :Re: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0b58l+l35m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0b9ug+ao98@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182880

Carol earlier:
> >> Just where she's supposed to run with no wand and no Invisibility
Cloak, I don't know. She, too, has trusted to the Fidelius Charm and
Peter. At least, thanks to Snape, she has a chance to live, giving her
sacrifice meaning. 
> <SNIP of the whole post>
> 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> I just want to say that I am deliberately snipping your whole post
since I choose to comment only upon small part of it.
> 
> But when I see "thanks to Snape Lily has a chance to live " this 
picture always strikes me as, how to put it, well incomplete. So I 
will just add that I think she had a chance to die thanks to Snape
first and foremost.
> 
> Alla,
> 
> who thinks that nobody who suffered in GH during that horrible night 
> owes Snape anything, since what happened there in my opinion cannot 
> be changed by any good deeds that Snape attempted to make.


Carol responds:

I see your point, and I agree that the picture here is incomplete. But
it was a remark made in passing amid the discussion of James's (to me)
disappointing failure to fight Voldemort.

All I meant was that, thanks to Wormtail's betrayal, James had no
chance of survival. Voldemort intended to kill him whether he put up a
fight or not, and he did exactly that. Nor was Harry supposed to have
 a chance of survival since he was the primary intended victim. But
Lily *did* have a chance to live, and was told several times to stand
aside. In the unlikely event that she had done so, Voldemort would not
have killed her. He would have left her to her grief and remorse and
Severus Snape. (Had she raised a wand, however, I think that he would
have killed her on the spot. Snape or no Snape, promise or no promise.
But then there would have been no chance to live and no
self-sacrifice, and Harry, too, would have died.) As Dumbledore and
Voldemort repeatedly tell Harry, Lily had a chance to live and chose
to die in place of her son. (Voldemort, once he had killed her,
thought that she would die along with her son, but it didn't work that
way. The choice that he gave her activated the ancient magic and
caused his attempt to kill Harry to deflect onto himself.) That
chance, given her by Snape's love and repentance, and that *choice* to
die, was not offered to James. Lily's death, not James', made possible
the ancient love magic that saved Harry and gave him the power to
defeat Voldemort.

I wasn't thinking of the earlier eavesdropping and the reporting of
the partial Prophecy to Voldmemort, which Snape repented. I was only
thinking that Lily's self-sacrifice--and Harry's subsequent survival,
along with the vaporization of Voldemort--were made possible because
Snape asked Voldemort to spare Lily and Voldemort actually came close
to honoring that request. He gave Lily a chance to live (which, of
course, she refused because she wanted to save her son instead of
herself).

Take Snape out of the equation if you like. Lily had a chance to live
and James didn't. Lily chose to die; James would have been killed
regardless.

Even though I knew that it was Lily's sacrifice that saved Harry (and
vaporized Voldemort and all the rest), I didn't want James's death to
be the meaningless murder that it was depicted in this scene. I wanted
him to show the heroism that we'd been led to expect of him. I thought
that you felt the same way.

Carol, who was not focusing here on either Snape's mistake or his
repentance, central though both are to the entire HP saga, only on
Lily's choice vs. James's sadly pointless death, which was not what I
was hoping for or expecting




From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Tue May 13 18:10:32 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 18:10:32 -0000
Subject: Redemption - who needed it? (was: DidHarry notice?)
In-Reply-To: <g0aeg8+5qls@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0clio+fe29@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182881

> bboyminn:
> 
> You are certainly a welcome member of the group...

Mike:
Thank you, Steve.

> bboyminn:
> Too bad, you haven't been around here for years, 
> it would have really added to the old discussions.

Mike:
Sorry, I became a Harry Potter nut around the time of the OotP 
release. But I didn't know about these internet sites and didn't 
realize there were other *adults* likewise afflicted.


> bboyminn:
> 
> It seems there were several areas of redemption that fell short
> in the final book. One of the others being the redemption of
> Slytherin House. Yes, Slytherins did take part in the battle
> against Voldemort, but what about Slytherin students. I really
> needed and expected some redemption there.

Mike:
I'm trying to recall some of your previous posts on the Slytherin 
redemption topic. Weren't you in the camp that thought it was up to 
the Slytherins themselves to change their ways and thereby redeem 
themselves? 

In any case, that's where I stand. I admit, like you, I expected 
the Slytherins to make a move in that direction during DH. More 
specifically, I expected Draco to come to some realization regarding
his allegiances. He seemed to start down that road in HBP, but 
seemed to reach a dead end in DH and went nowhere in this book. 
Because the focus is on Harry's generation, Draco's redemption 
would have symbolized the redemption of his house, for me.

That said, I didn't *need* Slytherin to be redeemed. I *needed* 
James to be redeemed. Carol has enumerated his many dubious 
accomplishments, so I won't repeat them. I will add that James and 
the Marauders' most amazing accomplishment, the Marauders Map, was 
titled "Aids to Magical Mischief Makers" and materialized through 
that incantion with "up to no good". I love the Marauders Map, and 
think it's fine for a bunch of teenagers to have made something so 
advanced and a little mischevious. But where does that leave me if 
that's the last accomplishment of James and Co.?

I smiled, right along with Harry, when Hagrid told him, "Yeh did as 
much as yer father would've done, an' I can' give yeh no higher 
praise than that." <GoF p.719, US>. Those words ring kind of hollow 
now, don't they?


> bboyminn:
> 
> That said, I repeat that I think Harry saw and understood. He
> knew that James acted foolishly and carelessly, yet, even so,
> he was brave and heroic. I think Harry understands and forgives
> the mistake. Something that may be easier for a character to
> do than for a reader.

Mike:
But I don't think Harry internalized this scene, because of the very 
real and pressing realizations of the Grindelwald picture and his 
broken wand. Which is a good thing for Harry, but as you say, leaves 
us readers flat. The whole implication of Harry's post-SWM, Floo chat 
with Sirius line - "I'm fifteen" <OotP> - is never repealed for us 
readers. 

Further on, in "The Prince's Tale", we learn that saving Severus 
Snape from werewolf!Lupin isn't the life changing moment for James 
either. It makes me think that James becoming Head Boy was a Flint, 
an undefendable authorial decision not based on how she otherwise 
painted James's character.

So put me in your category of readers that's unable to "understand 
and forgive" as Harry has. I loved James from the start of the series 
onward. But JKR spent all her on-page time on him tearing him down, 
never giving me a morsel of redeeming quality to hold on to. She 
can't just *tell* me he's a great guy without ever *showing* me he's 
a great guy and expect me to buy into the propaganda. Would his 
actually having fought Voldemort wipe out his past deeds? No, but it 
would have put them in perspective as the hijinx pervasive amongst 
those self-congratulatory teens "of a certain caliber".




> bboyminn:
> 
> Because of the confusing nature of the line in question, I 
> think Voldemort is mentally in two places at once. He has 
> mentally returned to Bathilda's but he is also still lost in
> the memory of what happened to him. I think the confusion of
> two places at once, and the rushing realization that Harry 
> Potter has thwarted him again cause sufficient distraction 
> that Voldie loses the significants of that thought - '...and 
> yet he was the boy...'. 
> 
> If he had been paying attension and spent some time trying to
> figure out what it meant, he might have succeeded. But that 
> anger at being bested by Harry, and the thrill of finding the
> handsome boy who robbed Gregorovitch drove it from his mind.
> 
> It is really kind of clever on JKR's part, assuming we are
> interpreting it right. The answer was right there in 
> Voldemort's mind, but he let it slip away. 

Mike:
As Catlady would say, this is an illegal I agree post.

I don't know what Voldemort could have done with the information, or 
if he would have done anything. He already made his six Horcruxes 
plus his seventh soul piece inside himself. He can't change that.



> bboyminn:
> 
> <snip>  The connection between Harry and Voldemort's
> minds has been a big on-going theme. It seems odd that such
> a unique shift in the working of the connection, would be 
> revealed in such an incredibly subtle and indirect way. 
> 
> Previously, Voldemort could inject thoughts and ideas into
> Harry mind, but we don't know that he had the same type or
> extent of connection that Harry has with him. Note the only
> time Voldemort substantially inhabits Harry's mind is when
> Voldemort possesses Harry at the Ministry of Magic. He seems
> to have access to Harry's thoughts in that moment, but it
> is a very unique and special case. 

Mike:
I'll go you one further in this on-going theme. I not only think that 
Voldemort can't visit Harry's mind, I don't think he can implant 
thoughts or scenes into it either. I think LV is (or was) aware when 
Harry was visiting his mind and could then conjure up images or 
scenes for Harry's consumption, but they were images or scenes 
playing within his own mind. Like in the scene we are talking about, 
Voldemort is visualizing what happened years ago and Harry sees that 
visualization. I think Voldemort visualized himself torturing Sirius 
in the Hall of Prophecies and Harry saw that, in OotP.

Curiously, in DH, Voldemort doesn't seem to be aware that Harry is 
visiting his mind any more. That or he doesn't care, which I find 
hard to believe. Why did he stop the Occlumency that DD said he was 
employing throughout HBP?

Mike, who could have used a little more clarity on this whole mind 
link thingee, but sees that with Harry not fully understanding it, we 
were never going to get that better explanation




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Tue May 13 19:35:10 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 19:35:10 -0000
Subject: James' death WAS: Lily had a chance to live thanks to Snape WAS :Re: Did Harry
In-Reply-To: <g0b9ug+ao98@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0cqhe+nbb1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182882

Carol:
<HUGE SNIP>
Even though I knew that it was Lily's sacrifice that saved Harry (and
vaporized Voldemort and all the rest), I didn't want James's death to
be the meaningless murder that it was depicted in this scene. I wanted
him to show the heroism that we'd been led to expect of him. I thought
that you felt the same way
<HUGE SNIP>

Alla:

Did I feel same way? Not quite. I commented in the past that from the 
first glance I totally see James' not having a wand versus what we 
hear in the past about GH as inconsistent. Having said that, James 
putting up courageous fight is coming only from Voldemort's mouth, 
isn't it? I think take Harry and run absolutely does not contradict 
James' being without a wand.

So, Pippin and Zara convinced me why Voldemort could have lied second 
time. 

Now am I absolutely sure that JKR meant to portray James without a 
wand? NO, of course not. Somebody said in the past something along 
the lines that we can explain away any inconsistency in the book, but 
that is happening too many times. So, while I love Pippin's 
explanation, I really would not put  past JKR to just not check what 
she wrote and forget about it, sorry, love the books and think that 
it is really a shame if she goofed that much in one of the pivotal 
scenes, but I would not put it past her.

So, basically since I cannot read JKR's mind I accept as two equal 
possibilities what Pippin said and that she goofed up.

But if I accept that she knew what she was doing in that scene, do I 
regret in any way that she did not portray James' without a wand? And 
the answer would be ? no way.

I think his death makes me hurt so much more **as it was portrayed in 
book 7**, his death makes me sad so much more **as it was portrayed 
in book 7**. Twenty one year old who plays with his son and trusts in 
his friends too much and still tries to make sure his wife and his 
son will escape. Would I mind seeing James trying to curse Voldemort 
with the wand? No, of course not.

But I think that one of the points that books make is to show that 
old magic, magic of the heart, magic of love is so much stronger than 
any fighting magic, any complicated curse, you know?

So, no I do not see James' death as meaningless murder at all. I see 
it as full of poignancy portrayal of death of innocence, both 
figuratively and literally. I do not need to see him with a wand to 
like him better, if anything I like him more after that scene.

I hope that JKR knew what she was doing here, I really do.





From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Tue May 13 19:43:48 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 19:43:48 -0000
Subject: In the Mind ...(was Re: Redemption - who needed it? )
In-Reply-To: <g0clio+fe29@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0cr1k+mjkf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182883

---  "Mike" <mcrudele78 at ...> wrote:
>...
> 
> 
> > bboyminn:
> > 
> > <snip>  The connection between Harry and Voldemort's
> > minds has been a big on-going theme. ...
> > 
> > Previously, Voldemort could inject thoughts and ideas into
> > Harry mind, but we don't know that he had the same type or
> > extent of connection that Harry has with him. ...
> 
> Mike:
> I'll go you one further in this on-going theme. I not only
> think that Voldemort can't visit Harry's mind, I don't think 
> he can implant thoughts or scenes into it either. I think LV
> is (or was) aware when Harry was visiting his mind and could
> then conjure up images or scenes for Harry's consumption, but
> they were images or scenes playing within his own mind. 
> ...I think Voldemort visualized himself torturing Sirius 
> in the Hall of Prophecies and Harry saw that, in OotP.

bboyminn:

I think your point is so subtle that the difference between us
in a matter of perspective and perception. Though, I must 
admit that I can't quite agree with Voldemort knowing Harry
was in his mind. I think more likely Voldemort had a sense of
when Harry was most vulnerable and therefore accessable, such
as when Harry was asleep. So, in those times of vulnerability
and accessability, Voldemort concentrated really hard on the
thoughts he wants Harry to see.

So, in that aspect, I guess I agree with you. Voldemort is
not pushing thoughts into Harry mind, he is having strong
thoughts in the hopes that Harry will, in a sense, come and
get them.

But I just can't accept that Voldemort knows when Harry is in
his mind. That just doesn't work for the rest of the books
in the series.

However, in your defense, consider this, did Voldemort spend 
all his time, day and night, concentrating on the thoughts he
wanted Harry to see? That seems a very boring and tedious 
existance. 

Now we know Harry is vulnerable when he sleeps, but then, 
why was Voldemort projecting the thought about Sirius being
tortured at the MoM late in the afternoon on a school day?
Why would he think Harry was vulnerable and sensitive at
that time of day? That would seem a time when Harry would
be too distracted by schoolwork and exams to receive any
kind of thought transfer. So, he was either 'transmitting'
ALL the time, or he just got luck, or he knew something.

> Mike: 
> 
> Curiously, in DH, Voldemort doesn't seem to be aware that 
> Harry is visiting his mind any more. That or he doesn't care,
> which I find hard to believe. Why did he stop the Occlumency 
> that DD said he was employing throughout HBP?
> 

bboyminn:

That's what I mean about Voldemort knowing Harry is in his
mind not being consistent with the rest of the series. 

I believe Voldemort IS employing Occlumency against Harry but
when he is emotional or distracted or extremely tired, he
drops his guard and that allows Harry to get in. It must take
a constant effort, even if the effort is in the background,
to employ Occulmency in this manner against Harry.

I believe as Voldemort grows both more weary and concerned,
yet at the same time, more confident, he lowers his guard.
Perhaps because he underestimates Harry. Or because he is
simply too distracted to maintain the 'shield'. 

The cursious thing is that there does seem to come a point
when Harry can both access Voldemort at will and block 
Voldemort from his own mind. Has Voldemort's concentration 
just slipped so badly, or are we seeing Harry get past 
Voldemort's defenses? 

Perhaps, Occlumency prevents thoughts from leaking out of 
Voldemort's mind and into Harry's unbidden, but do not block
Harry's willful access. In a sense, since Harry is carrying 
a part of Voldemort, the access to Voldemort's mind is 
soul-to-soul and nothing can block it. But Occlumency can, 
as I speculated, stop the leaks out of Voldemort's mind.

Think about the final confrontation between Harry and 
Voldemort. If Voldemort had sensed Harry in his mind, he
could have done what I suspect all good hyper-sensitive
dualer do. He could have sent false information to his
opponent to trick him into making the first move and
revealing himself and his intent. Harry's victory was tied
to his casting a counter-curse against Voldemort at the
exact instant the Voldemort sent a curse at him. The 
slightest flaw in timing, and it wouldn't have worked; Harry
would be dead. 

So, it seems critical to me in that last and final battle
that Voldemort NOT know that Harry is in his mind.

This connnection is tricky business.

Steve/bboyminn




From iam.kemper at gmail.com  Tue May 13 20:13:40 2008
From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (kempermentor)
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 20:13:40 -0000
Subject: Redemption - who needed it? (was: DidHarry notice?)
In-Reply-To: <g0clio+fe29@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0cspk+o38p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182884

> > bboyminn:
> > It seems there were several areas of redemption that fell short
> > in the final book. One of the others being the redemption of
> > Slytherin House. Yes, Slytherins did take part in the battle
> > against Voldemort, but what about Slytherin students. I really
> > needed and expected some redemption there.

Kemper now:
'Slytherins', plural?
I can only think of Slughorn overtly.
Mike adds to Steve's comment above...

> Mike:
> ...
> In any case, that's where I stand. I admit, like you, I expected 
> the Slytherins to make a move in that direction during DH. More 
> specifically, I expected Draco to come to some realization regarding
> his allegiances. He seemed to start down that road in HBP, but 
> seemed to reach a dead end in DH and went nowhere in this book. 
> Because the focus is on Harry's generation, Draco's redemption 
> would have symbolized the redemption of his house, for me.

Kemper now:
I agree.  At the end of HBP, Draco was at the cusp of acting his Truth
rather than in 'bad faith'.  Even in DH, I excused him at Malfoy
Manner believing he was wrestling with his Truth. Even when he
continued his immature wtf bs in the Room of Requirement, I thought
'Please JKR... please have Draco turn on Crabbe and/or Goyle'.  But
no.  Draco living the lie, clung on to his 'bad faith'.
But really, it wasn't Draco who acted this way. 

Draco's redemption would have transcended the story to something more
than just a fun ride. 

::sigh::
Kemper




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue May 13 20:44:04 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 20:44:04 -0000
Subject: James' death WAS: Lily had a chance to live thanks to Snape WAS :Re: Did Harry
In-Reply-To: <g0cqhe+nbb1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0cuil+7hl7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182885

Carol earlier:
> <HUGE SNIP>
> Even though I knew that it was Lily's sacrifice that saved Harry
(and vaporized Voldemort and all the rest), I didn't want James's
death to be the meaningless murder that it was depicted in this scene.
I wanted him to show the heroism that we'd been led to expect of him.
I thought that you felt the same way
> <HUGE SNIP>
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Did I feel same way? Not quite. I commented in the past that from
the first glance I totally see James' not having a wand versus what we
hear in the past about GH as inconsistent. Having said that, James 
putting up courageous fight is coming only from Voldemort's mouth,
isn't it? I think take Harry and run absolutely does not contradict 
> James' being without a wand.
> 
> So, Pippin and Zara convinced me why Voldemort could have lied
second time. 

Carol responds:
Do you mean that he could have lied in GoF, or that "straight-backed
and proud" isn't inconsistent with wandless and unprepared and overly
trusting? But what about SS/Ps, in which he actually says that James
bought courageously/ That line, in addition to the way James is
remembered by many other characters, sets up the reader's expectations
in a way that isn't fulfilled.

However, as I said in an earlier post in this thread, "Maybe what
mattered to Harry in that memory was his father playing
with Baby!Harry and showing him the pretty lights from his wand. At
any rate, Harry has no hesitation later in summoning up his father as
one of the loved ones he's about to join when he uses the Resurrection
Stone later. So, whether it matters to the individual reader or not,
it doesn't matter to *Harry,* who may not even remember that part of
the memory given the circumstances under which he experienced it."

So, while I do find it annoying and disturbing that she shaped our
expectations of James in a certain way--"arrogant berk" turned
hero--and then pulled the rug out from under us by having him
wandless, she does at least show him as a nice, if overly trusting,
young father who loves his wife and child. (we've known his last words
since PoA--the difference is that we thought he actually *made* the
attempt to hold LV off rather than claiming to do so without a wand).

Alla: 
> Now am I absolutely sure that JKR meant to portray James without a 
wand? NO, of course not. Somebody said in the past something along 
the lines that we can explain away any inconsistency in the book, but
that is happening too many times.

Carol responds:
I think that's Steve (bboy_minn). I'm with you here; there are far too
many inconsistencies to explain away.

Alla:
 So, while I love Pippin's explanation, I really would not put  past
JKR to just not check what she wrote and forget about it, sorry, love
the books and think that it is really a shame if she goofed that much
in one of the pivotal scenes, but I would not put it past her. <snip>

Carol responds:
Nor would I. She's even admitted that she hasn't reread any of the
books since they were published. I enjoy the books, but I'd enjoy them
more if there weren't so many careless errors and inconsistencies that
could have been prevented if she'd checked her own fictional facts.
And, as you say, this is a pivotal scene.

Alla:
> But if I accept that she knew what she was doing in that scene, do I
regret in any way that she did not portray James' without a wand? And
the answer would be ? no way.

Carol:
Even though it contradicts the view of him that has been previously
established and even though it's Lily's death, not his, that protects
Harry? I think I'd be more likely to share your view if JKR hadn't led
me to expect otherwise. And there *is* the whole question of trust and
loyalty to friends seeming, in this case, to be a bad thing.

Alla: 
> I think his death makes me hurt so much more **as it was portrayed
in book 7**, his death makes me sad so much more **as it was portrayed
in book 7**. Twenty one year old who plays with his son and trusts in
his friends too much and still tries to make sure his wife and his son
will escape. Would I mind seeing James trying to curse Voldemort with
the wand? No, of course not.

Carol responds:
It's the difference between pathos and tragedy. Had he fought
heroically and died as LV said he did, he'd be a tragic hero. As it
is, the most a reader can feel is pity and sadness--that is, a reader
who likes James would feel that way. I wanted more of his
transformation, more reason to like and admire him, and I have to
settle for playing with his baby son. (Is love of family more
important than protecting that family? and what is courage without
preparedness and common sense? He doesn't even get to fight a losing
battle, only to die without expressing fear. That's something, I
suppose. But I also keep remembering that it was the *risk* that made
it worthwhile to James. It's one thing to risk your own life, but that
of your child?)

So, is James's death "tragic" in that it was the result of his own
character flaws, arrogance, carelessness, and trust in an unworthy
friend and a spell that wasn't, after all, infallible? Or was it just
pathetic, in the sense of instilling pathos in the reader (some
readers, at least)?

Alla: 
> But I think that one of the points that books make is to show that
old magic, magic of the heart, magic of love is so much stronger than
any fighting magic, any complicated curse, you know?

Carol:
Yes, of course. That's why *Lily's* death is significant. *she's* the
one with the chance to live and the choice to die, a chance and choice
not available to James, who would have died whether he fought or ran
blindly into danger or fell on his knees and begged for life. (At
least he didn't act like Wormtail!) But James's death, unlike Lily's,
accomplished nothing. He didn't protect his wife even though he wanted
to. She died, too. And he didn't protect Harry. It was *Lily's* death,
imbued with ancient magic through the combination of Snape's request,
Voldemort's offering her the chance to stand aside, and her own choice
to die instead of Harry that gave her death the power of ancient
magic. (Just standing in front of her child with her arms spread to
protect him would not have been enough, as we see with the German
mother.) 

I agree that the power of love and magic of the heart is more powerful
than complicated curses. But love alone isn't always enough. Both
James and Snape loved Lily, but their love couldn't save her. And
Lily's love for Harry could not have saved him had it not been for the
chance she was given to live, her choice *not* to take it, and (I
think) Voldemort's own broken word. (What would have happened if he
had honored her choice to die instead of her son, I wonder? But that
was never a possibility since it was always Harry that LV was after.
But what would have happened if she had stepped aside as requested
seems clear. Lily would have lived (most unhappily) and Harry would
have died. No Chosen One, and LV would have thwarted the Prophecy.) 

Alla: 
> So, no I do not see James' death as meaningless murder at all. I see
it as full of poignancy portrayal of death of innocence, both 
figuratively and literally. I do not need to see him with a wand to 
like him better, if anything I like him more after that scene.
> 
> I hope that JKR knew what she was doing here, I really do.

Carol:
I'm glad that the scene affected you that way, regardless of JKR's
intentions. And, as I said, James's death does reflect Cedric's in a
way. But Cedric was truly innocent and truly good. He never bullied or
tormented anyone, and he was a champion of the whole school, not just
of his own house. He never let his accomplishments as Quidditch
captain or as TWT champion go to his head. So Cedric's death, quick
and unexpected and wholly undeserved, the result of accidentally being
where he wasn't supposed to be, moves me in a way that James's does
not. For one thing, James, unlike his infant son (whose innocence
doesn't really die that day, either--I think it dies with the death of
Hedwig in DH) is not an innocent.

I wanted more from him. I was led to expect more from him. And I see
no meaning in his murder at all except that it, along with Lily's,
made Harry an orphan. Lily's death, in contrast, gave Harry the
protection that saved his life and led, through the rebounding of the
AK and the vaporization of Voldemort, to his becoming the Chosen One.

Compare James's death, which accomplished nothing except to allow him
to die "straightbacked" and wandless, to Dobby's. Dobby has returned
to the home of his old masters, whom he still fears, to rescue Harry
and his friends. He has just saved Luna, Dean, and Mr. Ollivander, and
he returns to save Harry and the goblin Griphook. (Ron at this point
can Disapparate with Hermione because Dobby has caused a chandelier to
fall on Bellatrix.) He is fatally wounded in the act of rescuing them.
Dobby's death accomplishes something important. His last acts are
truly heroic. Nothing of the sort can be said for James, who doesn't
even go down fighting, as Sirius does. The best that can be said is
that he doesn't die ignominously like Wormtail.

Carol, who would rather have seen James futilely throwing curses at
Voldemort as Harry does with Snape in HBP





From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Tue May 13 21:04:42 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 21:04:42 -0000
Subject: Redemption - who needed it? (was: DidHarry notice?)
In-Reply-To: <g0cspk+o38p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0cvpa+5i70@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182886

 Kemper now:
> I agree.  At the end of HBP, Draco was at the cusp of acting his Truth
> rather than in 'bad faith'.  Even in DH, I excused him at Malfoy
> Manner believing he was wrestling with his Truth. Even when he
> continued his immature wtf bs in the Room of Requirement, I thought
> 'Please JKR... please have Draco turn on Crabbe and/or Goyle'.  But
> no.  Draco living the lie, clung on to his 'bad faith'.
> But really, it wasn't Draco who acted this way. 
> 
> Draco's redemption would have transcended the story to something more
> than just a fun ride. 
> 
> ::sigh::

Magpie:
Probably comes as no surprise that that's totally how it came across to 
me too. Actually, I just recently elsewhere referred to HP as, for 
me, "The Land that Redemption Forgot." I remember pre-DH people were 
cautioning others not to expect *every* character set up for redemption 
to have it, and in the end, imo, none of them did. They earned enough 
to be forgiven, but there was no true redemption stories. I think it's 
probably telling that not only did the ones I was expecting not pan out 
the way I thought they were going, but James's arc, which many of us 
had assumed, didn't happen either. Not so much because he didn't have 
his wand in DH, because I didn't need to know he was a good fighter, 
but the way the whole Prank turned out. It just wasn't something she 
was interested in.

-m




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Tue May 13 21:48:33 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 21:48:33 -0000
Subject: James' death WAS: Lily had a chance to live thanks to Snape WAS :Re: Did Harry
In-Reply-To: <g0cuil+7hl7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0d2bh+rm1p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182887

Carol responds:
Do you mean that he could have lied in GoF, or that "straight-backed
and proud" isn't inconsistent with wandless and unprepared and overly
trusting? But what about SS/Ps, in which he actually says that James
bought courageously/ That line, in addition to the way James is
remembered by many other characters, sets up the reader's expectations
in a way that isn't fulfilled.

Alla:
I meant that I initially was not sure what Voldemort would have 
wanted to accomplish by lying in GoF scene. I think that lying in PS 
would be actually very consistent with all that occurred.

I do see how it can be explained that Voldemort wanted to play with 
Harry emotions and lie in GoF as well. I was saying that the line 
which Harry hears "take and run" is IMO consistent with him being 
without a wand, so the only source of saying otherwise is Voldemort, 
who is a liar.

And my expectations were fulfilled.


Alla:
> But if I accept that she knew what she was doing in that scene, do I
regret in any way that she did not portray James' without a wand? And
the answer would be ? no way.

Carol:
Even though it contradicts the view of him that has been previously
established and even though it's Lily's death, not his, that protects
Harry? I think I'd be more likely to share your view if JKR hadn't led
me to expect otherwise. And there *is* the whole question of trust and
loyalty to friends seeming, in this case, to be a bad thing. <SNIP>

Alla:

That's my point ? it does not contradict my expectations and as I am 
sure I mentioned before I cannot ever consider loyalty and trust in a 
friend to be a bad thing.


Carol responds:
<SNIP>
He doesn't even get to fight a losing
battle, only to die without expressing fear. That's something, I
suppose. But I also keep remembering that it was the *risk* that made
it worthwhile to James. It's one thing to risk your own life, but that
of your child?)

Alla:

Risk made it what worthwhile to James? Going under Fidelius? I do not 
understand what you mean here.  How is he risking his child's life 
anymore than it is already at risk? He went into hiding to protect 
his child as you said before, no?

How to put it? I think JKR is going here for bravery of the soul and  
the message (IMO) is stronger when one is ready to fight even without 
a weapon.

Carol:
<SNIP>
But James's death, unlike Lily's,
accomplished nothing. He didn't protect his wife even though he wanted
to. She died, too. And he didn't protect Harry. It was *Lily's* death,
imbued with ancient magic through the combination of Snape's request,
Voldemort's offering her the chance to stand aside, and her own choice
to die instead of Harry that gave her death the power of ancient
magic. (Just standing in front of her child with her arms spread to
protect him would not have been enough, as we see with the German
mother.)


Alla:

Did his death accomplish nothing? Or as it was said it may have given 
Lily extra minute to stand for Harry, maybe if James was not here, 
Voldemort would have gone straight after her and no sacrifice would 
have happened.

Carol:
<SNIP>
For one thing, James, unlike his infant son (whose innocence
doesn't really die that day, either--I think it dies with the death of
Hedwig in DH) is not an innocent. <SNIP>

Alla:

He is most definitely an innocent to me. As somebody, I believe Betsy 
used to argue the standard of innocence in Potterverse seems to be 
very high. Dumbledore refers to Draco in HBP as innocent despite 
murder attempts. I do not recall James doing anything remotely as bad 
as what Draco did in HBP. 

I really do not know what else to say, we just see this scene too 
differently






From jkoney65 at yahoo.com  Tue May 13 22:16:51 2008
From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65)
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 22:16:51 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0b4c9+chtu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0d40j+8e12@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182888

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
>
> 
> > Jack-A-Roe:
> <snip>
> > 
> > The viewpoint is Voldemorts. So we are going to get his 
perspective
> on things and we can't completely trust it anymore than we can 
> believe the Harry filter or Snape's cherry picked memories. They 
are 
> > all true to that person but probably not the entire truth. (Which 
I 
> > think is what Steve has mentioned)
> 
> Carol responds:
> 
> Actually, we know that the Pensieve memories are accurate. The only
> perspective that distorts them at all is not snape's but Harry's. 
(To
> be sure, Snape has chosen the memories that suit his purpose, but
> there's no point in delaying Harry by giving him irrelevant ones.)
> Snape's memories, unlike this one of Voldemort's are objective 
records
> in which we see him from the outside. Our only indication of his
> thoughts and feelings is his words, actions, and facial expressions.
> Dumbledore's memories--and Hokey's and Morfin's and Bob Ogden's--are
> all exactly as they happened, seen from the outside. The only 
example
> we have of an altered Pensieve memory is Slughorn's, and the
> alterations are obvious to anyone except Harry, who wonders what the
> fog was.

> Voldemort's memory is different from the Pensieve memories in being
> from his own perspective, but it's so detailed that I think it is 
also
> intended to be accurate. (For one thing, it's the only description 
we
> get of the events at Godric's Hollow. The subjective element comes 
in
> when we get his decision not to kill the little boy he scares (his
> thoughts at the moment that it happened, not his interpretation 
after
> the fact), hi view of James as foolish and trusting (the reader is
> free to agree or disagree), and so forth. 
<large snip>

Jack-A-Roe
I apologize for not making myself clearer. I agree that the pensieve 
shows us things as accurate. What I was saying about Snape's memories 
are that he chose them. It wasn't only for lack of time. We don't get 
to see the memories that Lily had to defend him from time and again. 
We are told that the people he hangs around with are borderline dark. 
Are we supposed to assume that Snape wasn't participating at all? 
Lily already tells us no, that she has made excuses for him. Without 
descriptions we don't get to see what had been building between the 
two until the final SWM.

Voldemort's viewpoint is subjective and tells us that James is 
foolish and while the reader may agree or disagree they aren't really 
given the chance. Voldemort surprises them in their safe house, which 
is protected by one of their best friends, and kills James before he 
can defend himself. James is made to look foolish because startled he 
goes to see what the problem is, and as I mentioned probably realized 
that he didn't have his wand a second too late (assuming that the 
house is as small as I think). If I put myself in that position, I 
know my first thought would be to see what is going on (it is 
Halloween) before going and getting my Browning.

 
> > Jack-A-Roe:
> > I don't understand why James needed redeeming. We saw him act like
> and were told that he acted like a teenage boy when he was a young
> teenage boy. <snip>
> 
> Carol responds:
> Maybe for you he doesn't. But some of us wanted to see something of
> James beyond the arrogant bullying toerag, to use Lily's name for 
him.
> We wanted to see the brave and powerful James that we'd been led to
> expect from the moment that Hagrid and McGonagall mourned him and 
Lily
> in SS/PS. We saw a talented boy who became an Animagus and helped to
> create the Marauder's Map, we (barely) glimpsed the young father
> playing with his baby son, but we never saw the Order member doing
> anything important to help save the WW, never saw him putting up the
> courageous fight that Voldemort claimed he had done, never saw him
> casting so much as a Stupefy in his family's defense. Instead, he
> carelessly tosses his wand on the sofa, trusting to the Fidelius 
Charm
> and Peter Pettigrew. It's sad, or it would be if I liked James, but 
it
> isn't tragic or heroic. And, for me and readers like me, it doesn't
> take away the bad taste left by SWM. The arrogant teenage bully, who
> torments Severus Snape *after* rescuing him from the werewolf,
> transforms offstage into the nice but overly trusting young father.
> And Hero!James is reduced to a vain (in the sense of futile) boast
> "I'll hold him off!" and the advice to Lily to take Harry and run.
> Just where she's supposed to run with no wand and no Invisibility
> Cloak, I don't know. She, too, has trusted to the Fidelius Charm and
> Peter. At least, thanks to Snape, she has a chance to live, giving 
her
> sacrifice meaning. James's death is just a death, over as quickly as
> Cedric Diggory's when Fetal!mort tells Wormtail to "Kill the spare!"
> 
> Maybe you don't find it disappointing. I wanted James to really be a
> hero, to really be all that Hagrid and Sirius and Lupin painted him 
as
> being. All I see is a clever boy who liked risks, was good at
> Quidditch, had an extremely high opinion of himself, genuinely liked
> Sirius because they were so much alike, tolerated Wormtail because 
he
> fawned on him, thought that Remus Lupin was "cool" solely because he
> was a werewolf, and hexed people who annoyed him, was always in
> detention, and attacked Severus Snape (whom he viewed as an instant
> enemy simply because Severus wanted to be sorted into slytherin) two
> on one with Sirius with no provocation. In short, he gives Percy
> competetion in the Big Head Boy department and the Twins competition
> in the troublemaker department and Sirius Black competition in the
> risk-taking department (though I think that Sirius wins that one) 
and
> Dudley and Draco competition in the bullying department.
> 
> Yes, he's a kid, but he's not a kid that I find admirable. I was
> hoping to find a (very young) man to take his place and win my
> affection as the "arrogant little berk" did not. And, unfortunately
> for my hopes and expectations, that brave young man who courageously
> fought Voldemort to give his wife time did not materialize.
> 
> I can't convince you to see him as I see him, but, as LV says in 
GoF,
> "I confess myself--disappointed."
> 
> In James only, BTW. Otherwise, I thought that the Godric's Hollow
> flashback, even with the confusion of viewpoints and of past and
> present near the end, was brilliantly written and imagined, down to
> the smallest detail.
> 
> Carol, wondering whether James's blind trust in the fawning but
> faithless Wormtail is intended as a contrast to Dumbledore's trust 
in
> Snape, which had a firm foundation in more than Snape's love of Lily
>

Jack-A-Roe:
I was highly disappointed that James didn't get to fight with 
Voldemort because it would have made his death seem that much more 
heroic. 

I think part of the problem that people have with James is how he was 
presented. It's like a movie that start's with the ending. We are 
told by everyone what a great guy James is, etc., etc. Then we only 
get to see the parts that take away his sainthood. We never get to 
see the parts that build him up (other than saving a snooping Snape) 
so we are left feeling down on him. Although, almost all of the 
negative thoughts of James come from Snape. 

When it comes down to it, James defied Voldemort three times as we 
are told in the prophecy. James rescued Snape (although he was 
probably also trying to protect Lupin/Sirius from the ramifications. 
Yet when the situation is turned around, Snape only tries to protect 
Lily and it's Dumbledore who tells him that he is disgusting. James 
did those things before he died (age 21?). Imagine what else he could 
have done if he had lived.

I agree that the scene in Godric's Hollow was well done and the 
question of trust does puzzle me. Is JKR saying you should only trust 
someone if you have proof. That seems to go against the very nature 
of the term trust.

Jack-A-Roe





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue May 13 23:00:00 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 23:00:00 -0000
Subject: James' death WAS: Lily had a chance to live thanks to Snape WAS :Re: Did Harry
In-Reply-To: <g0d2bh+rm1p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0d6hg+e1qn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182889

Carol earlier:
> Do you mean that he could have lied in GoF, or that "straight-backed
and proud" isn't inconsistent with wandless and unprepared and overly
trusting? But what about SS/Ps, in which he actually says that James
bought courageously/ That line, in addition to the way James is
remembered by many other characters, sets up the reader's expectations
in a way that isn't fulfilled.

Carol again:
"Bought" should be "fought" and the slash a question mark. Sorry!
> 
> Alla:
> I meant that I initially was not sure what Voldemort would have 
wanted to accomplish by lying in GoF scene. I think that lying in PS
would be actually very consistent with all that occurred.
> 
> I do see how it can be explained that Voldemort wanted to play with
Harry emotions and lie in GoF as well. I was saying that the line
which Harry hears "take and run" is IMO consistent with him being 
without a wand, so the only source of saying otherwise is Voldemort,
who is a liar.
> 
> And my expectations were fulfilled. <snip>

Carol responds:
Thanks for the clarification. I agree that Voldie is a liar, but I
don't see what having him in lie accomplishes in this instance.
Needless to say, my expectations *weren't* fulfilled, nor do I see any
foreshadowing at all of a wandless James.
 
> Alla:
> 
> That's my point ? it does not contradict my expectations and as I am
sure I mentioned before I cannot ever consider loyalty and trust in a
friend to be a bad thing.

Carol responds:
I flet the same way about DD trusting Snape even if Snape turned out
not to deserve it. and yet trust in an unworthy person, one whoma a
wiser James would have seen through, led to his death (and Lily's). I
think that the whole trust motif, like the mother love motif, goes in
a variety of directions without providing any clear answers. I'd like
to know what others think on this point.

lla:
> 
> Risk made it what worthwhile to James? Going under Fidelius? I do
not understand what you mean here.  How is he risking his child's life
anymore than it is already at risk? He went into hiding to protect 
his child as you said before, no?

Carol responds:
sorry to be unclear. I just meant that risk makes life exciting to
James (and Sirius), as we see with the werewolf adventures and risking
detention as a teenager and joining the Order in the first place. (the
words are Sirius's, not mine, and he's talking in this instance about
the risk of defying Delores Umbridge.) The only explanation that I can
find for James's tossing the wand on the couch, other than naive trust
in a sychophantic follower whom he mistakes for a friend, is
recklessness. It's one thing to risk your own life (setting aside
those of the people of Hogsmeade, which I don't think he considered)
to have adventures with a werewolf, or even to risk your own life by
joining the Order in the hope of fighting evil (too bad we never see
him doing it), and another thing altogether to drop your wand and run
to the door without it, knowing that not only you but your wife and
child are in grave danger. First, he lends the Invisibility Cloak to
Dumbledore (who could and should have examined it without taking it
from them, but never mind that!). And then he drops his wand and his
guard and faces the enemy unprepared. Recklessness, in a way, is his
downfall, as it was Sirius's--though James could not have saved
himself in any case.

Alla: 
> How to put it? I think JKR is going here for bravery of the soul and
the message (IMO) is stronger when one is ready to fight even without
a weapon.

Carol:
I suppose. But it would have been smarter to stay on his guard and
keep the wand with him at all times. Certainly, it's more admirable to
die bravely than to die begging for mercy. But, still, his death
accomplished nothing. It didn't even buy Lily time to find her own
wand (which would have been worse for Harry, actually, since an armed
Lily wouldn't have been given that all-important chance to live). If
you don't see the difference between James's death, which is just
another murder by Voldemort, however brave the wandless victim, and
Lily's death, which saves Harry and gives him the protection of her
love and all that, I don't know what else to say. It's his mother's
death, not his father's that Harry speaks of as he faces Voldemort for
the last time.

I used to think that the distinction between Lily's death and James's
was that he was a hero, fighting the enemy to the death against
hopeless odds, and she was a martyr, saving her son with her
self-sacrifice. Now I can't even grant James the status of hero (in
contrast to Neville, whose unarmed defiance earns him the Sword of
Gryffindor and the right to kill Nagini). Dobby's death, too, as I
said earlier, is generally heroic. James's, like Cedric's, is merely
sad (at least for those who liked James in the first place).

Carol:
> <SNIP>
> For one thing, James, unlike his infant son (whose innocence doesn't
really die that day, either--I think it dies with the death of Hedwig
in DH) is not an innocent. <SNIP>
> 
> Alla:
> 
> He is most definitely an innocent to me. As somebody, I believe
Betsy used to argue the standard of innocence in Potterverse seems to
be very high. Dumbledore refers to Draco in HBP as innocent despite
murder attempts. I do not recall James doing anything remotely as bad
as what Draco did in HBP. 

Carol responds:
Is innocence relative, at least in the WW? Or maybe Dumbledore was
using "innocent" to mean "not guilty" rather than blameless or free
from sin or unacquainted with evil? James (the boy) may not be as bad
as Draco, but he knows that he's breaking rules and bullying people.
There's nothing innocent about sneaking up on someone you don't like
and attacking him tow on one. there's nothing innocent about the
bullying that Draco does, either, much less working to get DEs into
Hogwarts and attempting in increasingly desperate ways to kill Dumbledore.

I don't know what DD meant by calling Draco "innocent," nor do I think
that Harry, who has already attempted at least one Crucio, is quite as
"pure" as Dumbledore thinks. But setting aside DD's opinion, if we
compare Cedric Diggory to James Potter, I think it's clear which is
the more innocent. And there's no question that Baby!Harry is truly
innocent in every sense of the word. James is, I suppose, intended to
be an ordinary young adult--by no means sinless or flawless but
essentially good. It's just that we never get to *see* that goodness
or learn how it developed. I do consider it a greater accomplishment
to overcome our faults and become good than to be good to begin with
and have no faults to overcome (not that any characters except perhaps
Luna fit that pattern), but we never see the "arrogant berk" evolving
into the loving (but careless) father. We never even get to see him
fighting a Death Eater. Essentially, he made an enemy of Snape, did a
few clever things and got into a lot of trouble at Hogwarts, acted
like an arrogant bully, joined the Order, married Lily, fathered
Harry, made Peter the Secret Keeper, and got killed. The only time we
really see him is when he's at his worst.

Alla: 
> I really do not know what else to say, we just see this scene too
differently

Carol responds:
Me, too. Alla. Me, too.

Carol, who also expected the Giant Squid and the link between
Durmstrang and Hogwarts to play a role in DH ;-)




From celizwh at intergate.com  Tue May 13 23:44:18 2008
From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102)
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 23:44:18 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
Message-ID: <g0d94i+ejhb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182890

The chapter opens the morning after the appearance of the doe 
Patronus, Ron's return and rescue of Harry, and the destruction of 
the locket horcrux.  In spite of all these positive developments, 
Hermione is still angry, Ron is maintaining an unnaturally somber 
demeanor and Harry is feeling like the only non-mourner at a poorly 
attended funeral. Only when he and Harry are alone together while 
foraging for water and mushrooms does Ron's mood become unabashedly 
cheery.

The reader is privy to one such sortie, which takes place late in the 
afternoon. Harry fills Ron in on his and Hermione's wanderings after 
Ron left.  Ron shares the news he has picked up about the wider 
Wizarding world.

Ron asks Harry how he found out about the Taboo.  Harry doesn't know 
what Ron is talking about.  He explains that he and Hermione had just 
slipped into the habit of saying You-Know-Who rather than V--.  Ron 
hastily shuts him up before he can say Voldemort's name and then 
explains that Voldemort has placed a jinx on the uttering of his 
name.  Anyone who says it aloud can be traced and that is how Death 
Eaters found the Trio in Tottenham Court Road.  Kingsley Shacklebolt 
was nearly captured in the same way.

Harry and Ron speculate on the doe Patronus sender's identity. 
Kingsley is briefly considered and rejected because his Patronus is 
known to be a lynx.  They move further away from Hermione and Ron 
tentatively voices the possibility that the doe might have been sent 
by Dumbledore.  Harry is adamant that this is not possible.  They 
argue about it for a while and that leads into a general discussion 
of Dumbledore, his judgment, and the revisionist assessment of his 
character by Rita Skeeter.

Ron tells Harry that in his weaker moments he used to think that 
Dumbledore was just having a laugh at them or trying to make things 
more difficult, but he doesn't think that anymore.  "He knew what he 
was doing when he gave me the Deluminator, didn't he? . . . he must 
have known I'd run out on you." "No," is Harry's generous reply.  "He 
must have known you'd always want to come back."

Ron tries to excuse Dumbledore's friendship with Grindelwald by 
pointing out that Dumbledore was really young at the time that it 
took place.  "Our age," Harry responds, and something in his face 
tells Ron not to pursue the subject.

Harry begins practicing on a spider with his newly acquired 
blackthorn wand and discovers that his Engorgio spell is weak and 
Reducio is completely ineffective. Hermione has come noiselessly upon 
them at this point and assures Harry that he just needs practice.  
Harry thinks she still feels guilty about breaking his own wand.

They return to the tent.  Harry continues to practice fruitlessly 
with the wand while Ron tries unsuccessfully to tune in an anti-
Voldemort broadcast on a small wooden wireless. Hermione is reading 
on her bunk.  Suddenly she climbs down from the bunk, reveals that 
the book she is reading is _The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore_, 
and announces that she wants to go see Xenophilius Lovegood.  Her 
reason:  She has finally connected the mark in Beedle the Bard, the 
symbol in Dumbledore's letter to Grindelwald (reproduced in Rita's 
book), the mark on the tombstone in Godric's Hollow, and the pendant 
Xenophilius wore to Bill and Fleur's wedding.

After the disastrous experience in Godric's Hollow, Harry is not keen 
to visit the Lovegoods.  Ron takes Hermione's side, however, (for 
meretricious reasons Harry suspects) and the two of them carry the 
argument.

They disapparate to a hillside overlooking Ottery St. Catchpole from 
which they can see the Burrow.  We learn that Ron was never at the 
Burrow during his absence.  He didn't think he would have been 
welcome.  Instead he stayed at Bill and Fleur's new place, Shell 
Cottage.

The Trio has a hard time finding the Lovegoods' house.  They walk for 
hours under the Invisibility Cloak.  They disapparate to a new 
location.  Finally Ron spots a strange-looking structure on top of a 
hill.

The house resembles a giant black chess rook.  It has a creaking, 
broken-down gate adorned with three hand-painted signs:  
THE QUIBBLER.  EDITOR: X. LOVEGOOD
PICK YOUR OWN MISTLETOE
KEEP OFF THE DIRIGIBLE PLUMS. 
A zigzagging path overgrown with odd plants leads up to the door.

Hermione stashes the Invisibility Cloak in her beaded bag and knocks 
three times.  After barely ten seconds the door is opened by 
Xenophilius Lovegood looking dirty and disheveled, in stark contrast 
to his dapper appearance at the wedding.  His voice is high-pitched 
and querulous.  He refuses Harry's hand and doesn't want to let them 
in at first, relents finally, but urges them to come in quickly.  He 
slams the door shut as they barely clear the threshold.

Inside, the house presents just as peculiar an appearance as 
outside.  The kitchen is completely circular with curved appointments 
covered with flowers, insects, and birds painted in bright primary 
colors.  The room upstairs is as cluttered as the Room of 
Concealment.  Books and papers are piled on every surface.  Models of 
unrecognizable creatures with flapping wings and snapping jaws hang 
from the ceiling.  An old fashioned printing press is noisily 
churning out copies of the Quibbler.  Luna is not to be seen.

Hermione spots one especially prominent trophy on a wall and she and 
Mr. Lovegood get into an argument. Xenophilius maintains that it is 
the horn of a Crumple-Horned Snorkack, acquired two weeks ago from a 
"delightful young wizard" as a Christmas surprise for Luna.  Hermione 
insists that it is really an Erumpent horn, dangerous, explosive and 
illegal.

In contradiction to his previous exhortations in the Quibbler, 
Xenophilius seems unwilling to help them.  He is clearly 
uncomfortable. He keeps swallowing. His eyes dart nervously among the 
three of them.  Hermione asks, "Where's Luna?" He gulps, hesitates, 
and finally answers in a shaky voice that she is down by the stream 
fishing.  He goes to get her.

While he is gone, Harry notices another peculiar object: A stone bust 
of a beautiful but austere-looking witch wearing a bizarre 
headdress.  Two objects resembling golden ear trumpets curve out from 
the sides.  A leather strap sporting two tiny blue glittering wings 
runs across the top of the head, while another covered in orange 
radishes spans the forehead.

Xenophilius returns bearing a tea tray.  He reveals that the bust is 
a likeness of Rowena Ravenclaw and explains that the object on it is 
his pet invention.  Wrackspurt siphons to remove sources of 
distraction, a billywig propeller to elevate the frame of mind, and 
the Dirigible Plum to enhance reception of the extraordinary.

Luna is still nowhere to be seen, but Xenophilius asserts that she 
will not be long.

"Now," he asks at last, "how may I help you, Mr. Potter?"  Harry 
explains that it's about the symbol Xenophilius was wearing around 
his neck at the wedding.

Xenophilius raises his eyebrows.

"Are you referring to the sign of the Deathly Hallows?"

Chapter 20 Questions

1.  Is Hermione's intransigence toward Ron justifiable?  Why is she 
so unforgiving?

2.  We finally get an explanation for the sudden appearance of DEs in 
Tottenham Court Road-the Taboo.  Was it satisfying?  Did it feel 
contrived that H and H continued to use the euphemism after Ron's 
defection (saving themselves from the DEs even if they didn't know 
about the Taboo).  Could there have been a Taboo on the name in VWI?

3.  Harry quickly shoots down Ron's hope that DD may still be 
watching over them and as quickly shoots down Ron's excuse of young 
Dumbledore's behavior.  Is this meant to show Harry's disenchantment 
with DD or illustrate his growing maturity?

4.  Does Harry's emphatic rejection of youth as an excuse for 
behavior hark back to a lingering dissatisfaction with Sirius and 
Lupin's excuse for his father?

5.  Harry tries out his new wand on spiders.  Why spiders again?

6.  There has been a good deal of argument over the theme of insiders 
and outsiders in HP.  Those who are enmeshed in the "good" side never 
seen to have to question their place in the world; those who are born 
into "bad" side, either accept or rebel. Where do the Lovegoods fit 
in to this scheme?

7.  Why does Ron not know where to find the Lovegoods' house when he 
has grown up in the same neighborhood?

8.  Did the physical description of the house strike you in any 
particular way? Is the fact that it looks like a black rook 
significant? (Black is the side the Trio took in "Through the 
Trapdoor" in Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. Hermione 
replaced the rook, in fact.)

9.  Xenophilia, literally love of the stranger, is the Greek word for 
hospitality.  Was Xenophilius Lovegood's markedly inhospitable 
behavior intentionally ironic?  Is he a lover of strangers or merely 
a lover of the strange? 

10. The Lovegoods are the only Ravenclaw family into whose home we 
are admitted.  Do they typify Ravenclaw?

11. The odd-looking contraption on the bust of Rowena Ravenclaw turns 
out to be a counterfeit Lost Diadem, but that is not revealed until a 
later chapter.  What did you think it was when you first read about 
it?

11. What did you think of the non-appearance of Luna?

12. Any question you want to add.

Thanks to Shorty Elf for corrections and suggestions,
houyhnhnm

 
  






From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Wed May 14 00:13:06 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 00:13:06 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0d40j+8e12@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0daqi+e1de@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182891

Jack-A-Roe
> I apologize for not making myself clearer. I agree that the pensieve
shows us things as accurate. What I was saying about Snape's memories
are that he chose them. It wasn't only for lack of time. We don't get
to see the memories that Lily had to defend him from time and again.
We are told that the people he hangs around with are borderline dark.
Are we supposed to assume that Snape wasn't participating at all? 
Lily already tells us no, that she has made excuses for him. Without
descriptions we don't get to see what had been building between the
two until the final SWM.

Carol responds:
True, it wasn't *just* lack of time though tiem was limited. Snape
could only select those memories that served his purpose, which was to
establish his own trustworthiness so that he could convery the message
that would send Harry to sacrifice himself. He does not come across as
wholly innocent in those memories (though I do think he comes across
as sympathetic and Harry empathizes with him for a number of reasons);
memories that showed him in a wholly bad light would defeat his
purpose. He *does* show himself as not only a Death Eater but the
eavesdropper who had told LV the Prophecy, and what, in Harry's eyes,
could be worse than that?

If you mean that we never get James's side of the story, we see him
entirely objectively in SWM (the only interpretations are Harry's; the
scene is presented as it happened--and it happened *after* James's
rescue of Severus from werewolf!Remus--which was motivated, as you
say, more by a desire to keep his friends out of trouble than to save
Severus's life.

We don't have James's or Lily's memories. We never get to see Remus's
or Sirius's before they die. Until James's death scene, Snape's
memories and the photograph that fell out of Lily's letter to Sirius,
along with the letter itself (never mind the improbablities attached
to that letter) give us our only view of James. That is, of course, no
fault of Snape's; he has no good memories of James to include, even if
they were relevant to his purpose. Maybe it's JKR's. She could, at
least, have had James's friends talk about him in something other than
general terms. And it would be nice to know what is meant by "defied
Voldemort three times." Does joining the Order count as one of those
times? That seems like a defiance to me.

Jack-A-Roe: 
> Voldemort's viewpoint is subjective and tells us that James is 
foolish and while the reader may agree or disagree they aren't really
given the chance. 

Carol:
Sure we are. You and I are disagreeing on the matter right now. We can
agree with Voldemort or not. What *isn't* subjective or distorted is
the depiction of the events themselves. Just as in the Pensieve
visits, we're shown what really happened. And just as we can
distinguish between Harry's interpretation of the Pensieve memories
and the words and actions of the characters in those memories, along
with descriptions of the setting, etc., we can distinguish between
Voldemort's thoughts and interpretations and what is actually happening.

Jack-A-roe:
Voldemort surprises them in their safe house, which is protected by
one of their best friends, and kills James before he can defend himself. 

Carol:
"Fictional fact," right?

Jack-A-Roe:
James is made to look foolish because startled he goes to see what the
problem is, and as I mentioned probably realized that he didn't have
his wand a second too late (assuming that the house is as small as I
think). 

Carol responds:
I don't see the relevance of the size of the house though I believe
that it's referred to at some point as a cottage. But "made to look
foolish" is Voldemort's interpretation, and any reader can decide for
him- or herself whether Voldemort is right. You think it wasn't
foolish; I disagree. We both know that we're interpreting, agreeing or
disagreeing with Voldemort. (Not that it matters in terms of James's
survival; he would have died whether he had his wand or not.)

Jack-A-Roe:

If I put myself in that position, I know my first thought would be to
see what is going on (it is Halloween) before going and getting my
Browning. <snip>

Carol:
It took me a moment to understand that a Browning is a gun. I was
wondering why you needed a book of poetry, which is what "Browning"
means to me! (Was it Robert or EBB? ;-) ) Joking aside, James is in no
position to "see what's going on" before picking up his wand. He
should have it with him at all times, Fidelius Charm or no Fidelius Charm.


> Jack-A-Roe:
> I was highly disappointed that James didn't get to fight with 
Voldemort because it would have made his death seem that much more
heroic. 

Carol responds:

So was I. That was the main point of my post, and Mike's, as well.

Jack-A-Roe:
> 
> I think part of the problem that people have with James is how he
was presented. It's like a movie that start's with the ending. We are
told by everyone what a great guy James is, etc., etc. Then we only 
get to see the parts that take away his sainthood. We never get to 
see the parts that build him up (other than saving a snooping Snape)
so we are left feeling down on him. Although, almost all of the 
negative thoughts of James come from Snape. 

Carol responds:
I actually agree with what you're saying here except for one detail.
The "negative thoughts" that come from Snape--the accusations of
arrogance and so forth--are backed up by the objective evidence of the
Pensieve memories. (Snape has no good memories of James to include
even if he had a reason to do so.) All we have is the word of the
other characters, none of them objective, that James was wonderful.
(Well, McGonagall views him as a talented troublemaker.) But we barely
glimpse that admirable James. JKR has not allowed us inside the
memories of anyone who would see him in a more favorable light and
present objective evidence that (as Mike mentions) James deserved to
be made Head Boy or that he did anything for the Order. We could at
least have learned in what way the Potters and the Longbottoms defied
Voldemort three times. Going into hiding certainly wasn't one of them
(though it *was* the right thing to do, for Harry's sake).

 Jack-A-Roe:
> When it comes down to it, James defied Voldemort three times as we
are told in the prophecy. 

Carol:
But we're not told how. And Lily and the Longottoms also defied
Voldemort three times. I'd say that Gideon and Fabian Prewett defied
him twice, the second time fatally. And they weren't alone. We just
have to take James's defiance on faith. And that, too, is
disappointing. As I said, I wanted him to redeem himself, to be
*shown* as something other than an arrogant bully. I wanted to have a
reason to forgive him or even like him. And the vague "defying
Voldemort three times" doesn't do that for me.

Jack-A-roe:
James rescued Snape (although he was probably also trying to protect
Lupin/Sirius from the ramifications. 


Carol responds:
Exactly. And we never learn whether he was himself involved, as Snape
thought, so he may really have gotten cold feet, as Snape said. And
since we know that, as an Animagus, he was in no danger from the
werewolf, the heroism of the act is rather dimmed. (How could he
transform without Sevrus seeing him? Did he Stupefy or Obliviate him?)
And the heroism of the act is further dimmed by the fact that it
occurred *before* the SWM and does not signify a more mature
perspective on James's part. (What is DD *doing* making this boy Head
Boy? The change must have occurred in his sixth year, which we don't
get to see.)

Jack-A-Roe:
> Yet when the situation is turned around, Snape only tries to protect
Lily and it's Dumbledore who tells him that he is disgusting. 

Carol:
Interesting comparison, although I'm not quite sure that I see your
point in making it. And not one of my favoorite Dumbledore moments.
Snape does, however, beg DD to protect them all. He's not in a
position to rescue Lily himself, but he believes that Dumbledore can,
and he shows himself willing to do "anything" to bring that about. and
he continues to do it so that Lily won't have died in vain after DD's
attempts to protect her fail. (Not DD's fault, but I don't want to
talk about the Secret Keeper change at this point.)

Jack-A-Roe:
James did those things before he died (age 21?).

Carol:
Yes, twenty-one. the birth and death dates are given in DH. Lily,
James, Remus, and Severus were all twenty-one at the time. Peter and
Sirius would have been either twenty-one or twenty-two, depending on
whether they had birthdays in September/October or in some other
month. BTW, James was sixteen, not fifteen, during SWM (he was born in
March), but JKR either hadn't yet assigned him a birth month or forget
to do the math in OoP.

Jack-A-Roe:
> Imagine what else he could have done if he had lived.

Carol responds:
But that's the point. We don't get to see him doing anything else. The
Animagus form and the Marauders Map are the height of his career.
After that, he's an Order member (whom we never see fighting) and a
dad who doesn't need to work because his parents left him gold--and
can't work in any case because he and his family have to go into
hiding. Imagination is all we have; we don't get anything solid on his
accomplishments or his character. (Imagine what Severus Snape could
have done if he'd been recruited by the MoM instead of the DEs. But we
don't get that, either, alas!)

Jack-A-Roe: 
> I agree that the scene in Godric's Hollow was well done and the
question of trust does puzzle me. Is JKR saying you should only trust
someone if you have proof. That seems to go against the very nature of
the term trust.

Carol:
Exactly. All that talk in HBP about Dumbledore's "foolish" trust in
snape and his tendency to give second chances, and it turns out that
his trust was justified and the second chances he gives are few and
far between. (Hagrid, Snape, perhaps Trelawney?). was James right or
wrong to trust Wormtail? (Certainly, he was wrong to listen to
Sirius's brilliant suggestion to change Secret Keepers, but that's not
quite the same thing.

Does Harry need proof to trust Hermione and Ron? He certainly seems to
be searching for proof ("the truth") about Dumbledore in DH. And he
does come around to trusting Neville and the DA with part of the truth
about his mission.

And yet false trust, trusting the wrong person, led to James's and
Lily's deaths. It's just confusing.

Carol, not sure whether to blame the limited point of view or JKR's
forgetfulness




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Wed May 14 05:50:19 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 05:50:19 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
In-Reply-To: <g0d94i+ejhb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0duir+gqdq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182892

houyhnhnm wrote:
<snip summary>
> 
> Chapter 20 Questions
> 
> 1.  Is Hermione's intransigence toward Ron justifiable?  Why is she
so unforgiving?

Carol responds:
I'm not sure that it's justifiable, but it's understandable, and at
least this time, she's not attacing him with conjured birds. She was
deeply hurt by what seemed to be his desertion (i don't think that she
realizes what the Horcrux was doing to Ron), and she and Harry have
been through an ordeal together that makes Ron's adventures with the
Snatchers (and his loneliness) seem trivial. She has the high moral
ground here, and I think she has to deal with her righteous
indignation before she can forgive him. She doesn't witness the silver
doe or Ron's rescue of Harry or his destruction of the Horcrux (Harry
has carefully concealed the details from her), so she doesn't share
the common bond of that experience or, IMO, understand the extent of
Ron's heroism. But also, intransigence, or at any rate, obstinacy and
a general unwillingness to forgive, is a Hermioneish trait. We've seen
her take revenge on several people (including Ron, with the birds),
and she forgave him in HBP only because he nearly died from poison. So
even though I understand how she suffered when Ron was gone, I think
that she's only hurting herself with her refusal to forgive. At least,
she eventually comes around thanks to Ron's siding with her (i don't
think I'd label his reasons as "meretricious," but not scrupulously
honest, true!)
> 
> 2.  We finally get an explanation for the sudden appearance of DEs
in Tottenham Court Road-the Taboo.  Was it satisfying?  Did it feel
contrived that H and H continued to use the euphemism after Ron's
defection (saving themselves from the DEs even if they didn't know 
about the Taboo).  Could there have been a Taboo on the name in VWI?

Carol responds:
I can understand Hermione's returning to You-Know-who after the
encounter with the snake and the narrow escape from Voldemort himself,
but it does seem contrived for Harry to say it. (Does he actually do
so? I just remember Ron saying that they've both stopped saying the
name.) As an explanation for why the DEs showed up so quickly in
Tottenham Court Road, it works perfectly. And it certainly provides
the only sensible explanation for why people were and are so afraid of
Voldemort's name. There's no indication in the books themselves that
there was a jinx in VW1, but it makes more sense than a widespread
speak-of-the-devil superstition.
> 
> 3.  Harry quickly shoots down Ron's hope that DD may still be 
watching over them and as quickly shoots down Ron's excuse of young
Dumbledore's behavior.  Is this meant to show Harry's disenchantment
with DD or illustrate his growing maturity?

Carol responds:
I think that he's already had experience with denial regarding
Sirius's death (for which there was no body). He saw DD die, and he
experienced denial as he ran toward Snape, thinking that somehow he
could bring DD back if only he brought the two of them together, but
then he saw the body and attended the funeral, so DD's death became
real to him much more quickly than Sirius's did. Also, of course, he's
feeling resentful, almost cheated or betrayed, because of DD's
apparent lack of helpful information. Ron, in contrast, has just found
the Deluminator an invaluable gift; he has been led back to his
friends, and he's just destroyed a Horcrux thanks to the Sword of
Gryffindor and the silver doe. The only cloud on *his* horizon is
Hermione's moodiness, and he's prepared to tolerate that cheerfully
(especially since he knows that he partially deserves it and she'll
get over it). Anything seems possible in Ron's optimistic frame of
mind, even Dumbledore offering help from beyond the grave. (And in a
way he is, via the portrait and Snape though they can't know it.)
> 
> 4.  Does Harry's emphatic rejection of youth as an excuse for 
behavior hark back to a lingering dissatisfaction with Sirius and
Lupin's excuse for his father?

Carol responds:
Interesting insight! I'll bet that it does. Lupin and Sirius say that
James was just fifteen (actually he was sixteen) and Harry angrily
responds, "I'm fifteen!" And here his response is similar: "Our age!"
(I doubt that he would have accepted Narcissa's "He's just sixteen!"
for Draco's attitude and conduct the previous year, either.) I wonder
whether the excuses he made in sixth year for the Half-Blood Prince,
who turned out to be the eavesdropper and "murderer" Snape, have
anything to do with this intolerance for this unwillingness to excuse
folly in any form on the grounds of youth?
> 
> 5.  Harry tries out his new wand on spiders.  Why spiders again?

Carol:
To get Ron's reaction? Of course, they also recall Crouch!Moody in GoF
illustrating the Unforgiveables on spiders. Maybe JKR suffers from
arachnophobia? <g>
> 
> 6.  There has been a good deal of argument over the theme of
insiders and outsiders in HP.  Those who are enmeshed in the "good"
side never seen to have to question their place in the world; those
who are born into "bad" side, either accept or rebel. Where do the
Lovegoods fit in to this scheme?

Carol:
I don't want to oversimplify since simply being a Gryffindor doesn't
put Romilda Vane or Cormac McLaggen on Harry's side (or even, in
Cormac's case, on his Quidditch team). And whatever may be the case
with her father, whose love for his daughter is stronger than his
opposition to Voldemort, Luna is indisputably on the good side, the
first Ravenclaw to declare loyalty to Harry and belief in his story
and Dumbledore's. (Cedric Diggory was also indisputably a good guy,
without ever having to make any declaration of loyalty to Harry or
DD.) Xeno Lovegood is chiefly notable for his eccentricity (his
"dapper" appearance at the wedding was relative to his unkempt
appearance at home--Auntie Muriel compared his yellow robes to an
omelet). He seems really to consider belief in the unbelievable to be
a kind of virtue. Luna accepts his beliefs unquestioningly, but she
also accepts Harry's story before her father prints it in the
Quibbler, a sign that she's starting to think on her own. I think that
Luna represents intuition and eccentric genius (I certainly never
expected her to be a gifted painter). She doesn't accept the "good"
side because she's rebelling against anything or because she's come to
some reasoned conclusion. She just seems to know intuitively that
Harry is speaking the truth in OoP, and she also considers Harry and
his friends to be her friends when she's never had friends before.
touching, at least to me. And Xenophilius--lover of the strange--loves
his daughter most of all.
> 
> 7.  Why does Ron not know where to find the Lovegoods' house when he
has grown up in the same neighborhood?

Carol:
It's not quite the same neighborhood. The Weasleys' view is blocked
not only by their hedge and orchard but by, IIRC, at least one row of
hills. However, Ron rightly expects to know it when he sees it because
it will stand out from everything else. Also, of course, the Weasley
kids never went to school in Ottery St. Catchpole. I doubt that Luna
did, either. So chances are that their paths didn't cross very often.
(Mr. Weasley mentions in passing that the Lovegoods couldn't get
tickets to the QWC; that's our first hint that the families have any
contact at all with each other.)
> 
> 8.  Did the physical description of the house strike you in any 
particular way? Is the fact that it looks like a black rook
significant? (Black is the side the Trio took in "Through the
Trapdoor" in Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. Hermione 
replaced the rook, in fact.)

Carol responds:
Interesting that she wouldn't catch Ron's rook reference, then! I just
thought that it was a nod to Ron's chess-playing skills, which are of
no use whatever in the Horcrux hunt. What popped into my mind was the
 black chimney from the disused mill that stands like an ominous
warning finger over the town that Snape lives in (Spinner's End is, of
course, the name of the street, not the town).
> 
> 9.  Xenophilia, literally love of the stranger, is the Greek word
for hospitality.  Was Xenophilius Lovegood's markedly inhospitable 
behavior intentionally ironic?  Is he a lover of strangers or merely 
a lover of the strange?

Carol:
Definitely a lover of the strange, as the shape of the house, the
supposed Crumple-Horned Snorkack horn, and his absurd idea of Rowena
Ravenclaw's diadem all demonstrate. 
> 
> 10. The Lovegoods are the only Ravenclaw family into whose home we
are admitted.  Do they typify Ravenclaw?

Carol:
I seriously doubt it seince even the Ravenclaws consider Luna Loony
and she doesn't have any friends in that House. The other Ravenclaws
that we meet, including Cho and her friend Marietta, Padma Patil,
Anthony Goldstein, Michael Corner, Roger Davies, and Terry Boot, all
seem much more normal. Only a few of them seem exceptionally
intelligent and noe seems at all eccentric. (They do seem, for the
most part, interested in doing well on their OWLs, however.)
> 
> 11. The odd-looking contraption on the bust of Rowena Ravenclaw
turns out to be a counterfeit Lost Diadem, but that is not revealed
until a later chapter.  What did you think it was when you first read
about it?

Carol:
I immediately thought that the real diadem was the tiara in the RoR,
which I had suspected since HBP was the Ravenclaw Horcrux. (There's a
later reference to it in "Shell Cottage," as well, in connection with
the goblin-made tiara, but naturally, Harry doesn't catch it.)
> 
> 11. What did you think of the non-appearance of Luna?

Carol:
At first, I thought that it was perfectly logical for Luna to be
gathering Gulping Plimpies for soup. But when she didn't return and
Xenophilius kept glancing out the window, I thought that something
suspicious was happening.
> 
> 12. Any question you want to add.

Carol responds:
I wondered who the "delightful young wizard" who sold Xeno the
supposed Crumple-Horned Snorkack horn was. At first, I thought that he
must have gone to school with Luna (he could be as much as five years
older, with only one year of overlap at Hogwarts, rather than being in
her year or Harry's), but then I realized that anyone who had read the
Quibbler would know about Xeno's obsession with Crumple-Horned
Snorkacks. the wizard *could* just be an unscrupulous young
businessman wanting to take advantage of Xeno's gullibility, but I
think it must have been a Death Eater or other supporter of
Voldermort. The similarity to Quirrell selling Hagrid the dragon's egg
is just too marked to ignore, and an Erumpent horn is so dangerous
that the young man must have wanted Xeno dead. Or he could have been
under the Imperius Curse, doing the bidding of someone (voldemort or a
DE) whowanted Xeno silenced permanently. I doubt that it was Draco or
anyone young enough to still be in school, which also lets out Theo
Nott (who I hope isn't a DE in any case), and though I wouldn't put it
past Macnair, he's not all that young (about forty, I think) and it's
more than a stretch to call him "delightful." Thoughts as to the
identity of this young wizard and whether he was a DE or Imperiused,
anyone? Might he have been a Ravenclaw Death Eater? Or is he just a
plot device not worth exploring?

Carol, thanking hounynnhymn--er, houyhnhnm--I had to resort to cutting
and pasting to get it right!--for her interesting summary and
enjoyable questions




From celizwh at intergate.com  Wed May 14 16:44:49 2008
From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 16:44:49 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
In-Reply-To: <g0duir+gqdq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0f4u1+ai4t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182893

Carol:

> He seems really to consider belief in the 
> unbelievable to be a kind of virtue. Luna 
> accepts his beliefs unquestioningly, but she 
> also accepts Harry's story before her father 
> prints it in the Quibbler, a sign that she's 
> starting to think on her own. I think that Luna 
> represents intuition and eccentric genius (I 
> certainly never expected her to be a gifted 
> painter). She doesn't accept the "good" side 
> because she's rebelling against anything or 
> because she's come to some reasoned conclusion.


houyhnhnm:

That's kind of what I was getting at.  I didn't 
put it very well.

Carol: 

> What popped into my mind was the black chimney from 
> the disused mill that stands like an ominous warning 
> finger over the town that Snape lives in 

houyhnhnm:

Maybe because you have a literary background?  I suppose 
it did strike an ominous note with me, too, but I didn't 
connect it to the factory smokestack.




From lfreeman at mbc.edu  Wed May 14 18:06:51 2008
From: lfreeman at mbc.edu (lmf3b)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 18:06:51 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0d40j+8e12@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0f9nr+5a29@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182894

I've always assumed Dumbledore would have told both the Longbottoms and 
the Potters the gist, if not the exact words of the prophecy, since 
both boys had to be protected until Voldemort made his "choice." The 
broom-shed conversation would still be accurate; the Potters are dead 
and sadly, the Longbottoms can't be said to truly "know" anything much 
anymore.

We still don't know where Neville was that Halloween night. The 
Longbottoms did not seem to have gone into hiding with their child like 
the Potters did, since Bella tracked them down so easily after Voldy 
fell and there's no indication he was with them then (else Bella would 
probably have tortured the baby instead of the parents.) I've wondered 
if they didn't send Neville off into hiding with Gran when they learned 
of the prophecy, with Frank or Alice as the Secret-keeper for their 
location. As formidable as Augusta turned out in her old age, she would 
probably have been a pretty powerful protectress when younger.

-lmf3b-




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Wed May 14 18:33:11 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 18:33:11 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
In-Reply-To: <g0f4u1+ai4t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0fb97+ehdp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182895

Carol earlier: 
> 
> > What popped into my mind was the black chimney from the disused
mill that stands like an ominous warning finger over the town that
Snape lives in 
> 
> houyhnhnm:
> 
> Maybe because you have a literary background?  I suppose it did
strike an ominous note with me, too, but I didn't connect it to the
factory smokestack.

Carol responds:
I'm sure that you're right about my literary background causing me to
notice imagery and to see similarities between houses and chimneys
that other readers might not notice, but houses, unlike factory
chimneys, don't normally "[rise] vertically against the sky" or appear
as "a great black cylinder with a ghostly moon hanging behind it in
the afternoon sky" (DH Am. ed. 397). That ghostly moon in the middle
of the day is spooky, too. Imagine seeing it at night, as Bellatrix
and Narcissa saw the factory chimney, which "rear[s] up, shadowy and
ominous" against the midnight sky and, a few pages later, "seem[s] to
hover like a giant admonitory finger" (HBP Am. ed. 19).

The warning finger (along with the fog!) reminds me of "Fog on tthe
Barrow Downs," the Barrow Wight chapter in FOTR: "In the midst of it
there stood a single stone standing tall under the sun above . . . .
It was shapeless and yet significant, like a landmark or a guarding
finger, or more like a warning." At any rate, when I see tall, dark
objects in fiction, whether they're towers or chimneys or even the
Lovegoods' house, especially coupled with darkness or ghostly moons or
any other ominous imagery, I think of that warning finger in LOTR and
sense danger coming. The "admonitory finger" image is explicit in
"Spinner's End" (whether it's a deliberate allusion to LOTR or
something out of the collective unconscious, I don't know). The image
of the "rooklike" house gave me that same feeling of foreboding. It
clearly didn't affect the characters in the same way, but the Hobbits
didn't sense danger, either. They had lunch under the standing stone
and fell asleep! (Their ponies, however, had more sense and ran away.)

BTW, did anyone notice that Xeno Lovegood has one eye that turns in
toward his nose, which reminded me of the Gaunt children, Morfin and
Merope, with their eyes looking outward? Are Xeno's eyes, one normal
and one presumably half-blind, any indication of his character--his
oddness or his inability to see the world as normal wizards do? 
(Trelawney's far-sightedness is both comic and symbolic. She can't see
the mundane world clearly, but sometimes she really does see with "the
Inner Eye," even if she doesn't interpret what she sees correctly.
Would Xeno in normal circumstances be a comic character like
Trelawney, whereas in these few chapters, he's both pitiable and
treacherous?) I don't like the idea of physical defects, such as eyes
that turn inward or outward, being either comic traits or indications
of a weak or bad character. In any case, it seems to me that the
wizards could use a good Muggle ophthalmologist! 

Carol, whose sense of impending danger was somewhat muted by the fact
that it was the *Lovegoods'* house but alerted again by Xeno's odd
behavior





From jkoney65 at yahoo.com  Thu May 15 00:09:05 2008
From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 00:09:05 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0daqi+e1de@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0fuv1+i6g2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182896

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
> Carol responds:
> True, it wasn't *just* lack of time though tiem was limited. Snape
> could only select those memories that served his purpose, which was 
to
> establish his own trustworthiness so that he could convery the 
message
> that would send Harry to sacrifice himself. 


Jack-A-Roe:
Thank you. Originally I was just pointing out that Snape's memories 
were selected to what best "served his purpose."

Carol:
He does not come across as
> wholly innocent in those memories (though I do think he comes across
> as sympathetic and Harry empathizes with him for a number of 
reasons);
> memories that showed him in a wholly bad light would defeat his
> purpose. He *does* show himself as not only a Death Eater but the
> eavesdropper who had told LV the Prophecy, and what, in Harry's 
eyes,
> could be worse than that?

Jack-A-Roe:
While the pensieve shows the actual scene, you are right in that he 
chose memories that were sympathetic to his actions because they 
served his purpose.


> 
> If you mean that we never get James's side of the story, we see him
> entirely objectively in SWM (the only interpretations are Harry's; 
the
> scene is presented as it happened--and it happened *after* James's
> rescue of Severus from werewolf!Remus--which was motivated, as you
> say, more by a desire to keep his friends out of trouble than to 
save
> Severus's life.
> 
> We don't have James's or Lily's memories. We never get to see 
Remus's
> or Sirius's before they die. <snip>


Jack-A-Roe:
I find myself agreeing again that the SWM is Snape's memory and the 
problem is that we don't get to see James from another viewpoint. 
That was the point I was originally making (we really only see 
memories from Snape, who as you said doesn't have any/many good 
memories of James) although it appears I didn't present it well 
enough.


> Jack-A-roe:
> Voldemort surprises them in their safe house, which is protected by
> one of their best friends, and kills James before he can defend 
himself. 
> 
> Carol:
> "Fictional fact," right?

Jack-A-Roe:
Sorry but I'm not sure what you mean by fictional fact.


<snip> 
> Carol responds:
> I don't see the relevance of the size of the house though I believe
> that it's referred to at some point as a cottage. 

Jack-A-Roe:
The size of the house is only important to me because it helps 
analyze what James did. We are told he "came sprinting into the 
hall." Sprinting conjures up the image of someone who came a great 
distance to me. If it was a great distance he should have gone back 
for his wand the moment he realized he didn't have it. Whereas if it 
was only a few steps he would be in the hall about the time he 
realized he didn't have his wand. As I said it probably only means 
something to me (I've probably watched to much CSI) because I want to 
know why James came into the hall unarmed. The first way doesn't make 
any sense as I look at it. The second way makes sense to me, even if 
it is still a sad ending.


> 
 
> Carol:
> But we're not told how. And Lily and the Longottoms also defied
> Voldemort three times. I'd say that Gideon and Fabian Prewett defied
> him twice, the second time fatally. And they weren't alone. We just
> have to take James's defiance on faith. And that, too, is
> disappointing. As I said, I wanted him to redeem himself, to be
> *shown* as something other than an arrogant bully. I wanted to have 
a
> reason to forgive him or even like him. And the vague "defying
> Voldemort three times" doesn't do that for me.
> 

Jack-A-Roe:
So it seems to me that our basic difference is that in order for 
James to be redeemed you needed to see it happen while I accept the 
general theme presented to us early in the series that James was a 
good guy, who once his ego was deflated turned out fine. 


> 


> Jack-A-Roe:
> > Yet when the situation is turned around, Snape only tries to 
protect
> Lily and it's Dumbledore who tells him that he is disgusting. 
> 
> Carol:
> Interesting comparison, although I'm not quite sure that I see your
> point in making it. And not one of my favoorite Dumbledore moments.
> Snape does, however, beg DD to protect them all. He's not in a
> position to rescue Lily himself, but he believes that Dumbledore 
can,
> and he shows himself willing to do "anything" to bring that about. 
and
> he continues to do it so that Lily won't have died in vain after 
DD's
> attempts to protect her fail. (Not DD's fault, but I don't want to
> talk about the Secret Keeper change at this point.)


Jack-A-Roe:
My point was that James saved everyone while Snape only wanted to 
save Lily. Even after he had been admonished by Dumbledore he 
says "Keep her -- them -- safe." His first instinct was still only 
her, then realizing that wasn't the best way to convince Dumbledore 
he changed it to them.


Jack-A-Roe, who loves reading Carol's view of things even if we don't 
totally agree.






From kersberg at chello.nl  Wed May 14 15:59:32 2008
From: kersberg at chello.nl (kamion53)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 15:59:32 -0000
Subject: Redemption - who needed it? (was: DidHarry notice?)
In-Reply-To: <g0clio+fe29@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0f294+crik@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182897

> Mike:
> Curiously, in DH, Voldemort doesn't seem to be aware
> that Harry is visiting his mind any more. That or he
> doesn't care, which I find hard to believe. Why did
> he stop the Occlumency that DD said he was employing
> throughout HBP?


Kamion:
I don't think Harry is actually visiting Voldemort's mind
in Deathy Hallow, it's Voldemort who is not aware that
he is invading Harry's mind.

In OotP he is fully exploring the limits of exploring
Harry's mind till at the Ministry he reaches that limit
and is seriously burning his own mind by Harry's thought
of LOVE. He then closes the backdoor from sneaking in. But
as he grows in power his mind and emotions get so fierce
that he starts leaking. He is as a light that cannot see
the shadows it casts.

He neither seems to understand that it is his own sliver
of soul that is resonating with his emotions and rages.
Nagini at the same time must suffer too intense impressions
and experience the things Voldemort is doing in messages it
can understand. Probable in images of smell, taste and heat,
as a serpent is very limited in eyesight and hearing.

If Voldemort ever notice anything odd to his snake he must
have blamed it on his capacity to control animals, if he
ever wondered why he is so well connected with Harry he must
blame it on his strong gift of Legilemency and Occlumency,
not on the Horcrux.

For someone who went so deep into Dark Arts and Black Magic
aa he did, Voldemort is pretty ignorant of such a thing as
side effects. Not just ignorant of the wisdom in elf tales
and childrens stories but also of the risks and by effects
most likely well studied and described by those who wrote
down the lore of Horcruxes. He probably slammed down the
tome as soon as he understood the formula and ignored to
read the other ongoing 75 odd chapters.

Kamion



From bgrugin at yahoo.com  Thu May 15 03:04:48 2008
From: bgrugin at yahoo.com (bgrugin)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 03:04:48 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
In-Reply-To: <g0duir+gqdq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0g98g+2olc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182898



> > 7.  Why does Ron not know where to find the Lovegoods' house when he
> has grown up in the same neighborhood?
> 
> Carol:
> It's not quite the same neighborhood. The Weasleys' view is blocked
> not only by their hedge and orchard but by, IIRC, at least one row of
> hills. However, Ron rightly expects to know it when he sees it because
> it will stand out from everything else. Also, of course, the Weasley
> kids never went to school in Ottery St. Catchpole. I doubt that Luna
> did, either. So chances are that their paths didn't cross very often.
> (Mr. Weasley mentions in passing that the Lovegoods couldn't get
> tickets to the QWC; that's our first hint that the families have any
> contact at all with each other.)


MusicalBetsy here:
Actually, in GOF, when Amos Diggory asks if there's anyone else
meeting them at the portkey, Mr. Weasley states that the Lovegoods
have already been there for a week.  I'm in the middle of rereading
GOF, so it was nice to know a fact for once!  Of course, at the time,
the Lovegoods didn't seem important, as we hadn't met Luna yet, so
that fact really stuck out in my mind this time around (it was
something about the cheaper your seats were, the earlier you had to
arrive).




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Thu May 15 03:09:32 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 03:09:32 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0a3qa+i5lj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0g9hc+5l5n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182899

> Mike:
> I see your point and I agree. Voldemort will lie whenever it suits 
> him and possibly even when the truth would be more to his advantage, 
> being the contrarian that he is. 
> 
> But there is more at stake here than whether Voldemort is/was lying. 
> As Carol correctly pointed out, this was the chance for James to 
> redeem himself from the bad press he'd gotten since PoA. It wasn't 
> just whether Voldemort lied about James's "courageous fight", it was 
> whether James was more than the trusting fool.

Pippin:
We should have already learned, from Harry's adventures, that the
hero's one true accomplishment is his choice to face the enemy against
the odds.  All the rest he owes to providence. 

This is our final exam, our chance to find out if we've internalized
what we've been told. Are we ready to think the same of James' bravery
knowing how easily he was beaten? I guess for some of us the answer is
'no'. <g> But in that case, IMO, JKR would like us to see that we
weren't really admiring heroism. We were only admiring luck. James'
luck ran out that night, but IMO that did not make him less valiant.

We should also know better by DH than to think we can take someone's
choices for granted because that someone is a Gryffindor; wasn't that
part of James's mistake?

Peter Pettigrew was a Gryffindor too. 

As to whether James was a talented fighter or not, I think there is
indirect evidence that he was. Voldemort surely did not linger at the
window out of sentiment. He waited until James had put down his wand,
and did not advertise the fact. If he feared  having it look as if
he'd only beaten James because he'd caught him with his wand down,
then James must have been formidable indeed.

Mike:
 It was whether James  had really graduated from that brash, bullying
young man into a more  responsible adult.

Pippin:
But that's just backwards, IMO.  No one in canon has to be a
responsible adult to be a hero -- Harry was a hero in his own right at
the age of eleven.  You have to be a responsible adult to be a kind
and loving father, to find it more important and more rewarding  to
sit on the sofa and play with your child than to slay a legion of
dragons or to save the world from Voldemort. Yes, we need heroes to
fight the Voldemorts of this world, but canon seems to imply there
might be fewer  Voldemorts if we valued men less for their heroic
prowess and more for their love and dedication to fathering.


Mike:
> First, a correction, you had quoted me and not Shelley in this post. 
> Geez, first James gets credit then Shelley gets credit for my words. 
> Hey, at least I'm being quoted by real people now. ;-)
> 
> To your point; Pippin, I would think you would most appreciate the 
> symbology of this scene. I've always found your analogies and 
> allegories to be most insightful. So maybe I should ask you, am I
all  wet when it comes to my reading? Is my desire for a meaningful 
> progression from James misguided?

Pippin:
Sorry for the misquote  --  And thanks for the compliments! 
I don't think your desire for a meaningful progression is misguided,
but  I think we're supposed to look at *all* the characters to see a
meaningful progression. It's our desire to see progress demonstrated
in our particular favorites that's frustrated. 

Instead of watching each character take each step from irresponsible
student to caring adult (or fail to take it), we see each step
examined through a different character. 

We don't see how James grows out of hexing people for fun,
but we see how Harry does -- nothing dramatic, no realization that
he'd even done it. He just stopped as he developed a taste for more
mature activities, such as snogging Ginny and took on a   man's job
(in the colloquial sense) of hunting for horcruxes. 

We don't see James getting a handle on his thrill-seeking behavior,
but we watch Sirius struggle with it in OOP. We don't see James trying
to make the transition from Order member to family man, but we see
Lupin in DH. And we don't see Lupin enjoying life with his wife and
son, but we do see James. James goes from a braggart whose idea of
bravery is brandishing an imaginary sword at a non-existent foe to
someone who faced a deadly enemy bare-handed and unflinching. 

Besides which, if he'd had a chance to fight and still failed,
wouldn't we see  inferior magical skills rather than betrayal as the
cause of his death?  Perhaps that is why people are so reluctant to
abandon the idea of James falling with his wand in hand -- it's too
uncomfortable to think that his trust in his friends betrayed him. 

But I wouldn't say that it was trust that betrayed him, it was failing
to see that he had grown and Peter had not. 
  

IMO, the epic is not one of sin and redemption but of moral and
emotional growth, from Voldemort and his fellow baby-heads, who never
get the better of their aggressive impulses and are eventually doomed
by them, to Harry who learns the full power of love at Dobby's grave,
and thus  can choose to offer a second chance to the man who killed
his parents even after years of seeking   revenge on him,  and  who
can choose to return good for evil in giving honor to the memory of a
man who never honored him in life.


Mike: 
> Furthermore, if there is even a possibility that James thought this 
> could be a prank by one of his friends, doesn't that prove that
these  are still a bunch of boys playing in a man's world? 


Pippin:
Hmmm, I can't speak from personal experience, but judging from my
father's stories, men at war play as hard as they fight. 
 
> 
> > Pippin:
> > I think JKR knew exactly what she was doing in DH, foreshadowed
> > it with the scene from PS/SS, and always intended to show James
> > facing Voldemort without his wand. Isn't that braver than facing
> > him with one?
> 
> Mike:
> Braver, not in my way of thinking. Facing Voldemort, knowing he is 
> more powerful than you and that you are going to die is bravery. 
> Facing him without your wand, is resignation to your fate. Not 
> bringing your wand in the first place is foolish, just as Voldemort 
> noticed. 

Pippin:
Foolish? Or just tired and accident prone? Dumbledore made the same
kind of mistake on the Tower -- he  froze Harry instead of dealing
with Draco first. I'm sure he realized it was a mistake as soon as
he'd done it, but it was too late by then. James always had fast
physical reflexes, but that means the body moves before the brain has
finished analyzing the situation, not good in this case. James had
also spent days on end with an active, housebound toddler -- I'm
worn out just thinking about that. No wonder he was tired!   

I'd bet he   didn't realize he'd left his wand on the sofa till he was
halfway to the hall --  and then what? Go back? Whatever was coming,
it was already in the house, and moving towards him; if he turned back
for the wand, then it would meet Lily and Harry first. 


Pippin




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Thu May 15 05:18:07 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 05:18:07 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0fuv1+i6g2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0gh2f+nf2q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182900


> > Carol:
> > "Fictional fact," right?
> 
> Jack-A-Roe:
> Sorry but I'm not sure what you mean by fictional fact. <snip>

Carol again:
Sorry to be unclear. Apparently, I've spent too much time reading the
transcripts of the JKR vs. RDR trial, where that term is used rather
frequently. What I meant by it in this instance was that the action or
event you mentioned was a "fact" in the the sense that we're supposed
to take it as really happening as opposed to being Voldemort's
interpretation. The part about James being too trusting, in contrast,
is Voldemort's interpretation of the "fictional fact," which the
reader, even in passing and even more so on a rereading, is free to
accept or reject.

> Jack-A-Roe:
> So it seems to me that our basic difference is that in order for 
James to be redeemed you needed to see it happen while I accept the 
general theme presented to us early in the series that James was a 
good guy, who once his ego was deflated turned out fine. 

Carol responds:
Yes, I think that sums it up. For me, and I realize that you don't
agree, SWM left a very unfavorable impression of James (and Sirius)
which not only supported the view that Snape had always held of James
but was actually worse than he indicated. And Sirius's and Lupin's
fond memories of "fifteen"-year-old James rumpling his hair and so
forth did nothing to justify his behavior. I wanted to *see* him
transform into the brave and noble Order member that everyone
remembered, and I had hoped, along with other posters in this group,
that rescuing Severus from the transformed Remus was the first step
toward that developing maturity. That didn't happen. And I had also
hoped to actually *see* him defying Voldemort a fourth and fatal time.
That didn't happen, either. So, to me, he remains an undeveloped
character whose reformation is unconvincing.

I wonder if the James in JKR's head is a good guy and she forgot that
we need evidence on the page to have anything like her view of the
characters. (A lot of us don't agree with her view of Lily, either.)

> 
> Jack-A-Roe, who loves reading Carol's view of things even if we
don't totally agree

Carol:
Thank you very much.

Carol, who still thinks that a Browning is one of a pair of Victorian
married poets ;-)





From s_ings at yahoo.com  Thu May 15 15:50:32 2008
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 15:50:32 -0000
Subject: Convention Alley 2008 Announces Guest Speakers
Message-ID: <g0hm48+76h3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182902

Convention Alley 2008 is delighted to announce its guest speakers for 
this year's event!

John Granger will be presenting "Unlocking Deathly Hallows: Five Keys 
for a Greater Appreciation of the Last Harry Potter Novel" on 
Saturday evening. Mr. Granger is the author of a number of books 
based on the popular Harry Potter series, some of which are used in 
classrooms across the continent. He has also been a featured speaker 
at numerous Harry Potter conferences. 

On Friday evening, Dr. Karen J. Kebarle will offer her keynote 
presentation: "If Rowling says Dumbledore is Gay, is he Gay?: In 
other words, what do we do with Rowling's interpretations of her own 
books?" Dr. Kebarle is presently writing a book called "Is Dumbledore 
Gay?". Karen has a Ph.D. in English, has taught on the college and 
university level and has been a presenter at three previous Harry 
Potter conferences.

We invite you to join us for what are going to be some very 
interesting discussions at Convention Alley 2008. Remember that 
registration for the event includes both keynote presentations as 
well the regularly scheduled programming and all meals. We look 
forward to seeing you next month!

Sheryll Townsend
For the Convention Alley Planning Committee
http://www.conventionalley2008.org/




From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Thu May 15 16:06:13 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 16:06:13 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0g9hc+5l5n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0hn1l+tnte@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182903


Montavillla47:
To begin with, Pippin.  I thoroughly enjoyed your post and, as usual,
you make sense out of a storyline that made very little sense to me.
Thank you for the insight.  I just wish it didn't take someone 
explaining to me the moral storyline of a children's book!


> Pippin:
> We don't see how James grows out of hexing people for fun,
> but we see how Harry does -- nothing dramatic, no realization that
> he'd even done it. He just stopped as he developed a taste for more
> mature activities, such as snogging Ginny and took on a   man's job
> (in the colloquial sense) of hunting for horcruxes. 

Montavilla47:
Here I have a slight nit to pick.  Harry didn't just grow out of hexing
people.  He had a big dramatic fight with Draco in which Draco 
almost bled to death in front of him.  Then he had several weeks of 
detention--which were only interrupted by Professor Snape killing
Professor Dumbledore.

And hexing people proved to be a handy skill in DH, where Harry
hexes people right and left in the Ministry, the bank, and, notably,
in Ravenclaw Tower.

Pippin:
> We don't see James getting a handle on his thrill-seeking behavior,
> but we watch Sirius struggle with it in OOP. We don't see James trying
> to make the transition from Order member to family man, but we see
> Lupin in DH. And we don't see Lupin enjoying life with his wife and
> son, but we do see James. James goes from a braggart whose idea of
> bravery is brandishing an imaginary sword at a non-existent foe to
> someone who faced a deadly enemy bare-handed and unflinching. 

Montavilla47:
Maybe I'm dense, but that doesn't seem like such a big change to me.
The transition that people are missing are James going from "arrogant
toerag" (which is all that we see of him in the memories) to someone
Lily Evans (protector of the weak and arbitor of all things socially
acceptable) would enjoy dating.  And someone Dumbledore chose
to make Head Boy.

Either James made that transition between the end of the fifth year,
when he was gleefully dangling Snape upside down, or he *didn't*
substantially change and Lily started dating him just because her
hermones overtook her good sense--and Dumbledore gave him the 
Head Boy position because he---well, maybe DD's hormones 
overtook his good sense.  Or maybe it just didn't matter what 
the Gryffindors did to the Slytherins because boys will be boys 
the Snakes are all future Death Eaters anyway.

I have no beef myself with the wandless James at the end.  The
thing that blows me away is the Marauders targeting Snape
after they almost killed him.  (Something Harry does *not* do
with Draco.)   I think that perhaps with the wand moment, 
people are upset because it's the last chance for the story to 
signal that James was something more than an arrogant toerag.

Frankly, I don't care if he wasn't.   But it's a hell of a joke to
play on those who believed the James/Lily hype.


Pippin:
> IMO, the epic is not one of sin and redemption but of moral and
> emotional growth, from Voldemort and his fellow baby-heads, who never
> get the better of their aggressive impulses and are eventually doomed
> by them, to Harry who learns the full power of love at Dobby's grave,
> and thus  can choose to offer a second chance to the man who killed
> his parents even after years of seeking   revenge on him,  and  who
> can choose to return good for evil in giving honor to the memory of a
> man who never honored him in life.

Montavilla47:
Did you think that offer Harry gave LV was a sincere one?  Because it
didn't come that way to me.

> > Mike:
> > Facing Voldemort, knowing he is 
> > more powerful than you and that you are going to die is bravery. 
> > Facing him without your wand, is resignation to your fate. Not 
> > bringing your wand in the first place is foolish, just as Voldemort 
> > noticed. 
> 
> Pippin:
> Foolish? Or just tired and accident prone? Dumbledore made the same
> kind of mistake on the Tower -- he  froze Harry instead of dealing
> with Draco first. I'm sure he realized it was a mistake as soon as
> he'd done it, but it was too late by then. James always had fast
> physical reflexes, but that means the body moves before the brain has
> finished analyzing the situation, not good in this case. James had
> also spent days on end with an active, housebound toddler -- I'm
> worn out just thinking about that. No wonder he was tired!   

Montavilla47:
Funny, but I never took that Dumbledore thing at face value.  I always
assumed that Harry was seeing it as a mistake, but that Dumbledore
allowed himself to be disarmed because he had always intended to talk
Draco down from the murder, rather than use force.  Of course, that
would mean he'd need to live and retrieve his wand (lest Draco 
become its master).





From captivity at gmail.com  Thu May 15 16:20:35 2008
From: captivity at gmail.com (pea22407)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 16:20:35 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
In-Reply-To: <g0d94i+ejhb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0hnsj+7u12@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182904

Pea from Virginia - First time poster - long time fangirl of HP - I
tried to follow posting rules, let me know if I screwed up.


1. Hermione has not yet resolved her internal feelings towards the
situation.  I felt that her reaction  - while not one I would have
chosen, was thoroughly justifiable given the extreme circumstances
before and during their separation.  
 
2.  The Tabboo felt contrived because there are many more conceivable
ways to ab/use power in regards to a tabboo word or phrase.  

3. It's meant to show harry's disenchantment with DD - Harry has
consistently been emotionally reactive to events in the HPverse.  His
character is notone who often comes to rational conclusions - that's
for Hermy and Ron.

4.  Nail on the head. Harry's "youth/ignorance is no excuse" policy
refers back to his dad's youthful transgressions but it also pulls
forth from his extremely egocentric attitude.  He gives off an aura of
"If I can hack such a tough situation at my young age, then other
people should also behave reasonably."  He seems unfairly judge his
father's impetuous behavior while not considering his and his friends
behavior towards their enemies - the Weasley kids getting into a
quidditch fight, scaring the pants off Dudley, etc.

5.  JKR uses spiders so often as instruments that can be easily
tortured becasue they are a common creepy-crawly bug that most of the
world can identify with as being vermin.  

6.  I think the Lovegoods are the c-c-c-combo breaker of this theme. 
They have no qualms with their place in life, their friends and
acquaintances are limited and public opinion of them is... a mockery.
 Yet they are happy with the life they lead.  I can definitely
identify with Luna - not a lot of friends in my youth, I yearned for
'em, didn't get many -  but it didn't bother me too terribly.  Though
I'm always eager to make new friends, my father was always my best
friend when I was growing up.  I may be putting my face on Luna's
character, but I don't think she's as friend-obsessed as she appears
at times in the novel.  She didn't ask Harry to help her find her
belongings or to post fliers - in fact, she declined his assistance
and was very unaffected by the absence of her personal items. 

7.  Xeno has a daughter. Not a son. Ron didn't really notice girls
until right around the Tri-Wizard tournament, so it makes sense for
him not to be terribly interested in the female daughter of a
neighbor.  And after that, he really did look down on Luna and
probably wasn't too fussed to find out exactly where her house was.

8. Hrmm... I thought they meant "rook" as in bird - I thought the
house looked like a blackbird... there goes my reading comprehension.
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rook_(bird)  I figured that the look of
the bird, combined with the look of thehouse made it seem, in my minds
eye, to be disorderly of architecture, and with roughly hewn
shingles... My imagination runs away with me.

9. Xeno - is a lover of constructs outside of the norm.  More often
ideas than people.  I question JKR's ability to be so inventive with
creating a situation like that.  It seems to be par for the course for
a man in his situation.


10. I believe that the Lovegoods do not typify Ravenclaw especially
when one considers the other Ravenclaw students actions and statements
in comparison to Luna's.

11. A Thinking Cap!
 
11. Definitely suspicious. Luna would have loved to have her friends
assist her with plimpy-catching.
 
12. Why are their two 11s? KIDDING. I want to know why JKR may have
left out so much information about Luna's mother? Does Luna appear to
be the product of her father's tutelage, or does she have traits from
her mother as well? Did her mother's death affect Xeno to the point
where it may have shaken his character? Changed his personality?  What
is left behind of her mother's laboratory and belongings?





From danjerri at madisoncounty.net  Thu May 15 16:48:57 2008
From: danjerri at madisoncounty.net (Jerri/Dan Chase)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 11:48:57 -0500
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
References: <1210769407.3595.53788.m46@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <005701c8b6ab$af4ea990$49ae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>

No: HPFGUIDX 182905

Thanks, houyhnhnm for a great summary and questions.

>Xenophilius raises his eyebrows.
>"Are you referring to the sign of the Deathly Hallows?"

And, finally the first time reader of DH starts to understand what the
title is all about!  I think it is significant that JKR chose to end
this chapter here, and give the reader a chance to pause and think
about the term before rushing on to the next chapter and learning
more, but also being plunged into action.

>Chapter 20 Questions
>
>1.  Is Hermione's intransigence toward Ron justifiable?
>Why is she so unforgiving?

Hermione's tendency to hold grudges is the major part of her
personality that I dislike.  I suppose in part JKR put in in to
contrast with Harry's tendency to be forgiving.

>2.  We finally get an explanation for the sudden appearance of
>DEs in Tottenham Court Road-the Taboo.  Was it satisfying?
>Did it feel contrived that H and H continued to use the euphemism
>after Ron's defection (saving themselves from the DEs even if they
>didn't know about the Taboo).
>Could there have been a Taboo on the name in VWI?

While I find it a reasonable explanation of the Tottenham Court Road 
issue, I have a problem with the "Taboo" as a whole.  Going back to 
the first book, when DD says, in part:  " . . . - for eleven years I 
have been trying to persuade people to call him by his proper name: 
Voldemort." and later he says "fear of the name increases the fear of 
the thing itself" or something like that (lines given to Hermione in 
the medium not to be named).  If there was a Taboo on the name in VWI, 
then it was rational and proper not to use the name.  Even if there 
wasn't a "Taboo" on the name in VWI, if a "Taboo" on a name is 
possible, then there is still a rational reason to avoid saying names 
which one thinks appropriate for a Taboo in the future.  (And if Lord 
V. wanted to find and terrorize people who might be against him, why 
not put Taboo's on other names, like Dumbledore or Harry Potter?)

>4.  Does Harry's emphatic rejection of youth as an excuse for
>behavior hark back to a lingering dissatisfaction with Sirius and
>Lupin's excuse for his father?

I do like Harry's tendency to think that youth alone isn't an excuse 
bad behavior.  He doesn't seem to expect other's to excuse him for his 
mistakes because of his youth.

>5.  Harry tries out his new wand on spiders.  Why spiders again?

I think JKR thinks spiders are suitably witch/wizard creepy creatures.

>7.  Why does Ron not know where to find the Lovegoods' house
>when he has grown up in the same neighborhood?

JKR doesn't seem to have the Weasley's know much about their 
neighbors.  After all, Mr. Diggory doesn't seem to know Arthur's kids 
either, and they also in the same neighborhood, at least within 
walking distance.

>9.  Xenophilia, literally love of the stranger, is the Greek word for
>hospitality.  Was Xenophilius Lovegood's markedly inhospitable
>behavior intentionally ironic?  Is he a lover of strangers or merely
>a lover of the strange?

Well, I think he is primarily a lover of the strange, and especially 
of his daughter, Luna.

>10. The Lovegoods are the only Ravenclaw family into whose
>home we are admitted.  Do they typify Ravenclaw?

I feel pretty sure not.

>11. What did you think of the non-appearance of Luna?

At first it seemed OK, but as the chapter progressed I did start to 
wonder.

>12. Any question you want to add.

I have one, but decided that I had better hold it until chapter 21.

Jerri 





From celizwh at intergate.com  Thu May 15 17:07:52 2008
From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 17:07:52 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
In-Reply-To: <g0hnsj+7u12@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0hql8+slkg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182906

Pea:

> Hermione has not yet resolved her internal 
> feelings towards the situation.

houyhnhnm:

Anger to keep away the realization of how 
devastating it was to her to be abandoned by Ron?  
That makes sense.

Pea:

> I think the Lovegoods are the c-c-c-combo breaker 
> of this theme. They have no qualms with their place 
> in life, their friends and acquaintances are limited 
> and public opinion of them is... a mockery.

houyhnhnm:

Observers rather than participants, outside of the 
pale, not subject to the tyranny of custom?

Pea:

> I want to know why JKR may have left out so much 
> information about Luna's mother? Does Luna appear 
> to be the product of her father's tutelage, or does 
> she have traits from her mother as well? Did her 
> mother's death affect Xeno to the point where it 
> may have shaken his character? Changed his 
> personality? Whatis left behind of her mother's 
> laboratory and belongings?

houyhnhnm:

Oh, me too!

Very nice first post.

houyhnhnm

 




From celizwh at intergate.com  Thu May 15 17:23:21 2008
From: celizwh at intergate.com (houyhnhnm102)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 17:23:21 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
In-Reply-To: <005701c8b6ab$af4ea990$49ae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>
Message-ID: <g0hri9+6nl4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182907

Jerri:

> While I find it a reasonable explanation of the 
> Tottenham Court Road issue, I have a problem with 
> the "Taboo" as a whole. Going back to the first 
> book, when DD says, in part: " . . . - for eleven 
> years I have been trying to persuade people to call 
> him by his proper name: Voldemort." and later he says 
> "fear of the name increases the fear of the thing 
> itself" or something like that (lines given to Hermione 
> in the medium not to be named). If there was a Taboo 
> on the name in VWI,then it was rational and proper not 
> to use the name.

houyhnhnm:  

It was one of the minor irritations that caused me 
to be dissatisfied with DH.  I didn't really analyze 
why it bothered me (other than it's being one more 
example of a tendency to multiply entities beyong 
necessity).  But you're right.  If it was possible 
to jinx a name in that way, the most powerful wizard 
of his age should have known it. Therefore why would 
he be urging people to put themselves at risk? 

Jerri:

> JKR doesn't seem to have the Weasley's know much 
> about their neighbors. After all, Mr. Diggory 
> doesn't seem to know Arthur's kids either, and 
> they also in the same neighborhood, at least 
> within walking distance.

houyhnhnm:

Good point.





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Thu May 15 18:25:12 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 18:25:12 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
In-Reply-To: <g0d94i+ejhb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0hv69+d1hj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182908


> Chapter 20 Questions
<snip>
> 5.  Harry tries out his new wand on spiders.  Why spiders again? <snip>

Carol responds:
I've already answered this question, half-facetiously, half-seriously.
but it just occurred to me--spiders in England in December? Wouldn't
spiders of any species that doesn't die after mating be in hibernation
at Christmastime? It's like Venus appearing in the midnight sky in
OoP; it wouldn't really happen.

Carol, who thinks that the scene illustrates Harry's preoccupation
with the uncooperative blackthorn wand to the point that he forgets
about Ron's fear of spiders (which was not cured by Ron's destruction
of the Horcrux)





From danjerri at madisoncounty.net  Thu May 15 17:55:06 2008
From: danjerri at madisoncounty.net (Jerri/Dan Chase)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 12:55:06 -0500
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
References: <1210856757.4363.10683.m46@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <007601c8b6bb$1aa723c0$49ae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>

No: HPFGUIDX 182909

In reply to my comments about the "Taboo" on Lord V's name, houyhnhnm 
said:

>It was one of the minor irritations that caused me
>to be dissatisfied with DH. I didn't really analyze
>why it bothered me (other than it's being one more
>example of a tendency to multiply entities beyond
>necessity). But you're right. If it was possible
>to jinx a name in that way, the most powerful wizard
>of his age should have known it. Therefore why would
>he be urging people to put themselves at risk?

Yes, and I felt that there were just too many "new" types of magic or 
new uses introduced in DH.  And things that if they had existed we 
should have known about in earlier books.  "The Trace" and the "Taboo" 
and the rather strange extra use for DD's "put-outer" which Ron used 
in the previous chapter, and many more that I kept noticing.

Harry's ability to do the Imperious Curse the first time, with no 
practice and no special lessons, and have it work pretty well. 
(Compared with the experienced death eater who presumably tried to put 
an imperious curse on the Muggle PM's staff member and end up with 
someone who quacked like a duck and tried to attack people.  One can 
only assume that he had intended some more useful and less noticeable 
activities for that person.)

I know that JKR liked to keep introducing new things.  I believe we 
saw at least one new form of transportation in each book.  But Harry 
has been in the wizarding world for almost 7 years now, and has been 
taking classes and getting fairly good grades.  How did there come to 
be so very many issues that were still new to him and to us?  The 
Deathly Hallows alone were a major new concept to spring on Harry and 
the reader in the last book of a series.  All these other little new 
types of magic or changes or apparent inconsistencies kept adding up. 
Any ONE can be accepted or explained away or just considered a minor 
irritation.

Jerri 





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Thu May 15 19:47:17 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 19:47:17 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
In-Reply-To: <007601c8b6bb$1aa723c0$49ae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>
Message-ID: <g0i405+e3dv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182910

Jerri wrote:
> <snip> I felt that there were just too many "new" types of magic or
new uses introduced in DH.  And things that if they had existed we
should have known about in earlier books.  "The Trace" and the "Taboo"
and the rather strange extra use for DD's "put-outer" which Ron used 
in the previous chapter, and many more that I kept noticing.
> 
> Harry's ability to do the Imperious Curse the first time, with no 
practice and no special lessons, and have it work pretty well. 
(Compared with the experienced death eater who presumably tried to put
an imperious curse on the Muggle PM's staff member and end up with 
someone who quacked like a duck and tried to attack people.  One can
only assume that he had intended some more useful and less noticeable
activities for that person.)
> 
> I know that JKR liked to keep introducing new things.  I believe we
 saw at least one new form of transportation in each book.  But Harry
has been in the wizarding world for almost 7 years now, and has been
taking classes and getting fairly good grades.  How did there come to
be so very many issues that were still new to him and to us?  The
Deathly Hallows alone were a major new concept to spring on Harry and
the reader in the last book of a series.  All these other little new
types of magic or changes or apparent inconsistencies kept adding up. 
> Any ONE can be accepted or explained away or just considered a minor
irritation.

Carol responds:
I agree with you about the inconsistencies, especially regarding the
Imperius Curse and the Trace. (The Taboo works beautifully for the
scene at Tottenham Court Road and as a means of detection that gets
them kidnapped by Snatchers--what is Harry *thinking*?--but presents
other problems that have already been discussed. Ditto for Harry
performing Unforgiveable Curses, but I don't want to go round and
round on that topic again!)

However, I don't see a problem with Harry's being introduced to new
concepts, such as Horcruxes in HBP and Deathly Hallows in DH, that are
not familiar to the average Wizard on the street. (DD has removed the
books on Horcruxes from the Hogwarts library, and if any books on the
Deathly Hallows exist, they're apparently not read by many people. The
list of "believers" in DH consists of Grindelwald, who somehow found
about them at Durmstrang, and Dumbledore and Xenophilius, who somehow
found out about them at Hogwarts. Tom Riddle and Hermione, who also
spent a great deal of time conducting research in the Hogwarts
library, never found out about the Deathly Hallows, probably because
they were exploring other subjects. 

Each book in the series has a mystery of some sort for HRH to solve,
along with ongoing plot elements, such as the central conflict with
Voldemort and the Snape and Draco arcs. IMO, the Deathly Hallows serve
as the mystery in DH. Granted, it's solved rather earlier than the
mysteries usually are, but that's because Harry has crucial choices to
make, the first one being Horcruxes or Hallows.

As for the Deluminator having additional properties besides lighting
and "unlighting," I don't find that surprising given that it's DD's
invention and he can adapt it to his own purposes. And the moment when
Harry realizes what "I open at the close" means is one of the most
moving in the book. I hate the Elder wand, but I can't say that JKR
hasn't been preparing for its appearance since at least the graveyard
Priori Incantatem scene in GoF.

The types of new magic that I found most irritating were Hermione's
protective spells. why would anyone resort to a Fidelius Charm, which
can be broken by a faithless Secret Keeper or weakened by the death of
the SK, when the spells that Hermione casts provide such good
protection that not even Ron can find Harry and Hermione. They're
perfectly protected from DEs and Snatchers until Harry blows
everything by breaking the Taboo. And yet adult Wizards like Ted Tonks
and Slughorn's protege Dirk Cresswell are found and killed (and the
kids can overhear them because they've never heard of
Muffliato--evidently Severus Snape never let that one become
popular--or Ted Tonks and Dirk Cresswell left school before he did).
You'd think that Ted and Dirk would at least cast an Impervius charm
to prevent them from being overheard or rained on, but maybe that only
works to seal off doorways and keep the rain off eyes and glasses.
(Unlikely, right?) And how about Salvia Hexia and Protego Totalum and
whatever that spell was that had the Latin word for "enemy" in it?
Hermione knows those spells but the older wizards don't? I find that
disturbing, at the very least.

Carol, also noting that Harry's Protego (DH Am. ed. 380), cast with
Hermione's wand, lasts longer and works differently from previous
Shield Charms, which cause the opponent's spell to backfire rather
than creating a barrier between the opponent (in this case, Hermione!)
and the caster




From karenshaw727 at yahoo.co.uk  Thu May 15 19:40:00 2008
From: karenshaw727 at yahoo.co.uk (Karen)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 19:40:00 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
In-Reply-To: <g0hnsj+7u12@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0i3ig+psl0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182911

- reply for Pea :o)

> Pea:
> 8. Hrmm... I thought they meant "rook" as in bird - I thought the
> house looked like a blackbird...there goes my reading comprehension.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rook_(bird) I figured that the look of
> the bird, combined with the look of the house made it seem, in my 
> minds eye, to be disorderly of architecture, and with roughly hewn
> shingles... My imagination runs away with me.


*giggles* Maybe you were distracted whilst reading that particular
exchange? Hermione (*footnote) made the same assumption (that Ron was
talking about a bird)

"That's got to be Luna's house, who else would live in a
place like that? It looks like a giant rook!"
"It's nothing like a bird," said Hermione, frowning at the
tower.
"I was talking about a chess rook," said Ron. "A castle to
you."

Ron, as you can see, corrected her (and probably enjoyed having the
chance to do so for once *L*). So I wouldn't worry about the fact that
you had thought the house to resemble a bird all this time - you're in
good *not to mention extremely intelligent* company ;o) - also I think
it may have been better if the Lovegood house HAD been in the shape of a giant bird; much wackier!

Karen  [:D]


(*footnote) even though, as has been pointed out previously, she
replaced the rook in Philosopher's Stone - Ron refers to it as a
'castle' when telling Hermione to take it's place "Well, Harry, you take the place of that bishop, and Hermione, YOU go next to him instead of that castle."



From jkoney65 at yahoo.com  Thu May 15 22:33:22 2008
From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 22:33:22 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
Message-ID: <g0idni+tfbn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182912



Chapter 20 Questions

1. Is Hermione's intransigence toward Ron justifiable? Why is she
so unforgiving?

Yes, Hermione is justified. They were all in it together, each 
suffering the same hardships and Ron just walked away. He was also 
the one complaining about the food, while Hermione was the one who 
did the preparations, her beaded bag and the items in it, not to 
mention that she took her cash out of the bank to support them in 
their quest.


2. We finally get an explanation for the sudden appearance of DEs in
Tottenham Court Road-the Taboo. Was it satisfying? Did it feel
contrived that H and H continued to use the euphemism after Ron's
defection (saving themselves from the DEs even if they didn't know
about the Taboo). Could there have been a Taboo on the name in VWI?

The taboo makes the sudden appearance of DE's understandable, but I 
still thought it was dumb concept. Why wouldn't you just put a taboo 
on Potter or Hermione...neither are those are very common names and 
would lead you directly to them.


3. Harry quickly shoots down Ron's hope that DD may still be
watching over them and as quickly shoots down Ron's excuse of young
Dumbledore's behavior. Is this meant to show Harry's disenchantment
with DD or illustrate his growing maturity?

I think it is Harry's disenchantment with Dumbledore. He's confused 
by the clues and very frustrated. I think you need more maturity to 
be able to look back at your own actions or those of others when they 
or you were young. It's easy to say years later that something was 
stupid, it's much harder when you are doing it. 


4. Does Harry's emphatic rejection of youth as an excuse for
behavior hark back to a lingering dissatisfaction with Sirius and
Lupin's excuse for his father?

I didn't read it that way. I just thought he was frustrated and 
nothing is an excuse when you are frustrated. You just want it to 
work. 

5. Harry tries out his new wand on spiders. Why spiders again?

It was any easy demonstration. Most people don't like spiders so 
there wouldn't be complaints about harming them.


6. There has been a good deal of argument over the theme of insiders
and outsiders in HP. Those who are enmeshed in the "good" side never
seen to have to question their place in the world; those who are born
into "bad" side, either accept or rebel. Where do the Lovegoods fit
in to this scheme?

The Lovegoods are firmly on the good side. Wasn't Xeno still 
publishing positive reports about Harry until Luna was captured. Luna 
is definitely on the good side. They just come across as people who 
ate too many wild mushrooms. ;-)


7. Why does Ron not know where to find the Lovegoods' house when he
has grown up in the same neighborhood?

I doubt he had any reason to walk over to it. Floo travel would make 
it unnecessary to walk any distance to someone's house. Also, Ron 
wasn't friends with Luna, Ginny was so I don't see him going over 
there.


8. Did the physical description of the house strike you in any
particular way? Is the fact that it looks like a black rook
significant? (Black is the side the Trio took in "Through the
Trapdoor" in Harry Potter and the Philosopher' s Stone. Hermione
replaced the rook, in fact.)


It didn't strike me as much as anything, although the word black made 
me think that this might have something bad about it.


9. Xenophilia, literally love of the stranger, is the Greek word for
hospitality. Was Xenophilius Lovegood's markedly inhospitable
behavior intentionally ironic? Is he a lover of strangers or merely
a lover of the strange?


I thought it meant liking something that was different and that fits 
the Lovegoods.



10. The Lovegoods are the only Ravenclaw family into whose home we
are admitted. Do they typify Ravenclaw?

It's tough to typify something with only one view. If you believe all 
intelligent people are a little strange in their own ways, then the 
Lovegoods are an extreme example.


11. The odd-looking contraption on the bust of Rowena Ravenclaw turns
out to be a counterfeit Lost Diadem, but that is not revealed until a
later chapter. What did you think it was when you first read about
it?

I thought he was nuts, but assumed it was forshadowing something.

11. What did you think of the non-appearance of Luna?

It struck me as very odd. The painting in Luna's bedroom was enough 
to know that she would have run back to see them. While Luna was odd 
and played up that part of her personality, she did like having 
friends. Her comment about the DA being like having friends says alot 
about her.





12. Any question you want to add.





From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Thu May 15 22:34:47 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 22:34:47 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood - Location of Home
In-Reply-To: <g0hnsj+7u12@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0idq7+c6np@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182913

---  "pea22407" <captivity at ...> wrote:
>
>...
> 
> 7.  Xeno has a daughter. Not a son. Ron didn't really notice
> girls until right around the Tri-Wizard tournament, so it 
> makes sense for him not to be terribly interested in the 
> female daughter of a neighbor.  And after that, he really 
> did look down on Luna and probably wasn't too fussed to find
> out exactly where her house was.
> 
> ...

bboyminn:

Just a minor comment on this. Keep in mind that even if the
Weasley and the Lovegood kids go together for a play date at
either place or the place of a third party, they would have a
sense of the location itself, but not the space in between.

Likely they would have gotten together via Floo Network, which
means unlike traveling by car or train, they would have no
sense of the space in between, and the relative location of
each place. 

So, while they might be familiar with the woods and land
around either's house, they would have no sense of the land,
space, distance, or time connecting them. 

Does that make sense?

Though, Ron doesn't seem familiar with Luna when he meets 
her, so likely they never got together as kids. But Ginny
might have traveled to Luna's house for an occasional
play date, or the two of them might have traveled to the
house of a third party to play.

But the point is, using the Floo Network, you have a sense
of the place on either end, but no comprehension of the
space in between.

Again, does that make sense?

Also, I grew up in a rural community, so I know that farm kids
are pretty self-sufficient. They play with their brothers and
sisters and maybe the nearest neighbor, and they are content
with that. Certainly, when the enter school their social 
world expands, but prior to that, they mostly hang close to
the farm. 

Given the Weasley's large family, I suspect they were very 
much self-contained.


Steve/bboyminn




From captivity at gmail.com  Thu May 15 23:17:56 2008
From: captivity at gmail.com (Lisslar)
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 19:17:56 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood - Location of Home
In-Reply-To: <g0idq7+c6np@eGroups.com>
References: <g0hnsj+7u12@eGroups.com> <g0idq7+c6np@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <e5596df00805151617o33ae26e2i84793f0a73d6b2d3@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182914

That's genius - I hadn't considered the inherent problem in the Floo network
- you know where you are going, but not really how to get there.  I imagine
this may have something to do with the Wizardng community's awe in driving
cars.

Pea

On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 6:34 PM, Steve <bboyminn at yahoo.com> wrote:

>   --- "pea22407" <captivity at ...> wrote:
> >
> >...
> >
> > 7. Xeno has a daughter. Not a son. Ron didn't really notice
> > girls until right around the Tri-Wizard tournament, so it
> > makes sense for him not to be terribly interested in the
> > female daughter of a neighbor. And after that, he really
> > did look down on Luna and probably wasn't too fussed to find
> > out exactly where her house was.
> >
> > ...
>
> bboyminn:
>
> Just a minor comment on this. Keep in mind that even if the
> Weasley and the Lovegood kids go together for a play date at
> either place or the place of a third party, they would have a
> sense of the location itself, but not the space in between.
>
> Likely they would have gotten together via Floo Network, which
> means unlike traveling by car or train, they would have no
> sense of the space in between, and the relative location of
> each place.
>
> So, while they might be familiar with the woods and land
> around either's house, they would have no sense of the land,
> space, distance, or time connecting them.
>
> Does that make sense?
>
> Though, Ron doesn't seem familiar with Luna when he meets
> her, so likely they never got together as kids. But Ginny
> might have traveled to Luna's house for an occasional
> play date, or the two of them might have traveled to the
> house of a third party to play.
>
> But the point is, using the Floo Network, you have a sense
> of the place on either end, but no comprehension of the
> space in between.
>
> Again, does that make sense?
>
> Also, I grew up in a rural community, so I know that farm kids
> are pretty self-sufficient. They play with their brothers and
> sisters and maybe the nearest neighbor, and they are content
> with that. Certainly, when the enter school their social
> world expands, but prior to that, they mostly hang close to
> the farm.
>
> Given the Weasley's large family, I suspect they were very
> much self-contained.
>
> Steve/bboyminn
>
>  
>


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




From bgrugin at yahoo.com  Fri May 16 02:42:57 2008
From: bgrugin at yahoo.com (bgrugin)
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 02:42:57 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
In-Reply-To: <g0i405+e3dv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0isbh+muc2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182915


> Carol responds:

> The types of new magic that I found most irritating were Hermione's
> protective spells. why would anyone resort to a Fidelius Charm, which
> can be broken by a faithless Secret Keeper or weakened by the death of
> the SK, when the spells that Hermione casts provide such good
> protection that not even Ron can find Harry and Hermione. They're
> perfectly protected from DEs and Snatchers until Harry blows
> everything by breaking the Taboo. And yet adult Wizards like Ted Tonks
> and Slughorn's protege Dirk Cresswell are found and killed (and the
> kids can overhear them because they've never heard of
> Muffliato--evidently Severus Snape never let that one become
> popular--or Ted Tonks and Dirk Cresswell left school before he did).
And how about Salvia Hexia and Protego Totalum and
> whatever that spell was that had the Latin word for "enemy" in it?
> Hermione knows those spells but the older wizards don't? I find that
> disturbing, at the very least.
> 


MusicalBetsy here:
This actually did not bother me at all.  I personally can envision
Hermione burying her head in every book she can find about protective
spells, until she's found many that most wizards/witches don't know,
and then practicing them until she's got them perfectly down.  Most
wizards aren't going to go to the trouble to really research them as
thoroughly as Hermione - or maybe they didn't have time to research
them until it's too late, and they have to flee.  Although, you'd
think she would have done more research on healing!






From zgirnius at yahoo.com  Fri May 16 06:43:04 2008
From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara)
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 06:43:04 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
In-Reply-To: <g0hri9+6nl4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0jado+55qg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182916

> houyhnhnm:  
> 
> It was one of the minor irritations that caused me 
> to be dissatisfied with DH.  I didn't really analyze 
> why it bothered me (other than it's being one more 
> example of a tendency to multiply entities beyong 
> necessity).  But you're right.  If it was possible 
> to jinx a name in that way, the most powerful wizard 
> of his age should have known it. Therefore why would 
> he be urging people to put themselves at risk? 

zgirnius:
It puts a different complexion on this exchange in OotP:

> OotP, "Occlumency":
>How come I saw through the snake's eyes if it's Voldemort's thought 
I'm sharing?"

>"Do not say the Dark Lord's name!" spat Snape.

>There was a nasty silence. They glared at each other across the 
Pensieve.

>"Professor Dumbledore says his name," said Harry quietly.

>"Dumbledore is an extremely powerful wizard," Snape muttered. "While 
he may feel secure enough to use the name
the rest of us
" He rubbed 
his left forearm, apparently unconsciously, on the spot where Harry 
knew the Dark Mark was burned into his skin.

zgirnius:
Using the name Voldemort in Albus's presence would be safe whether or 
not it is Tabooed. He might have warned Harry of the possibility - 
but others, adults, would presumably already know of the possibility. 




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Fri May 16 13:25:24 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 13:25:24 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood - Location of Home
In-Reply-To: <g0idq7+c6np@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0k204+t4n4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182917

 
> bboyminn:> 
> Likely they would have gotten together via Floo Network, which
> means unlike traveling by car or train, they would have no
> sense of the space in between, and the relative location of
> each place. 

Potioncat:
Good point. And remember how disoriented Arthur was when he took 
Harry to the MoM by Muggle train.


> Steve/bboyminn
> Given the Weasley's large family, I suspect they were very 
> much self-contained.


Potioncat:
The Weasley kids didn't know Mr. Diggory either. So it does not 
appear that neighbors get together much. Keep in mind though, it was 
a long walk to the hill, and the other two "near-by" families could 
have been coming from as far. Distance doesn't matter with a floo of 
course, and your point about floo travel was very good.

I agree the Weasleys must be self contained. Ron doesn't seem to know 
anyone on that first Hogwarts Express trip. Or if he did, they 
preferred other company. Or he wanted to see if that boy really was 
Harry Potter. During the time at Hogwarts when he and Harry were at 
odds, Ron hung out with the twins, not with other kids from his year.

I don't think JKR gave this aspect of Wizarding life much thought. It 
isn't part of the story she's telling. Many of us have imagined 
wizading parties, and younger-aged schools, but I don't think she 
did. All the new kids at the Gryffindor table seem to be introducing 
themselves to each other. No one seems to know anyone else. I think 
that might make sense in the RW at some schools, but not one where 
everyone goes.

Even going back a generation, we see that James and Sirius didn't 
know each other, even though they have relatives in common. (if you 
consider the Black family tree as canon.) But Severus doesn't seem to 
know anyone either, since he is with Lily. Unless of course at that 
point, he didn't want to introduce Lily to anyone he already knew.

We know that JKR intended to write about a time when Theo was at the 
Malfoy house with his father--but it never made it to canon. We do 
have canon that Seamus and Dean visited each other, but that was 
after they met at Hogwarts. Again, Sirius visited the Potters after 
he met James at Hogwarts.

Must make for a secluded childhood!







From danjerri at madisoncounty.net  Fri May 16 13:39:07 2008
From: danjerri at madisoncounty.net (Jerri/Dan Chase)
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 08:39:07 -0500
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
References: <1210943222.3391.21240.m46@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <002a01c8b75c$f815c670$c4ae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>

No: HPFGUIDX 182918

Carol responded:
>However, I don't see a problem with Harry's being introduced
>to new concepts, such as Horcruxes in HBP and Deathly
>Hallows in DH, that are not familiar to the average Wizard on
>the street.

I didn't mean to say that I objected to the introduction of Horcruxes 
in HBP or Deathly Hallows in DH, although I do see that my post 
probably looked like that.

What I was thinking was that in DH the Deathly Hallows were one MAJOR 
new concept, necessary for the way JKR wanted to end her series. 
Harry and the reader had to learn about them, as well as learn a lot 
more about Horcruxes than DD had taught Harry back in HBP.

I was objecting to the introduction of so many relatively minor 
(compared with Hallows or Horcruxed) new magical concepts in this 
final book.  And that is most especially true when those concepts 
would have logically come up in earlier books if JKR had already 
invented them.  The Taboo and the Trace are two examples of this.

And, when types of magic to which we had already been introduced are 
made to behave in ways that seem inconsistent to the ways that they 
behaved in the earlier books, this is similar to introducing a new 
type of magic.  And, I agree with Carol's long list of seeming 
inconsistencies.

The Hallows and additional new information about Horcruxes, as well as 
new information about the after life in HP land, and other new 
concepts that the book required were enough.  These other issues we 
have been discussing were a bit too much to allow me to be truly happy 
with DH as a book, and thus the entire series.

Jerri 





From willsonkmom at msn.com  Fri May 16 14:30:23 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 14:30:23 -0000
Subject: CHAPDISC: DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood
In-Reply-To: <g0d94i+ejhb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0k5pv+6nsg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182919


> 
> 4.  Does Harry's emphatic rejection of youth as an excuse for 
> behavior hark back to a lingering dissatisfaction with Sirius and 
> Lupin's excuse for his father?

Potioncat:
Yes, I think so, and it's just as valid. Harry goes through his youth 
without giving in to bad influences...unless you count the HBP. <eg>

I think it's something that JKR has mixed emotions about. James and 
Albus, and even Harry are allowed to be excused for youthful bad 
behavior and poor decisions. Pansy isn't.

> 
> 5.  Harry tries out his new wand on spiders.  Why spiders again?

Potioncat:
Sometimes a bug is just a bug. Like the wasp buzzing in the OWLs.

At the very first reading, I was convinced the spider was Snape!


> 6.  There has been a good deal of argument over the theme of 
insiders 
> and outsiders in HP.  Those who are enmeshed in the "good" side 
never 
> seen to have to question their place in the world; those who are 
born 
> into "bad" side, either accept or rebel. Where do the Lovegoods fit 
> in to this scheme?

Potioncat:
That theme only applies to Gryffindors and Slytherins.

But here's an example of how LV is able to make someone work for him. 
We know that Lovegood has been brave and defiant in the past. He 
doesn't lack for courage or integrity and in no way supports LV's 
program. But he does have a daughter who is in danger.


> 
> 8.  Did the physical description of the house strike you in any 
> particular way? Is the fact that it looks like a black rook 
> significant? (Black is the side the Trio took in "Through the 
> Trapdoor" in Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. Hermione 
> replaced the rook, in fact.)

Potioncat:
Some of us had been expecting another chess-symbolic event in DH. I 
thought this foreshaddowing it. But I don't know that it played out. 
Of course, from another standpoint, it's a lot like the lightening 
struck tower, with a betrayal and a change of direction.
> 

> 
> 10. The Lovegoods are the only Ravenclaw family into whose home we 
> are admitted.  Do they typify Ravenclaw?

Potioncat:
No more than the Weasleys are typical of Gryffindor; the Blacks of 
Slytherin or Hepzibah of Hufflepuff.
 
> 11. What did you think of the non-appearance of Luna?

Potioncat:
It grew more and more ominous. I knew something was wrong.


Thanks for a great summary and discussion.




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Fri May 16 16:38:54 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 16:38:54 -0000
Subject: Capt DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood - Battle of the Century
In-Reply-To: <g0hri9+6nl4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0kdau+r0cn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182920

---  "houyhnhnm102" <celizwh at ...> wrote:
>
> Jerri:
> 
> > While I find it a reasonable explanation of the 
> > Tottenham Court Road issue, I have a problem with 
> > the "Taboo" as a whole. ...
> 
> houyhnhnm:  
> 
> It was one of the minor irritations that caused me 
> to be dissatisfied with DH.  ...  If it was possible 
> to jinx a name in that way, the most powerful wizard 
> of his age should have known it. ...
> 

bboyminn:

On the general theme of new magic revealing itself or old
magic being revealed in new way, there was was particular
aspect that caught my eye and to some extent pulled me
out of the story.

First, let us examine the 'Taboo' and Ron's explanation of
it in light of the Snatchers finding them on the camping
trip after Harry inadvertently say Voldemort's name.

Now supposedly according to Ron and according to their
experience with the Snatchers, when the name is spoken,
the person speaking the name can be traced AND all
protective enchantments around them break. 

It wouldn't have been enough for the Snatchers to be able
to trace Harry's location is, once the got there, they 
couldn't see or find the encampment. So, Hermione's
protections had to break.

Now after this horrible experience with the Snatchers and
being brought to Malfoy Manor, and Dobby eventually dying,
you would think Harry would learn his lesson, but no, at
Hogwarts, in the Ravenclaw Common Room, Harry says the 
name 'Voldemort'. 

If what we have been told is true, then at that moment, Harry
became traceable AND all the protective enchantment guarding
Hogwarts BROKE.

Remember earlier in the series, we were told that Hogwarts
has the protective enchantments of a countless succession of
Headmasters. That is a lot of accumulative protection. Some
of those protective enchantments were centuries old. Poof!
Gone in a careless second.

Now, Prof. Flitwick began to restore or replace those 
enchantments soon after, but the enchantments he knows and
was able to place could never equal centuries of the best
enchantments of the best Headmasters.

It seems a very foolish thing for Harry to have done, 
especially when he knows the greatest battle of the Century
is about to unfold. 

Just a thought.

Steve/bboyminn




From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Fri May 16 18:50:23 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 18:50:23 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0g9hc+5l5n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0kl1f+vjig@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182921

I wrote this yesterday, got all finished when my computer decided it 
didn't like what I wrote and forced me to shut down. I hope my 
computer likes this version and let's me post it. ;(


> Pippin:
> We should have already learned, from Harry's adventures, that the
> hero's one true accomplishment is his choice to face the enemy 
> against the odds.  All the rest he owes to providence.

Mike:
I thought we were supposed to learn that Harry's one true virtue was 
his extrodinary ability to love and all the ways in which that 
manifests itself. Harry made true and loving friends, put the welfare 
of others above himself, would do anything for the ones he loved 
(which in the end included giving up his life for the rest of the 
WW), and fought the entire fight to validate the love of his parents.

Though the hero often has the odds stacked against him, I always 
thought that the one true test was his/her selfless adherence to the 
cause that elevated him/her to the status of hero.

 
> Pippin:
> This is our final exam, our chance to find out if we've
> internalized what we've been told. Are we ready to think the same
> of James' bravery knowing how easily he was beaten? I guess for
> some of us the answer is 'no'. <g> But in that case, IMO, JKR
> would like us to see that we weren't really admiring heroism. 

Mike:
I don't think James bravery was ever in question. Nor do I think 
bravery is all that is required to be pronounced a hero. But why 
shouldn't I think differently of James based on how he performed? 

Let me compare and contrast him with Perseus. James gave up his 
helmut of invisibility (his IC to DD) willingly, lost his shield 
(broken Fidelius) unwillingly, which only left him his sword (his 
wand). James then stepped into the Gorgon's chamber without his last 
weapon. It's no wonder he was turned to stone (AKed).

This isn't a Greek tragedy nor epic poem, but what would you have 
thought of Perseus if he had performed like James? Why shouldn't I 
take the same approach to James as I would any hero? I think it was 
James that failed to internalize the teachings of his youth. He saw 
what happened when leaving Sirius up to his own devices (the Prank). 
If he wasn't aware of Peter's lack of fortitude, he should have been. 
And for goodness sake, he proved himself what happens to someone 
taken unawares if they don't have their wand at the ready (SWM).

Would it have made a difference in the battle, of course not. But it 
would have made a difference in James legacy.



> Pippin:
> But that's just backwards, IMO.  No one in canon has to be a
> responsible adult to be a hero -- <snip>

Mike:
James does, imo. We were shown all the ways James behaved 
irresponsibly in his youth. He was still picking on Severus, two on 
one mind you, as late as his fifth year O.W.L.s (and after he had 
saved him from the Prank). Yet somehow he was made Head Boy in his 
seventh year. Why? In what way did he mature enough to deserve that 
honor?


> Pippin:
> Harry was a hero in his own right at the age of eleven. You have
> to be a responsible adult to be a kind and loving father, to find
> it more important and more rewarding to sit on the sofa and play
> with your child than to slay a legion of dragons or to save the
> world from Voldemort. Yes, we need heroes to fight the Voldemorts
> of this world, but canon seems to imply there might be fewer 
> Voldemorts if we valued men less for their heroic prowess and
> more for their love and dedication to fathering.

Mike:
James was never going to be the kind of hero that Harry was, I agree 
with this premise. I certainly don't deny that love of family was an 
important theme and rightly so. Heaven knows, without Lily's love of 
Harry we wouldn't have a story. 

But what part was James supposed to play in this theme. I submit it 
was loving father, adoring husband, and *protector of hearth and 
home*. It was in this last role that James falls short, not by a lot. 
However, in the one role that differentiates him from Lily, he 
doesn't give his best performance possible. Doesn't this in a small 
way point to James' dedication to fathering?


> Pippin:
> Sorry for the misquote  --  And thanks for the compliments! 
> I don't think your desire for a meaningful progression is
> misguided, but I think we're supposed to look at *all* the
> characters to see a meaningful progression. It's our desire to
> see progress demonstrated in our particular favorites that's
> frustrated.

Mike:
I think you're right, both about character progression and my 
frustration regarding James' portrayal. But I also think I'm right in 
pointing out James failure to perform. Further, I think it was poor 
penmanship for JKR to make James Head Boy without giving us any real 
reason to believe that he earned that position.

Yes, this was Harry's story and we were supposed to see that Harry 
transcended his father's looks and deeds. We were also supposed to 
see how Harry transcended and forgave the man that treated him like 
dirt and could never forgive Harry for being born or looking like his 
father. Yet Snape was shown to have progressed, to have realized the 
errors of his ways and repented. He did this while James was still 
alive. So why couldn't we have been given just one example of how 
James progressed?

It's not just that James was one of *my* favorites. He was Harry's 
father, Harry looked up to him. We knew that Harry was going to 
exceed James' accomplishments. But shouldn't that have required Harry 
to go a little farther down the hero's path? Instead, Harry barely 
had to do anything to exceed the meager accomplishments of his 
father, and that's just not right imo. Harry was given a raised bar 
early on, and then the bar was lowered by the end, at least as far as 
his father was concerned.


> Pippin:
> We don't see how James grows out of hexing people for fun,
> but we see how Harry does -- nothing dramatic, no realization that
> he'd even done it. He just stopped as he developed a taste for more
> mature activities, such as snogging Ginny and took on a man's job
> (in the colloquial sense) of hunting for horcruxes. 

Mike:
Montavilla already responded to this point, so I shant. But thanks 
for your colloquial response. ;-)



> Pippin:
> Besides which, if he'd had a chance to fight and still failed,
> wouldn't we see inferior magical skills rather than betrayal as the
> cause of his death?  Perhaps that is why people are so reluctant to
> abandon the idea of James falling with his wand in hand -- it's too
> uncomfortable to think that his trust in his friends betrayed him.

Mike:
I know I wouldn't have thought less of James if he had fought and 
lost. I didn't expect anyone besides Dumbledore to be able to 
withstand a Voldemort assault. It was the effort that counted, imo.

Harry quashes the idea of not trusting each other early on in DH. 
This despite the knowledge that it was one of his father's *friends* 
that betrayed him. Since that position didn't come back and bite him 
in the ass, I don't think we should be uncomfortable to think that 
James had done the same thing all those years previous. In fact, 
isn't that a typical theme in a hero's journey, that of betrayal of 
trust that leads to the lesser hero's downfall? The only thing 
missing is that Harry doesn't really have to deal with his own 
betrayal of trust, Marrietta notwithstanding.

 
> Pippin:
> IMO, the epic is not one of sin and redemption but of moral and
> emotional growth, from Voldemort and his fellow baby-heads, who
> never get the better of their aggressive impulses and are
> eventually doomed by them, to Harry who learns the full power of
> love at Dobby's grave, and thus  can choose to offer a second
> chance to the man who killed his parents even after years of
> seeking revenge on him, and who can choose to return good for evil
> in giving honor to the memory of a man who never honored him in
> life.

Mike:
As Magpie phrased it, this is certainly the land that redemption 
forgot. :D Yet that man that Harry honored got his redemption badge, 
didn't he? But yeah, this was a Bildungsroman not a Greek epic. Harry 
was already a hero in the WW before he stepped into the WW.

Still, the two most disappointing characters for me were Draco and 
James. Neither of their story arcs were completed. For Draco we were 
left guessing what there may be to come and for James we were left 
lamenting what might have been.


> > > Pippin previously:
> > > I think JKR knew exactly what she was doing in DH, 
> > > foreshadowed it with the scene from PS/SS, and always
> > > intended to show James facing Voldemort without his wand. 
> > > <snip>
> > 
> > Mike previously:
> > <snip> 
> > Facing him without your wand, is resignation to your fate.

Mike:
I've had a further thought. Was JKR forshadowing Harry's resignation 
to his fate in the forest by James responding to Voldemort's 
intrusion without his wand? 


> > Mike previously:
> > Not bringing your wand in the first place is foolish,
> 
> Pippin:
> Foolish? Or just tired and accident prone? 

Mike:
It really doesn't matter, does it? James was both hero to Harry and 
failure to the reader. At least to this reader.




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Fri May 16 21:24:13 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 21:24:13 -0000
Subject: Capt DH20, Xenophilius Lovegood - Battle of the Century
In-Reply-To: <g0kdau+r0cn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0ku1t+ul69@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182922

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

> If what we have been told is true, then at that moment, Harry
> became traceable AND all the protective enchantment guarding
> Hogwarts BROKE.
> 

Pippin:
Interesting thought. But as the gargoyle outside Dumbledore's office
was unaffected,   the charm-breaking effect had to be extremely local.
Voldemort wouldn't want people to be able to rob Gringotts just by
walking in and saying his name!

Since Snape as headmaster had control over the Hogwarts magical
defenses, it would only be prudent for McGonagall to assume they'd
need strengthening. 

But there would have been little to fear from the name if *everyone*
had followed Dumbledore's example and used it freely. The DE's
couldn't have captured them all. 


Pippin
who only meant to re-read the chapter where Harry is captured, but got
caught up in the story and had to go all the way to the end. <sniff>





From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Sat May 17 00:30:00 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 00:30:00 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <fvg6op+apr5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0l8u8+8klv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182923

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

> > zanooda wrote:
 
> > I would really like to know how common it is for an Animagus 
> > to have the same Patronus and Animagus form.

  
> Bex wrote:
 
< SNIP>
 
> Animagi forms depend on *your* personality traits. Patroni generally
> reflect people who mean a great deal to you. (Snape's doe, Tonks'
> wolf, Hermione's otter (which is very, very similar to a weasel...).
 
> Arthur's weasel - could represent his family (like his father), or
> perhaps his immediate family - clearly his sons would be willing to
> fight to the death for him.
 
> Cho's swan: I read this as representing her mother - very gentle and
> graceful.
 
> Ron's terrier: Terriers are tough, very energetic, and brave,
> especially considering their size - they aren't the biggest dogs in
> the park, but they sure think they are. Very energetic... I wonder 
> if this could represent the twins? Or, brave and tough beyond all
> expectations - perhaps Molly?
  
> Draco's Patronus would almost certainly be something representing
> Snape - if not before the end of HBP, certainly afterward.

> Anyone else have some thoughts?


zanooda:

Sorry it took me so long to reply, but better late than never :-). I 
agree with most of your points (snipped), except for one thing. 
Judging by your examples, you seem to believe that a Patronus always 
represents some person - a mother, a father, a lover etc., and in 
some cases it's true. 

However, I'm not sure it's always the case, because it doesn't fit 
sometimes. I see Patronuses more like those Power animals/Spirit 
animals, or whatever else they are called. Yes, they are protectors, 
but they represent just themselves, and not necessarily someone's 
mother.
 
I want to note here that I personally don't believe in such things as 
Power animals, but I read an article about them once (just out of 
curiousity :-)), and I think there are some similarities between them 
and Patronuses.

There must be a certain affinity between you and your power animal, 
but the link is not always an obvious one. Sometimes they represent 
some trait that is so deeply suppressed that a person may not even 
suspect he/she has it - the power animal is supposed to help the 
person to get in touch with this much needed suppressed part of 
him/herself. At least that's what that article said, and to me 
sometimes it's easier to explain someone's Patronus this way than to 
try to find its connection to another person.

Take Aberforth, for example. To follow your rule :-), his goat 
Patronus must represent his father or mother, right? But to me it's 
easier to think that this goat is just that - a goat :-) - a spirit 
goat, I mean. He loves goats, he keeps goats - why wouldn't his 
guardian also be a goat?

Or look at Umbridge: of course it's possible that her cat Patronus 
represents her dear deceased mother, who was the greatest in the 
world cat-lover, and from whom Dolores inherited that plate 
collection. But why can't this cat be just a cat? She obviously loves 
cats (or at least pictures of cats :-)). It's just easier for me to 
see it this way :-). 

So to me, Cho's swan is not her mother (about whom we know 
practically nothing), but the spirit swan who chose her for some 
reason. In some cases however (Harry, Tonks), your explanation 
obviously works perfectly well for me. And thank you for answering my 
question in such detail :-).
 


zanooda, failing to find an explanation for Ron's Jack Russel 
terrier, except that maybe JKR loves this breed ... 





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sat May 17 03:49:30 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 03:49:30 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0l8u8+8klv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0lkka+19rn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182924

zanooda wrote:
<snip>
> zanooda, failing to find an explanation for Ron's Jack Russel 
terrier, except that maybe JKR loves this breed ...
Carol responds:

Forgive me for responding only to your sig line, but I think that the
Patronus is a protective spirit, often but not always associated with
another person (or pet if we go with goats and phoenixes--someone or
something that the caster has an affinity for/with rather than
representing the Witch's or wizard's own personality, as an animagus
form does.

Of course, Mr. Weasley's weasel could be an exception, and I have no
idea what Kingsley's lynx or Luna's hare represents--unless the hare
is her father, with his hare-brained schemes.

But, to get to the point, I've thought since I first read about them
that Hermione's playful otter (a member of the weasel family)
represents Ron and Ron's Jack Russell terrier somehow represents
Hermione. Granted, part of the reason for Hermione's Patronus is, as
you seem to be suggesting, that JKR gives the characters she likes
Patronuses that she likes. Umbridge, in contrast, gets a cat Patronus
to go with the "foul" kittens that decorate her walls because JKR
loathes Umbridge and hates cats. (McGonagall is an exception to the
rule, of course. I think that JKR hadn't thought about Patronuses yet
when she made McGonagall a cat Animagus--she was merely associating
cats and witches as in folklore. And since McG was already associated
with cats, JKR gave her a cat Patronus as well.)

But, aside from giving Ron a Patronus that she likes--her favorite
breed of dog, in fact--I think that Hermione must have certain traits
in common with a Jack Russell terrier. I'm not a dog lover (anything
but!), but I did look up Jack Russells to see how they might be
associated in JKR's mind with Hermione. I think we can rule out
shedding and a love for digging in the dirt, but how about some of
these traits?

According to the website--and it's my only authority, so if it's
wrong, I'm wrong--Jack Russells Jack Russells are intelligent
(Hermione) and can be aggressive and have a natural hunting instinct
(Hermione when she's bent on revenge). Jack Russells of the same sex
don't get along, and they don't get along well with other breeds,
either. Hermione doesn't associate with anyone outside her House
(other "breeds," so to speak) and has no close friends of her own sex.
(The closest is Ginny who's in a different year and they don't spend a
lot of time together.) She does, however, get along well (most of the
time) with two Gryffindor boys in her year.

Jack Russells, according to another page of the site, are very
possessive. Hermione is possessive of Ron. She's the jealous type
(but, then, so is he). And "they have been known to train their owners
more often than not." Counting Ron as Hermione's "owner" (and her as
his--don't get me wrong!), I think it's pretty clear who trains whom
(though that book the Twins gave Ron on dealing with women seems to
hav taught him a few tricks as well, such as agreeing with her when he
wants to calm her down). And they're unwilling to put up with even
unintended abuse.

http://www.therealjackrussell.com/breed/index.php

http://www.therealjackrussell.com/breed/whatis.php

Feisty? Intelligent? Courageous? Loyal to the point of possessiveness?

Just some thoughts on why JKR might think that Hermione resembles a
Jack Russell terrier in some respects and, if I'm right, why Ron has
that Patronus.

Carol, admitting that Hermione's fondness for Crookshanks is very
un-Jack Russell-like!






From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sat May 17 15:20:30 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 15:20:30 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0kl1f+vjig@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0mt3u+m8fr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182925

 
> 
> > Pippin:
> > We should have already learned, from Harry's adventures, that the
> > hero's one true accomplishment is his choice to face the enemy 
> > against the odds.  All the rest he owes to providence.
> 
> Mike:
> I thought we were supposed to learn that Harry's one true virtue was 
> his extrodinary ability to love and all the ways in which that 
> manifests itself.

Pippin:
The hero needs a noble cause, but the cause elevates the hero, not
vice versa. Bella thought her cause was noble, but that doesn't make
her a hero, right? 


> Mike:
> I don't think James bravery was ever in question. Nor do I think 
> bravery is all that is required to be pronounced a hero. But why 
> shouldn't I think differently of James based on how he performed? 
> <snip>
> 
> This isn't a Greek tragedy nor epic poem, but what would you have 
> thought of Perseus if he had performed like James?

Pippin:
I would think that Fate was against him. Achilles died at the hands of
a warrior far inferior to him who was helped by a god, IIRC. IOW, the
other guy got lucky, same as Voldemort.

How many times has Harry been careless with his wand?  He might have
been killed by Barty Jr at the QWC or blown one of his buttocks off --
my guess is it runs in his family, just like Sirius's exhilarated laugh. 


> > Pippin:
> > But that's just backwards, IMO.  No one in canon has to be a
> > responsible adult to be a hero -- <snip>
> 
> Mike:
> James does, imo. We were shown all the ways James behaved 
> irresponsibly in his youth. He was still picking on Severus, two on 
> one mind you, as late as his fifth year O.W.L.s (and after he had 
> saved him from the Prank). Yet somehow he was made Head Boy in his 
> seventh year. Why? In what way did he mature enough to deserve that 
> honor?

Pippin:

 We saw that James had leadership abilities, they just needed to be
redirected. DD would need somebody who'd stick up for kids who were
being harassed by DE wannabes. I'd think James would be perfect. Of
course Snape would see it as hypocritical bullying. But why didn't JKR
just show us all that?

IMO, because relating  James's story mostly through  Snape's limited
experiences shows us why Snape had  no direct evidence that James had
changed. We need to understand that, or Snape's hatred would continue
to seem as demented as it did in PoA. As it is, Toerag!James is a
compelling point of view even though it is contradicted by everybody
who knew James in later life better than Snape did.


> 
> Mike:
> James was never going to be the kind of hero that Harry was, I agree 
> with this premise. I certainly don't deny that love of family was an 
> important theme and rightly so. Heaven knows, without Lily's love of 
> Harry we wouldn't have a story. 
> 
> But what part was James supposed to play in this theme. I submit it 
> was loving father, adoring husband, and *protector of hearth and 
> home*. It was in this last role that James falls short, not by a lot. 
> However, in the one role that differentiates him from Lily, he 
> doesn't give his best performance possible. Doesn't this in a small 
> way point to James' dedication to fathering?

Pippin:
I don't see how. As usual, Voldemort got it backwards, it was James
who didn't have to die. If he hadn't rushed headlong to defend his
wife and child, if he'd let them face Voldemort alone, then both James
and Harry would have lived. But he couldn't have done that and been
James, any more than Harry could have kept himself from going to save
Sirius in OOP.

That same headlong behavior cost James his wand and whatever chance he
had to make a fight of it. But that's the price of  being a
Gryffindor. Where he fell short of Lily was only in not seeing that if
he *chose* to die instead of wishing, no matter how ineffectually, to
hold Voldemort off, then he could have cast the shield charm as she did.

That's where Harry goes further down the hero's path than James did,
and further than Lily, who thought only of protecting her son, while
Harry thought of protecting everyone.

> 
> > Pippin:
> > We don't see how James grows out of hexing people for fun,
> > but we see how Harry does -- nothing dramatic, no realization that
> > he'd even done it. He just stopped as he developed a taste for more
> > mature activities, such as snogging Ginny and took on a man's job
> > (in the colloquial sense) of hunting for horcruxes. 


Pippin:
(responding to Montavilla's points without quoting in this already
overlong post)

I didn't forget the sectum sempra episode or Harry's detentions. But
canon shows us how little effect they had on Harry's attitude. That
illuminates how the prank and all those detentions didn't seem to have
any effect on James. Harry managed to rationalize what happened to
Draco, just as Sirius in PoA rationalized that it would have served
Snape right if he'd been killed. Having done that, the detentions only
made Harry feel martyred. 

Things that point a moral in a cautionary tale don't have to  have
that effect on the characters. We can see quite clearly the lesson
that ought to have been drawn, but that doesn't mean that Harry or
James need to have seen it. 

And yes, Harry continues to hex people aggressively in DH. But he's
not doing it just to entertain himself. Sirius says that James
continued to hex Snape because Snape was still trying to hex James
every chance he got, and (quoting from memory) "you couldn't expect
James to take that lying down." That's the stage that Harry is in
through most of DH, IMO.  Hexing in retaliation or self-defense, yes,
but not completely for amusement, unaware of why he acts the way he
does. SWM!James doesn't understand or feel whatever frustrations are
driving him to act out against Snape -- like a child he doesn't feel
angry and hit, he just hits. 

Further,   an arrogant bully can't be a decent father in canon. He
just can't. Sirius tries  hard in OOP, but he can't pull himself out
of his self-absorbed state for very long. We certainly never see
Vernon or Lucius or Barty Sr. just enjoy being with their kids. Even
when he takes Dudley to the zoo, Vernon spends most of his time
talking about the things he dislikes. 

Besides there was no one at GH for James to bully except Lily, Harry
and the cat -- since he didn't bully them I will conclude he wasn't a
bully anymore.

> Mike:
> I've had a further thought. Was JKR forshadowing Harry's resignation 
> to his fate in the forest by James responding to Voldemort's 
> intrusion without his wand? 

Pippin:
See, I just can't get my head around "I'll hold him off!" as
resignation. It's not like he said, "Save yourself, I'm finished!" 

I think where Harry goes beyond James is being able to "take it lying
down" -- in being able to control the urge to retaliate. What he
discovers at Dobby's grave is that if he fully allows himself to
experience the pain of his loss, he feels no anger, no need to get
revenge. He still has the *choice* -- he can admit anger to his mind
if he  wants it. But he also has the choice to let it go.

IMO, love, in JKR's world, gives you the power to overcome anger, but
it doesn't force you to do so. You still have to make the choice. In
Ravenclaw Tower, Harry didn't yet see why he should refrain from
revenge on  Amycus, who to his mind clearly deserved it. Harry had not
yet realized that he might be a poorer judge of that than he thinks. 
So at that point, IMO, he hadn't fully gone beyond James, because even
though he understood how to control his desire to strike back, he
didn't understand why he should do so. 

Pippin




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sat May 17 20:21:37 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 20:21:37 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0mt3u+m8fr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0neoh+a6i4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182926

Pippin wrote:
> 

<snip> As usual, Voldemort got it backwards, it was James who didn't
have to die.

Carol responds:
In that case, JKR and Dumbledore have it wrong, too.

Pippin:
 If he hadn't rushed headlong to defend his wife and child, if he'd
let them face Voldemort alone, then both James and Harry would have
lived. <snip>

Carol responds:
If Lily had fought as James did, *she* wouldn't have been given the
choice to die. But James would not have been given the choice. You're
taking away the significance of Snape's going to Voldemort to ask him
to spare Lily, which resulted in LV's actually ordering Lily two or
three times to step aside. So it's not just choosing to die, as Lily
did; it's having the opportunity to make the choice in the first
place. Had Snape not made that request, all three Potters would have
died: no chance to live for Lily; no choice to die on her part; no
mistaken decision to break his word and "prudently" kill them all on
Voldemort's. If he had either killed just her and left Harry alone,
honoring *her* choice (which, of course, would not have happened) or
honored his word to Snape and let Lily live, perhaps just Stunning
her, and then killed Harry, his plan to thwart the Prophecy would have
worked--no Vapor!mort; no Chosen One.

But, again, just stepping in front of your child and choosing to die
(like the German woman in DH) is not enough. You have to be given a
chance to live in the first place and forfeit that chance.

That's why it doesn't matter, in terms of Harry's survival (as opposed
to our view of James), whether James (who also, in effect, chose to
die by confronting Voldemort wandless) had a wand or not and whether
he fought a futile but courageous battle with Voldemort or foolishly
left his wand on the sofa. His death had no effect on Harry's survival
or the ancient magic, which only worked because Voldemort gave Lily a
choice. His killing her after giving her a chance to live *and* her
choice to die *together* turned her death into a self-sacrifice with
the power of ancient love magic, in contrast to James's, which was an
ordinary death like that of the McKinnons, who no doubt fought bravely
to save their family and failed.

Lily's death is different from all the rest because she, unlike them,
had a chance to live and chose not to take it, asking Voldemort to
kill her instead of him. Her death activated the magical protection so
that when Voldemort tried to kill Harry, the spell backfired and would
have killed him had it not been for the Horcruxes. No one else's
death, sacrifice or not, has that power because no one else was given
a chance to live and chose to die.

In Voldemort's mind and in Dumbledore's, James had to die. Voldemort
was not going to leave him alive, nor did he have any reason to do so.
And had it not been for Snape, he would have felt exactly the same way
about Lily, who would no more have been given a chance to live than
Marlene McKinnon or the German mother were.

Carol, whose Internet connection has been acting up, crossing her
fingers that the problem is now solved




From zgirnius at yahoo.com  Sat May 17 21:53:00 2008
From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara)
Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 21:53:00 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0neoh+a6i4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0nk3s+q4bi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182927

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
>
> Pippin wrote:
> > 
> 
> <snip> As usual, Voldemort got it backwards, it was James who didn't
> have to die.
> 
> Carol responds:
> In that case, JKR and Dumbledore have it wrong, too.

zgirnius:
No, they do not. Who said James had to die? That was Voldemort's 
choice, just as it was his choice not to kill Lily (initially). 
Voldemort had no particular reason to kill James *or* Lily, their 
deaths did not serve any particuaor purpose of which we ever leran, 
he just decided he would kill the whole family. The only one he had 
any reason at all to kill, was Harry, because he feared/believed the 
Prophecy. It said nothing about any threat posed by Harry's parents.

Now, once Voldemort decided to kill them all (a choice owing, it 
would seem, to his tendency to solve most problems that way, see e. 
g. "The Elder Wand"), it transpired that Snape asked him for Lily's 
life, and so Voldemort decided he might change his mind about killing 
them all. 





From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sat May 17 22:31:17 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 22:31:17 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0neoh+a6i4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0nmbl+8jc5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182928

Carol: 
> In Voldemort's mind and in Dumbledore's, James had to die. Voldemort
> was not going to leave him alive, nor did he have any reason to do so.
>

Pippin:
I guess I didn't put that very clearly. James did not have to die
because if Voldemort had met Lily first and everything had then
happened as it did in canon, she would have chosen to die as a shield,
the curse would have rebounded, Voldemort would have lost his powers,
and both Harry *and* James might have lived.

Voldemort does not give Harry a choice to stand aside in the forest,
it's enough that Harry knows he is there by choice. I was thinking, if
James had had a chance to escape and didn't use it, it would have been
enough to activate the magic if he had thought of it, but I could be
wrong. 

Pippin






From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sun May 18 02:06:32 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 02:06:32 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0nk3s+q4bi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0o2v8+po64@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182929

Pippin wrote:

> > <snip> As usual, Voldemort got it backwards, it was James who
didn't have to die.
> > 
> > Carol responds:
> > In that case, JKR and Dumbledore have it wrong, too.
> 
> zgirnius:
> No, they do not. Who said James had to die? That was Voldemort's 
choice, just as it was his choice not to kill Lily (initially). 
Voldemort had no particular reason to kill James *or* Lily, their 
deaths did not serve any particuaor purpose of which we ever leran, 
he just decided he would kill the whole family. 

Carol responds:
He was killing off the Order members one by one. Would he have killed
the McKinnons and left the Potters? I doubt it. In any case, Snape
tells DD that he's after the entire family. He wouldn't be in a panic
over Lily if LV hadn't made it clear that he intended to kill the
parents. (He could, of course, have Stunned them, but they're enemies
and he has no reason to spare them--*other than* Snape's request to
spare Lily and only Lily.

zgirnius:
> The only one he had any reason at all to kill, was Harry, because he
feared/believed the Prophecy. It said nothing about any threat posed
by Harry's parents.

Carol:
Aside from their having "defied him three times"? I'm sure he "deemed
it prudent" to prevent a fourth attempt.

zgirnius: 
> Now, once Voldemort decided to kill them all (a choice owing, it 
would seem, to his tendency to solve most problems that way, see e. 
g. "The Elder Wand"), it transpired that Snape asked him for Lily's 
life, and so Voldemort decided he might change his mind about killing
them all.

Carol responds:
Or, rather, he decided to give *Lily* a chance to live. That
chance--and choice--were never extended to James.

At any rate, I'm not sure that you understand my point. I was saying
that *if* Pippin is right--and I don't think that she is--Dumbledore
and Voldemort were wrong. I, however, think that they were right.

"Who said James had to die?" By my count, Voldemort himself, Snape and
Dumbledore.

Here's the canon for their statements to that effect.

Voldemort tells Harry:

"I killed your father first, and he put up a courageous fight . . .
but your mother needn't have died . . . . she was trying to protect
you" (SS Am. ed. 294, ellipses in original).

Harry repeats this information to DD: "Voldemort said that he only
killed my mother because she tried to stop him from killing me. But
why would he want to kill me in the first place?"

DD of course doesn't answer that question but he repeats that Harry's
mother died to save him and that it was *her* love that protected
Harry. (Why hers? Because she, unlike James, had a choice to live and
didn't take it. James, in contrast, had to die because LV had deciede
that he would.)

Snape tells Dumbledore that Voldemort plans to "hunt her [Lily]
down--kill them all--"

DD reminds him that the Prophecy refers to a boy born at the end of
July and asks if Snape could not ask LV for mercy for the mother in
exchange for the son; Snape says that he's done so. DD contempptuously
says, "you do not care, then about the deaths of her husband and child?"

Snape asks him to "hide them all, then. Keep her--them--safe. Please"
(678).

It's clear from Snape's panic and SS's response that the parents are
in as much danger as their child and that he plans to dispatch the
whole family. (James and Lily are, after all, Order members, and the
DEs are killing off the Order one by one.) As Hagrid says, "nobody
lived once he [Voldemort] decided to kill 'em." (Doesn't Sirius say
something similar?)

At any rate, LV clearly intends to kill all the Potters until Snape
gives him a reason to spare Lily. That's why she, but not James, is
given the all-important chance to live, making possible the choice to
live or die that activates the ancient magic. DD's response makes
clear that he, too, believes (despite knowing the entire Prophecy)
that LV will kill the whole family.

Voldemort again:

"My curse was deflected by the woman's foolish sacrifice" (GoF Am. ed.
653)--nothing about James's death being a sacrifice or having the
power of ancient magic. (That, of course, is why LV wants to have
harry's blood in his veins. DD on this occasion is not much help--all
we get in the infamous gleam in his eye.)

Harry's Dementor memories show, again and again, that it's Lily and
only Lily, who has a chance to live: "Stand aside, silly girl!" The
scenario is repeated in detail in "Bathilda's Secret" in DH:

James attempts to hold LV off without a wand and drops like a
marionette as LV kills him. Had he fought (as LV's own words led
readers to believe), he would still have died. If he's in the house
with Harry, he has to die. And Lily, too, is wandless. "How stupid
they were. How trusting, thinking that their safety lay in their
friends" (344). Clearly, had it not been for his promise to Snape, she
would have died like her husband on the spot despite her cries to kill
her rather than Harry. But "as long as she was sensible, she, at
least, had nothing to fear." If she doesn't fight or get in his way,
he'll let her live. He tells her to stand aside four times, twice
after he's said that it's his last warning. He considers forcing her
away from the crib and decides to kill her instead.

But the whole point I'm trying to make is that Lily could have lived
but made the choice to die. That's the only reason that her death has
the power of ancient magic and James's does not. And had it not been
for Snape's request, she wouldn't have had that choice, either.

FWIW, and I'm no fan of JKR's interviews, here's her take on the topic:

ES: This is one of my burning questions since the third book - why did
Voldemort offer Lily so many chances to live? Would he actually have
let her live?

JKR: Mmhm. [IOW, yes.]

ES: Why?

JKR: [silence] Can't tell you. But he did offer, you're absolutely
right. Don't you want to ask me why James's death didn't protect Lily
and Harry? There's your answer, you've just answered your own
question, because she could have lived and chose to die. James was
going to be killed anyway. Do you see what I mean? I'm not saying
James wasn't ready to; he died trying to protect his family but he was
going to be murdered anyway. He had no - he wasn't given a choice, so
he rushed into it in a kind of animal way, <snip>

The complete excerpt can be found at 

http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-1.htm

So, if we take JKR at her word, and I think that canon shows that we
can in this instance, James *did* have to die. He had no choice.
Unlike Lily, he was going to die no matter what, whether he fought or
ran to the door wandless. Lily, however, had a choice. And that made
all the difference.

With Snape's request, Voldemort's offering Lily a chance to live, and
Lily's sacrifice, we get Vapor!mort and the Chosen One. Take away any
one of those components (the second and third depend on the first) and
we get three dead Potters (and no story).

Carol, who was sure that there were more Dumbledore quotes to this
effect but didn't find them in her rather hurried search















From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Sun May 18 02:08:23 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 02:08:23 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0lkka+19rn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0o32n+tv8d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182930

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

> I have no idea what Kingsley's lynx or Luna's hare 
> represents--unless the hare is her father, with his 
> hare-brained schemes.


zanooda:

Well, I tried to read something on animal symbolism yesterday, but
it's just impossible, you know. In different cultures the same animal
means different things, and even in the same culture some animals have
 too many meanings, which sometimes contradict each other. I mean, how
can rabbit/hare symbolize lust and innocence at the same time? I gave
it up :-). Everybody seems in consent about dogs, however - they 
always symbolize loyalty and protection. BTW, about Xeno's
"hair-brained schemes" - rabbit usually represents quick-thinking and
guile, not stupidity :-).

As for lynxes, they are linked to the supernatural. Lynxes have an
incredibly keen sight, so they are believed to be able to see the
unseen and help develop psychic abilities - stuff like that.


> Carol wrote:

> But, to get to the point, I've thought since I first read about them
> that Hermione's playful otter (a member of the weasel family)
> represents Ron and Ron's Jack Russell terrier somehow represents
> Hermione.


zanooda:

I snipped your very insightful essay about Jack Russell terriers,
which I read with much interest (I love dogs, although terriers are
not my kind of dogs :-)). However, I'm still not convinced. Somehow I
don't see Hermione (or Molly, for that matter :-) as Jack Russell
terrier. It was funny though that while reading your post I glimpsed
at the TV screen for a moment, and guess what, an old episode of
"Frasier" was on, with Eddie, the Jack Russell terrier, right there on
the screen! Isn't it strange? Eddie was of course the weirdest dog
ever, although I think in RL (not on TV) the dog who played him was
just a normal terrier - energetic, self-assured and not very obedient.


> Carol wrote: 

> Umbridge, in contrast, gets a cat Patronus
> to go with the "foul" kittens that decorate her walls because JKR
> loathes Umbridge and hates cats. (McGonagall is an exception to the
> rule, of course. I think that JKR hadn't thought about Patronuses 
> yet when she made McGonagall a cat Animagus--she was merely 
> associating cats and witches as in folklore. And since McG was 
> already associated with cats, JKR gave her a cat Patronus as well.)


zanooda:

Well, animals, like people, have different traits. Cats can symbolize
 independence and wisdom - that's McGonagall. They also like to play
with their victims before finishing them off - that's Umbridge :-).



zanooda, who would have given McGonagall a different Patronus - maybe
an owl ...
    





From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Sun May 18 02:52:31 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 02:52:31 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0o32n+tv8d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0o5lf+f4n9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182932

> zanooda:
> 
> Well, I tried to read something on animal symbolism yesterday, but
> it's just impossible, you know. In different cultures the same 
animal
> means different things, and even in the same culture some animals 
have
>  too many meanings, which sometimes contradict each other. I mean, 
how
> can rabbit/hare symbolize lust and innocence at the same time? I 
gave
> it up :-). Everybody seems in consent about dogs, however - they 
> always symbolize loyalty and protection. BTW, about Xeno's
> "hair-brained schemes" - rabbit usually represents quick-thinking 
and
> guile, not stupidity :-).
>
> Well, I tried to read something on animal symbolism yesterday, but
> it's just impossible, you know. In different cultures the same
animal
> means different things, and even in the same culture some animals
have
> too many meanings, which sometimes contradict each other. I mean,
how
> can rabbit/hare symbolize lust and innocence at the same time? I
gave
> it up :-). Everybody seems in consent about dogs, however - they
> always symbolize loyalty and protection. BTW, about Xeno's
> "hair-brained schemes" - rabbit usually represents quick-thinking
and
> guile, not stupidity :-).

Magpie:
Maybe there's a "mad as a March hare" implication? Rabbits are also
associated with fertility and with intuition and the moon. But of
course, as you say, animals mean so many things depending on where
you're looking! I wear a necklace that shows the mysterious "three
hares" motif that shows up a lot of places and nobody knows what it
means. But Loony=moon and madness.

I'll be lynxes are just kind of badass.:-)

-m




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sun May 18 02:57:48 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 02:57:48 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0nmbl+8jc5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0o5vc+8g9a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182933

Carol earlier: 
> > In Voldemort's mind and in Dumbledore's, James had to die.
Voldemort was not going to leave him alive, nor did he have any reason
to do so.
> >
> 
> Pippin:
> I guess I didn't put that very clearly. James did not have to die
because if Voldemort had met Lily first and everything had then
happened as it did in canon, she would have chosen to die as a shield,
the curse would have rebounded, Voldemort would have lost his powers,
and both Harry *and* James might have lived.
> 
> Voldemort does not give Harry a choice to stand aside in the forest,
it's enough that Harry knows he is there by choice. I was thinking, if
James had had a chance to escape and didn't use it, it would have been
enough to activate the magic if he had thought of it, but I could be
wrong. 

Carol responds:
My monitor screen just went black and I lost my response to you. And
here I just got a new network card. My computer is being very
temperamental today. Scarier than Voldmort, I'll tell you!

Anyway, I think what matters is not James's own decisions. As long as
he was in that house, he was going to die. I suppose it's possible
that he could have survived if Voldemort had met Harry and Lily first,
but I doubt it. He'd have fought and died then, surely. And whatever
he did, his choice could not have set off the ancient magic that
protected Harry and vaporized Voldemort because, unlike Lily, he would
not have been given a choice.

Suppose that Lily had been downstairs and James had run upstairs to
Harry. LV had promised Snape not to hurt Lily if she was "sensible,"
so he might have spared her without giving her the choice that
triggered the ancient magic, or he might have killed her if she tried
to fight him, violating his promise to Snape but still not triggering
the ancient magic because he hadn't given her the choice. And then, if
he met James, whom he'd made no promise to spare, he'd have killed
him, wand or no wand, whether he put up a fight or stood in front of
Harry. Even if he'd pleaded, like Lily, "Kill me instead!" (not very
Jameslike, I realize), there would have been no ancient magic because
Voldemort would not have offered to spare him. ("Stand aside! Stand
aside, silly boy!")--unless the eavesdropper had been a young female
DE who had begged him to spare James as Snape begged him to spare Lily.

Carol, sure that her lost post was better but too worried about that
screen going suddenly black (it had to be the monitor, not the
computer, because I could hear the Windows XP theme when I turned the
computer on and off) to compose a coherent message




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sun May 18 03:37:33 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 03:37:33 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0o5lf+f4n9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0o89t+l5md@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182934

zanooda wrote:
<snip> BTW, about Xeno's "hair-brained schemes" - rabbit usually
represents quick-thinking and guile, not stupidity :-).
> 
Magpie responded:
> Maybe there's a "mad as a March hare" implication? Rabbits are also
> associated with fertility and with intuition and the moon. <snip>

carol responds:
I think we should look specifically at hares rather than including
rabbits. (Maybe Lavender Brown, whose pet rabbit died, had a bunny
Patronus? I can't remember whether hers was mentioned.)

But JKr's Luna/lunacy/moon connection is clear, and, bearing in mind
the  "mad as a March hare" idea, I did a quick Google search. It turns
out that the moon and hares are connected in many mythologies. Since
JKR's version of witchcraft and wizardry seems to have fairly strong
Celtic connections (after all, Britain was Celtic before it was
Anglo-Saxon or Norman), I think Celtic mythology might be what JKR had
in mind when whe assigned Luna her Patronus. 

One of the sites I checked put the connection rather succinctly:
"Celtic Myths*~
The Celts believed that the Goddess Eostre's favourite animal and
attendant spirit was the hare. It represented love, fertility and
growth and was associated with the Moon, dawn and Easter - death,
redemption and resurrection. Eostre changed into a hare at the full
Moon. The hare was sacred to the White Goddess - the Earth Mother -
and as such was considered to be a royal animal."

Fits nicely with Luna, I think. Well, maybe not the fertility part,
but love, dawn, death, redemption, resurrection--look at the timing of
Luna's Patronus cast in DH. It occurs in "The Elder Wand," the chapter
in which Snape dies, and those themes pervade the next few chapters:
death and redemption and love in "the Prince's Tale" and "the Forest
Again" and "King's Cross," love and dawn and resurrection in "The flaw
in the Plan." I could be reading too much into the symbolism, but
surely some of it is there, along with the common perception of Luna
as "loony" and hares and full moons associated with madness. (Hares.
like cats, were considered to be witches' familiars by medieval
Christians, according to some of the sites.)

Carol, now wondering whether Celtic mythology will throw any light on
Seamus's fox and Ernie's boar (assuming that the order in which the
names are given is intended to match the order of the Patronuses)





From catlady at wicca.net  Sun May 18 04:02:28 2008
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 04:02:28 -0000
Subject: Patronus / Chapter Discussion 20 / Hiding Neville / Typica
Message-ID: <g0o9ok+r53i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182935

Carol wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182934>:

<< now wondering whether Celtic mythology will throw any light on
Seamus's fox and Ernie's boar >>

*If* the boar is Ernie's, maybe it's a simpler pun on Ernie being
good-hearted but pompous and stodgy. I would prefer if whoever it is's
boar was a reference to Hogwarts, with the winged boars at the front gate.

houyhnhnm discussed Chapter 20 in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182890>:

<< Ron hastily shuts him up before he can say Voldemort's name and
then explains that Voldemort has placed a jinx on the uttering of his
name. Anyone who says it aloud can be traced >> 

As always, one wishes Harry would have *remembered* the Taboo even
when angry.

<< Could there have been a Taboo on the name in VWI? >>

If there was, then Dumbledore having encouraged Order members to say
the name 'Voldemort' ('fear of a name increases fear of the thing
itself') probably helped them be killed in such numbers. Either
Dumbledore didn't know about the Taboo, which would be a major flaw in
his omniscence, or he didn't care that he was getting his followers
killed for no reason, which is wasteful. It would be much better if
there weren't such a Taboo in VWI, altho' that does require us to make
up a difference reason why people were afraid to say the name.

<< Hermione has come noiselessly upon them at this point and assures
Harry that he just needs practice. Harry thinks she still feels guilty
about breaking his own wand. >>

I was *very* disappointed in Hermione claiming that one wand is not
more powerful than another and one wand is not more in tune with a
particular wizard than another. I am not demanding that she be New Age
irrational -- she wouldn't claim that every shoe in the world would
fit Harry equally well and equally badly, nor would she claim that
every shoe in the world would last the same amount of walking on rough
terrain -- some would wear out faster than others.

<< The house resembles a giant black chess rook. >>  << Did the
physical description of the house strike you in any particular way? >>

It struck me as a danger to wizarding secrecy. Surely a tower on a
hill can be seen for some distance, and Muggle kids would have gone to
get a closer look at the peculiar building.

<< The Lovegoods are the only Ravenclaw family into whose home we
are admitted. Do they typify Ravenclaw? >>

Surely not. Look how badly the other Ravenclaw students treated Loony
Luna.

Potioncat wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182919>:

<< No more than the Weasleys are typical of Gryffindor; the Blacks of
Slytherin or Hepzibah of Hufflepuff. >>

I thought the Weasleys, other than their degree of poverty, ARE
typical of Gryffindor, and the Blacks, other than their degree of
wealth, ARE typical of Slytherin. I agree that Hepzibah and Zacharias
did not seem typical of Cedric Diggory, Ernie Macmillan, Justin
Finch-Fletchley, Hannah Abbot, Susan Bones, Amelia Bones (because
Houses seem to run in families), etc.

Carol wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182892>:

<< I think that Luna represents intuition and eccentric genius (I
certainly never expected her to be a gifted painter). >>

I agree with both sentences. (Surely she could have gained a bit more
popularity at school with her painting.) 

In specific, I think she is a spiritual genius rather than an
artistic, musical, scientific, literary, or magical genius -- that she
was born knowing wisdom that usually takes a long hard time to learn.
Non-anger, non-fear, kindness, meet again in the next life, give
second chances, that stuff. Saintliness -- e.g. one starving refugee
in a group of starving refugees finds a stash of food, and gives all
of it to the other refugees, keeps none for him/her/self, and soon
dies of starvation. 

I sure don't *feel* any of this (spiritually, I'm a single-cell
organism) and I dunno how much of it I even *believe* (*is* it better
to refuse to kill one innocent janitor just in order to free a bunch
of useful good-guy prisoners from a bad-guy prison where they'll be
executed in the morning?), but I used to think that Dumbledore had
come to this viewpoint over the course of his long life, finding from
experience that anger and fear and self-preservation and desire aren't
very rewarding in the long run, and that he actually felt some of the
general Love he preached about... I even worried whether his refusal
to do some evil, but necessary, deed might cause Voldemort to triumph
... DH sure proved me wrong about Dumbledore!

lmf3b wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182894>:

<< We still don't know where Neville was that Halloween night. The
Longbottoms did not seem to have gone into hiding with their child
like the Potters did, since Bella tracked them down so easily after
Voldy fell >>

Bella attacking the Longbottoms 'after Voldy fell' could have been
months after that Halloween night. If the Longbottoms had gone into
hiding when the Potters did, they would have come out of hiding soon
after Voldy fell. If they hid their baby with Gran as you suggest,
they would have retrieved him soon after Voldy fell. 

An old theory on this list is that Neville witnessed the entire
torture of his parents, hidding under an Invisibility Cloak that his
mother threw over him when she heard intruders enter.






From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sun May 18 04:05:30 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 04:05:30 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0o89t+l5md@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0o9ua+m7ab@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182936

 "Carol"  wrote:
 I could be reading too much into the symbolism, but
> surely some of it is there, along with the common perception of Luna
> as "loony" and hares and full moons associated with madness. (Hares.
> like cats, were considered to be witches' familiars by medieval
> Christians, according to some of the sites.)
> 


Potioncat:
First a quote from the Leaky Cauldron interview July 2005:
MA: What's Ron's Patronus?

JKR: Ron's Patronus? Have I never said that either? Oh no, that's 
shocking! [Laughter.] Ron's Patronus is a small dog, like a Jack 
Russell, and that's a really sentimental choice, because we've got a 
Jack Russell. He's insane.


Potioncat again:
I think the myths, and particularly the Celtic ones play a big role 
in the way JKR crafted her Wizarding world; she hasn't been shy about 
changing them, to fit her ideal. So I think JKR has most likely drawn 
on those myths for some of the patronuses and just used whims for 
others.






From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Sun May 18 16:56:49 2008
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 18 May 2008 16:56:49 -0000
Subject: Weekly Chat, 5/18/2008, 1:00 pm 
Message-ID: <1211129809.11.77924.m54@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182937

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

Weekly Chat
Sunday May 18, 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/20080518/3df24ed0/attachment.html>

From jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com  Sun May 18 17:10:31 2008
From: jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com (Jayne)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 17:10:31 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0o32n+tv8d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0pnu7+cteo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182938

snip

> Well, animals, like people, have different traits. Cats can symbolize
>  independence and wisdom - that's McGonagall. They also like to play
> with their victims before finishing them off - that's Umbridge :-).
> 
> 
> 
> zanooda, who would have given McGonagall a different Patronus - maybe
> an owl ...

Oh no.! I would have kept McG patronus as a cat , but given Umbridge 
something different and horribler such as a rat (Which IMHO suited 
her ) as I adore Cats and it is an insult to those beautiful, 
intellegent creatures to be her patronus

Jayne
Just dropping in to this discussion




From kersberg at chello.nl  Sun May 18 15:04:33 2008
From: kersberg at chello.nl (kamion53)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 15:04:33 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0o5lf+f4n9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0pgi1+mq1j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182939

> Magpie:
> Maybe there's a "mad as a March hare" implication? Rabbits are also
> associated with fertility and with intuition and the moon. But of
> course, as you say, animals mean so many things depending on where
> you're looking! I wear a necklace that shows the mysterious "three
> hares" motif that shows up a lot of places and nobody knows what it
> means. But Loony=moon and madness.
>
> I'll be lynxes are just kind of badass.:-)
>
>


There is another association with the hare, then mad as a march hare.
According to Graves ( I Claudius) Boadiccea let loose hares when
facing the Romans on the battle field, hoping they would strike at
them.
This because breaking a taboo on hare-hunting was supposed to be
punished with cowardice. Hares were only alowed to be hunted at May-
Eve.....but then the boys were too busy chasing the girls.

Luna is in her peculiar way a very courageous girl, and the moment she
is "chased" by Death Eaters, her father loses his courage to speak
his own independent mind. Another aspect of a chased hare is that it
makes unexpected fast turns. Luna herself is complete unpredictable.

So the hare as a reflection of Luna's unpredictable kind of courage
is quite well chosen.
kamion53




From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Sun May 18 17:45:29 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 17:45:29 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0pnu7+cteo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0ppvp+metg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182940

Jayne:
> Oh no.! I would have kept McG patronus as a cat , but given 
Umbridge 
> something different and horribler such as a rat (Which IMHO suited 
> her ) as I adore Cats and it is an insult to those beautiful, 
> intellegent creatures to be her patronus

Magpie:
We don't know McGonagall's Patronus, remember. That's her Animagus 
form, which indicates that she shares qualities with it (and she's 
certainly intelligent).

The Patronus doesn't reflect the person, but something that makes the 
person happy. We know Umbridge likes cats given all the kittens on 
plates in her office, so it just reflects her love of cats. I don't 
think she's very rat-like herself. Rats are incredibly smart and 
badass in ways Umbridge doesn't seem to be. Peter obviously shares 
the survival instincts of rats. I would guess if she had an animagus 
form it would be a toad since that's the animal she's always said to 
resemble. (No offense to toads--wonder if she'd be a poisonous one?)

-m




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun May 18 18:48:14 2008
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 18:48:14 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0ppvp+metg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0ptle+ank8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182941

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

> Magpie:
> We don't know McGonagall's Patronus, remember. That's her Animagus 
> form, which indicates that she shares qualities with it (and she's 
> certainly intelligent).

We do know McGonagalls'a Patronus. In DH, she sends three shining
silver cat Patronus messengers in the scene where Snape flies out the
window.





From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Sun May 18 18:56:16 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 18:56:16 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0pnu7+cteo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0pu4g+76ni@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182942

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jayne" <jaynesmith62 at ...> wrote:

> > zanooda, who would have given McGonagall a different Patronus - 
> > maybe an owl ...


> Jayne wrote:
 
> Oh no.! I would have kept McG patronus as a cat , but given Umbridge 
> something different and horribler such as a rat (Which IMHO suited 
> her ) as I adore Cats and it is an insult to those beautiful, 
> intellegent creatures to be her patronus


zanooda:

Oh, Jayne, I didn't mean it this way :-)! I wanted McGonagall to have a 
different Patronus *not* because I hate cats! I'm more of a dog person 
myself, but I certainly appreciate cats' beauty and grace. I wanted a 
different Patronus for McGonagall not because cats are bad and don't 
deserve to be her guardians - it's just doesn't feel right for me, you 
know? When McGonagall's Patronus turned out to be a cat in DH, I was 
surprised - I expected something else for some reason. I guess I 
thought of an owl because of McGonagall's name - Minerva. I certainly 
didn't intend to offend cats and cat-lovers like you :-).





From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Sun May 18 19:04:39 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 19:04:39 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0pu4g+76ni@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0puk7+10bo8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182943

> zanooda:
> 
> Oh, Jayne, I didn't mean it this way :-)! I wanted McGonagall to have 
a 
> different Patronus *not* because I hate cats! I'm more of a dog 
person 
> myself, but I certainly appreciate cats' beauty and grace. I wanted a 
> different Patronus for McGonagall not because cats are bad and don't 
> deserve to be her guardians - it's just doesn't feel right for me, 
you 
> know? When McGonagall's Patronus turned out to be a cat in DH, I was 
> surprised - I expected something else for some reason. I guess I 
> thought of an owl because of McGonagall's name - Minerva. I certainly 
> didn't intend to offend cats and cat-lovers like you :-).

Magpie:
Did we see her Patronus in DH? Obviously I totally forgot that! 
Disregard my earlier post distinguishing between her Patronus and 
Animagus form--McGonagall seems to have the same for both. Maybe being 
a cat is a happy memory for her and that's why it's her Patronus.

But I stand by the Umbridge one. Her animagus form would never be a 
cat, but it's obvious why that's her Patronus.

-m




From jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com  Sun May 18 20:08:03 2008
From: jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com (Jayne)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 20:08:03 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0pu4g+76ni@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0q2b3+4qtd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182944

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zanooda2" <zanooda2 at ...> wrote:
>
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jayne" <jaynesmith62@> wrote:
> 
> > > zanooda, who would have given McGonagall a different Patronus - 
> > > maybe an owl ...
> 
> 
> > Jayne wrote:
>  
> > Oh no.! I would have kept McG patronus as a cat , but given 
Umbridge 
> > something different and horribler such as a rat (Which IMHO 
suited 
> > her ) as I adore Cats and it is an insult to those beautiful, 
> > intellegent creatures to be her patronus
> 
> 
> zanooda:
> 
> Oh, Jayne, I didn't mean it this way :-)! I wanted McGonagall to 
have a 
> different Patronus *not* because I hate cats! I'm more of a dog 
person 
> myself, but I certainly appreciate cats' beauty and grace. I wanted 
a 
> different Patronus for McGonagall not because cats are bad and 
don't 
> deserve to be her guardians - it's just doesn't feel right for me, 
you 
> know? When McGonagall's Patronus turned out to be a cat in DH, I 
was 
> surprised - I expected something else for some reason. I guess I 
> thought of an owl because of McGonagall's name - Minerva. I 
certainly 
> didn't intend to offend cats and cat-lovers like you :-).

>zanooda:
Thats fine. I was getting at JKR for giving such a horrible person as 
Umbridge a cat as a patronus, not at all at you.
We can't all be clever enouGh to be cat lovers!!!!!! (VBG )
I didn't mind McG having a cat patronus at all. She was clever, wise 
and loyal, just like those beautiful creatures

Jayne
Who is not a great Dog lover,but appreciates them for their loyalty




From jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com  Sun May 18 20:18:57 2008
From: jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com (Jayne)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 20:18:57 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0ppvp+metg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0q2vh+4t0u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182945

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sistermagpie" 
<sistermagpie at ...> wrote:
>
> Jayne:
> > Oh no.! I would have kept McG patronus as a cat , but given 
> Umbridge 
> > something different and horribler such as a rat (Which IMHO 
suited 
> > her ) as I adore Cats and it is an insult to those beautiful, 
> > intellegent creatures to be her patronus
> 
> Magpie:
> We don't know McGonagall's Patronus, remember. That's her Animagus 
> form, which indicates that she shares qualities with it (and she's 
> certainly intelligent).
> 
> The Patronus doesn't reflect the person, but something that makes 
the 
> person happy. We know Umbridge likes cats given all the kittens on 
> plates in her office, so it just reflects her love of cats. I don't 
> think she's very rat-like herself. Rats are incredibly smart and 
> badass in ways Umbridge doesn't seem to be. Peter obviously shares 
> the survival instincts of rats. I would guess if she had an 
animagus 
> form it would be a toad since that's the animal she's always said 
to 
> resemble. (No offense to toads--wonder if she'd be a poisonous one?)
> 
> -m
>
Actually I have to agree with you m about Umbridge and her patronus. 
Your idea of it being a toad is better than my rat. I did have 
problems thinking of something horrible and the rat was the first 
thing I thought of.
Any futher suggestions on what Umbridge'ss Patronus should be would 
be very much appreciated

Jayne
Who adores Cats, elephants and Horses




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sun May 18 21:54:43 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 21:54:43 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0q2vh+4t0u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0q8j3+l07u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182946

Magpie wrote:
> > <snip>
> > The Patronus doesn't reflect the person, but something that makes
the person happy. We know Umbridge likes cats given all the kittens on
plates in her office, so it just reflects her love of cats. 

Carol responds:
And JKR's dislike of them (she made an exception for Crookshanks).

http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/extrastuff_view.cfm?id=10

(That's another reason why it's odd that JKR gave McGonagall a cat
Patronus). I agree, however, that given Umbridge's love of cats,
especially "foul" kittens that wear bows around their necks, it's no
surprise that her Patronus is a cat. (I'm surprised that she can cast
one at all, but I suppose that even wicked witches who masquerade as
kindly middle-aged women can have happy memories.)

Jayne:
I don't think she's very rat-like herself. Rats are incredibly smart
and badass in ways Umbridge doesn't seem to be. Peter obviously shares
the survival instincts of rats.

Carol:
I like rats, too--preferably lab rats (preferably white--the spotted
ones tend to be a bit meaner, in my experience). not sewer-roaming
street rights, of course, but even those are smart and can become pets
for poor children. (Poorer than little Percy Weasley, I mean!)

Magpie:
 I would guess if she had an animagus form it would be a toad since
that's the animal she's always said to resemble. (No offense to
toads--wonder if she'd be a poisonous one?)

Jayne:
> Actually I have to agree with you m about Umbridge and her patronus.
Your idea of it being a toad is better than my rat. <snip>

Carol responds:
I agree that Umbridge's Animagus form would be a toad. (I'm sure I've
said exactly that fairly recently.) The mere fact that she looks like
a toad (often with a large fly unwisely perched on its head) and that
toads (not Trevor, of course) are often poisonous suggests that that's
the form she would take. (Toads are often poisonous to dogs, and she
posed a risk to Sirius.) And they're ugly as well (no offense to poor
Trevor intended).

To get back to McGonagall, I agree with Potioncat and anyone else who
thinks that her Patronus (as opposed to her Animagus form, which was
probably established way back in SS/PS based simply on the widespresd
association, especially in the minds of children, between witches and
cats) should be an owl--the usual form of messenger in the WW but much
faster--because of the association between owls and the goddess
Minerva. Then, again, Minerva was the Roman goddess of wisdom and owls
themselves are associated with wisdom ("wise old owl"), and
McGonagall's behavior in DH struck me as anything but wise. Anyway, I
suppose that McGonagall, like Umbridge, just likes cats, the standard
animal companion or familiar for witches. (I don't see any catlike
traits that would make a cat a suitable *Animagus* form for her--maybe
in her youth, she was graceful, independent, and curious?)

Carol, wondering whether Umbridge is any relation to the froglike
little man in the portrait in the Muggle Prime Minister's office and
whether JKR was confusing Patronuses with Animagi when she assigned
McGonagall that Patronus





From beatrice23 at yahoo.com  Sun May 18 22:10:35 2008
From: beatrice23 at yahoo.com (Beatrice23)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 22:10:35 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0neoh+a6i4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0q9gr+gduf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182947


> 
> Carol responds:

snip
> But, again, just stepping in front of your child and choosing to 
die
> (like the German woman in DH) is not enough. You have to be given a
> chance to live in the first place and forfeit that chance.
snip

Beatrice:  I disagree with you here.  The German woman did not stand 
in front of her children.  She was frightened and died first, but at 
no time did she do what Lily does (Harry does the same thing at then 
end of DH).  What is important in their deaths is not that Snape 
asks LV to spare Lily, although this does mean that LV tells her to 
stand aside.  What IS important is that Lily says, "kill me 
INSTEAD."  

This in a way becomes a contract between the two of them.  LV takes 
accepts the terms of her verbal / magical contract.  Lily sacrifices 
herself on the understanding or on the assumption that LV will kill 
her and spare her son (although we could argue that Lily has no 
reason to believe that he will do such a thing.)  LV's undoing is 
that Lily's act of sacrifice protects her son from harm.  Harry does 
the same thing in DH.  He states the terms before LV AK's him in the 
forest.  Harry declares that he will willingly die to protect all 
those fighting at Hogwarts.  LV accepts and "murders" Harry, 
although he still hasn't learned anything...and harry's sacrifice 
protects everyone in the castle.  It may not be as powerful as 
Lily's sacrifice, LV doesn't seem to feel pain when he attempts to 
hurt the people in the castle, eg. Neville.  But as Harry points out 
his spells are greatly weakened when it comes to harming others.

Beatrice




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun May 18 22:21:39 2008
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 22:21:39 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0q8j3+l07u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0qa5j+3qi1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182948

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
> 
> To get back to McGonagall, I agree with Potioncat and anyone else
> who thinks that her Patronus (snip) should be an owl--the usual form
> of messenger in the WW but much faster--because of the association
> between owls and the goddess Minerva. Then, again, Minerva was the
> Roman goddess of wisdom and owls themselves are associated with 
> wisdom ("wise old owl"), and McGonagall's behavior in DH struck me
> as anything but wise. 

It is said that owls, the symbol of wisdom in Western cultures, are
the symbol of stupidity in Arab cultures. However, Minerva's behavior
in DH might have something to do with her Animagus form, expression of
her inner being as it is, but not with her Patronus, expression of
what makes her feel safe or strong or happy. While the thought of
wisdom might make her feel safe or strong or happy, I vote for giving
McGonagall a Patronus resembling her lover. As I am convinced that her
lover is Madam Hooch, that would be a hawk.

> (I don't see any catlike traits that would make a cat a suitable
> *Animagus* form for her--maybe in her youth, she was graceful, 
> independent, and curious?)

Sure she does! She puts on this big act in public of being prissy and
oh-so-dignified, and a pretence of being unsentimental and
unaffectionate about her students that a blind cavefish could see
through -- just like a cat, always pretending to be dignified and to
look down on the human, while really chasing its tail like a baby
kitten and absolutely loving, even worrying about, the human.

Giving me confidence that she privately has the traits cats have
privately (maybe except growling and hitting each other over food),
such as a strong inclination to sensual pleasures, such as lying down
on a soft cushion, and baths (tub baths for a human rather than tongue
baths), and cuddling.




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Sun May 18 22:52:00 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 22:52:00 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0q9gr+gduf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0qbug+b1r7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182949

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Beatrice23" <beatrice23 at ...> wrote:

> The German woman did not stand in front of her children.


zanooda:

Yes she did! She "tried to shield them with her arms" (p.233 Am.ed.).
Isn't it the same thing? She didn't offer herself instead of her
children though, because she just had no idea what was going on.  


> Beatrice wrote:
 
> This in a way becomes a contract between the two of them.  LV takes 
> accepts the terms of her verbal / magical contract.  Lily sacrifices 
> herself on the understanding or on the assumption that LV will kill 
> her and spare her son (although we could argue that Lily has no 
> reason to believe that he will do such a thing.)  LV's undoing is 
> that Lily's act of sacrifice protects her son from harm.  Harry does 
> the same thing in DH.  He states the terms before LV AK's him in the 
> forest.  Harry declares that he will willingly die to protect all 
> those fighting at Hogwarts.  


zanooda:

This is true in Lily's case, but not in Harry's. There was no
conversation between Harry and LV in the forest. The only words Harry
said before LV "killed" him were "you weren't", when LV admitted that
he was mistaken (about Harry coming). There was no conversation and no
contract. The words you are referring to ("I was ready to die ..."
etc.) were said later, in "The Flaw in the Plan", during Harry and
LV's last confrontation.




From beatrice23 at yahoo.com  Sun May 18 23:13:31 2008
From: beatrice23 at yahoo.com (Beatrice23)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 23:13:31 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0qbug+b1r7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0qd6r+l3jg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182950

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zanooda2" <zanooda2 at ...> 
wrote:
>
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Beatrice23" <beatrice23@> 
wrote:
> 
> > The German woman did not stand in front of her children.
> 
> 
> zanooda:
> 
> Yes she did! She "tried to shield them with her arms" (p.233 
Am.ed.).
> Isn't it the same thing? She didn't offer herself instead of her
> children though, because she just had no idea what was going on.  
> 
> 
> > Beatrice wrote:
>  
> > This in a way becomes a contract between the two of them.  LV 
takes 
> > accepts the terms of her verbal / magical contract.  Lily 
sacrifices 
> > herself on the understanding or on the assumption that LV will 
kill 
> > her and spare her son (although we could argue that Lily has no 
> > reason to believe that he will do such a thing.)  LV's undoing 
is 
> > that Lily's act of sacrifice protects her son from harm.  Harry 
does 
> > the same thing in DH.  He states the terms before LV AK's him in 
the 
> > forest.  Harry declares that he will willingly die to protect 
all 
> > those fighting at Hogwarts.  
> 
> 
> zanooda:
> 
> This is true in Lily's case, but not in Harry's. There was no
> conversation between Harry and LV in the forest. The only words 
Harry
> said before LV "killed" him were "you weren't", when LV admitted 
that
> he was mistaken (about Harry coming). There was no conversation 
and no
> contract. The words you are referring to ("I was ready to die ..."
> etc.) were said later, in "The Flaw in the Plan", during Harry and
> LV's last confrontation.

Beatrice: Actually, this is incorrect.  I believe that in this case 
LV does say that he will stop hurting those in the castle if Harry 
surrenders himself.  He does this counting on Harry being foolish 
enough to sacrifice himself or foolish enough to believe in LV's 
word.  Instead of Lily setting the terms, oddly it is LV who sets 
them in DH.  I would give you the quote and the page, but I am on 
vacation and I don't have my book with me ;)
>





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon May 19 00:09:07 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 00:09:07 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0q9gr+gduf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0qgf3+r4n1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182951

Carol earlier:
> 
> snip
> > But, again, just stepping in front of your child and choosing to 
die (like the German woman in DH) is not enough. You have to be given
a chance to live in the first place and forfeit that chance.
> <snip>
> 
> Beatrice:  I disagree with you here.  The German woman did not stand
in front of her children.  She was frightened and died first, but at
no time did she do what Lily does (Harry does the same thing at then
end of DH).  What is important in their deaths is not that Snape asks
LV to spare Lily, although this does mean that LV tells her to stand
aside.  What IS important is that Lily says, "kill me INSTEAD."  

Carol responds:

Well, then, we disagree with each other, which, in itself, proves
nothing. And you're mistaken about the German woman not standing in
front of her children: "Two young children came running into the hall.
she tried to shield them with her arms. There was a flash of green
light--" (DH Am. ed. 253).

The scene ends at that point, but since LV is angry and since he has
no qualms about killing children and hates the sound of children
screaming or crying, it's safe to assume, as Harry does, that "by now
he'''s probably killed her whole family" (233).

Moreover, I'd say that Snape's request, which, as you say, results in
LV's repeated requests or orders to Lily to stand aside, is *very*
important. If not for that, Lily would have had no more choice in the
matter than James or the German woman. 

Please notice that I said "Just stepping in front of your child and
choosing to die . . . is not enough." Setting aside the words that
Lily spoke, which I'll get to in a moment, let's look at the actions.
The German woman extended her arms to protect her children, just as
Lily did. Clearly, that wasn't sufficient. She died, and so, it
appears, did her children. Certainly, there's no ancient magic
involved. Voldie is not harmed. I think we can agree that just
stepping in front of your child with your arms spread, an instinctive
gesture that occurs several times in the books, is not enough, any
more than it would protect a Muggle child from a gunman.

James, too, rushes out to protect his wife and child. Again, that's
not enough, nor would it have been enough if he'd had a wand. Why?
Because, as JKR says herself, he was going to die, anyway. He, unlike
Lily, was not given a chance to live and the choice of accepting or
rejecting that chance.

Beatrice:
> 
> This in a way becomes a contract between the two of them.  LV takes
 accepts the terms of her verbal / magical contract. 

Carol responds:
I partially agree with you that there was an implicit contract between
LV and Lily, which *may* have been a factor in what happened to
Voldemort himself, if not in the protection that Harry received. In
fact, I mentioned something of the sort upthread. However, I'd be more
inclined to weight this ostensible contract heavily if JKR or the
narrator or LV or DD ever mentioned it, but no one ever does. What
*is* mentioned, as I've shown in my previous posts, is that Lily was
given a choice, as neither James nor the German woman nor anyone else
that we know of ever was. Lily was told four times to stand aside; she
chose not to accept the offer and offers herself instead of Harry.

Beatrice:
 Lily sacrifices herself on the understanding or on the assumption
that LV will kill her and spare her son (although we could argue that
Lily has no reason to believe that he will do such a thing.)

Carol responds:
I disagree with all except the parenthesis. There's no *understanding*
between Lily and LV, only a plea for (nonexistent) mercy. But, as we
know, LV never had any intention of showing mercy to Harry or of
trading Lily's life for his. He came to GH intending to kill James and
Harry but not necessarily Lily ("As long as she was sensible, she, at
least, had nothing to fear," 344).

Beatrice:
  LV's undoing is that Lily's act of sacrifice protects her son from
harm. <snip>

Carol responds:
Here we agree. Her self-sacrifice protected Harry, but only because
she had a chance to live and didn't take it. That chance, that choice,
is what makes her death a sacrifice rather than a standard murder. Had
LV gone after Neville Longbottom instead of Harry, and had Alice stood
in front of Neville's crib, begging LV for mercy, as she surely would
have done, and even if she had offered herself in his place, it would
not have been enough. Why? Because LV would not have promised to spare
Alice and would not have given her the chance to live. 

The point is that Lily alone *chooses* to die. No one else is given
that choice. And she has that choice solely because Severus snape
begged Voldemort to spare Lily. There would be no point in Harry's
mentioning to Voldemort that Snape begged him to spare Lily's life if
that request, in itself, had not resulted in giving Lily the *choice*
to live or to sacrifice herself for her son. Had she merely died
begging him for mercy for Harry, I don't think that the love charm
would have worked.

To quote again from JKR herself:

ES: This is one of my burning questions since the third book - why did
Voldemort offer Lily so many chances to live? Would he actually have
let her live?

JKR: Mmhm. [IOW, yes.]

ES: Why?

JKR: [silence] Can't tell you. But he did offer, you're absolutely
right. Don't you want to ask me why James's death didn't protect Lily
and Harry? There's your answer, you've just answered your own
question, because *she could have lived and chose to die*. James was
going to be killed anyway. Do you see what I mean? I'm not saying
James wasn't ready to; he died trying to protect his family but he was
going to be murdered anyway. He had no - he wasn't given a choice, so
he rushed into it in a kind of animal way, <snip>

There you have it, in JKR's own words. Lily "could have lived and
chose to die." *That*, not her begging LV to kill her instead of Harry
and LV's breaking of a contract never mentioned in canon or
interviews, is what made her death a sacrifice and gave it the power
of ancient magic. James wasn't given a choice; Lily was. And that,
*along with* her choice to die, is what mattered.

http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-1.htm

Carol, agreeing that Harry, who also chose to die, made a similar
sacrifice without being offered a choice by Voldemort, but he was an
accidental Horcrux and the Chosen One, sharing a drop of magical blood
with LV, so, to adapt Snape's phrase, the usual rules don't apply to him






From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon May 19 01:46:56 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 01:46:56 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0qgf3+r4n1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0qm6g+mb5f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182952

Carol quoted earlier: 
> ES: This is one of my burning questions since the third book - why
did Voldemort offer Lily so many chances to live? Would he actually
have let her live?
> 
> JKR: Mmhm. [IOW, yes.]
> 
> ES: Why?
> 
> JKR: [silence] Can't tell you. But he did offer, you're absolutely
> right. Don't you want to ask me why James's death didn't protect
Lily and Harry? There's your answer, you've just answered your own
question, because *she could have lived and chose to die*. James was
> going to be killed anyway. <snip>

Carol earlier: 
> There you have it, in JKR's own words. Lily "could have lived and
chose to die." 

Carol again:
One more point regarding this quotation: Note what JKR "can't" (won't)
tell the questioner (Emerson Somebody): *Why* Voldemort would have let
Lily live. But we know now that the reason he would have let Lily live
is that Snape asked him to do so. And that bit of information is so
important that JKR "can't" tell it to the questioner. It would ruin
not only the Snape arc but the whole behind Lily's accidental love
magic. She, unlike James, had a choice to live or die because
Voldemort gave it to her. And Voldemort would not have given her that
chance if Snape had not requested it.

Carol, in no way denigrating the value of Lily's sacrifice even though
she had no idea why LV was offering her the chance to live and no idea
of the effects of her self-sacrifice (any more than Harry, when he
willingly sacrificed himself, knew that he would survive and his love
magic would work as Lily's did on a larger scale)




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Mon May 19 04:24:05 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 04:24:05 -0000
Subject: Did Harry Notice?
In-Reply-To: <g0qd6r+l3jg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0qvd5+hr1q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182953

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Beatrice23" <beatrice23 at ...> wrote:
 
> Beatrice: Actually, this is incorrect.  I believe that in this case 
> LV does say that he will stop hurting those in the castle if Harry 
> surrenders himself.  



Oh, I think I know what you mean now :-). You were thinking about the
speech that LV addressed to the defenders of Hogwarts and Harry
personally in "The Princes Tale", right? It didn't happen in the
forest, Harry heard it in the Shrieking Shack  - LV didn't talk to
Harry at all in the forest. 

I'm not sure it can be considered "a contract" though, it's too
ambiguous: LV doesn't promise *directly* to stop hurting people at
Hogwarts. He doesn't say "if you come I won't hurt them anymore".
Besides, who would believe his promise :-)?

Anyway, here is the quote I have in mind (hope it's the one you meant
:-)): "If, at the end of that hour, you have not come to me, have not
given yourself up, then battle recommences. This time, I shall enter
the fray myself, Harry Potter, and I shall find you, and I shall
punish every last man, woman, and child who has tried to conceal you
from me" (p.660). Is this the right one :-)? If not, I don't know what
other conversation you mean, I can't remember anything else:-).


zanooda, wishing Beatrice a fun vacation. 




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Mon May 19 14:52:40 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 14:52:40 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0q8j3+l07u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0s47o+ti35@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182954


> Magpie wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > > The Patronus doesn't reflect the person, but something that 
makes
> the person happy. We know Umbridge likes cats given all the kittens 
on
> plates in her office, so it just reflects her love of cats. 


Potioncat:
The Patronus doesn't reflect something that makes the person happy, 
but you do need a happy thought to cast one. At least once, Harry's 
happy thought is about Ron and Hermione, but his stag Patronus 
doesn't change to something that reflects them.

I think---that while it symbolizes a protector or a source of stength-
-it isn't always reflecting a specific person, or even any human.
> 

> Carol:
> To get back to McGonagall, I agree with Potioncat and anyone else 
who
> thinks that her Patronus <snip> should be an owl

Potioncat:
Oops, that wasn't me. To be honest, I would have expected a Phoenix 
or Bumblebee for her Patronus. She depended on DD so much. 

I think a cat Animagus fits her aloof personality and rather 
dignified bearing.

But I bet she was a corker in her youth!






From willsonkmom at msn.com  Mon May 19 15:01:12 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 15:01:12 -0000
Subject: / Chapter Discussion 20 / Typical family
In-Reply-To: <g0o9ok+r53i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0s4no+tsfi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182955

> Catlady:
> I thought the Weasleys, other than their degree of poverty, ARE
> typical of Gryffindor, and the Blacks, other than their degree of
> wealth, ARE typical of Slytherin. I agree that Hepzibah and 
Zacharias
> did not seem typical of Cedric Diggory, Ernie Macmillan, Justin
> Finch-Fletchley, Hannah Abbot, Susan Bones, Amelia Bones (because
> Houses seem to run in families), etc.

Potioncat:
The more I think of it, just what would be a typical family? And 
then, what would be a typical House-based family? What traits might a 
Gryffindor family have that a Hufflepuff family might not?

How does the Weasley family compare to the Dumbledore family?

How do the Snape, various Black, Gaunt and Malfoy families compare?

What House would we think the Crouch family fit into?

The one big difference I can see between the Malfoys and the Blacks, 
(at least some of the Blacks) is that family members were more 
important than the Cause. Of course, no one in the Malfoy family had 
actually rebelled against the Cause. 







From iam.kemper at gmail.com  Mon May 19 16:44:36 2008
From: iam.kemper at gmail.com (kempermentor)
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 16:44:36 -0000
Subject: / Chapter Discussion 20 / Typical family
In-Reply-To: <g0s4no+tsfi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0sapk+gvkv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182956


> > Catlady:
> > I thought the Weasleys, other than their degree of poverty, ARE
> > typical of Gryffindor, and the Blacks, other than their degree of
> > wealth, ARE typical of Slytherin. I agree that Hepzibah and 
> > Zacharias
> > did not seem typical of Cedric Diggory, Ernie Macmillan, Justin
> > Finch-Fletchley, Hannah Abbot, Susan Bones, Amelia Bones (because
> > Houses seem to run in families), etc.

> Potioncat:
> The more I think of it, just what would be a typical family? And 
> then, what would be a typical House-based family? What traits might 
> a Gryffindor family have that a Hufflepuff family might not?
> 
> How does the Weasley family compare to the Dumbledore family?
> 
> How do the Snape, various Black, Gaunt and Malfoy families compare?
> 
> What House would we think the Crouch family fit into?


Kemper now:
As Hufflepuff is open to take all the rest, I take that to also mean
open to all ideas (that don't significantly harm an individual or the
community).  So I see the Gryffindor family courageously standing up
for their side of a disagreement and attacking the other family member
physically (Aberforth, whose family I take to be sorted into
Gryffindor regardless of the lack of canon support) or verbally
(seemingly, all of Percy's siblings.)  Age mellows, but Aberforth
holds onto his grudge for over a century.  I imagine Hufflepuff
families would work hard to achieve balance with family members
experiencing strong disagreement. 

As for the Crouch's... I think they would be Ravenclaw: they seem to
value intelligence and I can easily see them coping with issues by
intellectualizing. ... If Sr isn't a Ravenclaw, then he'd be a
Slytherin, but, to me, Jr is definitely a Ravenclaw.

Kemper




From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Mon May 19 16:49:32 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 16:49:32 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0s47o+ti35@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0sb2s+3t3f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182957

> > Magpie wrote:
> > > > <snip>
> > > > The Patronus doesn't reflect the person, but something that 
> makes
> > the person happy. We know Umbridge likes cats given all the 
kittens 
> on
> > plates in her office, so it just reflects her love of cats. 
> 
> 
> Potioncat:
> The Patronus doesn't reflect something that makes the person happy, 
> but you do need a happy thought to cast one. At least once, Harry's 
> happy thought is about Ron and Hermione, but his stag Patronus 
> doesn't change to something that reflects them.
> 
> I think---that while it symbolizes a protector or a source of 
stength-
> -it isn't always reflecting a specific person, or even any human.

Magpie:
There's always been that rumor that JKR said James was a nose-biting 
teacup for a while because he was so happy to have finally made one.

But no, the Patronus doesn't have to represent a *person* but it 
represents some over-arching idea or something that brings comfort 
and protection. So it's still, as I understand it, the thing that 
makes you happy on the grander scale. For instance, Harry's stag is 
his father, which relates to his real family and being a wizard. 
That's still the thing that makes him feel safe and happy even if at 
a particular moment he's thinking of Ron and Hermione who make him 
happier in a shorter-term. Likewise, your Patronus turns into a 
symbol of your true love because no matter what you might think of at 
that moment, they are your happiest memory. Harry reached for Harry 
and Hermione because they were closer presences in his life, but they 
hadn't replaced his father as representing his greatest source of 
happiness and what gave him security.

With Umbridge, for instance, we know kittens seem to make her happy 
and make her feel secure. She's not necessarily casting the spell by 
thinking about kittens, but they make a good representation of 
whatever her greatest source of security is. Maybe a person she 
associates with cats or whatever cats symbolise to her.

-m






From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon May 19 17:06:31 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 17:06:31 -0000
Subject: / Chapter Discussion 20 / Typical family
In-Reply-To: <g0s4no+tsfi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0sc2n+ub1s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182958

Potioncat:
> The more I think of it, just what would be a typical family? And 
then, what would be a typical House-based family? What traits might a
Gryffindor family have that a Hufflepuff family might not?
> 
> How does the Weasley family compare to the Dumbledore family?
> 
> How do the Snape, various Black, Gaunt and Malfoy families compare?
> 
> What House would we think the Crouch family fit into?
> 
> The one big difference I can see between the Malfoys and the Blacks,
(at least some of the Blacks) is that family members were more 
important than the Cause. Of course, no one in the Malfoy family had
actually rebelled against the Cause.

Carol responds:
If we eliminate the Weasleys and look only at the other families we
actually see, a typical family in the WW seems to consist of two
parents and a son! The Crouches; the Malfoys; both James's family and
Harry's original, pre-Dursley, families; the Snapes; the Finnegans (if
his father counts); the Diggorys, the Longbottoms (before their
incapacitation), the Notts, and apparently the Zabinis, the Crabbes,
and the Goyles as well. Zacharias smith, too, seems to be an only
child. The Blacks change the pattern by having two sons and the
Lovegoods (before Mrs. L's death) by having a daughter! Obviously,
there are as many girls as boys at Hogwarts, and some of them, like
Muggle-born Lily, may have a sister (or brother), but the typical
family we see depicted has one child, and it's usually a boy. (No
wonder the Pure-Bloods are dying out!) 

I think that the biggest contrast is not between the families of
students in different Houses as between those born in the WW, whether
they're Half-Bloods like Snape or Pure-Bloods like the Crouches, and
those born in the Muggle world, whose families would always be
outsiders to the WW. Of course, the families of Half-Blood children,
if one parent is a Muggle rather than a fully WW-adapted Muggle-born,
would face special problems, as we see with the Snapes. (We never do
learn how the Finnegans dealt with the problem once Mrs. F. confessed
that she was a Witch. We don't see Seamus's Muggle father at the
QWC--I doubt he'd have been allowed to come or could have gotten past
the Muggle-repelling charms--and it's his mother who twice wants him
out of Hogwarts.

Anyway, given Mr. Crouch's opposition to Dark magic, I doubt that the
Crouch home when Barty Jr. was young was anything like the Black
house, whatever House the two Bartys were Sorted into. Both of them
were highly intelligent and magically gifted (based on the testimony
of others for Barty Sr. and on Barty Jr.'s actions in GoF). If it's
possible to be Sorted into Slytherin based on pure blood and ambition
alone, despite an aversion to Dark Magic, I can see Barty Sr. being a
Slytherin. Otherwise, he strikes me as a Ravenclaw, very intellectual
and austere like Rowena herself. Barty Sr. could have been Sorted into
Slytherin, a disappointment to his father, who nevertheless was proud
of his son's twelve OWLs, and that Sorting could have been the
beginning of the estrangement between the father and son (which seems
to have persisted despite the twelve OWLs). I see Barty Jr.'s joining
the DEs as an act of rebellion against his tyrannical father but also,
possibly, a bid for Pure-Blood supremacy similar to Regulus's. (They
were about the same age, maybe a year apart, the youngest DEs of VW1.)
So, IMO, Barty Jr. was probably a Slytherin, but I can see him being a
Ravenclaw. I'd like that, actually. We need DEs from other Houses, and
he would fill the bill.

Carol, just responding to Potioncat without having any real arguments
to present





From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Mon May 19 19:11:28 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 19:11:28 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0sb2s+3t3f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0sjd0+jarh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182959

> 
> Magpie:
> With Umbridge, for instance, we know kittens seem to make her happy 
> and make her feel secure. She's not necessarily casting the spell by 
> thinking about kittens, but they make a good representation of 
> whatever her greatest source of security is. Maybe a person she 
> associates with cats or whatever cats symbolise to her.

Montavilla47:

Does this mean we should start shipping Umbridge/McGonagall?

Heaven forfend!




From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Mon May 19 19:18:11 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 19:18:11 -0000
Subject: That Minerva, what a card (WAS: Patroni (speculation) )
In-Reply-To: <g0s47o+ti35@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0sjpj+guj8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182961

> Potioncat on McGonagall:
>
> But I bet she was a corker in her youth!
___________________________________________

Dear Minerva,

Congratulations on your appointment as Headmistress at Hogwarts. They
couldn't have found a more deserving candidate. I know the school
will grow and prosper under your tutelage. You have the utmost
respect of your fellow professors and I know the students, from
whichever house, will come to see your fairness and compassion.

Ah, how things have changed, have they not m'dear? I can still
remember our times together at Hogwarts, when we were students. By
the way, has anyone ever figured out that one of the gargoyles
outside of the teacher's lounge used to be a troll until you
transformed it? You never told me where you found that troll, was it
in the Forbidden Forest? I know I'll never forget that time the
Centaurs chased us out, I still have the scar on my tush where one of
their arrows got me. I think he was aiming there, but who knows,
after I called him Seabiscuit he wasn't to happy with me.

And what about the time you transformed that fish into a book and
snuck it into Amelia Bones' book bag? It took her forever to figure
out where that smell was coming from. I never laughed so hard as the
time I watched her empty all her books out and kept screaming
Scourgify at that bag, over and over again to no avail. She never
found out it was you, did she?

But your best one had to be the one at that Muggle wax museum, Madam
Tussaud's was it? When you made the wax statues talk back to the
Muggles. Then you animated them all to have them perform the last act
of MacBeth in the Henry the VIII display. I was there, though you
didn't see me. Marie Antoinette crying "Out, damned spot!" from her
head that she was holding in her arms. Elvis and James Dean carrying
tree limbs and singing "A-huntin' we will go..." Where do you come up
with them?

Oh, I've always been meaning to ask you, but I don't see you much
these days; Is it true that you once transformed into your cat and
snuck into Buckingham Palace with the other pets back in the 50s? I
heard that you transformed every handbag the Queen owned into a glass
slipper and left a note that said, "For Charles, he's going to need
these!" Is that true?

Minerva, we had some fun times when we were younger didn't we? Well,
you had some fun times, I was only along for the ride. What to you
say I stop by Hogwarts and we can reminisce?

Irreverently yours,
Dedalus Diggle

**********************

Dedalus,

I told you 50 years ago to leave me alone, and I haven't changed my
mind since. And if you tell anyone about the wax museum, I'll turn
you into a toad again and this time I won't change you back. You know
I can do it.

Minerva McGonagall
Headmistress, Hogwarts
and bloody well going to stay that way

************
Mike, who wishes Minerva a long and prosperous reign as Head Witch.
And who foolishly forgot to sign his first post and is re-issuing it 
now with a signature.





From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net  Tue May 20 21:20:30 2008
From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman)
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 21:20:30 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
Message-ID: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182962

Well, poor Mike thinks he may have killed the list with his last 
post.  There's been a stunned silence around here for 24 hours now, 
anyway. ;)

So I thought I'd break that silence to ask a very mundane sort of 
question of all y'all.

That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the release 
of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books has become 
your favorite?

Tangential questions relating to that one might be:  Has your 
favorite changed over time, or since the series has ended?  Can you 
explain WHY this book is your favorite?

Then, if you're game, how 'bout these:
*Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?  Again, 
can you express why?
*Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now that 
it's all over?  Any pourquoi to add?
*Which character would you just love to follow from here on out if 
you could?  Por que?
*Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when you 
(if you) re-read?  Warum?
*Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you find yourself 
turning to again and again?  Perche?

*Are you surprised at any of your responses?  IOW, is there anything 
about how you feel about the series now that you never expected you'd 
feel?

Siriusly Snapey Susan,
in a reflective mood today







From jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com  Tue May 20 21:35:02 2008
From: jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com (Jayne)
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 21:35:02 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0vg66+d7d0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182963

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" 
<susiequsie23 at ...> wrote:
>
> Well, poor Mike thinks he may have killed the list with his last 
> post.  There's been a stunned silence around here for 24 hours now, 
> anyway. ;)
> 
> So I thought I'd break that silence to ask a very mundane sort of 
> question of all y'all.
> 
> That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the 
release 
> of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books has 
become 
> your favorite?
> 
> Tangential questions relating to that one might be:  Has your 
> favorite changed over time, or since the series has ended?  Can you 
> explain WHY this book is your favorite?
> 
> Then, if you're game, how 'bout these:
> *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?  
Again, 
> can you express why?
> *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now that 
> it's all over?  Any pourquoi to add?
> *Which character would you just love to follow from here on out if 
> you could?  Por que?
> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when 
you 
> (if you) re-read?  Warum?
> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you find 
yourself 
> turning to again and again?  Perche?
> 
> *Are you surprised at any of your responses?  IOW, is there 
anything 
> about how you feel about the series now that you never expected 
you'd 
> feel?
> 
> Siriusly Snapey Susan,
> in a reflective mood today
>
Well my favourite started out as OoP ,and is now my second fav. That 
honour now goes to DH, because JKRties up things in this book and 
Harry matures and most important  * I just like it*

My least favourite is the second one (I am having a senior moment as 
I can't remember it's name without going into my daughters bedroom to 
look and probably waking her up ) 

Lupin is still my favourite character as he is loyal and a true 
friend to Harry

I would like to follow Harry to see what happens in the future


Jayne




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Tue May 20 21:38:09 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 21:38:09 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0vgc1+61q1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182964

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" 
<susiequsie23 at ...> wrote:
>
> Well, poor Mike thinks he may have killed the list with his last 
> post.  There's been a stunned silence around here for 24 hours now, 
> anyway. ;)
> 
> So I thought I'd break that silence to ask a very mundane sort of 
> question of all y'all.
> 
> That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the 
release 
> of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books has 
become 
> your favorite?
> <SNIP>


Alla:

Oh, me loves this game.

Favorite book. Hmmmm, I would still say Prisoner of Azkaban, GoF and 
yes, Deathly Hallows. I got so many emotionally satisfying moments in 
that last book that I do like it very much.


Has my favorite changed over the time? Well, DH became one of them, 
but I still love Prisoner and Goblet the most because Prisoner 
introduced my favorite adults in the series, because it touched my 
emotions the most and because after those books I truly started to 
care for Harry not just because he is is the hero on the quest.

My least favorite book, well OOP, definitely. I love some things in 
there very much, but when I read it I was hurting with Harry, I hated 
Umbridge, I cried for Sirius. So I guess when I say least favorite, I 
should say the one which is hard to reread, not the one which I think 
badly written or something.

Which characters I love the best when it is all over? I still like 
sooo many of them and still love Sirius and Harry and Ron the best.

I was a bit dissapointed with Ron in DH, but then I realized that I 
should be happy that he was allowed real growth.

I LOVE Snape and Dumbledore as well written characters too :-) 

I do not sympathize with them (well, maybe with Dumbledore sometimes) 
or respect them, but I think they are very well done.

I certainly have temptation to skip Umbridge in OOP and I will not 
reread Harry's grieving over Sirius at the end and yes, yes, 
Dumbledore's speech at the end of OOP makes me sooo angry.

I will write more about favorite and least favorite chapters later.

Am I surprised at any of my reactions? Well, I did not expect to have 
so much disgust for Dumbledore at the end, even if I forgive him if 
Harry can - that is considering the fact that I already hated some of 
his **actions** indeed should say a lot.

Thanks :)

Alla





From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net  Tue May 20 21:46:29 2008
From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman)
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 21:46:29 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0vgrl+dtue@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182965

SSSusan asked: 
> So I thought I'd break that silence to ask a very mundane sort of 
> question of all y'all.
> 
> That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the 
> release of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books 
> has become your favorite?

SSSusan:
I thought I'd get my own ball rolling and post my answers separately 
from my questions. :)

Let's see.  My favorite?  Well, believe it or not, I am quite fond of 
Deathly Hallows.  I know that's not a popular answer, but it's 
essentially true for me. 


SSSusan asked:
> Tangential questions relating to that one might be:  Has your 
> favorite changed over time, or since the series has ended?  Can you 
> explain WHY this book is your favorite?

SSSusan:
For the longest time, PoA was my answer to that question.  This 
seemed to be a LOT of people's answer, in fact.  Perhaps it still is 
the overwhelming favorite?  

In a way, it's surprising that POA is one of my favs -- heck, Voldy 
didn't even have a part in it and TT gives me fits!  But it was so 
CLEVER, and it moved along so very well.  It was just exciting for me 
and I loved Sirius.

OotP and HBP are also strong candidates for my favorite.  I know that 
many fans (adult fans, especially) didn't care all that much for OotP 
and had mixed reactions to HBP and had **highly** mixed and sometimes 
volatile reactions to DH.  But I liked the Harry we got in OotP, as 
he felt authentic to me, and even though I hated Sirius' death, the 
whole ending was very exciting, with the mystery rooms so inventive 
and intriguing.

Also, HBP featured Snape so prominently that it would be hard not to 
find it a favorite.  

And DH, as the closure to it all, with so many things playing out as 
I wanted them to... and with the writing in a couple of chapters so 
*very* effective for me (the scene after Dobby's death, the gruesome 
Bathilda's Secret, the Forest Again chapter), I find that, in spite 
of some letdowns, it really ranks right up there.


SSSusan asked:
> Then, if you're game, how 'bout these:
> *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?  
> Again, can you express why?

SSSusan:
Probably CoS, which has been my consistent response to this question, 
although that one carries more meaning after the last couple came 
out.  Still, the giant snake in the walls/plumbing didn't do as much 
for me as many of the other books.


SSSusan asked:
> *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now that 
> it's all over?  Pourquoi?

SSSusan:
Interestingly, I think Minerva McGonagall.  She's always been a 
favorite, and I just find myself thinking about her, missing her wit, 
appreciating her overall fairness, pondering her strength & her style.


SSSusan asked:
> *Which character would you just love to follow from here on out if 
> you could?  Por que?

SSSusan:
Oh... besides the trio + Ginny, which are sort of a given for many of 
us, I think I'd be interested in seeing Neville moving forward.  He 
made such great strides and gained so much confidence, I'd like to 
see how that played out in the next years.  I'd also like to see what 
kind of person Percy ended up being after those rough times with his 
family & his career ambitions, and then the loss of his brother.


SSSusan asked:
> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when 
> you (if you) re-read?  Warum?
> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you find 
> yourself turning to again and again?  Perche?

SSSusan:
I sometimes am tempted to skip CoS in toto.  I've also been tempted 
to skip the Bathilda's Secret chapter because it's so gross. :)  
Mostly I don't skip, though.

As to chapters I've been inclined to revisit, there are two in HBP 
(Spinner's End and The Lightning Struck Tower), but they're mostly in 
DH -- really, everything from The Lost Diadem on, esp. The Prince's 
Tale & The Forest Again.  

As to why, I guess because I find it very satisfying to have gotten 
what I wanted there re: Harry's belief that he needed to sacrifice 
himself + his willingness to do so actually being "enough."  And I 
find the story very moving.  Also, to have so much of Snape's story 
revealed in one fell swoop is fascinating.


SSSusan asked:
> *Are you surprised at any of your responses?  IOW, is there 
> anything about how you feel about the series now that you never 
> expected you'd feel?

SSSusan:
It was hard to know how I would feel, never having participated in 
this kind of a read-it-as-it-unfolds-and-wait-for-its-conclusion 
process before, *nor* having been involved in any kind of online 
fandom as active & interesting as the HP fandom.  

I think I was surprised, though, how hard it was for me to move on to 
other books.  Also disappointed how little there was to say 
afterwards.  There WERE things to say -- but it didn't take so long 
to do it... and there was no more wacky and sometimes hilarious 
postulating going on... and there was difficulty at times for those 
who strongly disliked and those who strongly liked the series, being 
together.  That part didn't totally surprise me, but it was hard to 
have anticipated how all of that would feel.

FWIW,
Siriusly Snapey Susan






From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Tue May 20 22:25:39 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 22:25:39 -0000
Subject: Magical Contracts and Ancient Magic
Message-ID: <g0vj53+5hcj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182966

---http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182947
> Beatrice: 
> What is important in their deaths is not that Snape
> asks LV to spare Lily, although this does mean that LV tells
> her to stand aside. What IS important is that Lily says,
> "kill me INSTEAD."
>
> This in a way becomes a contract between the two of them. LV
> accepts the terms of her verbal / magical contract. 

Mike:
Beatrice has raised an interesting question. How important to the 
activation of the "Ancient Magic" was the choice to live for Lily? 
Asked another way, was it only Lily's choice to live or were there 
other factors just as important to the once off backfiring AK at 
Godric's Hollow?

As Beatrice also brought up, I'd like to compare and contrast GH 
with "The Forest Again" AK against Harry. How were they different, 
what was the same?

Voldemort instructed Lily to step aside. According to LV's flashback 
memory, he had gone to the house with the intention of sparing Lily's 
life. How important the intentions of the killer are, I couldn't say 
for sure. They don't seem to carry much weight in my way of reading. 
But it did create the choice for Lily. Lily then chose to die, she 
literally begged Voldemort to kill her instead of Harry. We don't 
know what was in Lily's mind, so we must take her words at face 
value. She asked to die in Harry's stead, so mustn't we assume that 
she thought that was a possible outcome?

In the forest, it was Harry that was going to meet Voldemort. Harry 
had already made the choice whether to show up in the first place. 
And we see in Harry's thoughts, ("Dumbledore knew,
, that Harry would 
not let anyone else die for him now that he had discovered it was in 
his power to stop it." <DH p.693, US> ) that Harry made the choice 
willingly and with the intention of preventing further deaths. 
Because this time when they meet, Voldemort would give no one a 
choice. Harry was his intended target and there were no choices in 
the offing. 

Yet Voldemort had already given Harry the choice. And Voldemort 
himself set the parameters. "You have permitted your friends to die 
for you rather than face me yourself. I shall wait for one hour 
 If, 
at the end of that hour, you have not come to me, not given yourself 
up, then battle recommences
 I shall punish every last man, woman, 
and child 
" <DH p. 660, US> 

So, in both cases there was a choice. Lily chose to die in hopes of 
protecting Harry. Harry intended to die in hopes of protecting 
"anyone else". In the first case, Voldemort had no intention and made 
no pretence of not killing Harry. Whether Lily had any idea that 
there was some "Ancient Magic" available to make her sacrifice 
meaningful, we have no way of knowing but it seems unlikely. 

In the second case, Voldemort implied that the war would end and no 
harm would come to anyone else, if Harry gave himself up. Whether 
Harry believed that is unclear, but he was sure that his sacrifice 
would put Voldemort one step closer to defeat and that seemed to be 
at least part of his intention. As I said above, I don't place much 
weight in the intentions of the killer, Voldemort, as to whether or 
not the "Ancient Magic" will be activated. Conversely, the intention 
of the one voluntarily sacrificing his/her life seems to make all the 
difference in the world.

Also, in both cases there seems to be a verbal contract in the 
offing. Lily offered her life "instead" of Harry's. Voldemort offers 
to cease the battle, not have any more of Harry's friends "die for 
you" if Harry gives himself up. The fact that Voldemort intends to 
kill Harry is so heavily implied that there can be no doubt as to 
what the verbal contract is demanding of Harry and therefore what 
Voldemort is conceding in exchange.

The theme of "choice" runs heavy through the series. There is no 
doubt in my mind that the choice to sacrifice oneself in defense of 
others commands access to the ultimate magical force in the WW. But 
surely, somewhere, sometime, someone has offered his/her life to 
protect someone else, thereby voluntarily sacrificing their life. So 
why didn't this "Ancient Magic" ever activate before?

This is a magical world and we are talking about ancient magic. It 
seems reasonable that the presence of a magical contract (also a 
recurring theme, from the Fidelius to the Unbreakable Vow), would be 
a necessary ingredient to activate this ancient magic.

Sure enough, both Harry and Lily, giving up their lives, fulfilled 
their half of their respective magical contracts. Both times, 
Voldemort tried to deny, acted counter to his half of the magical 
contract. Both times he was thwarted commensurate to how he attempts 
to break his contract. At GH, where his contract was not to kill 
Harry, his attempt to kill rebounds and "kills" himself. At Hogwarts, 
where he had promised to "punish" if Harry didn't show and thereby 
contracted himself to *not* punish when Harry did, his attempts to 
punish are weak, wear off quickly, and are generally ineffectual.

Note, Harry is not protected by the "Ancient Magic" in the final 
showdown in the Great Hall. The contract was for Harry to give up his 
life to protect the others, and Harry fulfilled his part of the 
contract just as Voldemort suffered the consequences of trying to 
break his half of the contract. But the contract was not made for 
Harry's protection and therefore there was none for Harry.

Most of you know I'm not a fan of interviews. Nor do I put too much 
stock in authorial intent unless s/he has made that intent clear in 
the text. Through her interviews, I know that JKR *intended* to give 
Lily the choice, that being the key ingredient as to why the AK 
rebounded and Harry lived. And though she tried to hide why Lily was 
given that choice, she never hid Lily's pleading to "kill me 
instead". JKR may not have thought of Lily's pleading as a magical 
contract, but putting it in context with the other themes and motifs 
of the series it reads like a magical contract to me.

Mike




From lwalsh at acsalaska.net  Tue May 20 22:42:56 2008
From: lwalsh at acsalaska.net (Laura Lynn Walsh)
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 14:42:56 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
References: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <AFB63E41-CE7B-4748-8E4C-456E5807120C@acsalaska.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 182967


On 2008, May 20, , at 13:20, cubfanbudwoman wrote:

> That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the release
> of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books has become
> your favorite?

I guess my favorite now is DH.  I think it has the most complex
dealings with character development.  We see Dumbledore's
history and Snape's.  We see big changes in Ron, and lesser,
but important changes in Hermione and Harry.

> Tangential questions relating to that one might be:  Has your
> favorite changed over time, or since the series has ended?  Can you
> explain WHY this book is your favorite?

My favorite seems to change quite often.  I like the innocence,
astonishment, and camaraderie of SS/PS.  I like the revelations
of PoA.  I like the teenagery anger of OoP.

> *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?  Again,
> can you express why?


I think my least favorite up until HBP was GoF.  GoF seemed
too long for what it was worth.  And the plausibility of the crowd
scenes still bothers me.  I mean, the dragon thing, I could get,
but what in the name of Godric's Hollow were the spectators
watching for an hour while the competitors were in the lake?
And what were they watching while Harry et al. rambled through
the maze?  The hedges were so high they couldn't see the
champions, or else the champions could have seen them.
And in the German version (which I listen to on CD), I really
hate the Rita Skeeter (Rita Kimmkorn) voice, making the whole
book rather distasteful to me.

I couldn't stand HBP until DH came out.  I had to skip over
some of the chapters because they were so painful to me -
Spinner's End in particular.  I don't dislike it as much now,
as I can see the craft in Snape's words and actions.  I don't
like Snape, unlike many posters here, but I do respect him.

> *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now that
> it's all over?  Any pourquoi to add?

I like Neville a lot better now.  He has grown out of his insecurity
into an interesting person.

> *Which character would you just love to follow from here on out if
> you could?  Por que?

I am ever the future-looking reader.  I would love to know what
Albus Severus, Rosie, Hugo, Lily, and even James Sirius get
up to at Hogwarts.

> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when you
> (if you) re-read?  Warum?

I still find the hippogriff scene with Draco's injury difficult.  I long
for Hagrid to be aware enough to yell at Draco to pay attention.

I often skip GoF when I re-read or re-listen to the series.  See
reasons above.

> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you find yourself
> turning to again and again?  Perche?

I am still pondering the ending of DH, especially the parts when
Harry is mostly alone or on his own.  I am still thinking about how
he managed to put it all together, so I keep going back to any
scene that might have helped him "get" it all.  Yes, I know that
pretty much the whole series is relevant, but I am thinking in
particular about the hallows vs. horcruxes question.

> *Are you surprised at any of your responses?  IOW, is there anything
> about how you feel about the series now that you never expected you'd
> feel?

I am a bit surprised that my views about individual books are
still changing.

Laura W.
-- 
Laura Lynn Walsh    lwalsh at acsalaska.net
http://llwcontemplations.blogspot.com



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




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Wed May 21 00:00:52 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 00:00:52 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g0vonl+a1rh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182968

SSS wrote:
>
> Well, poor Mike thinks he may have killed the list with his last 
> post.  There's been a stunned silence around here for 24 hours now, 
> anyway. ;)

Carol responds:
Poor Mike! It's not that you killed the list; it's just that some
posts, while entertaining to read, are hard to respond to, and most of
the current threads seem to have run their course. (I can't think of
any new topics at the moment, either, but maybe this one will get us
going again.)

SSS: 
> So I thought I'd break that silence to ask a very mundane sort of 
question of all y'all.

Carol:

"All y'all"? I do believe that's redundantly repetitious. :-p!

SSS: 
> That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the release
of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books has become
your favorite?

Carol responds:
Now that Snape is revealed as DD's (or Lily's) man, or, at any rate,
not a "murderin' traitor" any more than SB was, I'll go with HBP.
After all, Snape shares the title with Harry and he's a very important
(and thoroughly misunderstood!) character both as boy and man. Lots of
delicious Snape scenes, from "Spinner's End" to the duel with Harry
(if easily parrying Harry's curses can be called a duel) and glimpses
of Snape the Healer. Besides Snape, we get a Draco on the verge of
repentance or conversion, a Dumbledore who still seems wise and good
(if a bit too full of himself and too sparing in his description of
Snape's role in treating the ring curse), and a Trelawney who actually
seems to be a Seer, even if her spectacles are a bit fogged. (She saw
disaste coming and DD ignored her warnings; I guess he knew that he
would be the victim or that it couldn't be averted.) I may be the only
person on the list who likes "The Other Minister": I thought it
depicted Fudge very sympathetically and I forgave him on the spot for
listening to Umbridge in OoP. There are small moments, too, such as
Harry's two impulses to laugh during Dumbledore's funeral and his
wondering what's the matter with him. I want to reach out to him and
say, "Nothing's the matter, Harry. This is the way Dumbledore would
want you to feel." (I like *that* Dumbledore--calm and brave on the
tower, constantly stating his trust in Snape, warmly humorous and
eccentric in his public appearances: "Nitwit, blubber, oddment,
tweak"). And the cave scene is scary and suspenseful, or was the first
time through. The book ends with Snape's loyalties hanging in the
balance and Harry's quest neatly set out (of course, it wasn't quite
so simple)--very much the penultimate act of a seven-act play waiting
for a resolution. Too bad that resolution wasn't all I hoped it would
be though it had some pleasant as well as unpleasant surprises. 
 
SSS:
> Tangential questions relating to that one might be:  Has your 
favorite changed over time, or since the series has ended?  Can you 
explain WHY this book is your favorite?

Carol:
Well, I've already explained why HBP is my current favorite (though of
course, that didn't happen till I'd read DH. I had to be sure that the
tower scene was distorted by Harry's pov and preconceptions and by the
impossibility of his knowing the truth at that point before I made HBP
my favorite. That is, if Snape had really been what he appears to be
at the end of the book, it would have become my *least* favorite,
along with DH, in short order. In fact, to be frank, I probably would
not still be rereading and discussing the books.

Until HBP came out and was, in effect, waiting in the wings to be the
favorite if DH proved Snape to have killed DD on DD's orders or at his
request, my favorite was GoF. Why? I'm not sure. I liked Cedric
Diggory a lot (his death scene will always be painful for me). I was
thoroughly taken in by Fake!Moody even though I didn't like him at
all, especially demonstrating the Unforgiveable Curses to the fourth
years and torturing that spider in front of Neville). I liked finding
out a bit about the DE's backgrounds, not to mention Snape's in the
Pensieve scenes, and Snape showing his Dark Mark to Fudge, appearing
in the Foe Glass, and going off on a dangerous mission for Dumbledore
seemed to me definitive proof of his loyalties. I couldn't wait for
OoP to come out in paperback. I rushed out and bought it in hardback.
I wanted more of the same and so, I suppose, OoP was a disappointment.
(I did like the Occlumency scenes and the moment when Neville's mother
gave him the gum wrapper in St. Mungo's made me cry, but, still, the
book was a letdown.)

Anyway, GoF remains my second favorite. You just have to ignore the
silly stuff, like wondering how the spectators entertained themselves
while the champions were at the bottom of the lake.

SSS: 
> Then, if you're game, how 'bout these:
> *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?  Again,
can you express why?

Carol:
Unlike a lot of people, I've never particularly disliked CoS. (I could
live without Dobby even though he redeemed himself so bravely in DH.
Yes, he was trying to help Harry, but with friends like that . . . .)
As I said earlier, I was disappointed in OoP. Maybe it was too much
Umbridge and not enough Snape or maybe Harry didn't seem like Harry. I
could do without Grawp, as well. And DH--well, it was certainly
exciting, but it took me a long time to recover from Dumbledore as he
appeared in "the Prince's Tale." (I didn't mind the friendship with
Grindelwald and the flirtation with Muggle domination nearly as much
as the harsh puppeteer we seemed to see in Snape's Pensieve memories.
I think, though, to get a fair and reasonably complete picture of
either Snape or Dumbledore, we'd have to set all their scenes in a
chronological sequence, and even then, we wouldn't know their
thoughts.) I didn't like the casting of Unforgiveable Curses by good
guys when another curse or hex would suffice, and, of course, I didn't
want Snape to die, especially not at the fangs of Nagini (but that
last bit of magic was very impressive!).

SSS:
> *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now that
it's all over?  Any pourquoi to add?

Carol:
Other than Snape, do you mean? He is and always will be my favorite HP
character. But I like poor Cedric and I acquire a real fondness for
Luna. I like Ron despite all his faults--and brave Neville, of course.
Kreacher was a surprise--I like the reformed Kreacher (in small doses)
and Master Regulus, champion of House Elves. And, for most of DH, I
actually liked Harry (except for his desire for revenge on Snape and
that stupid Crucio).

SSS:
> *Which character would you just love to follow from here on out if
you could?  Por que?

Carol:
Well, of course, it's fun to imagine that JKR was wrong about Snape
and to have Hermione or a summoned House Elf rescue him. As for the
future of the characters outside the books, I don't really care who
married whom and what their careers were. I *would* like to know if
Ollivander had an heir or successor--no Ollivander wands after 2300
years or thereabouts seems like a real loss to the WW. I'd also like
to know what happened to the various DEs and, though I don't like him
as a character, to Pius Thicknesse., who, after all, was under the
Imperius Curse and not fully responsible for what he did. And, just
out of curiosity, I'd like to know what became of Sturgis Podmore,
Fudge, Bagman, Mrs. Figg, even Mundungus Fletcher--not to mention how
Stan Shunpike got involved with the DEs and whether he really was
Imperiused. But Neville marrying Hannah Abott and Hagrid never
marrying or even rejoining Madame Maxime? JKR should have left those
things open for readers to imagine as they see fit.

> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when
you (if you) re-read?  Warum?

Carol:
"Warum"? "The Sacking of Severus Snape," "The Elder Wand") are still
hard for me to read. I'm rereading DH and I just forced myself to
reread the first of those two chapters. It isn't just McGonagall's
vicious attack on Snape (she does believe him to be a murderer but
those daggers were worthy of Bellatrix) or her calling him coward and
Snape's being forced to jump through the window and fly, batlike,
away. It's Harry's Crucio and McGonagall's Imperius Curse and her
assumption that the Slytherins are likely to join Voldemort. I hate
that chapter. And, of course, I hate what happens to Snape in "The
Elder Wand." Other chapters in other books I'm tempted to skip for
other reasons--for example, Hagrid's account of his adventures with
the giants in OoP and Harry's first detention with Umbridge in the
same book. I'm sure that there are others, but that's all I can think
of at the moment.

SSS:
> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you find
yourself turning to again and again?  Perche?

Carol:
"Spinner's End," maybe, or "The Doe Patronus." Parts of "the Prince's
Tale." I don't normally read chapters out of context unless I'm
rereading to write or respond to a chapter discussion or I'm looking
for evidence to support a point in a post, but I find those chapters
either fascinating or comforting. (I don't think I need to specify
which fall under which labels!)

SSS: 
> *Are you surprised at any of your responses?  IOW, is there anything
about how you feel about the series now that you never expected you'd
feel?

Carol:
I certainly never expected a series of children's books to pull me in
this way or to cause such strong emotions in me and in other readers.
I didn't expect to feel so bereaved at the end of the series or so
annoyed by inconsistencies or so disillusioned with JKR herself for a
number of reasons that have no direct relation to this topic. I
suppose I'm like Snape with Lily. I can't just get over the books, set
them asie, move on to something else.

Or maybe it's this group that I can't let go of. Like Snape and Harry
at Hogwarts, I've found a home.

Carol, thanking SSS for her new thread and hoping that she [SSS] finds
herself in a reflective mood more often





From lauren1 at catliness.com  Wed May 21 02:02:50 2008
From: lauren1 at catliness.com (Lauren Merryfield)
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 19:02:50 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
References: <g0vonl+a1rh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <72D3CD73A8BB40D2BA783802FFAB36E5@laurenye0o5w8x>

No: HPFGUIDX 182969

Hi,
SSS: 
> That question is: Now that we're almost a year out from the release
of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books has become
your favorite?


Lauren:

My favorite book was GOF, with the TriWizard Tournament and Harry making it through the terrible time with Voldemort.  I thought that book was really well-written.  
Thanks
Lauren


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




From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Wed May 21 05:43:51 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 05:43:51 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g10cqn+pf08@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182970

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" <susiequsie23 at ...> wrote:
>
> Well, poor Mike thinks he may have killed the list with his last 
> post.  There's been a stunned silence around here for 24 hours now, 
> anyway. ;)
> 
> So I thought I'd break that silence to ask a very mundane sort of 
> question of all y'all.
> 
> That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the release 
> of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books has become 
> your favorite?

Montavilla47:
My favorate is still the same as it was before DH came out:  
Prisoner of Azkaban.  It had the best plot twist in the series, with
the clues all nicely planted in all of the first three books.  It had a 
happier ending than either of the first two books (since now
Harry had an adult who truly loved him, plus Remus), with a 
little bit of darker set-up for the next book.  

And, it didn't leave any loose ends that weren't tied up 
later.  


> Then, if you're game, how 'bout these:
> *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?  Again, 
> can you express why?

Montavilla47:
Right now, DH is my least favorite.  There were a lot of loose
strings that needed to be tied up in that book, and many were
left hanging.  There were several character developments that 
made me unhappy, the most obvious of which was what happened
with Remus.  

I found the camping section tedious and frustrating, not just 
because I suspected I could a better job of hiding out, but no 
one besides Hermione even seemed to be trying to think through 
the situation.

To digress a little, I just read through Prince Caspian again--for 
obvious reasons--and the kids there are  younger, arrive in the 
wilds with nothing but their bookbags and a flashlight, and are 
able to forage and fish and camp with very little problem.  Oh,
and they can't do magic.


> *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now that 
> it's all over?  Any pourquoi to add?

Montavilla47:
I'm wild about Neville now, but I always liked him.  

Other than Neville, I can't think of a single character that liked 
better after DH, including Aberforth--although I don't dislike 
him.


> *Which character would you just love to follow from here on out if 
> you could?  Por que?

Montavilla47:
Hmm.  Parvati, maybe.  Or Draco, I guess.  I'd like to know what 
happened to his family and whether he, Narcissa, or Lucius had
to serve time in Azkaban.



> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when you 
> (if you) re-read?  Warum?

Montavilla47:
I haven't re-read DH again.  The one chapter I've never been able to 
re-read is Hagrid's Tale from OotP.  It's just too dull.



> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you find yourself 
> turning to again and again?  Perche?

Montavilla47:
Heh.  Anything with Snape in it.  But my favorite Snape chapters are the
ones with the Occlumency lessons.


> *Are you surprised at any of your responses?  IOW, is there anything 
> about how you feel about the series now that you never expected you'd 
> feel?

Montavilla47:
I was surprised to realize that I didn't like any of the characters *better*
after DH.  I often like supporting characters better than the heroes,
because they usually don't make a fuss, but still contribute.  (For 
example, my absolute favorite bunny in Watership Down is Blackberry--
not Hazel or Fiver.)  A perfect example of that happening is Neville
coming through at the end.  It was awesome, and completely
in character for him.

But was so odd in DH was that the other supporting characters 
hardly contributed at all to the story.  They just sort of showed up 
(those that did, anyway).  

For example, Viktor Krum shows up merely to drop a bit of 
information--but nothing is made of either his mad flying 
skills, his mad magical skills (guy was a champion), or that
he had a relationship with Hermione for two years.

Likewise, we know that Charlie knows Dragons, but all he
does is get a haircut.  Bill is a cursebreaking expert with 
close ties to the goblins, but all he does is wash dishes
and deliver a warning that is totally disregarded.

I really expected that to be different.  





From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Wed May 21 09:10:45 2008
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 09:10:45 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g10oum+kd3d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182971

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" 
<susiequsie23 at ...> wrote:
 
> 
> That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the 
release 
> of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books has 
become 
> your favorite?

The best written is IMO Prisoner of Azkaban. It has a very well 
structured and thoughtful plot. Even Snape's anger in the Shrieking 
Shack, which I always thought to be overdone, makes sense in lights 
of Deathly Hallows.

However, I think the one I enjoyed the most was Deathly Hallows. I 
loved the Trio in this one, particularly Ron, flaws and all. I 
enjoyed Badass!Neville and the Hogwarts rebellion (wish we had seen 
more of this). I loved Neville killing Nagini. I liked the 
Ron/Hermione kiss, Percy's grief about Fred, Narcissa Malfoy 
betraying Voldemort, I enjoyed that old nitch Muriel, and I loved 
what JKR did with Snape and Dumbledore. Even Snape's death I enjoyed 
in a cruel way, because I thought it was fitting. Not because he 
deserved it (definitely not), but because what this scene tells us 
about Harry, Voldemort and Snape. Harry, who showed compassion 
towards the man, who he still thought to be Dumbledore's murderer at 
this point. Voldemort, who had no problems killing the man, who was 
allowed to sit on his right at the beginning of the book, even though 
he didn't know, where Snape's true loyalties were. And Snape, where 
it became crystal clear for everyone, how much he risked everyday. 

I enjoyed Kreacher's Tale and Kreacher in general. And I liked 
Dobby's death scene. So yes, it's Deathly Hallows.
  
> Tangential questions relating to that one might be:  Has your 
> favorite changed over time, or since the series has ended?  Can you 
> explain WHY this book is your favorite?

Well, since DH came last, of course it has changed. For quite some 
time, GoF was my favourite, and I still find it a good read. But it 
lost to PoA and I think even OotP, because by time the plot hole 
regarding the TWT started me to bother more, than it did in the 
beginning.
  
> Then, if you're game, how 'bout these:
> *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?  
Again, 
> can you express why?

They all have their good parts and it's none that I really dislike. 
But my least favourite is Half-Blood Prince, because I found the 
middle part simply tedious, especially Harry sneaking after Draco and 
the romance subplots. The Pensieve scenes got too repetetive with 
time as well, but the House of the Gaunts is still one of my 
favourite chapters in the entire series. And I did like both the 
beginning and the end. @ Carol: You are not the only one, who 
likes "The Other Minister". We are at least two.

> *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now that 
> it's all over?  Any pourquoi to add?

I'm especially fond of Neville and Luna, and I always was. As a 
character, I'm also fond of Snape, and I always was.

> *Which character would you just love to follow from here on out if 
> you could?  Por que?

None, really. I think the storyline had a fitting end for most 
characters. Which is another reason, why DH is my favourite, because 
I thought, that most characters' stories came to a fitting 
conclusion. Maybe a very minor character from the books, like Euan 
Abercrombie, with whom we could start a completely new tale.

> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when 
you 
> (if you) re-read?  Warum?

Hagrid's Tale about the giants. I tried to reread that chapter one, 
and I literally fell asleep. Also basically all Harry/Ginny scenes, 
particularly in HBP.

> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you find 
yourself 
> turning to again and again?  Perche?

Neville killing Nagini. Voldemort killing Snape. Neville visiting his 
parents in St. Mungo's. The chapter "The Parting of the ways" in 
GoF. "The Tale of the Prince."

> 
> *Are you surprised at any of your responses?  IOW, is there 
anything 
> about how you feel about the series now that you never expected 
you'd 
> feel?

No, not really.
 




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Wed May 21 12:23:14 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 12:23:14 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vgrl+dtue@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1147i+uqki@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182972

Potioncat:
Well, Mike, you've topped me. I've brought countless threads to a 
screaching halt, but never the entire list!

But that was such a good post, I think everyone was laughing too hard 
to write.
>
> SSSusan asked: 
> > That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the 
> > release of DH and the completion of the series, which of the 
books 
> > has become your favorite?
Potioncat:
My first reaction was that I don't have a favorite one. But perhaps 
it would be SS/PS because it was the first. Then as I read other 
posts I began to agree "yeah, PoA, that's it." "No, no, I mean HBP 
and for all those reasons." "No, wait, OoP was good too."

So I'll stick with my first reaction, I don't really have a favorite 
book. It's hard to evaluate HP as simply books in a series. We have 
dicussed them so much and brought so much more to the table, that for 
me, HP is an experience. So I have a number of favorite moments that 
were either a pleasure to read and "get" on my own, or to have 
dicussed and experienced with the group.
 
 
> SSSusan asked:
> > Then, if you're game, how 'bout these:
> > *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?  
> > Again, can you express why?
> 
Potioncat:
Again my first reaction was to say DH beause that book ended it all. 
(In more ways than one.) I didn't enjoy a lot of DH...I mean, who 
could say they enjoyed reading about Regulus and the Lake, or Nagini 
anytime--but DH also had lots to like. So I'll remain consistent--
just this once---and say I don't have a least favorite.
> 
> 
> SSSusan asked:
> > *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now 
that 
> > it's all over?  Pourquoi?

Potioncat:
Dumbledore. I don't think that's very popular either. But after DH, 
earlier moments made so much sense. His background was such a 
surprise and his reasons for trying to do the right thing even when 
he wasn't going about it in the right way...I don't know, I just see 
him differently.
 
> SSSusan asked:
> > *Which character would you just love to follow from here on out 
if you could?  Por que?

Potioncat:

Well, I would have liked to follow Snape, but since I can't--

Interestingly, I think Minerva McGonagall.  She's always been a 
favorite, and I just find myself thinking about her, missing her wit, 
appreciating her overall fairness, pondering her strength & her style.

No, wait, SSSusan said that, I'm just repeating it. I would like to 
see what happens after the battle. How she pulls it all together. I 
imagine she is the next Head of Hogwarts. I'd like to hear her 
thoughts about DD and Snape. And I bet she's so mad at them for never 
confiding in her, that she never ever speaks to either of their 
portraits. 

 
> SSSusan asked:
> > *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when 
> > you (if you) re-read?  Warum?
> > *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you find 
> > yourself turning to again and again?  Perche?

Potioncat:
I haven't re-read any of the books since DH. I've decided to wait a 
while before starting them again. It's all too new. I am only in the 
second read of DH. I'm reading it with my son and we haven't even 
finished it! I did go back and re-read some chapters in DH for 
myself, more for a cooler-headed look at them.

 
> SSSusan asked:
> > *Are you surprised at any of your responses?  IOW, is there 
> > anything about how you feel about the series now that you never 
> > expected you'd feel?

Potioncat:
I was surprised at how sad I was at the end. Even the sugary epilogue 
didn't help. Things had gotten so dark before the end. I guess, goofy 
person that I am, that I went into mourning.


  
>SSSusan: 
> I think I was surprised, though, how hard it was for me to move on 
to 
> other books.  Also disappointed how little there was to say 
> afterwards.  There WERE things to say -- but it didn't take so long 
> to do it... and there was no more wacky and sometimes hilarious 
> postulating going on... and there was difficulty at times for those 
> who strongly disliked and those who strongly liked the series, 
being 
> together.  That part didn't totally surprise me, but it was hard to 
> have anticipated how all of that would feel.

Potioncat:
Me too. I think it was Carol who referred to this as like a family. 
It's hard to give this experience up, and I miss the ones who already 
dropped out. I think I'll still be popping in until the lights go 
out. Unless of course we can something else to talk about.

Hmmm, I wonder how long before JKR's next book?










From jamiesonwolf at gmail.com  Wed May 21 14:44:38 2008
From: jamiesonwolf at gmail.com (Jamieson Wolf Villeneuve)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 14:44:38 -0000
Subject: Special Anniversary Edition of HP and the SS
Message-ID: <g11cgm+ktke@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182973

Hey all,

Is everyone else as excited as I am about the 10th anniversary 
edition of Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone that is coming out on 
September 23rd? 

I'm wondering if they will do a Canadian edition, but probably not as 
I haven't been able to find any info on it and it's Scholastic that's 
issuing the new edition. 

The press release from scholastic says that there will be new 
material by JK Rowling: 

"...The book, published by Scholastic, will feature exclusive bonus 
material from J.K. Rowling as well as new cover art and a four-color 
frontispiece by Mary Grandpr?...." 


You can read the press release here: 

http://www.scholastic.com/aboutscholastic/news/press_05202008_CP.htm

I'm wondering what kind of new material will be published in the 
book, as it's the only reason I want it. LOL I'll probably have to 
order it off of Amazon, but that's all good. 

What are everyone elses thoughts? 

Cheers,
Jamieson


--

Jamieson Wolf
Passion that satisfies every need...
www.jamiesonwolf.com 






From jamiesonwolf at gmail.com  Wed May 21 14:58:33 2008
From: jamiesonwolf at gmail.com (Jamieson Wolf Villeneuve)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 14:58:33 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g11dap+n40c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182974

I'm game to answer. They have a threat on Amazon where people are 
rating their faves in order, but this is way more fun. 

Here goes: 

*Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series? Again,
can you express why?

My least favourite of the series would have to be Chamber of Secrets. 
I just can't stand Dobby at the first half of the book and he annoys 
me. *ducks* I like him so much later on, so it's all good. 

*Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now that
it's all over? Any pourquoi to add?

I LOVE Molly Weasley. She's how I picture my grandmother...if I had 
one. 

*Which character would you just love to follow from here on out if
you could? Por que?

I was thinking of that and I think I would love to see what happens 
to Dudley. His character has really grown through out the books, 
especially in the last one. 

*Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when you
(if you) re-read? Warum?

Normally I skip OOP as it's the longest, but now that's no longer 
true as I'm reading it now after reading 1-4 again. LOL

*Are you surprised at any of your responses? IOW, is there anything
about how you feel about the series now that you never expected you'd
feel?

Not really. I'm surprised that Deathly Hollows is my fave book out 
the series. The long time fave was POA, but DA is just SO GOOD! 

Cheers,

Jamieson 


--

Jamieson Wolf
Passion that satisfies every need...
www.jamiesonwolf.com 





--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" 
<susiequsie23 at ...> wrote:
>
> Well, poor Mike thinks he may have killed the list with his last 
> post.  There's been a stunned silence around here for 24 hours now, 
> anyway. ;)
> 
> So I thought I'd break that silence to ask a very mundane sort of 
> question of all y'all.
> 
> That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the 
release 
> of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books has 
become 
> your favorite?
> 
> Tangential questions relating to that one might be:  Has your 
> favorite changed over time, or since the series has ended?  Can you 
> explain WHY this book is your favorite?
> 
> Then, if you're game, how 'bout these:
> *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?  
Again, 
> can you express why?
> *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now that 
> it's all over?  Any pourquoi to add?
> *Which character would you just love to follow from here on out if 
> you could?  Por que?
> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when 
you 
> (if you) re-read?  Warum?
> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you find 
yourself 
> turning to again and again?  Perche?
> 
> *Are you surprised at any of your responses?  IOW, is there 
anything 
> about how you feel about the series now that you never expected 
you'd 
> feel?
> 
> Siriusly Snapey Susan,
> in a reflective mood today
>





From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Wed May 21 15:38:25 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 15:38:25 -0000
Subject: Magical Contracts and Ancient Magic
In-Reply-To: <g0vj53+5hcj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g11fli+6eek@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182975

---  "Mike" <mcrudele78 at ...> wrote:

bboyminn:

Your throwing out the bait, but no one seems to be biting, so
I'll address a couple of minor points.

>
> ...
>
>
> Mike: 
> 
> Also, in both cases there seems to be a verbal contract in the 
> offing. Lily offered her life "instead" of Harry's. Voldemort 
> offers to cease the battle, not have any more of Harry's 
> friends "die for you" if Harry gives himself up. The fact 
> that Voldemort intends to kill Harry is so heavily implied 
> that there can be no doubt as to what the verbal contract is 
> demanding of Harry and therefore what Voldemort is conceding
> in exchange.
> 
> The theme of "choice" runs heavy through the series. There is
> no doubt in my mind that the choice to sacrifice oneself in 
> defense of others commands access to the ultimate magical 
> force in the WW. But surely, somewhere, sometime, someone has
> offered his/her life to protect someone else, thereby 
> voluntarily sacrificing their life. So why didn't this 
> "Ancient Magic" ever activate before?
> 
> This is a magical world and we are talking about ancient magic.
> It seems reasonable that the presence of a magical contract 
> (also a recurring theme, from the Fidelius to the Unbreakable 
> Vow), would be a necessary ingredient to activate this ancient 
> magic.
> 

bboyminn:

Certainly, similar invocations of Ancient Magic have occurred
before, but the big question is, were they ever tested?

Voldemort invoked the ancient magic when he killed Lily under
very specific circumstances, but what if he had not subsequently
tried to kill Harry? Would anyone know about the ancient 
protective magic? Or in the case of Voldemort killing Harry
in the forest, what if he had just walked away afterwards? 
Again, what if after the fact, he was not in a position to
tempt or demonstrate the results of his action?

In this case, I'm using Lily and Harry as metaphors, but again
in other cases, it is possible that the magic was invoked but
never tested. Also, note that for the most part, the protective
magic is somewhat specific. If Lucius had stepped into the 
room right after Voldemort killed Lily and Lucius had tried to
kill Harry, likely he would have succeeded. In that specific
case, it seems like Harry is only protected from Voldemort.

In the scene where Harry dies, again as you point out, 
Voldemort's minor spells aren't 'binding', they don't seem
to hold for every long. But also note that many people die 
in the final scene before Harry and Voldemort face off. So,
some protection exists, but it is not complete and all-
inclusive. 

As to the likelihood of an magical contract, I think in Lily's
case, she /proposed/ a contract, but Voldemort didn't accept.
In the later case of Voldemort killing Harry, it seems far
more likely that Voldemort proposed a contract and that
Harry accepted it. His acceptance might have sealed the deal.
It might have given force to that situation that came from
another source in Lily's case. 

But now we must ask, is every verbal agreement in the form
of a simple statement, magically binding? Certainly people
make vaguely contractual statements in common everyday 
conversation. Are those casual statements bonded and sealed
by the fact that magical people are making them? It would 
seem to me NO. You can have the full force of law, or in this
case magic, tied to every casual statement you make. There
has to be something real and significant at stake to be 
serious enough to invoke that ancient magic; at least in my
mind it does.

> Mike: 
> 
> ...
> 
> Most of you know I'm not a fan of interviews. Nor do I put 
> too much stock in authorial intent unless s/he has made that
> intent clear in the text. Through her interviews, I know that
> JKR *intended* to give Lily the choice, that being the key 
> ingredient as to why the AK rebounded and Harry lived. And 
> though she tried to hide why Lily was given that choice, she
> never hid Lily's pleading to "kill me instead". JKR may not 
> have thought of Lily's pleading as a magical contract, but 
> putting it in context with the other themes and motifs 
> of the series it reads like a magical contract to me.
> 
> Mike
>

bboyminn:

I think likely other people and parents have died trying to
protect their children or to protect others, so very much I
think that Voldemort offered Lily a choice plays a huge 
role. However, it would seem that in most cases, when bad 
guys attack, they intend to kill everybody. They might kill
the kids first to torture the parents, and the parents might
plead 'kill me instead' but likely they were always going to
be killed. So, I think there is some weight given to the 
fact that Voldemort really would have killed Harry then just
walked away leaving Lily broken but alive.

My point is that simple self-sacrifice, or offering to die
instead, is not enough. There has to be the very real 
prospect that you will live if you yield to the bad guy, and
it can't just be a random chance of living either. For 
example, I suspect it was common practice for DE's to leave
someone alive at the end to tell the terrible and sorted
tale of the ruthlessness and brutality of the DE's as a way
of warning other people not to resist them. In a sense, 
leaving someone to tell the tale enhances your reputation for
brutality not for your seeming mercy. But the fact that you
would be the one person to live would be purely random; it 
wouldn't be a choice even if you made the offer.

So, when all things are considered, Lily's case was very
unique and special. I don't think those specific combinations
of circumstances occurs all that often. 

For what it's worth.

Steve/bboyminn




From elfundeb at gmail.com  Wed May 21 16:09:21 2008
From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 12:09:21 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
References: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <80f25c3a0805210909y7331e9afh412dee46517ae6ad@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182976

SSSusan wrote:

>   That question is: Now that we're almost a year out from the release
> of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books has become
> your favorite?
>

Debbie:
No book has *become* my favorite.  My favorite has always been GoF.  Why?
None of the other books, before or since, come close to
matching the emotional intensity of that book, which begins in the very
first chapter (the best opening chapter of the series, IMO) and continues
throughout.  The QWC.  The tragedy of Winky.  The rift between Harry and
Ron.  The TWT.  The Pensieve, a chapter I've reread over and over.  And most
of all, the graveyard and everything that followed.

I also thought that the DEs we met in GoF (Barty Jr, Karkaroff, the ones we
met in the graveyard) were more fully realized as characters than the ugly
cardboard baddies that showed up in the later books.

And GoF was funny!  Rita Skeeter and her tabloid journalism.  The entire
Yule Ball sequence, complete with Snape blasting lovers out of the bushes.
The Egg and the Eye, a masterwork of comic timing.  The Canary Creams
(though I thought the Ton-Tongue Toffees were over the top).

With all that going on, I didn't care one whit if Barty Jr could have turned
Harry's toothbrush into a Portkey in September.  What a story!

SSSusan:

>   Then, if you're game, how 'bout these:
> *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series? Again,
> can you express why?
>

Debbie:
Once again, I'll go against the general trend.  My least favorite book is
the first, PS/SS.  It's more childish than the others, IMO, it contains too
many annoying POV changes, and I find Hagrid, who features prominently, to
be a really annoying character.


>   SSSusan:
> *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now that
> it's all over? Any pourquoi to add?
>

Debbie:
My favorite characters have changed very little over the years.  Snape.
Hermione.  Ron, who I've always been very fond of, in spite of (or perhaps
because of) his faults; I admire his lack of guile.  Oddly, Percy,
whose return proved me right in the end.  Lupin proved a disappointment,
however.

SSSusan:

>   *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when you
> (if you) re-read? Warum?
> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you find yourself
> turning to again and again? Perche?
>

Debbie:
Another oddity.  I've read the series over and over again, but for reasons I
still don't quite comprehend, I've read The Third Task from GoF only once.
It's not because I found anything wrong with it.  When I finished my first
read of GoF I reread the final chapters, starting with Harry's arrival in
the graveyard.  I skipped past it again on my first reread, and have done so
ever since.  I also skip chapter 2 of that book, which is basically just a
summary of the first three books.

I have many favorite scenes that I've gone back to again and again.  They
come from every book, even PS/SS.

SSSusan:

>   *Are you surprised at any of your responses? IOW, is there anything
> about how you feel about the series now that you never expected you'd
> feel?
>

Debbie:
I've been pleasantly surprised at how well the books fare upon rereading.  I
initially didn't like CoS, but I have come to appreciate its subtleties
after rereading it in the context of the entire series.  Similarly, I
initially found aspects of DH very disappointing, but I reread the book in
its entirety before I wrote my chapter discussion a few weeks ago, and while
my annoyances did not go away, I appreciated the book much more than the
first time.  JKR is some storyteller.

Debbie


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




From danjerri at madisoncounty.net  Wed May 21 16:31:24 2008
From: danjerri at madisoncounty.net (Jerri/Dan Chase)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 11:31:24 -0500
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
References: <1211372891.2139.2639.m46@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <002e01c8bb60$311f79a0$61ae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>

No: HPFGUIDX 182977

Siriusly Snapey Susan, asked some questions:
>That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the
>release of DH and the completion of the series, which of the
>books has become your favorite?

All of the books have good points and bad, but I really fell in love 
with the series with PoA, and I still find it to be a masterful piece 
of plotting, misdirection and EXPLAINATION at the end.  Yes, there are 
plot holes and inconsistencies, in light of the entire series as a 
whole.  But finishing it leaves me with a feeling of satisfaction. 
(Especially if I don't think about what is to come to characters, 
especially Lupin.)

>Tangential questions relating to that one might be:  Has your
>favorite changed over time, or since the series has ended?
>Can you explain WHY this book is your favorite?

I don't think it has changes, and I explained above.

>*Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?
>Again, can you express why?

DH.  Not enough explanation or consistency etc. as previously 
discussed in pervious posts.

>*Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now that
>it's all over?  Any pourquoi to add?

Neville.  And his grandmother.  I had not liked her in earlier books, 
but in DH she did come through like a trouper.  I loved it when she 
appeared out of the tunnel toward the end of DH and what we heard 
about her from Neville in DH.

>*Which character would you just love to follow from here on out if
>you could?  Por que?

Tonks's mother, who has lost husband and (apparently) only child, and 
has a grandchild to raise.  How does she deal with her losses and 
assume her responsibility without being bitter?  I assume/hope that 
she will be more understanding of Teddy than Neville's grandmother 
seemed to be prior to DH.  Lots of others as well.  Mostly, I would 
like more back story about various characters.

>*Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when
>you (if you) re-read?  Warum?

There are lots of parts of OoP which now seem without purpose. 
Hagrid's story, some of the rooms at the MoM, etc.

>*Are you surprised at any of your responses?  IOW, is there
>anything about how you feel about the series now that you
>never expected you'd feel?

Until I read DH I had never expected to feel so let down.  And I am 
also surprised that I can't just let go either.  I have just about 
finished listening to GoF, and listening to the detailed explanations 
makes me understand why I was able to enjoy GoF in spite of things 
like "what was the audience doing during task 2 and 3" and "WHY can't 
quidditch continue", and "Why didn't FakeMoody just turn something in 
his office into a port key and send Harry away long before the task 
ended", etc.  And it was the wonderfully detailed explanations at the 
end.  Lord V. explains to Wormtail, the death eaters and Harry, Barty 
C. Jr. explains, Winky adds some explanation, DD explains, Hermione 
explains Rita, the Twins explain Bagman, etc.  There is so much 
explanation of so many of the issues that the mind doesn't easily 
remember the other issues that were not explained.

Which brings us back to DH.  Yes, we have some explanations prior to 
the final confrontation, but after that just a few pages and the 
epilogue.  Every other book in the series has lots of post-action 
explanations.  DH doesn't, and that is probably the main reason I like 
it least, in spite of some very good parts in it, to go back to an 
earlier question.

Jerri






From becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk  Wed May 21 15:34:55 2008
From: becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk (becks3uk)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 15:34:55 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g11fev+6r1e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182978

Ok, I'll play!

SSSusan:
> which of the books has become your favorite?

 - I would have to say Half Blood Prince. My favourite changed every
time a new one came out. It was PoA, then GOF, then OotP, then HBP.
I think they got steadily better. But HBP remains my favourite, DH
didn't have the same impact for me.

> *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?

 - My least favourite are the first two to be honest. They are not
so meaty and you don't know the characters so well. Plus, I found it
much better once Sirius and Remus were around and once you found out
more depth to Snape. It would probably be Chamber of Secrets but for
the fact that there is some good Snape action in that. (You may be
able to tell, I love Snape!) So, all in all I would say Philosopher's
Stone, it was not as well developed as later books in the series.

> *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now
that its all over?

 - Yes, Severus Snape forever! I am also rather fond of Hagrid,
Remus, Molly and Arthur.

> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when
you (if you) re-read?  Warum?

 - Interesting question. Yes, I do do that occasionally. I sometimes
decide I will read the whole thing but other times I find that I
skip. I often skip a lot of the Umbridge bits and Hagrid's brother
in OOTP, the troll bit in PS and sometimes I skip the bits before he
gets to school. I rarely read PS and CoS at all anymore.

I will often skip straight to favourite scenes in all of the books
with Snape in, such as the Occlumency chapter in OOTP and Spinner's
End in HBP etc

I love questions like this!

back to lurking

becky



From anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com  Wed May 21 18:11:28 2008
From: anigrrrl2 at yahoo.com (Katie)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 18:11:28 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g11okg+oqri@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182979

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" 
<susiequsie23 at ...> wrote:

<<<SNIP>>>
 
> That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the 
release 
> of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books has 
become 
> your favorite?


Katie replies: You have tempted me out of amjor lurkdom with this 
post! I haven't read any of the books in months and haven't posted in 
even longer, but here goes. My favorite would have to Half Blood 
Prince. It was the minute I finished reading it for the first time 
and it still is. 

> 
> Tangential questions relating to that one might be:  Has your 
> favorite changed over time, or since the series has ended?  Can you 
> explain WHY this book is your favorite?


Katie replies: My favorite was PoA until I read HBP. It's still a 
very close #2. HBP is my favorite for a number of reasons. First, 
it's the most exciting ending of any of the books, and certainly the 
most shocking. I like how the book as a whole is different in tone 
and in format from the rest of the series, and frankly, I just think 
it's the most well-written. 
> 

> Then, if you're game, how 'bout these:
> *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?  
Again, can you express why?


Katie: Unfortunately, DH is most definitely my least favorite. It 
seems poorly written in comparison with the rest of the series, it's 
too long for the story it's telling, and I hate what was done to 
Snape. And, I can't say enough about that damned epilogue.


> *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now that 
> it's all over?  Any pourquoi to add?


Katie: Hermione is still my favorite, as she has been since SS/PS. I 
loved her journey and how she grew and changed from that naive and 
rigid girl to a true heroine. I just love her. 


*Which character would you just love to follow from here on out if 
> you could?  Por que?


Katie: Hermione, and Neville. I love Neville, and I have a feeling 
his life was going to be interesting to watch.


> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when 
you (if you) re-read?  Warum?


Katie: I skip large sections of PoA - mostly because I have read it 
so many times, but also because I hate it when everyone thinks Sirius 
is a bad guy. Makes me sad!


> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you find 
yourself  turning to again and again?  Perche?


Katie: I love the graveyard scene in GoF, love the end of HBP, and I 
really like every scene with Neville. Especially in St Mungo's in 
OotP.
> 

> *Are you surprised at any of your responses?  IOW, is there 
anything  about how you feel about the series now that you never 
expected you'd feel?


Katie: I never expected to feel ambivilent about the series. I really 
have a hard time with DH, and it colors the whole series for me. 
While I love the books individually, as a series, they don't hang 
together as well as I think they should. I find myself wondering if 
my daughter will even read HP, or whether this has all been a passing 
fad. (Forgive me for wondering that, but I really do!)  KATIE





From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk  Wed May 21 20:16:17 2008
From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 20:16:17 -0000
Subject: Special Anniversary Edition of HP and the SS
In-Reply-To: <g11cgm+ktke@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g11vuh+r29a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182980

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jamieson Wolf Villeneuve" <jamiesonwolf at ...> 
wrote:
>
> Hey all,
> 
> Is everyone else as excited as I am about the 10th anniversary 
> edition of Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone that is coming out on 
> September 23rd? 

Geoff:
I presume I am correct in assuming that this is the American edition, 
since "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone" was first published in 
the UK on 26th June 1997.




From g2rm2002 at yahoo.com  Wed May 21 20:19:22 2008
From: g2rm2002 at yahoo.com (Gloria Rodriguez)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 20:19:22 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1204a+10t4i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182981

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman"
<susiequsie23 at ...> wrote:

> That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the
> release of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books
> has become your favorite?
>
> Tangential questions relating to that ....
<snip>


Well... I seldom have time to get into the discussion groups - or
post anything  for that matter - but I couldn't let this one pass.

Let's see... my favorite book so far I believe is POA, followed
closely by DH.

I can't make much of difference between them: POA because the trio
never fights Voldmort, but evil in other forms (the wrong
imprisonment of Sirius, Peter's betrayal, etc.); Harry meets Sirius
and discovers his father and friends were always a tight and closed
group - all of them nice, and noble and brave. Also, in this book
JKR introduces my favorite character: Remus Lupin, who was always
loyal and true to Harry.

DH is almost tied in the first place as my favorite because we can
see how all the stories end, and how all the pieces of the puzzle
finally fit together.

I don't think I have a book I don't like. I have read them all a few
times each, and I still enjoy them all. I don't skip parts - I don't
like skipping parts - and every time I read the books, I discover
new things.

I can't say I have a favorite chapter as such for any of the books.
But, let me go through all of them once more and I will let you know.

As for the future of the characters... I would like to know about
our favorite group of six: Harry, Ron, Hermione, Ginny, Neville and
Luna. It would be interesting to know what happened to all of them.

And, if any of you has any ideas on how to contact JKR, please, ask
her to write one more book on the series: Howarts, A History (since
it is quoted so many times and would answer a few questions
regarding wizarding history).

Well, I hope I have contributed wisely to this post.

Regards to all,

Gloria




From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk  Wed May 21 20:52:14 2008
From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 20:52:14 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1221u+g0kp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182982

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" <susiequsie23 at ...> wrote:
>
> Well, poor Mike thinks he may have killed the list with his last 
> post.  There's been a stunned silence around here for 24 hours now, 
> anyway. ;)
> 
> So I thought I'd break that silence to ask a very mundane sort of 
> question of all y'all.
> 
> That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the release 
> of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books has become 
> your favorite?
> 
> Tangential questions relating to that one might be:  Has your 
> favorite changed over time, or since the series has ended?  Can you 
> explain WHY this book is your favorite?

Geoff: 
I think my favourite is a close run thing between GOF and POA. Why? 
Because in both of them, the baddie or, in Sirius' case, the presumed 
baddie is unmasked until well towards the end of the book.

I think the winner is GOF by a head. I can remember reading it the first 
time and my surprise when Crouch Junior suddenly pulls a wand on 
Harry in his room after Harry's return.

I have mixed feelings about DH. Some of it, I don't like, but I feel that, 
from "The Prince's Tale" to the end of the book (excluding the epilogue), 
JKR excels herself and the build up and the power of the writing is 
terrific. And I think my favourite piece of all JKR's writing occurs in this 
book - to me sheer magic:

"A red-gold glow burst suddenly across he enchanted sky above them, 
as an edge of dazzling sun appeared over the sill of the nearest window. 
The light hit both of their faces at the same time, so that Voldemort's 
was suddenly a flaming blur. Harry heard the high voice shriek as he, 
too, yelled his best hope to the heavens;"
(DH "The Flaw in the Plan" p.595 UK edition)

Magic. 

It reminds me so much of "The Two Towers":
"Then suddenly upon a ridge appeared a rider, clad in white, shining in 
the rising sun. Over the low hills the horns were sounding. Behind him, 
hastening down the long slopes, were a thousand men on foot; their 
swords were in their hands. Amid them strode a man tall and strong. 
His shield was red. As he came to teh valley's brink, he set to his lips 
a great black horn  and blew a ringing blast.

With the dawn comes hope and an unexpected victory.
(LOTR:TTT "Helm's Deep")

SSS:
> Then, if you're game, how 'bout these:
> *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?  Again, 
> can you express why?

G:
I have never liked HBP. The "feel" of the book was different to OOTP which, 
in turn, seemed more claustrophobic than GOF. Some people criticise the 
camping sections in DH as being slow and laborious. In the same way, I 
found the various visits by Harry and Dumbledore and their viewing of 
Pensieve records seemed repetitive.

SSS:
> *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now that 
> it's all over?  Any pourquoi to add?

Geoff:
Harry, because I can see so much of myself as a teenager in him. And 
Draco because I still have a soft spot for him. Pourquoi? Parce-que.

SSS:
> *Which character would you just love to follow from here on out if 
> you could?  Por que?

G: 
The two above.

SSS:
> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when you 
> (if you) re-read?  Warum?

G:
Das erste Kapitel von COS. Dobby's antics make me squirm with 
embarrassment, the Gringotts capture and the Bathilda chapter in DH 
inter alia.

SSS:
> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you find yourself 
> turning to again and again?  Perche?

G:
The duel between Harry and Voldemort in GOF. The chapters I mentioned 
above in DH.

SSS: 
> *Are you surprised at any of your responses?  IOW, is there anything 
> about how you feel about the series now that you never expected you'd 
> feel?

G:
Perhaps the events outlined in the epilogue. As I have said in the past, I 
am not a Ginny fan and do not think she is right for Harry.

My selection of thoughts to add to the mix.

Just one man's views (with apologies to Steve).




From sweenlit at gmail.com  Thu May 22 00:49:55 2008
From: sweenlit at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 17:49:55 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Magical Contracts and Ancient Magic
In-Reply-To: <g0vj53+5hcj@eGroups.com>
References: <g0vj53+5hcj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <43e41d1e0805211749l33ee0d4fhca15512c897adfdf@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182983

Mike:

Whether Lily had any idea that
there was some "Ancient Magic" available to make her sacrifice
meaningful, we have no way of knowing but it seems unlikely.

Lynda:

That's an interesting assumption. Throughout the series the "ancient magic"
has always been associated with Lily's sacrifice--it therefore makes sense
that Lily knew something about that ancient magic. I realize that there is
no hard and fast evidence to that effect, but neither is there any that the
other is true.

Mike:
In the second case, Voldemort implied that the war would end and no
harm would come to anyone else, if Harry gave himself up. Whether
Harry believed that is unclear, but he was sure that his sacrifice
would put Voldemort one step closer to defeat and that seemed to be
at least part of his intention

Lynda:

I never believe that what a deceiver is telling me is truthful, myself. So
I've always read Thingy's statements with a jaundiced eye, expecting them to
be lies.

Lynda


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




From andie1 at earthlink.net  Thu May 22 02:11:56 2008
From: andie1 at earthlink.net (grindieloe)
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 02:11:56 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g12kpc+v6pv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182984

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" 
<susiequsie23 at ...> wrote:
Now that we're almost a year out from the release 
> of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books has 
become 
> your favorite?
> 
Has your 
> favorite changed over time, or since the series has ended?  Can you 
> explain WHY this book is your favorite?
> 
> *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?  
Again, 
> can you express why?
> *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now that 
> it's all over?  Any pourquoi to add?
> 
> Siriusly Snapey Susan,
> in a reflective mood today
>


Hmmm... really like this question... :)

FAVORITES
My favorite book by far for quite a LONG time was PoA.  While I 
really couldn't get enough of Harry after SS and CoS, it was PoA 
where I truly fell in love with his character.  Aside from that, we 
get to meet Lupin and Sirius and find out more about our beloved 
Maurauders.  There was just something about it, and I still think the 
Shrieking Shack scene is one of my all time favorites.

That being said, my favorite then changed over to HBP.  I may have 
read that one more than the others, though only a few times more.  I 
love the Harry/Ginny dynamic and the closeness with DD.

Now that the series is over, I'm really growing to love DH.  After 
reading it so many times, I am beginning to appreciate it more and 
more.  I STILL can't keep myself from crying when Kreacher comes out 
of the kitchens with the locket bouncing on his chest.  It just shows 
that Harry is truly one man in a million who can bring everyone 
together.  Dobby gets me bawling EVERY TIME!  Plus, of course, the 
VERY well done Harry/Tom Riddle showdown.  I can see it so clearly in 
my head sometimes I swear it is real...

LEAST FAVORITES

I have to say that my least favorite started out as CoS, but after 
book 6, that changed dramatically because I enjoyed looking back 
after knowing more about the situations in the book.

OOP is the very hardest for me to get through.  My heart just aches 
for Harry.  It is so difficult for me to see him suffer to the extent 
to which he does in this book.  Everything of value is stripped from 
him - Hagrid, Quidditch, Sirius, Hogwarts as he knows it... just too 
painful.  It's a tough read for me.  


CHARACTERS

I never was a big fan of Snape.  I always believed that he was DD's 
man, and even saw the whole "Snape loves Lilly" thing and the "DD 
planned his death with Snape" stuff coming, but I still wasn't a big 
fan.  After re-reading DH, and seeing exactly where Snape is coming 
from, I do like him now.  I even found myself teary-eyed the last 
time I listened to the book in my car when Snape was dying.  Who'd a 
thunk it??? :)


Harry is still my favorite character.  I think it's because I strive 
to be as brave and noble as he is.  I don't think I'll ever achieve 
it to the extent he does, but I think he can be such a great role 
model in a world where positive role models seem to be hard to come 
by.  

Long Live HP!
grindieloe :)









From sweenlit at gmail.com  Thu May 22 03:31:01 2008
From: sweenlit at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 20:31:01 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g12kpc+v6pv@eGroups.com>
References: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com> <g12kpc+v6pv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <43e41d1e0805212031h244fb47dy58df95113ba70d47@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182985

My favorite is DH. Despite what some people think, it ties the story up
nicely.
My second favorite is SS. That started it all, after all.

My favorite character is Lupin, with Tonks and Luna coming in on his
coattails--this is after Harry, of course, the protaganist and hero of the
story.

Least favorite book--COS

Least Favorite character--Umbridge!!

Lynda


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




From juli17 at aol.com  Thu May 22 04:19:37 2008
From: juli17 at aol.com (julie)
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 04:19:37 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g12s8p+h85u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182986


> 
> That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the 
release 
> of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books has 
become 
> your favorite?
> 
> Tangential questions relating to that one might be:  Has your 
> favorite changed over time, or since the series has ended?  Can you 
> explain WHY this book is your favorite?

I think I'll still have to go with my longtime favorite, GOF.
The story was great (even with the plotholes), the reveal at
the end (Barty Crouch Jr) was even better, and most of all the 
potential for all the characters was at its greatest height.
Harry was innocent, noble, and perhaps pure enough of heart
and spirit to defeat Voldemort through the "power of love."
Sirius was a loving and concerned godfather, not yet devolved
into the self-pitying man living in the past that he became
in OotP. Snape (small part though he had in GoF) was ready
to risk his life for the side of good, and Dumbledore was 
still the wise and kind man who gave out second chances 
purely for the sake of those souls who had repented their 
evil ways. Even mostly-absent Lupin still had potential to
become a valuable mentor to Harry. Finally, Voldemort
and his Death Eaters were portrayed at their best in the
GOF graveyard scene, where they seemed actually powerful
and frighteningly evil. 

If GOF was the pinnacle, where all was still possible (and
I admit that it would be difficult for *anyone* to satisfy 
the amazing set up of those first four books), then HBP
comes in second for the crop of new possibilities that
were presented in its cliffhanger (though I never doubted 
Snape was on the "good" side). I suppose it was the many
possibilities left open and the speculation engendered
at the end of those two books that made them the most
enjoyable to read and ponder.

> 
> Then, if you're game, how 'bout these:
> *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series? \

OotP is probably my least favorite because there are parts 
that I find too aggravating to read again (Umbridge and her
evil quill, Hagrid and his tedious Giants). Even at that, 
as others have said, there are still great parts of this
least favorite book (the Pensieve scenes, for instance).
DH would be my second least favorite, because for me it 
had too many areas where its potential as the final wrap
up of a great saga remained unrealized, and some character
moments I have difficulty accepting (e.g. Harry casting the
Crucio and Minerva all but praising that act).

> *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now that 
> it's all over?  Any pourquoi to add?

I was always fond of Snape as a character, of course ;-)
But also Luna grew on me a lot. And Neville was always
a favorite. On the flip side, Lupin ended up the biggest
disappointment given all the potential I saw for him in
the earlier books.

> *Which character would you just love to follow from here on out if 
> you could?  Por que?

Probably Draco, because I'd like to see how he made out in 
the post-Voldemort world, how he came to terms with his own
youthful actions, how his beliefs changed, and what he raised
his own son to believe. Characters who have a harder path
are far more interesting than those whose lives are set
on a straight and clear path (sorry, Harry!)

In the same vein, I'd also add George Weasley. I'd love to
know how he got on and rebuilt his life without Fred, in 
the process finding love and happiness of course (because
that's what Fred would want!).


> *Are you surprised at any of your responses?  IOW, is there 
anything 
> about how you feel about the series now that you never expected 
you'd 
> feel?

I do feel a little disappointed that the series didn't finish
with as big a bang as I expected (hoped), but that hasn't made
me toss out my HP books. I still love many of the characters
and find the series a worthwhile read.

Julie 





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Thu May 22 04:40:16 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 04:40:16 -0000
Subject: Poor unloved CoS!
Message-ID: <g12tfg+q8at@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182987

I notice that several posters to SSS's new thread have listed CoS as
their least favorite book and I don't think anyone has listed it as
their favorite. Why? Is it all Dobby's fault? A little bit Lockhart's,
maybe?

CoS is, after all, a crucial book, the one in which we discover that
Harry acquired at least one power, Parseltongue, from Voldemort, and
in which we're introduced, though we don't know it, to the first
Horcrux. (Is that another reason? A lot of people hate the whole
Horcrux idea.)

CoS also introduces Polyjuice Potion and Expelliarmus, both of which
have important roles to play (and both of which, dare I mention it,
are introduced to the Trio by Snape). Snape has a couple of great
scenes, one in which he shows up Lockhart's ineptitude and essentially
takes over the leadership of the short-lived duelling club and another
in which he leads the teachers in their exposure of Lockhart as a
coward and a fraud ("the man! the very man!"). and, of course, there's
the moment when Harry and Ron look through the window and see Snape
missing from the staff table ("Maybe he's ill!" "Maybe he's left!" "Or
he might have been sacked!" "Or maybe [dramatic pause] he's waiting to
hear why you two didn't arrive on the school train.")

Even Ginny has a fine moment standing up to Draco before she's
possessed and falls into her victim-requiring-rescue role. And, of
course, we meet the young Tom Riddle, even if he is a memory/Horcurx,
soul bit. He was certainly a surprise to me on a first reading. I
think I was as thoroughly deceived by the handsome young Prefect in
the diary as Harry was.

Maybe, given the importance of the events of CoS in retrospect, its
detractors might enjoy it more on a rereading?

Carol, just curious as to why CoS is apparently so low on everyone's
list of favorites




From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Thu May 22 05:28:12 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 05:28:12 -0000
Subject: Poor unloved CoS!
In-Reply-To: <g12tfg+q8at@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1309c+gnjs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182988

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

> Carol, just curious as to why CoS is apparently so low on everyone's
> list of favorites


Montavilla47:

Me, too, Carol.  I'm also surprised to see so many people listing 
DH as their favorite.  But then, I'm just a nasty curmugeon. :)

I quite liked CoS.  I didn't like Dobby much, of course, but he's
better in book form than on film and actually less annoying
in CoS than in later books.

It might the low Hermione quotient.  She does disappear for
months when she's petrified, and that sort of slows the 
action down.  

Also, the spiders?  I dunno, that was sort of 
Portkey question of CoS for me.  If the adults hadn't been
such idiots, Harry and Ron wouldn't have needed to go out
into the woods at all.

But I like CoS just fine as a book, and it's one of my favorites
as a film.  And all because of Kenneth Branagh playing 
Lockhart.  It's such perfect casting that I did a little dance
when I heard he was playing the part.  That he and Alan
Rickman had a duel with itty-bitty sticks filled me with 
joy.








From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Thu May 22 13:50:06 2008
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 13:50:06 -0000
Subject: Poor unloved CoS!
In-Reply-To: <g1309c+gnjs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g13tme+egv0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182989

 
> Montavilla47:
 
> I quite liked CoS.  I didn't like Dobby much, of course, but he's
> better in book form than on film and actually less annoying
> in CoS than in later books.

Hickengruendler:

For me it's exactly different. CoS is the book, where I couldn't 
stand Dobby. His appearence at the Dursleys is still one of my least 
favourite scenes ever. Harry has enough problems with the Dursleys, 
without an annoying little git like Dobby making his life worse, 
because he wanted to "help".

It got much better for me in the later books. I liked him from OotP 
onwards.
  
Plus, I found the climax over the top, and not in a good way. It 
never manged to captivate me the way the endings of GoF, HBP or DH 
did. It still had lots of good scenes, though. And it is tightly 
written.




From jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com  Thu May 22 14:51:24 2008
From: jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com (Jayne)
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 14:51:24 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1204a+10t4i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1419c+d39s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182990

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Gloria Rodriguez" 
<g2rm2002 at ...> wrote:
>
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman"
> <susiequsie23@> wrote:
> 
> > That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the
> > release of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books
> > has become your favorite?
> >
> > Tangential questions relating to that ....
> <snip>
> 
> 
> Well... I seldom have time to get into the discussion groups - or
> post anything  for that matter - but I couldn't let this one pass.
> 
> Let's see... my favorite book so far I believe is POA, followed
> closely by DH.
> 
> I can't make much of difference between them: POA because the trio
> never fights Voldmort, but evil in other forms (the wrong
> imprisonment of Sirius, Peter's betrayal, etc.); Harry meets Sirius
> and discovers his father and friends were always a tight and closed
> group - all of them nice, and noble and brave. Also, in this book
> JKR introduces my favorite character: Remus Lupin, who was always
> loyal and true to Harry.
> 
snip

> Gloria
>
Gosh Gloria it is great to find someone else whose favourite 
character is Lupin. I think he is great and I loved the character 
right from his introduction in POA to his very sad demise in DH
To me he is loyal, true  to Harry as you said, clever and wise

Jayne





From juli17 at aol.com  Thu May 22 18:29:07 2008
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 14:29:07 EDT
Subject: Poor unloved CoS!
Message-ID: <d30.2f482195.35671573@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182991

 
Carol wrote:

CoS  is, after all, a crucial book, the one in which we discover that
Harry  acquired at least one power, Parseltongue, from Voldemort, and
in which  we're introduced, though we don't know it, to the first
Horcrux. (Is that  another reason? A lot of people hate the whole
Horcrux  idea.)



Julie:
I agree that CoS is a crucial book, and for me that is even more true. I  
didn't
start reading HP until after GoF had come out, and both my niece and my  
sister
pestered me to read the series. I read PS/SS and enjoyed it, though once I  
put
it down I wasn't deeply compelled to read the rest of the series. I figured  
I'd get to
it sooner or later, and I did get to CoS about two months later. It was CoS  
that
hooked me completely into HP ("Hey, maybe this IS more than just a  pleasant
series of children's books!"). I immediately read POA and then GOF,  immensely
enjoying each, and by the time I finished eagerly anticipating the release  
of OotP
(due in about two months time at that point).
 
So definitely CoS has fond associations for me (it certainly wasn't one  of 
my least 
favorites). I think reading those first four books in relatively quick  
succession, as each
built on the previous book and deepened the overall saga in both plot and  
character
in a very linear way, was such a rich experience that the more scattershot  
plotting
of OotP came as a bit of a letdown (at least for a Ravenclaw type such as  
myself!).
And why GOF remains my favorite book. 
 
Julie 
 



**************Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with 
Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.      
(http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4&?NCID=aolfod00030000000002)


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




From kersberg at chello.nl  Thu May 22 14:40:03 2008
From: kersberg at chello.nl (kamion53)
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 14:40:03 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g0sjd0+jarh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g140k3+o330@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182992

Magpie:
> > With Umbridge, for instance, we know kittens seem to make her happy
> > and make her feel secure. She's not necessarily casting the spell
> > by thinking about kittens, but they make a good representation of
> > whatever her greatest source of security is. Maybe a person she
> > associates with cats or whatever cats symbolise to her.

Montavilla47:
> Does this mean we should start shipping Umbridge/McGonagall?
>
> Heaven forfend!


Kamion:
One can always ship Umbridge or McGonagal to whatever one wants to
ship them. But in Umbridge's case it's probably best to ship her off to a location where she can ship with a Lethifold.

But on the other hand, did anyone write positive fanfic about Umbridge?
She isn't very pleasant to go by, but neither was Snape, and after the
tremendous performance of Imelda Staunton one would expect to see a few
fans coming out of lurkdom.

Kamion


ELFY NOTE:  If you are interested in responding about the movie portrayal of Umbridge, please be sure to post that over at our sister movie list, rather than here at the main HPfGU list.  Here is the link to the movie list:  http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/






From ceridwennight at hotmail.com  Thu May 22 21:57:47 2008
From: ceridwennight at hotmail.com (Ceridwen)
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 21:57:47 -0000
Subject: Patroni (speculation)   WAS: (Re: CHAPDISC: Ch. 19:  The Silver Doe)
In-Reply-To: <g140k3+o330@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g14q8r+a0qj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182993

Kamion:
> One can always ship Umbridge or McGonagal to whatever one wants to
> ship them. But in Umbridge's case it's probably best to ship her off 
to a location where she can ship with a Lethifold.
> 
> But on the other hand, did anyone write positive fanfic about 
Umbridge?
> She isn't very pleasant to go by, but neither was Snape, and after the
> tremendous performance of Imelda Staunton one would expect to see a 
few
> fans coming out of lurkdom.

Ceridwen:
There is a huge difference for me between Snape and Umbridge.  Snape 
had business in being at Hogwarts - he was a professor of a necessary 
subject.  Umbridge was not, she was a Ministry insert, a mole in the 
hole, a spy.  She was placed in the vacant DADA post, but she wasn't an 
expert at it - her primary purpose in being at Hogwarts was to 
discredit Harry and Dumbledore.  Her detentions were actual torture, 
unlike Snape's.  Physical marring of the students, demoralizing them to 
the point that they wouldn't talk about it to anyone, even someone who 
might help.  Umbridge was smarmy and two-faced, unlike Snape, who was 
snarky and "wore his heart on his sleeve" where most of his emotions 
were concerned.  The only subtrafuge Snape practiced was his spying on 
Voldemort, a worthy endeavor.  Despite Imelda Staunton's movie 
portrayal, which was very good, I can't abide Umbridge.  I avoid re-
reading OotP specifically because of her.

Ceridwen.




From jkoney65 at yahoo.com  Thu May 22 22:46:07 2008
From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65)
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 22:46:07 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g14t3f+5pf5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182994

Now that I've warmed up and dried out from my camping trip, I thought 
I'd give my thoughts.
 
> That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the 
release 
> of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books has 
become 
> your favorite?
> Tangential questions relating to that one might be:  Has your 
> favorite changed over time, or since the series has ended?  Can you 
> explain WHY this book is your favorite?

Jack-A-Roe:
GoF is still my favorite. Probably because it had the most action in 
it. I loved the fact that the book wouldn't end: Survive the maze and 
end up in the graveyard, escape from the graveyard and end up trapped 
with Barty Crouch, Jr. I also thought it was one of the few times we 
actually saw Harry learning magic. 


> 
> Then, if you're game, how 'bout these:
> *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?  
Again, 
> can you express why?

Jack-A-Roe:
I have a feeling I'm in the minority, but I didn't like PoA after the 
first reading. The book seems to drag on, except for the scene in the 
shrieking shack.

The whole time turner thing at the end felt to much like a Deus ex 
machina ending to me. It seemed like she had painted herself into a 
corner and needed to change the ending.


> *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now that 
> it's all over?  Any pourquoi to add?

Jack-A-Roe:
I started to admire Neville after OotP. Beaten and useless he refused 
to quit. That's the type of friend I want. Add in his resistance in 
DH and I he's probably the character I thought grew the most.


> *Which character would you just love to follow from here on out if 
> you could?  Por que?

Jack-A-Roe:
I couldn't pick just one. I'd like to see what happened to Harry, 
Ginny, Hermione, Ron, Luna, Neville, George, and even Percy.


> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when 
you 
> (if you) re-read?  Warum?

Jack-A-Roe:
Well I tend to skip PoA. But also, Hagrid and giants, the pensieve 
scenes in HBP, and some of the camping in DH.


> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you find 
yourself 
> turning to again and again?  Perche?

Jack-A-Roe:
My all time favorit scene I've renamed Dead Man Walking. Harry's walk 
to the forest had my mind racing with thoughts of how I would handle 
walking to my death. What odd thoughts would be there, the blood 
pumping, etc.

I also loved the graveyard scene in GoF.


> 
> *Are you surprised at any of your responses?  IOW, is there 
anything 
> about how you feel about the series now that you never expected 
you'd 
> feel?

Jack-A-Roe:
I ended up not liking Ron as much because he had gone and quit on the 
other two. I don't like quitters so it just rubbed me the wrong way. 
At least he came back.

And this may get me crucified, but I ended up hating Snape more after 
I saw his memories than before. Some of his actions made more sense 
and others just made him seem like a petty bully. 










From jkoney65 at yahoo.com  Thu May 22 23:11:39 2008
From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65)
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 23:11:39 -0000
Subject: Poor unloved CoS!
In-Reply-To: <g12tfg+q8at@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g14ujc+t7p0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182995

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
>
> I notice that several posters to SSS's new thread have listed CoS as
> their least favorite book and I don't think anyone has listed it as
> their favorite. Why? Is it all Dobby's fault? A little bit 
Lockhart's,
> maybe?
> 
> CoS is, after all, a crucial book, the one in which we discover that
> Harry acquired at least one power, Parseltongue, from Voldemort, and
> in which we're introduced, though we don't know it, to the first
> Horcrux. (Is that another reason? A lot of people hate the whole
> Horcrux idea.)
> 

Jack-A-Roe:
I liked CoS. It is probably my second favorite in the series. I 
actually liked Doby from the start. I thought of Doby and Lockhart as 
comic relief in the story.

Carol:
> Even Ginny has a fine moment standing up to Draco before she's
> possessed and falls into her victim-requiring-rescue role. 

Jack-A-Roe:
By the time this story was over, I knew that JKR was going to bring 
these two together.  Not only did we have the knight rescue the 
damsel but we had Harry's own words in describing her.

"On the third landing, a door stood ajar. Harry just caught sight of 
a pair of bright brown eyes staring at him before it closed with a 
snap.
"Ginny," said Ron. "You don't know how weird it is for her to be this 
shy. She never shuts up normally." - CoS, The Burrow 
and... 

The moment she saw Harry, Ginny accidentally knocked her porridge 
bowl to the floor with a loud clatter. Ginny seemed very prone to 
knocking things over whenever Harry entered a room. She dived under 
the table to retrieve the bowl and emerged with her face glowing like 
the setting sun. Pretending he hadn't noticed this, Harry sat down 
and took the toast Mrs. Weasley offered him. 
"Oh, are you starting at Hogwarts this year?" Harry asked Ginny. 
She nodded, blushing to the roots of her flaming hair, and put her 
elbow in the butter dish. Fortunately no one saw this except Harry, 
because just then Ron's elder brother Percy walked in." -- CoS, At 
Flourish and Blotts 

These scenes are simply adorable. Little Ginny has a crush. An 11-
year-old, school girl crush. And Harry is sweet enough toward her -- 
he doesn't tease or draw attention to her putting her elbow in 
butter, and he graciously `pretends not to notice' her embarrassment 
as she emerges from under the table. 

Something else that is important is the wording that Rowling chooses 
for Harry to describe Ginny in those scenes. Harry imparts to us that 
her hair is `flaming', her face is `glowing', and she has 'bright 
brown eyes'. Subtle words, and words that could easily have been left 
out -- but they are there for a reason, so they must be important and 
necessary.

**The above was taken from an article by Kelli Kearney on Mugglenet**

We also have the forshadowing of Draco calling Ginny Harry's 
girlfriend.

Jack-A-Roe






From zgirnius at yahoo.com  Fri May 23 01:01:14 2008
From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara)
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 01:01:14 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1147i+uqki@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1550q+gue2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182996

> > SSSusan asked: 
> > > That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the 
> > > release of DH and the completion of the series, which of the 
> books has become your favorite?

zgirnius:
It's still DH, as it was after my first reading of it. I found it a 
fitting, gripping, and satisfying conclusion to the saga. Rowling 
managed to deliver some cool surprises (the fall of the Ministry, 
Kreacher's story, and the life story of Albus Dumbledore) as well as 
fulfill expectations that I had developed in the course of the series 
(Snape's story, the role of the Malfoys in DH, and Harry's sacrifica 
and non-death).

It also had all sorts of lovely moments for characters I liked - 
Neville's heroism, Hermione's immense controbution to the success of 
the Trio, Ron's destruction of the locket Horcrux, Molly's defeat of 
Bellatrix, and every last bit of "The Prince's Tale".

> > SSSusan asked:
> > > Then, if you're game, how 'bout these:
> > > *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?  
> > > Again, can you express why?

zgirnius:
My least favorites are the first two. I put each down with no 
intention of ever reading another book of the series, though I could 
not say I disliked them, precisely. My reaction was more, "Oh, so 
that is what the fuss is about. I suppose, as a kid, I would have 
loved them too." Now I love them with the rest, as parts of the 
series, but not as much as some others. I think, for me, the problem 
was that the endings wrapped things up too neatly. PoA, with the 
escape of Peter and the second Prophecy, gave me a feeling that 
things were going to get more serious on the Voldemort front, and GoF 
delivered.

PoA was the one that hooked me as a regular series reader, and HBP 
inspired me to become an addicted, obsessive, endlessly discussing, 
fanfiction-writing online fan. <bg>

> > SSSusan asked:
> > > *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now 
> that it's all over?  Pourquoi?

zgirnius:
Snape. Not that this was a big change for me. 

> Potioncat:
> Dumbledore. I don't think that's very popular either. 

zgirnius:
Add me to the list. Snape's my favorite, but Albus is the one whose 
status changed as a result of DH.  He was never a favorite character, 
I found him bland and uninteresting despite the occasional too-cute 
eccentricity. Now I like him.

>Potioncat:
> I'd like to hear her 
> thoughts about DD and Snape. And I bet she's so mad at them for 
never 
> confiding in her, that she never ever speaks to either of their 
> portraits. 

zgirnius:
I don't think she would have this reaction, actually. Unlike Harry, 
she always knew she was not being told everything, and seemed to 
accept it. So I don't think, in retrospect, that she would feel she 
should have been told.

I also think she would regret her last words to Snape, though whether 
this would cause her to want to talk to him, or avoid him, is not 
clear to me.

> Potioncat:
> I was surprised at how sad I was at the end. Even the sugary 
> epilogue 
> didn't help. Things had gotten so dark before the end. I guess, 
goofy 
> person that I am, that I went into mourning.

zgirnius:
This was the biggest surprise for me, too! Though, to get me over the 
biggest cause of my post-DH depression, it was not a sugary Epilogue 
about the living I needed, but an even more sugary scene of the 
afterlife.... I wouldn't actually want it in canon, though. It was 
sad, but a good kind of sad.

Hmm - scenes I avoid: I agree with everyone who says "Hagrid's Tale". 
(All other chapters ending in "Tale" are favorites.)

hickengruendler:
@ Carol: You are not the only one, who likes "The Other Minister". We 
are at least two.

zgirnius:
Make that, three. I thought it was a really fun way to start HBP, 
though my favorite opening chapter is DH's, for really great creepy 
atmosphere and fulfilling my long-held wish of seeing a scene of 
Snape with Voldemort.








From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Fri May 23 03:31:55 2008
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 03:31:55 -0000
Subject: Poor unloved CoS!
In-Reply-To: <g12tfg+q8at@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g15drb+ihdg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182997

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
 
> Carol, just curious as to why CoS is apparently so low on everyone's
> list of favorites


I liked CoS when I read it for the first time, liked it better than 
PS/SS, anyway. What spoiled it a little for me was the resolution of 
the Diary story line - a memory, possessing people and materializing 
at the end - it seemed not very convincing to me, even for a story 
about magic :-). Now that I know the Diary was a Horcrux, it all 
makes sense, and I like CoS more for this. 

Carol and others already named a few things to like about CoS, but I 
want to add the Weasleys and the Burrow to the list. I also think 
that Lockhart was a great character, although incredibly annoying - 
but that was the whole point, wasn't it :-)?


zanooda, who loves Ginny's valentine: "His eyes are as green as a 
fresh pickled toad ..." :-)





From becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk  Fri May 23 10:12:29 2008
From: becks3uk at yahoo.co.uk (becks3uk)
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 10:12:29 -0000
Subject: Poor unloved CoS!
In-Reply-To: <g14ujc+t7p0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g165ad+ht4t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182998

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67@> wrote:
> >
> > I notice that several posters to SSS's new thread have listed CoS
> > as their least favorite book and I don't think anyone has listed
> > it as their favorite. Why? Is it all Dobby's fault? A little bit
> > Lockhart's, maybe?
> >
> > CoS is, after all, a crucial book,<SNIP>

becks3uk:

I know I feel a bit bad for CoS now, it was one of my least favourite
but that isn't to say I didn't like it. It just wasn't as good as the
later ones for me. I guess as an adult I like the deeper insight you
get into the adult characters that comes in the later books, since we
see things through Harry's eyes, his perspective becomes more astute
as he grows older. Plus, I really like some of the characters that are
not introduced until post CoS (i.e. Remus and Sirius, and to a lesser
extent Moody).

But I do love some aspects of that book. One of my all-time favourite
chapters is the one with the Duelling club. With Lockhart, Snape and
Expelliarmus! The bits towards the end, with the diary and all the
action with the Basilisk were not as interesting to me. Nothing wrong
with it but its an action sequence and I prefer the little things,
like characterisation, subtle descriptions, conversations; that type
of thing. As an end to the book for the first read it was fine but I
don't get much out of re-reading it.

JMO
Becks




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Fri May 23 12:33:57 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 12:33:57 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1550q+gue2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g16djl+cebm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 182999

 
> zgirnius:
> This was the biggest surprise for me, too! Though, to get me over the 
> biggest cause of my post-DH depression, it was not a sugary Epilogue 
> about the living I needed, but an even more sugary scene of the 
> afterlife.... I wouldn't actually want it in canon, though. It was 
> sad, but a good kind of sad.

Potioncat:
I don't think I'd want it in canon either. I've seen a couple of fan-
fics that venture into the afterlife...I think it's a difficult course. 
I can't quite come up with what that fictional afterlife would be like, 
or for that matter, how Snape would fit into it.

I think DH's epilogue did what JKR wanted it to, but I think we (I) 
needed more of a transition. That 19 year jump was too fast.





From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com  Fri May 23 21:07:46 2008
From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (Blair)
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 21:07:46 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g17bn2+ul0k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183000

> That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the release 
> of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books has become 
> your favorite?

Oryomai:
HBP.  No contest.  As a super Severus fan, it was awesome to be able
to see the kind of creativity and power that he had.  The Potions book
really displayed the magical ability Severus has (that isn't Occulmency).

> Has your 
> favorite changed over time, or since the series has ended?  

Oryomai:
I didn't start reading HP until GoF came out (I can actually remember
getting ready for school and wondering why these totally insane people
were waiting for a children's book...how quickly that changed *g*), so
I didn't have the time with the earlier books that others did.  Before
HBP came out, I guess my favorite was PoA...

> Can you explain WHY this book is your favorite?

Oryomai:
HBP was my favorite because it gave us some Severus background.  I
liked being able to see Severus finally getting the DADA position. 
Slughorn, although not an admirable character, was definitely an
interesting addition to the series -- he's a totally different kind of
Slytherin than what we've seen.

> *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?  Again, 
> can you express why?

Oryomai:
As odd as this sounds, I cannot *stand* SS/PS.  The first half of the
book was so incredibly boring.  When I introduce people to the series,
I make them promise me that they will read at least until Harry
reaches Hogwarts -- the stuff before that tends to turn people off of
the series.

> *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now that 
> it's all over?  Any pourquoi to add?

Oryomai:
Percy Weasley.  I think he's a much more sympathetic character than I
originally thought.  He was a recent graduate who got offered a great
job -- he got swept up in the establishment.  He got a redemption in
the final battle.  I was really happy that he got to reunite with Fred
before his untimely death.

> *Which character would you just love to follow from here on out if 
> you could?  Por que?

Oryomai:
I want to know what happens to Lucius.  He's pretty much the only
person of that generation who made it out alive.

> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when you 
> (if you) re-read?  Warum?

Oryomai:
I can't read Severus' death.

> *Are you surprised at any of your responses?  IOW, is there anything 
> about how you feel about the series now that you never expected you'd 
> feel?

Oryomai:
I never thought I'd be disappointed in the ending.  I was one of the
people who did not like DH or the way that the series was brought to a
close.  I had such high standards for the ending, and I did not think
that I would dislike it.

Oryomai




From s_ings at yahoo.com  Fri May 23 22:46:20 2008
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 22:46:20 -0000
Subject: Another Keynote Presenter Joins Convention Alley 2008!
Message-ID: <g17hfs+eh39@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183001

Convention Alley is pleased to announce the addition of another 
Keynote presenter!

Travis Prinzi will be adding two presentations to our line-up, 
bringing our total of keynote presentations up to 5. Mr. Prinzi has 
an M.A. in Theological Studies and is currently working on his 
M.S.Ed. in Secondary English Education. He presented at Prophecy last 
summer and will be speaking at Portus later this summer. He's also 
working on a book and is excited to be joining the world of published 
Harry Potter analysis. We're very pleased to be able to add Travis to 
growing schedule of events!

The first presentation will be:

"Quills, Queries, and Quests: Literacy Learning in the Wizarding 
World"

When the term "literacy" is used in popular discourse, it most 
frequently refers simply to "the ability to read and write," and in 
education, it follows that becoming "literate" involves a process of 
rote repetition in order to get down basic "facts" and "skills" in 
order to become "literate."  Literacy, however, is far more complex 
than that simple definition, and more than that, all constructions of 
literacy are inherently political.  This presentation examines 
literacy in the Harry Potter series.  Defining literacy as "changing 
participation" in a sociocultural setting, we will examine Harry and 
Muggleborns as outsiders to the dominant discourse; the way education 
is framed by Hogwarts teachers; the "Ministry-approved, theory-
centered" curriculum of Delores Umbridge; the student subversion in 
the form of Dumbledore's Army; and finally, Albus Dumbledore's 
lessons with Harry as an example of an Apprenticeship model of 
literacy learning.

A second presentation is currently being determined.

All keynote presentations and meals are included in when you register 
for Convention Alley 2008. To register, visit our website: 
http://www.conventionalley2008.org/

Sheryll Townsend
For the Convention Alley 2008 Planning Committee

*****Please note that any discussion about this event should take 
place on either HPFGU's OTC or Convention groups*****




From danjerri at madisoncounty.net  Fri May 23 22:56:23 2008
From: danjerri at madisoncounty.net (Jerri/Dan Chase)
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 17:56:23 -0500
Subject: Poor unloved CoS!
References: <1211548910.3072.92372.m46@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <004501c8bd28$52495be0$71ae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>

No: HPFGUIDX 183002

Add me to those who enjoyed CoS.  Ranking the books is difficult, as 
for me they are a part of a whole.  I can name the one I like the 
least, but it is sort of like saying, what is my favorite part of my 
digestive track?  The throat, the stomach, the large intestine, the 
small intestine, the colon, etc?  They all are needed.  And CoS has 
great parts.  I admit that if JKR had only written the first two 
books, I would rank them as "good children's books" along with many, 
many other "good children's books".  But, the fact that it took PoA, 
GoF, and the rest to make it a powerful series doesn't make the first 
books less important.  I may like PoA best, but without what we learn 
from the first two, it wouldn't be nearly as good.

And, CoS does grow a LOT when read after HBP and DH.  Now that we know 
about Horcruxes.  Now that we know how important what happened at the 
dueling club will turn out to be.  Now that we know a lot more about 
house elves.  And I always liked Dobby.  But I like him even more once 
I met Winky, the Hogwarts House Elves, Kreacher, and the house elf who 
worked for H. Smith, and came to understand JKR's elves.

By the way, in a later book JKR seems to have Harry blame Dobby for 
the loss of the bones in his arm.  But Dobby only broke the bones, it 
took Lockhart to remove them!  As (what's her name, the school nurse, 
"Poppy") says, she can repair bones easily, regrowing them is hard.

Also, add me to the list of folks who enjoyed the chapter "The Other 
Minister".  I think it is very clever and amusing, and I wish that we 
could have heard JKR read it out loud at the release party, as she had 
planned to do, although I understand why she had to change her plans, 
do to world events.

Jerri 





From sweenlit at gmail.com  Sat May 24 06:01:21 2008
From: sweenlit at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova)
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 23:01:21 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g17bn2+ul0k@eGroups.com>
References: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com> <g17bn2+ul0k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <43e41d1e0805232301t4f95d40au8926bea15360b38f@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183003

 When I introduce people to the series,
I make them promise me that they will read at least until Harry
reaches Hogwarts -- the stuff before that tends to turn people off of
the series.

-------------------------

Really? My friends and relatives who have read the series (and that's a lot
of people--I'm including workmates, people I see on the bus people I know
from various social groups I belong to) have never mentioned that. My family
all (as I do) have a 100 page limit on books--there are simply to many books
out there to waste time on a book that hasn't caught hold by the 100th
page--and we all (I'm including my entire extended family--aunts uncles
cousins and their kids) love the HP books. (And for some strange reason the
soundtrack from Oh Brother Where Art thou--not the movie--just the
soundtrack). I'm not doubting you, really.  My family is a bit odd--geeks
all of us--but I think that your assertion is maybe slightly off.  I don't
think the series would have made it past the starting gate if the first half
of SS were boring.

Lynda


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




From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com  Sat May 24 07:17:55 2008
From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (Blair)
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 07:17:55 -0000
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <43e41d1e0805232301t4f95d40au8926bea15360b38f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <g18ff3+kkfj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183004

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lynda Cordova" <sweenlit at ...>
wrote:
> Really? My friends and relatives who have read the series (and
that's a lot
> of people--I'm including workmates, people I see on the bus people I
know
> from various social groups I belong to) have never mentioned that.
My family
> all (as I do) have a 100 page limit on books--there are simply to
many books
> out there to waste time on a book that hasn't caught hold by the 100th
> page--and we all (I'm including my entire extended family--aunts uncles
> cousins and their kids) love the HP books. (And for some strange
reason the
> soundtrack from Oh Brother Where Art thou--not the movie--just the
> soundtrack). I'm not doubting you, really.  My family is a bit
odd--geeks
> all of us--but I think that your assertion is maybe slightly off.  I
don't
> think the series would have made it past the starting gate if the
first half
> of SS were boring.

Oryomai:
It's all the exposition that's the issue.  My friends who start now
are people who have heard about the series before -- they're not
expecting a list of things that Harry needs at Hogwarts.  Exposition
is vital to a book, but it can be hard to get through.

Oryomai
...who has never seen Oh Brother Where Art Thou




From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk  Sat May 24 09:21:46 2008
From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 09:21:46 -0000
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <43e41d1e0805232301t4f95d40au8926bea15360b38f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <g18mna+8r7g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183005

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lynda Cordova" <sweenlit at ...> wrote:
>
>  When I introduce people to the series,
> I make them promise me that they will read at least until Harry
> reaches Hogwarts -- the stuff before that tends to turn people off of
> the series.
> 

Geoff:
I can't quite see why they should be turned off...

There are plenty of things going on at the beginning of Philosopher's 
Stone to capture the attention: Harry being left on the doorstep, the 
snake incident at the zoo, The Dursleys fleeing from the letters, Hagrid 
turning up, the magical entrance into Diagon Alley and the alley itself. 
If those don't whet your appetite for wanting explanations, you might 
just as well go away and read a book on knitting patterns. Dumbledore 
could probably recommend one.
:-)




From gav_fiji at yahoo.com  Sat May 24 10:01:32 2008
From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood)
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 10:01:32 -0000
Subject: Poor unloved CoS!
In-Reply-To: <g15drb+ihdg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g18p1s+2pg5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183006

> zanooda, who loves Ginny's valentine: "His eyes are as green as a 
> fresh pickled toad ..." :-)

Goddlefrood:

Just wondering if anyone made the connection between this and 
the line: 'his eyes were green as leeks' *, and then put together 
the whole gender reversal business to ascertain that Ginny might 
be lying apparently dead towards the end of the book?

No? Nor did I, at the time. The tale of Thisbe and Pyramus is an 
interesting one, and could be found here:

http://www.online-mythology.com/pyramus_thisbe/

After that, make the links. No hints.

* Thisbe on Pyramus




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sat May 24 11:18:59 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 11:18:59 -0000
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <43e41d1e0805232301t4f95d40au8926bea15360b38f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <g18tj3+pa98@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183007

Lynda: 
 I'm not doubting you, really.  My family is a bit odd--geeks
> all of us--but I think that your assertion is maybe slightly off.  I 
don't
> think the series would have made it past the starting gate if the 
first half
> of SS were boring.


Potioncat:
I don't know how far I read before I tossed SS/PS aside. My oldest son 
and I were reading it together and I found reading it aloud very 
difficult. Neither of us got into it. 

It was several books later, when a friend was talking about how much 
she enjoyed the series, that I picked it up again and was enchanted. 
I've read them to my younger son without any problem.

My friend stopped reading after PoA, because the series had become too 
dark for her. I don't think she's ever gone back to them.





From zarleycat at sbcglobal.net  Sat May 24 12:49:40 2008
From: zarleycat at sbcglobal.net (kiricat4001)
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 12:49:40 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g192t4+275b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183008

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" 
<susiequsie23 at ...> wrote:

> That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the 
release 
> of DH and the completion of the series, which of the books has 
become 
> your favorite?

Marianne:

Boy, it's been a while since I've had a chance to spend some time 
with HPfGU. But, it's good to see SSS coming up with a skein of 
thoughtful questions.  PoA has remained my favorite since I read it. 
I think it was the best constructed of the book and told a complete 
story, but one that also has additional depth when re-read with what 
we know of the characters now that the series has ended. Yes, there 
are some niggling issues, like just when does a werewolf turn into a 
werewolf - When the moon rises?  When he goes outside and acutally 
sees the moon?  When it comes out from behind a cloud? But, on the 
whole I didn't find these sorts of minor issues detracting from the 
book as a whole.  And, it introduced Remus and Sirius, who have 
remained my favorite characters.


> *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?  
Again, 
> can you express why?

I've never been fond of CoS. I don't hate it, and I don't skip it 
when re-reading the series, but it never grabbed me. I like OoP now 
more than I did, although I'd love to take some editing scissors to 
it because, in light of how the rest of the story went, we didn't 
need the whole story of Hagrid with the giants and could have done 
without Grawp.  

But, my least favorite is DH.  I felt that many of the underlying 
themes that seemed to be pointing towards resolution were not dealt 
with - house unity, rights of house elves, giants, etc. I also 
thought that larger themes of right and wrong became pretty flexible 
in that the good guys were allowed to behave just like the bad guys, 
but with no sense of them realizing they were crossing a line. I 
found the emphasis on people doing the right thing (Narcissa Malfoy, 
Regulus) to be somewhat lacking in that they acted how they did only 
because someone they cared about was in danger.  There was no sense 
that they ever had the least bit of sympathy or concern or empathy 
for others who suffered from Voldemort. It's only when it slapped 
them in the face that they turned on their Master. 

> *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now 
that 
> it's all over?  Any pourquoi to add?

My favorites are still my favorites, although I hate how Remus was 
portrayed in DH.  I have to go sort through old JKR interviews, but 
I'm sure she said after PoA came out that Remus would not only be 
back in later book(s), but that he had an important part to play. If 
she really did say something like that, I wonder if his important 
part changed when she decided not to kill off Arthur.  Or maybe the 
important part was to be the father of the next generation's orphan. 
Seems a little lacking to me.


> *Which character would you just love to follow from here on out if 
> you could?  Por que?

Love to follow? None.  Mildly interested in following? Neville.

> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when 
you 
> (if you) re-read?  Warum?

The ones mentioned in OoP. I haven't reread HBP or DH, nor have I 
felt any compulsion to reread them.

Is there anything 
> about how you feel about the series now that you never expected 
you'd feel?

I never expected to dislike Dumbledore as much as I do now.  I also 
never expected to feel sorry for Snape. 
I'm also not clear whether I'm judging DH too harshly. Part of it, 
I'm sure, is that things that were important to *me* were not as 
important to JKR. So, that's my problem as the reader, not her 
problem as the writer. I think that looking at the series as a whole 
will still take a while for me.  Maybe in another six months to a 
year, I'll do a complete reread and see whether my opinions change.

Marianne 






From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Sat May 24 17:06:26 2008
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 17:06:26 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapters 11-13 Post DH look
Message-ID: <g19hui+mjdm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183009

This will be very brief post since I really do not have any specific 
quotes to quote for this post.


Chapter 11 introduces new Hat Song with suggestion of unity within 
Hogwarts. I participated in so many debates about the meaning of it 
that I am not sure that I do remember my first reaction, but I am sure 
many people do remember theirs. What was it?

I think, I think I am not hundred percent sure, but I think I certainly 
saw the possible hint that houses unity will be achieved, but I do not 
think I saw it as what must necessarily happen.

Well, we also have Umbridge, Umbridge and more Umbridge. Have fun 
discussing her :) I just want to strangle her.

Oh, and I think Hermione "Know it all" locator was working full stop. 
She **knows** from one speech that ministry interferes in Hogwarts?

Okay, then, she is Hermione after all.

We see Snape's first lesson and I wanted to strangle him too, but that 
is no surprise for anybody :-)

Boy am I glad that there is no Snape anymore in Potterverse. It was not 
enough to tell Harry that he made a mistake, eh Snape? You just needed 
to destroy his potion. I mean god forbid maybe it will look no worse 
than other students' potions?

And really, while I will always hate Snape, I certainly can see that 
rereading OOP does not let me experience positive emotions about my 
favorite adults and that I do not like.

Let's not mention Dumbledore, but when Harry comes to Mcgonagall she 
tells him to keep his head down? Is that the best you can do Minerva?

Yes, yes I KNOW Ministry interfers at Hogwarts and it is scary, but if 
that's the most you are capable of, surprised I am that Harry did not 
come to you after his awful detentions .... NOT.

Detention with Dolores.... Die Umbridge Die.


See you guys in couple weeks.

Alla







From sweenlit at gmail.com  Sat May 24 17:21:11 2008
From: sweenlit at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova)
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 10:21:11 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g18ff3+kkfj@eGroups.com>
References: <43e41d1e0805232301t4f95d40au8926bea15360b38f@mail.gmail.com>
	 <g18ff3+kkfj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <43e41d1e0805241021t713dc939s9d207cf1501c429c@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183010

Oryomai:
It's all the exposition that's the issue. My friends who start now
are people who have heard about the series before -- they're not
expecting a list of things that Harry needs at Hogwarts. Exposition
is vital to a book, but it can be hard to get through.

---------------------------------


Lynda:
Gotcha. Although my first thought in reading your answer was "of course a
kid going off to school needs stuff! Clothing, books, supplies."

Lynda


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




From lwalsh at acsalaska.net  Sat May 24 18:02:40 2008
From: lwalsh at acsalaska.net (Laura Lynn Walsh)
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 10:02:40 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <43e41d1e0805241021t713dc939s9d207cf1501c429c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <43e41d1e0805232301t4f95d40au8926bea15360b38f@mail.gmail.com> <g18ff3+kkfj@eGroups.com> <43e41d1e0805241021t713dc939s9d207cf1501c429c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5DD36A1E-3BCD-4CB1-A36D-6E3A7416231E@acsalaska.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 183011


On 2008, May 24, , at 09:21, Lynda Cordova wrote:

> Oryomai:
> It's all the exposition that's the issue. My friends who start now
> are people who have heard about the series before -- they're not
> expecting a list of things that Harry needs at Hogwarts. Exposition
> is vital to a book, but it can be hard to get through.
> ---------------------------------
> Lynda:
> Gotcha. Although my first thought in reading your answer was "of  
> course a
> kid going off to school needs stuff! Clothing, books, supplies."
> Lynda

Actually, I love precisely that part.  It is the combination of
something so very normal with something that is totally
weird that really got me.  Here was a kid, getting ready to
go off to school, just like any other kid about "my" age (from
a kid's perspective) - only HIS list of things needed didn't
include a pack of #2 pencils, notebooks, erasers, and two
boxes of tissues for the class supply.  He gets to get cauldrons,
wizards robes, and a MAGIC WAND.  I think this is part of
what really appeals to people about the whole series.  It
is that the magical world exists right alongside our "real"
world and it seems so plausible.  It is what got so many
kids really wishing that they, too, would get a letter from
Hogwarts on their 11th birthday.

Many books of fantasy or science fiction for kids start out
with the kid falling through a trap door into another land,
era, universe, etc.  This one starts out right "here" and
now, doing ordinary things in a decidedly unordinary way.

Laura
-- 
Laura Lynn Walsh    lwalsh at acsalaska.net
http://llwcontemplations.blogspot.com



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




From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Sat May 24 18:53:11 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 18:53:11 -0000
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g18ff3+kkfj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g19o6n+f9r3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183012

 Oryomai:
> It's all the exposition that's the issue.  My friends who start now
> are people who have heard about the series before -- they're not
> expecting a list of things that Harry needs at Hogwarts.  Exposition
> is vital to a book, but it can be hard to get through.

Magpie:
I thought the beginning of the book dragged a lot. Not stuff like the 
list of what Harry needed at Hogwarts--once he finally got his letter 
it picked up again. But all that stuff with the owls and running away 
and trying to avoid them almost made me give up. Because as a reader 
I already knew the secret there; there was no suspense. I'd already 
read the first chapter that introduced the idea that Harry was 
somebody special. So I was just waiting for Harry to catch up while 
the Dursleys ineffectually tried to stop the letters. Also I remember 
yelling at Harry not finding a way to just steal one of the damn 
things and read it (even his original hesitation with the first 
letter that led to Vernon seeing it annoyed me). 

So yeah, I thought the beginning of PS was frustrating. I didn't 
enjoy the repeated slapstick joke of the Dursleys preventing the 
letters and then more letters appearing and then the Dursleys doing 
something else you know isn't going to work. 

-m





From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sat May 24 19:36:13 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 19:36:13 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapters 11-13 Post DH look
In-Reply-To: <g19hui+mjdm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g19qnd+7thb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183013

Alla wrote:
<snip> 
> Chapter 11 introduces new Hat Song with suggestion of unity within
Hogwarts. I participated in so many debates about the meaning of it
that I am not sure that I do remember my first reaction, but I am sure
many people do remember theirs. What was it? <snip>

Carol responds:
I can't clearly remember my first reaction, either, but I think it was
a vague hope that the Gryffindors would get over their prejudice
against slytherin (and vice versa). It was similar to my (even more
unfulfilled) hope at the end of GoF that Beauxbatons and Durmstrang
would contribute something important to the fight against Voldemort.
So much for "international magical cooperation" and any good coming
out of the TWT.

Alla: 
> Well, we also have Umbridge, Umbridge and more Umbridge. Have fun
discussing her :) I just want to strangle her.

Carol responds:
I can't imagine any reader not sharing that feeling. Unlike Snape, who
triggers a range of emotions and responses, Umbridge is set up to be
loathed (or to inspire "umbrage" in the reader, along with "dolor" in
the students). I may be the only one who sees this in her, but, to me,
she symbolizes "teaching to the test" and other government-inspired
"improvements" to education. Of course, I may be wrongly applying the
inadequacies of the American educational system to those in Britain.
(Obviously, this is the wrong forum for discussing that topic.)

Alla: 
> Oh, and I think Hermione "Know it all" locator was working full
stop. She **knows** from one speech that ministry interferes in
Hogwarts? <snip>

Carol responds:
Well, she knows what Fudge is up to with the hearing and that Umbridge
works for Fudge. She knows that making a speech is not a normal
response to being introduced as a new faculty member. And she picked
up on the very same phrases that I did when I first read that speech,
"Progress for progress's sake must be discouraged" and "pruning
practices that ought to be prohibited," all overemphasized by
repetition and alliteration. Whatever it meant, it was a danger
signal, especially a new teacher with strong Ministry connections
saying what "must" be done at Hogwarts. Taken along with DD's remark
about the seech being "most illuminating" and the staff's cold
response (bringing their hands together once or twice in a faint
semblance of applause), I was pretty sure that Hermione was exactly
right, and I saw nothing particularly odd about her correct
interpretation given her powers of concentration and memory.

You didn't mention the confrontation between Seamus and Harry, which
IMO is at least partly Harry's fault. (Boys should learn not to insult
each other's mothers!)

Alla:
> We see Snape's first lesson and I wanted to strangle him too, but
that is no surprise for anybody :-)
> 
> Boy am I glad that there is no Snape anymore in Potterverse. It was
not enough to tell Harry that he made a mistake, eh Snape? You just
needed to destroy his potion. I mean god forbid maybe it will look no
worse than other students' potions?

Carol:
Well, we probably agree that the Potterverse won't be the same without
Snape, but while you're glad that he's gone, *I* think that the loss
of him is irreparable. If Harry was going to get a zero for his
"worthless" potion (and we don't really know that he did or that other
"worthless" potions didn't also receive "no marks"), it doesn't really
matter that his potion was vanished. True, he was publicly humiliated,
but at least Snape told him exactly where he went wrong. The point
was, "Read directions carefully. Make sure you've done everything on
line three before proceeding to line four." Maybe not the best way to
teach that lesson, I don't see how the point could be any clearer.

At any rate, Snape could have made all sorts of contributions to
wizarding society--if not as headmaster in normal times unifying the
school then writing and publishing books of spells and improved
potions or working as a Healer at St. Mungo's. 

I know we'll never agree, so I'm not arguing with you, but I want
Snape back and wish that he hadn't died. My only consolation is not
that the WW is better off without him--quite the contrary, IMO--but
that he's probably happier in the afterlife.

Alla: 
> And really, while I will always hate Snape, I certainly can see that
rereading OOP does not let me experience positive emotions about my
favorite adults and that I do not like.
> 
> Let's not mention Dumbledore, but when Harry comes to Mcgonagall she
tells him to keep his head down? Is that the best you can do Minerva?

Carol responds:
Funny. I understand DD and his motivations completely in OoP, more so
than in HBP, where he's always praising his own intellect, and much
more so than in DH, and I think that McGonagall is right to caution
Harry against Umbridge, who is dangerous in a bureaucratic sort of way
in addition to being a sadist. I'm not sure of the best way to deal
with her, but it's probably not to call her a liar and get yourself
scarred by a blood-drawing quill.

BTW, in these chapters, we also see Harry being given a position of
responsibility that makes up for his not being made Prefect (maybe DD
knew what McGonagall had in mind and realized that bein both Qiidditch
captain and Prefect, along with the Boy who Lived, would be just too
much?), and we see Ron giving Remus Lupin a run for his money as most
ineffectual Prefect (except in standing up for Harry against Seamus,
which is as much favoritism/friendship as authority/responsibility.
IMO, he should have tried to get them to understand each other's
position rather than taking sides. Or is that too much to expect of a
fifteen-year-old?

Carol, who thought it was amusingly ironic that the Draught of Peace
was a source of contention between Harry and Snape




From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Sat May 24 20:45:24 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 20:45:24 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapters 11-13 Post DH look
In-Reply-To: <g19qnd+7thb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g19up4+3op8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183014

> Carol responds:
> I can't imagine any reader not sharing that feeling. Unlike Snape, who
> triggers a range of emotions and responses, Umbridge is set up to be
> loathed (or to inspire "umbrage" in the reader, along with "dolor" in
> the students). I may be the only one who sees this in her, but, to me,
> she symbolizes "teaching to the test" and other government-inspired
> "improvements" to education. Of course, I may be wrongly applying the
> inadequacies of the American educational system to those in Britain.
> (Obviously, this is the wrong forum for discussing that topic.)

Magpie:
I don't know if "teaching to the test" is a problem in the UK, but 
regardless, she's not doing that. The tests are OWLS and she's refusing 
to teach them the practical stuff they need for them. That's why 
Hermione tells the other kids they need a study group.

In general I think she's a combination of contradictory things. We know 
she wants to control the school, but the teachers who are in danger 
from her are the two who would get in trouble under honest evaluators 
anyway. Both teachers who are there due to their personal relationship 
to Dumbledore. Even Harry criticizes them as teachers. We know that 
Umbridge isn't really wanting the best teachers here--she wants people 
who uphold her agenda. But she doesn't seem to be able to attack the 
better teachers the same way (even the one of a different species, 
Firenze).

It seems like any interference in school is the problem--but I think 
that's assuming we're talking about Dumbledore's school. The idea that 
Umbridge is pushing an agenda rather than wanting what's best for the 
students is undercut by the fact that Dumbledore's all about his own 
agenda just as much. So it's kind of a mishmosh imo that comes down to 
Umbridge being mean to the people on Dumbledore's team and liking the 
people not on his team.

-m




From zgirnius at yahoo.com  Sat May 24 23:12:22 2008
From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara)
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 23:12:22 -0000
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g18mna+8r7g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1a7cm+d70i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183015

> Geoff:
> I can't quite see why they should be turned off...
> 
> There are plenty of things going on at the beginning of Philosopher's 
> Stone to capture the attention: Harry being left on the doorstep, the 
> snake incident at the zoo, The Dursleys fleeing from the letters, 
Hagrid 
> turning up, the magical entrance into Diagon Alley and the alley 
itself. 
> If those don't whet your appetite for wanting explanations, you might 
> just as well go away and read a book on knitting patterns. Dumbledore 
> could probably recommend one.
> :-)

zgirnius:
Or you could just go read PoA, where the *real* fun begins. It's where 
I recommend people start the series, if I want to be sure they will 
like it, and I think their tastes are similar to mine. The doorstep 
seemed contrived (thought tolerable in a series about a biy hero), the 
snake did little for me, and I was annoyed by its use of Spanish, since 
it speaks snake and was born and raised in London, Hagrid annoyed from 
the start, and I did not particualrly care how to get into Diagon 
Alley, though the concept of a hidden world inside ours was cool. The 
letters were funny, though, I will give you that. And I became 
interested in the plot of what was hidden in the school who was after 
it, and why, once we got to Hogwarts. Though not enough that, when it 
ended, I had any particular desire to seek out CoS.

It was the good reviews for PoA in TMTMNBN that won me over to the 
series - I am the sort of nerd who won't see a movie before reading its 
book, and the movie sounded cool. PoA the book, felt like part of a 
series. A good series. One in which really I wanted to know what 
happened next.








From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sun May 25 15:04:52 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sun, 25 May 2008 15:04:52 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapters 11-13 Post DH look
In-Reply-To: <g19qnd+7thb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1bv6k+m67s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183016

 
> Carol responds:
> I can't clearly remember my first reaction, either, but I think it was
> a vague hope that the Gryffindors would get over their prejudice
> against slytherin (and vice versa). It was similar to my (even more
> unfulfilled) hope at the end of GoF that Beauxbatons and Durmstrang
> would contribute something important to the fight against Voldemort.
> So much for "international magical cooperation" and any good coming
> out of the TWT.
> 

Pippin:

So um, defying Voldemort is only "something important" when the
Slytherin students aren't doing it?<g> 

If Madame Maxime hadn't gone with Hagrid, he'd have died. If Hagrid
hadn't brought back Grawp, Hogwarts wouldn't be  standing. Fleur
fights in the last battle, IIRC, besides helping to run the safe house
at Shell Cottage.

Durmstrang seems mostly to stay out of the fight, but that's far
more than one would have expected given what Draco and Sirius had to
say about the place in GoF. One could say much the same about
Slytherin House. 

I don't clearly remember my first reaction to the song -- my first
reading of OOP was a feverish all-nighter--but I did think Harry was
going to have to deal with his prejudices at some point. (Not "get
over" them, which is probably not possible. One can learn to to avoid
explicitly prejudiced actions, but implicit prejudice, the kind that
depends on a lifetime of subconscious associations, is hard to avoid.)

At some point that morphed into an expectation that Harry would unite
the Houses -- but in retrospect that was a false hope based more on
the events of The Little White Horse than anything actually in canon.
I mistook the Hat's song as a call to adventure, when it actually
isn't structured that way. The Hat is addressing itself to Hogwarts as
a whole, Slytherins included. 



Pippin





From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Sun May 25 16:56:43 2008
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 25 May 2008 16:56:43 -0000
Subject: Weekly Chat, 5/25/2008, 1:00 pm 
Message-ID: <1211734603.9.4145.m43@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183017

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

Weekly Chat
Sunday May 25, 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/20080525/8379b4c8/attachment.html>

From catlady at wicca.net  Sun May 25 19:46:39 2008
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 25 May 2008 19:46:39 -0000
Subject: Typical Slytherin Family / Ravenclaw Crouches
Message-ID: <g1cfmv+k2s6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183018

Potioncat wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182955>:

<< And then, what would be a typical House-based family? (snip) How do
the Snape, various Black, Gaunt and Malfoy families compare? (The one
big difference I can see between the Malfoys and the Blacks, (at least
some of the Blacks) is that family members were more important than
the Cause. Of course, no one in the Malfoy family had actually
rebelled against the Cause.) >>

I see the typical Slytherin family as arrogant, proud of themselves
and of their lineage, motivated to increase the glory and power of
their family, and sticking together with family members. (This would
apply as much to a lower-class Slytherin family striving to reach
working-class as to an upper-class Slytherin family striving not to fall.)

The Black family is not very different from the Malfoy family: only
the naive young sons actually cared about the Cause, while the parents
viewed the Cause as a way to increase the power and glory of the
family. Mrs Black didn't cast out Sirius because he rebelled against
the cause, because Sirius didn't start by rebelling against the cause;
he rebelled against the cause as a result of rebelling against his
family. It seems Mrs Black didn't cast him out until after he had
deserted her (running away to live with the Potters).

The Gaunts think that living in a hovel and avoiding other wizards
will increase their family's power and glory. A mad erroneous idea,
but the same motives as other Slytherin families.

The Snape family can't be a typical Slytherin family because Tobias
can't be typical of any House because he's a Muggle, and I can't see
Eileen as arrogant while cowering. Still, it would not be implausible
that she had raised her son on tales of how clever and talented and
successful all the Princes are. I don't know if the Princes were a
typical Slytherin family; I don't know if young Severus even got to
visit his Prince grandparents; if so, did they scorn him for poverty
and half-bloodedness, or did they dote on him for being a grandchild? 

Carol wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/182958>:

<< If it's possible to be Sorted into Slytherin based on pure blood
and ambition alone, despite an aversion to Dark Magic, I can see Barty
Sr. being a Slytherin. Otherwise, he strikes me as a Ravenclaw, very
intellectual and austere like Rowena herself. >>

No one has commented on whether a liking for Dark Magic is a
requirement for being Sorted into Slytherin House, but Barty Sr's
aversion to Dark Magic was a fake. He did Dark Magic himself, keeping
his son under Imperius for all those years. Barty Sr sure seems like a
Slytherin personality type, ambitious, power-hungry, proud. 

On another tentacle, his relationship with his wife and son seems more
'intellectual and austere' than sticking together. Rowena's daughter
(who annoyed me very much by not having an alliterative first name)
rebelled against her by stealing the diadem and running away; I don't
like the idea that Ravenclaw is the only House whose typical family is
dysfunctional.





From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Sun May 25 20:54:25 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Sun, 25 May 2008 20:54:25 -0000
Subject: Typical Slytherin Family / Ravenclaw Crouches
In-Reply-To: <g1cfmv+k2s6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1cjm1+dc5o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183019

Catlady:
> The Snape family can't be a typical Slytherin family because Tobias
> can't be typical of any House because he's a Muggle, and I can't see
> Eileen as arrogant while cowering. 

Magpie:
The Malfoys seem to be able to be arrogant while cowering.

-m




From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Mon May 26 04:38:26 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 04:38:26 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vfau+9pl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1des2+cpa8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183020

> SSSusan:
>
> Well, poor Mike thinks he may have killed the list with his last 
> post.  There's been a stunned silence around here for 24 hours
> now, anyway. ;)
> 
> So I thought I'd break that silence to ask a very mundane sort of 
> question of all y'all.

Mike:
Thank goodness we have your wisdom to rescue my foreboding sense of 
killing the list. :-) And, yeah PC, top this! Thread killing is 
nothing to an expert assassin like yours truly. ;-)



> SSSusan:
> 
> That question is:  Now that we're almost a year out from the 
> release of DH and the completion of the series, which of the
> books has become your favorite?
> 
> Tangential questions relating to that one might be:  Has your 
> favorite changed over time, or since the series has ended?  Can
> you explain WHY this book is your favorite?

Mike:
Hasn't changed, PoA still wins hands down. Though DH has replaced GoF 
as my second favorite. For me, the series didn't begin until PoA. 
Before that, PS/SS and CoS were cute stories that had a beginning and 
an end and didn't leave me wanting more because they didn't have lots 
of stuff hanging in the balance. Sure, Voldemort was still out there, 
and as Carol has rightly pointed out CoS took on different meanings 
by the end, but there wasn't enough to keep me interested. There 
wasn't that hook that made me keep on reading.

PoA, OTOH, had all those elements and more, despite the plotholes. 
First, I'm a sports nut and Quidditch came front and center, took on 
a whole new meaning for Harry and Gryffindor. I always liked Oliver 
Wood, loved his retelling of his talks with McGonagall over Harry's 
Firebolt. I was anxious about Lupin, intrigued by Snape's reactions 
towards him, and most obviously loved the Marauders, their map and 
their whole story. But the real hook was the Scabbers/Peter 
revelation, anybody with the ability to hang that in front of us for 
three books only to turn everything on it's ear,... I just had to 
read more of this story. 

And there was promise of more. You knew Pettigrew's escape was 
meaningful, because of Trelawney's prediction. You knew that 
Trelawney had already made one and that it was important. You knew 
Sirius wasn't going away and would play a bigger part in Harry's 
life. We understood so much better the enmity between Snape and Harry 
and wanted to know how that was going to play out. And though dense 
me didn't pick up on it, the brighter amongst us picked up on the 
Snape loved Lily theme, which looked to play some part in the story.



> SSSusan:
> *Which is/has become your least favorite book of the series?  
> Again, can you express why?

Mike:
OotP still tops this list. I cringed every time Umbridge came on 
stage. Was really hurting for Harry and that made it uncomfortable to 
read. Was likewise bored with the giants, especially since it turns 
out to be of no consequence. Mostly, it was that the whole 'getting 
the prophesy' seemed too contrived and *that* was the main storyline 
of the book. I did enjoy the whole MoM running fight and got goose 
bumps when Dumbledore showed up to battle "Tom". Of course, that was 
after my favorite character got himself killed, which meant I had two 
more books to go with no Sirius. :(


> *Is there a character you find yourself especially fond of now
> that it's all over?  Any pourquoi to add?

Mike:
I can't help but love Sirius, still. What he went through in his 
life, then to have it end just when it looked like he was about to be 
exonerated and become a free man again,... so sad. The promise of a 
brilliant youth turned into a bitter and desperate existance. The 
loss that was so devastating that Harry mentions him first, before 
even his parents, when thinking about who he wanted to see again with 
the Resurrection Stone.


> *Which character would you just love to follow from here on out
> if you could?  Por que?

Mike:
None of the characters that survived DH, really. I suppose George 
might be interesting, and I always wanted to hear more from Charlie. 
But I'd most like to read about the previous generation, I find all 
of them infinitely more interesting than Harry's generation.



> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when
> you (if you) re-read?  Warum?

Mike:
For the reasons above, I always found OotP hardest to read. I could 
also do without all the romances in HBP, which is almost half of that 
book. And after the first few pensieve memories, I found that whole 
motif was becoming tedious and of little value to either Harry or the 
story. And I'm sorry to say that I didn't find Dumbledore's temporary 
ouster in CoS to be credible from a story perspective, though I now 
understand why he went so easily (don't agree with it, but understand 
it).


> *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you find
> yourself turning to again and again?  Perche?

Mike:
An easy one. I loved to reread all of PoA, must have done it at least 
20 times. But my all-time favorite scene, and the best in the entire 
series imo, was Harry reaching out to his Stag Patronus after he just 
saved his own life and whispering "Prongs". It was magical, for me, 
on so many levels.



> *Are you surprised at any of your responses?  IOW, is there
> anything about how you feel about the series now that you never
> expected you'd feel?

Mike:
I was surprised by how much I sympathized with young Severus in "The 
Prince's Tale". That over-enamored, poor, young wizard actually made 
me feel sorry for him. 

OTOH, the choices he made while at Hogwarts, when he should have 
thrived, made me despise the adult Snape even more. He had proved 
that he was an exceptionally bright youth, he had a strong willed 
guiding friend in Lily, and he *still* chose Voldemort and the Death 
Eaters; that led eventually to his life of muted desperation.




From lilandriss at yahoo.com  Mon May 26 06:08:45 2008
From: lilandriss at yahoo.com (Alanna)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 02:08:45 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: True and False Predictions
In-Reply-To: <g1des2+cpa8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <505755.96460.qm@web53409.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183021

Ok, so I'm a very long time lurker/rare poster. I'm currently at work and reading through the archives for entertainment. I'm currently in Jan of 2001, and finding it interesting about the predictions / assumptions people were making. Now, I'm going to come right out and admit that i have not read the 7th book. I'm aware of who dies and all and I just can't bring myself to read it. But, that being said, now that it *is* over, what predictions did everyone make during the course of the series that came true or didn't come true? (R/H ending up together, H/H ending up together, Harry dieing(and staying dead) at the end etc.) There were some pretty good ones I've come across (Like Voldy being Lily's father.)  
 
So, yeah....thoughts? 
 
Lanna :)



From gav_fiji at yahoo.com  Mon May 26 09:11:24 2008
From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 09:11:24 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?CHAPTER_DISCUSSION:_DH_-_Chapter_Twenty-One_=96_The_Tale_of_the_Three_Brothers?=
Message-ID: <g1durs+vee8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183022

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 Twenty-One ? The Tale of the Three Brothers

----------------------------------------------------------------

`The Deathly Hallows?'

Take a sip of Gurdyroot tea with Xenophilius and dig out yon Tales of 
Beedle the Bard Hermione; once you're sitting comfortably you may 
begin.

Once upon a time, not so long ago, there lived three brothers. These 
brothers were wizards who, on a certain occasion, were travelling 
together when they reached a stream. Being wizards they conjured a 
bridge. This upset Death who stopped them half way over the magical 
bridge due to his being piqued at being denied three further victims 
from the dangerous river they were traversing. Death offers the 
brothers each a gift. The first chooses a wand that can not be 
defeated in a duel. The second a stone to bring back the dead and the 
third, being more ingenious than his brothers, chooses to take 
Death's own invisibility cloak.

The first brother, who was inclined to be a bit of a braggart, went 
to the nearest hostelry, boasted of his wand, killed another wizard 
and was himself killed and lost his unbeatable wand.

The second brother went home and continued yearning for his lost 
love. With the stone he had acquired he conjured her up, although 
only in a diminished and non-tangible form. Her presence made matters 
only worse and after a while he killed himself to save further 
distress.

Thus, Death had achieved a measure of vengeance on the first two 
brothers who had cheated him of themselves and their other brother at 
an earlier time.

Now, the third brother used the cloak to hide himself from Death 
until an advanced age, at which age he greeted Death warmly, but not 
before passing on the cloak to his son.

Here ends the paraphrased and pr?cised version of the Tale of the 
Three Brothers.

The chapter has some way to go once the tale has been read, not 
without minor interjections from both Harry and Ron. Xenophilius 
expands on the tale, saying that the wand is the Elder Wand, the 
stone is the Resurrection Stone and the cloak is actually Death's 
Cloak of Invisibility. Together their symbols form the sign of the 
Deathly Hallows.

There follows further discussion of the Hallows and those who seek 
it, during the course of which Mr. Lovegood makes out he is waiting 
for Luna to return from collecting Plimpies. Interestingly, once 
Xenohilius describes the Cloak of Invisibility in detail, the trio 
simultaneously realise that he could be describing Harry's own cloak. 
Then, after a brief exchange about the Resurrection Stone the group 
discusses the Elder Wand. Of the hallows, says Xenophilius, this is 
the most notorious. He uses the word 'capture' when describing how 
ownership of the wand can pass and narrates the known history.

Hermione throws the Peverell family into the discussion, a name that 
causes momentary pause to Harry. She does this due to having seen the 
symbol of the Hallows on the grave of Ignotus Peverell at Godric's 
Hollow. Before leaving to ostensibly go downstairs to check on the 
Freshwater Plimpy soup, Xenophilius states that the Peverell brothers 
are integral to the legend of the Hallows, naming them as Antioch, 
Cadmus and Ignotus. He retires leaving the trio alone.

HRH continue talking of the Hallows and whether they believe there 
might be any truth in the legend; they are back on the same terms as 
usual, with enmity between Ron and Hermione now forgotten, as noted 
by the narrator. They each say which Hallow they would want at the 
same moment, Ron naming the cloak, Hermione the wand and Harry the 
stone. The wand, the wand, the wand ? many different wands are 
discussed and a theory propounded that perhaps all the powerful 
legendary wands are in fact the Elder Wand. Harry briefly wonders if 
his wand could be it, but puts the idea aside due to his wand being 
of holly rather than elder wood.

At this point Harry explains why the stone would be his choice, he 
would want to see his dear departed ? `Sirius 
 Mad-Eye 
 Dumbledore 

 my parents 
' Hermione pooh poohs the idea that the stone could 
really exist, suggesting that Beedle possibly adjusted the legend of 
the Philosopher's Stone to fit into his tale. Briefly the cloak is 
touched upon once more, with Ron stating that Harry's cloak fits the 
bill of the description by Xenophilius closely, iow Harry's cloak is 
exceptional.

Harry is gazing around while this part of the discussion proceeds and 
he notices himself looking down from above. This him, he realises, is 
a painting and upon this realisation he goes upstairs into Luna's 
room. There, on the walls, are a series of murals showing 
five `beautifully painted faces', those of himself, Ron, Hermione, 
Ginny and Neville intertwined with a golden thread reading: `friends 

 friends 
 friends 
' However, Harry notes that there is a distinct 
unlived in feel to the room and that there is dust all over it at 
which point they descend and Xenophilius reappears. Shortly after his 
reappearance he breaks down and confesses that he is helping to trap 
Harry because Luna has been taken. The trio are barred from leaving 
the room and take no action against Xenophilius notwithstanding his 
betrayal.

Two figures on broomsticks now make their appearance at the same 
moment as Luna's father's stunning spell blasts the room containing 
the trio and himself to smithereens. Mr. Lovegood is blasted out of 
the room and away from the trio. The room is a mess, with rubble, 
paper and other detritus everywhere. The printing press blocks the 
door. Voices are heard below, the two interlopers being named as 
Travers and Selwyn, who interrogate and taunt Xenophilius, 
disbelieving him that Harry is in the house. One casts Hominem 
Revelio, which soon shows that people are present. Mr. Lovegood, 
after threats from the Death Eaters, begins to come upstairs, 
severely hampered by the debris.

Exit HRH after first ridding themselves of whatever bits of rubble 
they are encumbered by, Obliviating Xenophilius and burying the Death 
Eaters in much of the remains of the Lovegood abode. Hermione 
Disapparates all of them away, making sure the Death Eaters see her 
and Harry, but not Ron before doing so.

Questions:

1. Do you think Gurdyroot tea is really that bad?

2. While reading the story of the Tale of the Three Brothers by 
Beedle the Bard did any realisation come to you, as a reader, that 
the gifts given by Death were potentially items with which we had 
familiarity?

3. When Xenophilius named the gifts of Death from the story as the 
Elder Wand, the Resurrection Stone and the Cloak of Invisibility, did 
the title of the book you were reading make perfect sense?

4. What reaction did you have to the speculation relative to Harry's 
Cloak being the cloak from the story and did you find yourself 
agreeing with or dismissing Ron's thoughts about Harry's cloak being 
extraordinary?

5. Did the Elder Wand ring a bell at this point in the book or 
alternatively when Harry thought of his wand as the Elder Wand did 
you wonder if the Elder Wand was actually a wand with which we were 
familiar?

6. Xenophilius uses the word 'capture' when describing how ownership 
of the wand could be transferred - would that then mean that the wand 
does not necessarily have to be defeated in order to transfer its 
allegiance?

7. Was the Peverell link thrown in by Hermione rather too convenient 
or not? Explain.

8. Were you relieved to find normal relations amongst the trio 
restored?

9. Are the trio's choices of which Hallow they would like to have 
representative of their personalities?

10. Did you, as I did, find the order in which Harry named his dear 
departed notable?

11. By this stage, the trio having being at the Lovegood house for 
some time, were you expecting Xenophilius to betray the trio? Did you 
feel some sympathy with Xenophilius and his reasons for being a 
Quisling or not given the status of the WW at the time?

12. Was it just the stunning spell that blasted the room apart or was 
something else also involved?

13. Were you able to make the link between Selwyn and Umbridge at the 
time or did it not occur until later, or perhaps not until you read 
this question?

14. What is Deprimo, had it been previously heard of, and was its use 
necessary?

15. Any further questions arising.

Goddlefrood, not including too many questions in respect of the 
Hallows as he apprehends that later summarisers will have plenty for 
us.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

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 22, The Deathly Hallows, 9th June




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Mon May 26 12:00:49 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 12:00:49 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1des2+cpa8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1e8ph+113lh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183023


> 
> Mike:
> Thank goodness we have your wisdom to rescue my foreboding sense of 
> killing the list. :-) And, yeah PC, top this! Thread killing is 
> nothing to an expert assassin like yours truly. ;-)

Potioncat:
Heck, I kill the very threads I start!
> 

Mike:
 But the real hook was the Scabbers/Peter 
> revelation, anybody with the ability to hang that in front of us 
for 
> three books only to turn everything on it's ear,... I just had to 
> read more of this story. 

Potioncat:
I think that experience happened for me earlier because someone let 
it slip that Snape wasn't the bad guy when I was mid-way through 
SS/PS. He didn't give any other information and I still think the 
Bonehead had no idea he'd given anything away at all. But I started 
reading differently.

PoA was exciting because of the turn-arounds. I enjoyed that book, 
too.
 

> 
> Mike:
> OotP still tops this list. <snip>
 I did enjoy the whole MoM running fight and got goose 
> bumps when Dumbledore showed up to battle "Tom". Of course, that 
was 
> after my favorite character got himself killed, which meant I had 
two 
> more books to go with no Sirius. :(


Potioncat:
How difficult was it to continue reading the series after Sirius 
died?  Given that I'm still here, I suppose I would have continued 
reading if Snape had died earlier. But I was quite upset at his 
death, even expecting it. I thought Sirius's was completely 
unexpected.

Which reminds me of one thing I didn't like about OoP. We knew 
someone important was going to die. All through the book were 
teasers, and each time I'd breathe a sigh of relief that McGonagall, 
or Arthur or whomever, hadn't died. It was starting to feel contrived 
before we got to the real event.  
> 
> 
> Mike:
> None of the characters that survived DH, really. I suppose George 
> might be interesting, and I always wanted to hear more from 
Charlie. 
> But I'd most like to read about the previous generation, I find all 
> of them infinitely more interesting than Harry's generation.

Potioncat:
Agreed! But also, the epilogue wrapped up most of the story lines. 
Not that I blame JKR, had she left any doubt of another adventure, 
she would have been tormented by fans wanting more.

And no, I'm not saying there are no dangling threads, just that for 
the main group, it's been said and done.
> 

> 
> Mike:
> OTOH, the choices he made while at Hogwarts, when he should have 
> thrived, made me despise the adult Snape even more. He had proved 
> that he was an exceptionally bright youth, he had a strong willed 
> guiding friend in Lily, and he *still* chose Voldemort and the 
Death Eaters; that led eventually to his life of muted desperation.


Potioncat:
I find this part of the plot, the most difficult to understand. It 
does sort of mirror a plot found in Southern historical fiction 
stories set in either Ante-Bellum period or the time of segregation. 
But I don't think there's enough information to show us why he made 
those choices.





From jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com  Mon May 26 12:05:07 2008
From: jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com (Jayne)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 12:05:07 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_CHAPTER_DISCUSSION:_DH_-_Chapter_Twenty-One_=96_The_Tale_of_the_Three_Brothers?=
In-Reply-To: <g1durs+vee8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1e91j+5n8r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183024

-
Goddlefrood wrote


 Chapter Twenty-One ? The Tale of the Three Brothers
`The Deathly Hallows?'
> 
> Take a sip of Gurdyroot tea with Xenophilius and dig out yon Tales 
of 
> Beedle the Bard Hermione; once you're sitting comfortably you may 
> begin.
> 
> Once upon a time, not so long ago, there lived three brothers. 
These 
> brothers were wizards who, on a certain occasion, were travelling 
> together when they reached a stream. Being wizards they conjured a 
> bridge. This upset Death who stopped them half way over the magical 
> bridge due to his being piqued at being denied three further 
victims 
> from the dangerous river they were traversing. Death offers the 
> brothers each a gift. The first chooses a wand that can not be 
> defeated in a duel. The second a stone to bring back the dead and 
the 
> third, being more ingenious than his brothers, chooses to take 
> Death's own invisibility cloak.
> 
> The first brother, who was inclined to be a bit of a braggart, went 
> to the nearest hostelry, boasted of his wand, killed another wizard 
> and was himself killed and lost his unbeatable wand.
> 
> The second brother went home and continued yearning for his lost 
> love. With the stone he had acquired he conjured her up, although 
> only in a diminished and non-tangible form. Her presence made 
matters 
> only worse and after a while he killed himself to save further 
> distress.
> 
> Thus, Death had achieved a measure of vengeance on the first two 
> brothers who had cheated him of themselves and their other brother 
at 
> an earlier time.
> 
> Now, the third brother used the cloak to hide himself from Death 
> until an advanced age, at which age he greeted Death warmly, but 
not 
> before passing on the cloak to his son.
> 
> Here ends the paraphrased and pr?cised version of the Tale of the 
> Three Brothers.
> 
> The chapter has some way to go once the tale has been read, not 
> without minor interjections from both Harry and Ron. Xenophilius 
> expands on the tale, saying that the wand is the Elder Wand, the 
> stone is the Resurrection Stone and the cloak is actually Death's 
> Cloak of Invisibility. Together their symbols form the sign of the 
> Deathly Hallows.
> 
> There follows further discussion of the Hallows and those who seek 
> it, during the course of which Mr. Lovegood makes out he is waiting 
> for Luna to return from collecting Plimpies. Interestingly, once 
> Xenohilius describes the Cloak of Invisibility in detail, the trio 
> simultaneously realise that he could be describing Harry's own 
cloak. 
> Then, after a brief exchange about the Resurrection Stone the group 
> discusses the Elder Wand. Of the hallows, says Xenophilius, this is 
> the most notorious. He uses the word 'capture' when describing how 
> ownership of the wand can pass and narrates the known history.
> 
> Hermione throws the Peverell family into the discussion, a name 
that 
> causes momentary pause to Harry. She does this due to having seen 
the 
> symbol of the Hallows on the grave of Ignotus Peverell at Godric's 
> Hollow. Before leaving to ostensibly go downstairs to check on the 
> Freshwater Plimpy soup, Xenophilius states that the Peverell 
brothers 
> are integral to the legend of the Hallows, naming them as Antioch, 
> Cadmus and Ignotus. He retires leaving the trio alone.
> 
> HRH continue talking of the Hallows and whether they believe there 
> might be any truth in the legend; they are back on the same terms 
as 
> usual, with enmity between Ron and Hermione now forgotten, as noted 
> by the narrator. They each say which Hallow they would want at the 
> same moment, Ron naming the cloak, Hermione the wand and Harry the 
> stone. The wand, the wand, the wand ? many different wands are 
> discussed and a theory propounded that perhaps all the powerful 
> legendary wands are in fact the Elder Wand. Harry briefly wonders 
if 
> his wand could be it, but puts the idea aside due to his wand being 
> of holly rather than elder wood.
> 
> At this point Harry explains why the stone would be his choice, he 
> would want to see his dear departed ? `Sirius 
 Mad-Eye 
 
Dumbledore 
> 
 my parents 
' Hermione pooh poohs the idea that the stone could 
> really exist, suggesting that Beedle possibly adjusted the legend 
of 
> the Philosopher's Stone to fit into his tale. Briefly the cloak is 
> touched upon once more, with Ron stating that Harry's cloak fits 
the 
> bill of the description by Xenophilius closely, iow Harry's cloak 
is 
> exceptional.
> 
> Harry is gazing around while this part of the discussion proceeds 
and 
> he notices himself looking down from above. This him, he realises, 
is 
> a painting and upon this realisation he goes upstairs into Luna's 
> room. There, on the walls, are a series of murals showing 
> five `beautifully painted faces', those of himself, Ron, Hermione, 
> Ginny and Neville intertwined with a golden thread reading: 
`friends 
> 
 friends 
 friends 
' However, Harry notes that there is a 
distinct 
> unlived in feel to the room and that there is dust all over it at 
> which point they descend and Xenophilius reappears. Shortly after 
his 
> reappearance he breaks down and confesses that he is helping to 
trap 
> Harry because Luna has been taken. The trio are barred from leaving 
> the room and take no action against Xenophilius notwithstanding his 
> betrayal.
> 
> Two figures on broomsticks now make their appearance at the same 
> moment as Luna's father's stunning spell blasts the room containing 
> the trio and himself to smithereens. Mr. Lovegood is blasted out of 
> the room and away from the trio. The room is a mess, with rubble, 
> paper and other detritus everywhere. The printing press blocks the 
> door. Voices are heard below, the two interlopers being named as 
> Travers and Selwyn, who interrogate and taunt Xenophilius, 
> disbelieving him that Harry is in the house. One casts Hominem 
> Revelio, which soon shows that people are present. Mr. Lovegood, 
> after threats from the Death Eaters, begins to come upstairs, 
> severely hampered by the debris.
> 
> Exit HRH after first ridding themselves of whatever bits of rubble 
> they are encumbered by, Obliviating Xenophilius and burying the 
Death 
> Eaters in much of the remains of the Lovegood abode. Hermione 
> Disapparates all of them away, making sure the Death Eaters see her 
> and Harry, but not Ron before doing so.
> 
> Questions:
> 
> snip earlier questions>

 8. Were you relieved to find normal relations amongst the trio 
> restored?
> 
Yes. I always believed the friendship was too strong for them to fall 
out for good


> 9. Are the trio's choices of which Hallow they would like to have 
> representative of their personalities?

Not sure about that

> 
> 10. Did you, as I did, find the order in which Harry named his dear 
> departed notable?

> Yes. I was surprised that he put Sirius before his parents, but not 
that he put DD before them



> 11. By this stage, the trio having being at the Lovegood house for 
> some time, were you expecting Xenophilius to betray the trio? Did 
you 
> feel some sympathy with Xenophilius and his reasons for being a 
> Quisling or not given the status of the WW at the time?
> 
No. i was really surprised to learn of the trap, and I had no 
sympathy with him. I felt he could have told them at the beginning 
and worked something out for them to get away without harm to himself 
and Luna


> 12. Was it just the stunning spell that blasted the room apart or 
was 
> something else also involved?> 

Not sure

> 13. Were you able to make the link between Selwyn and Umbridge at 
the 
> time or did it not occur until later, or perhaps not until you read 
> this question?
> 

What Link ?

> 14. What is Deprimo, had it been previously heard of, and was its 
use 
> necessary?
> 
Don't know

> 15. Any further questions arising.

Not from this chapter
> 
>Jayne
Replying for a change




From jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com  Mon May 26 12:12:49 2008
From: jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com (Jayne)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 12:12:49 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1e8ph+113lh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1e9g1+7s45@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183025

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" <willsonkmom at ...> 
wrote:
>snip
> 
> > > Mike:
>  But the real hook was the Scabbers/Peter 
> > revelation, anybody with the ability to hang that in front of us 
> for 
> > three books only to turn everything on it's ear,... I just had to 
> > read more of this story. 
> 
> Potioncat:
> I think that experience happened for me earlier because someone let 
> it slip that Snape wasn't the bad guy when I was mid-way through 
> SS/PS. He didn't give any other information and I still think the 
> Bonehead had no idea he'd given anything away at all. But I started 
> reading differently.
> 
> PoA was exciting because of the turn-arounds. I enjoyed that book, 
> too.
> 
Me 
I have to agree that up until OoP and DH this was my favourite book. 
I loved the way the relationship between Harry and Sirius developed 
and of course I loved the relationship, trust and respect growing 
between Harry and Lupin
> > 
> > Mike:
> > OotP still tops this list. <snip>
>  I did enjoy the whole MoM running fight and got goose 
> > bumps when Dumbledore showed up to battle "Tom". Of course, that 
> was 
> > after my favorite character got himself killed, which meant I had 
> two 
> > more books to go with no Sirius. :(
> 
> 
> Potioncat:
> How difficult was it to continue reading the series after Sirius 
> died?  Given that I'm still here, I suppose I would have continued 
> reading if Snape had died earlier. But I was quite upset at his 
> death, even expecting it. I thought Sirius's was completely 
> unexpected.
>
Me
Yes. I was glad that it happened near the end of the book. It was 
unexpected to me and I was really sad , but the ending I felt was 
great in other ways and made this my fav book


snip rest

Jayne
Loving this discussion on OoP




From danjerri at madisoncounty.net  Mon May 26 14:58:33 2008
From: danjerri at madisoncounty.net (Jerri/Dan Chase)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 09:58:33 -0500
Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: DH - Chapter Twenty-One - The Tale of th
References: <1211806987.3016.4188.m46@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <005301c8bf41$37b77ad0$ccae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>

No: HPFGUIDX 183026

My thanks to Goddlefrood for summary and questions.  I hope to get 
back to the rest, but have a point that I have been wanting to make 
for some time related to this question:
>11. By this stage, the trio having being at the Lovegood house
>for some time, were you expecting Xenophilius to betray the trio?
>Did you feel some sympathy with Xenophilius and his reasons
>for being a Quisling or not given the status of the WW at the time?

I may be alone in this, but I feel great sympathy with Xenophilius. 
His only daughter is a hostage, who knows where with who knows what 
being done to her.  How many of you parents feel CERTAIN that you 
would have the strength not to betray a person who you supported in 
theory but didn't know when your child's life was on the line?

Also, I have wondered ever since DH, why Lord V. didn't take Ginny 
hostage very soon in the school year.  After all, he did know that the 
Weasley's were closely connected with Harry, or else why the raid on 
the wedding.  It seems such an obvious thing for him to have done, and 
long before the time when the family took precautions against it. 
After all soul fragment/memory Tom Riddle understood the power of a 
young hostage.  And we will learn eventually that Lord V. is using 
lots of different hostages.

And, what do folks think that the Weasley's and Harry would have done
if Ginny had been a hostage?   Those who judge Xenophilius harshly
should consider this.

(And I know that it didn't happen because JKR couldn't let it happen.
But once the concept of Lord V. as a hostage taker is established, it
seems strange that he would draw the line at Ginny.  As Harry says to
DD in the cave in HBP "this is Lord Voldemort we're talking about", or
words to that effect.)

Jerri





From foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon May 26 18:25:26 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 18:25:26 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1des2+cpa8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1evan+4bbg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183027

> Mike:
 Was likewise bored with the giants, especially since it turns 
> out to be of no consequence. 

<massive snip>
And after the first few pensieve memories, I found that whole 
> motif was becoming tedious and of little value to either Harry or
the  story. 

Pippin:
It wasn't until my latest reading of DH that I realized why these two
bits of the story had to be there. This time I  paid close attention
to Voldemort in DH. Voldemort Mark II is  a very different person from
Voldemort Mark I, thanks to Lily's blood, but we  wouldn't know that
without the pensieve scenes. 

Mark II is in many ways more normal than Mark I -- he gets sentimental
about Hogwarts and about his family, and even about seeing his old
DE's again. He  starts to grow up a little -- he has the temper
tantrums that he never had as a child. He understands, as he did not
on his way to Godric's Hollow, that the emotion which drives him to
kill is fury. He has the capacity to to hate and the choice to love,
in a way that Mark I never had. His newly acquired (and thus immature)
emotions make  him seem  less a scary psychopath and more  a common
thug,  hardly more capable of establishing a viable empire than the
new Gurg of the Giants. And that might make Voldemort seem less dangerous.

But the giants show us otherwise. Voldie couldn't have won. But he
could very easily have destroyed the WW in the process of losing.

Pippin 




From lwalsh at acsalaska.net  Mon May 26 19:32:14 2008
From: lwalsh at acsalaska.net (Laura Lynn Walsh)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 11:32:14 -0800
Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Re:_[HPforGrownups]_CHAPTER_DISCUSSION:_DH_-_Chap?=
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?ter_Twenty-One_=96_The_Tale_of_the_Three_Brothers?=
In-Reply-To: <g1durs+vee8@eGroups.com>
References: <g1durs+vee8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <203A98D3-EAE8-4CAF-AA70-9F99A4333C3F@acsalaska.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 183028


On 2008, May 26, , at 01:11, Goddlefrood wrote:

> 1. Do you think Gurdyroot tea is really that bad?

Undoubtedly.  Have you ever tried Lapsang Souchong, or
something like that.  Eww!

> 2. While reading the story of the Tale of the Three Brothers by
> Beedle the Bard did any realisation come to you, as a reader, that
> the gifts given by Death were potentially items with which we had
> familiarity?

I was sure about the cloak already.  Too many hints.  I wasn't
sure about the wands, but it seemed likely.  I was less sure
about the stone.  Why set an ugly stone in a ring?

> 3. When Xenophilius named the gifts of Death from the story as the
> Elder Wand, the Resurrection Stone and the Cloak of Invisibility, did
> the title of the book you were reading make perfect sense?

Not really.  But it was explained soon after.

> 4. What reaction did you have to the speculation relative to Harry's
> Cloak being the cloak from the story and did you find yourself
> agreeing with or dismissing Ron's thoughts about Harry's cloak being
> extraordinary?

We never saw Moody's cloaks fail or be less than as powerful
as Harry's.  So, while I thought Harry's might be the Hallows
cloak, I don't think there was a foreshadowing of this in prior
books.

> 5. Did the Elder Wand ring a bell at this point in the book or
> alternatively when Harry thought of his wand as the Elder Wand did
> you wonder if the Elder Wand was actually a wand with which we were
> familiar?

I wish it had.  Maybe that is one reason for Dumbledore's
astounding powers.  He started out extraordinarily talented and
then added the powerful wand.

> 6. Xenophilius uses the word 'capture' when describing how ownership
> of the wand could be transferred - would that then mean that the wand
> does not necessarily have to be defeated in order to transfer its
> allegiance?

I think capture is necessary, given that the wand is so powerful.
Winning the wand in an outright duel is probably not likely.  Since
the ownership of the wand has been transferred, sometimes by
force, one would suspect duplicity, trickery, or stealth.

> 7. Was the Peverell link thrown in by Hermione rather too convenient
> or not? Explain.

Hermione is always thinking two (or more) steps ahead of
everyone and she frequently makes connections that others
would only make after long contemplation.  I don't think it
was unusual.

> 8. Were you relieved to find normal relations amongst the trio
> restored?

Yes, but I expected it eventually, if only because Hermione
knows that they can't accomplish their tasks unless they are
all working as hard as possible for the same goal.  This is
also why she later urges Harry to seek horcruxes not hallows,
knowing they can't do both.

> 9. Are the trio's choices of which Hallow they would like to have
> representative of their personalities?

Of course.  Ron wants the wand to give himself more power,
feeling, as he does, inferior to his older siblings and Harry
and Hermione.  Even Ginny has advantages he doesn't - she
is the longed for girl in the family, is popular, is a good athlete,
is bright.

Hermione wants something that has proven useful - a versatile
tool for her arsenal.

Harry just wants friends and family.

> 10. Did you, as I did, find the order in which Harry named his dear
> departed notable?

I think he names them in reverse order according to how difficult
it is to admit that he needs them.  It is easy to admit he would like
Sirius and Mad-Eye back.  They would be of practical use and
everyone would acknowledge that.  It is also easy to admit that
Dumbledore would be helpful, but he is a bit more reluctant to
summon him back, as he needs to remain sure in his mind that
Dumbledore is really dead and can't help him as he did when he
was alive.  It is the most difficult to admit he would want to have
his parents back.  That is a purely emotional longing; he doesn't
really know them or know how they could be useful, but he wants
them anyway, even though he is nearly a man.

> 11. By this stage, the trio having being at the Lovegood house for
> some time, were you expecting Xenophilius to betray the trio? Did you
> feel some sympathy with Xenophilius and his reasons for being a
> Quisling or not given the status of the WW at the time?

I agree with Jerri.  I feel very sorry for Xenophilius.  He lost his
wife and his daughter has been taken by an evil wizard for whom
killing is a sport.

> 12. Was it just the stunning spell that blasted the room apart or was
> something else also involved?

I thought it was the spell hitting the Erumptent (sp?) horn.

Laura
-- 
Laura Lynn Walsh    lwalsh at acsalaska.net
http://llwcontemplations.blogspot.com



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




From elisedai at yahoo.com  Mon May 26 13:19:31 2008
From: elisedai at yahoo.com (elisedai)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 13:19:31 -0000
Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: DH - Chapter Twenty-One  The Tale of the Three Brothers
In-Reply-To: <g1durs+vee8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1edd3+qb5a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183029

Aaaah,Goddlefrood,

In the question below, you missed a key point,
> 12. Was it just the stunning spell that blasted the room apart or was
> something else also involved?

It was as Hermione noticed not the Snorkle-horn-thingy that Lovegood
thought it was, but a very combustible object & that got triggered in
the fray w/the Death Eaters...

elisedai



From eggplant107 at hotmail.com  Mon May 26 21:42:26 2008
From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 21:42:26 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?.
In-Reply-To: <g0vonl+a1rh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1fas2+cft9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183030

For whatever it's worth I would rate the quality books from best to
worst as follows:

1) Deathly Hallows

2) Goblet of Fire

3) Half Blood Prince

4) Order of the Phoenix (nearly a tie with #3)

5) Prisoner of Azkaban

6) Chamber of Secrets

7) Philosopher's Stone

  Eggplant
 





From winterfell7 at hotmail.com  Mon May 26 21:43:52 2008
From: winterfell7 at hotmail.com (mesmer44)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 21:43:52 -0000
Subject: OOP Chapters 11-13 Post DH look and Prejudices
In-Reply-To: <g1bv6k+m67s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1fauo+9dsp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183031

Carol responds:
> I can't clearly remember my first reaction, either, but I think
> it was a vague hope that the Gryffindors would get over their
> prejudice against slytherin (and vice versa).

Winterfell responds:

I'd like to revisit this whole issue of prejudice by Gryffindors
for Slytherins. The Free Dictionary defines Prejudice as: 1. An
adverse judgement or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge
or examination of the facts. 2.  The act or state of holding
unreasonable preconceived judgements or convictions.  3.  Irrational
suspicion of a particular group, race or religion.

Some Gryffindor students certainly do have adverse judgements
and opinions beforehand about Slytherin students passed down to them
in part by their older siblings so that when they go to Hogwarts they
already have negative judgements, suspicions and convictions against
Slytherins. And I do feel that a person in general should form their
own opinions about a group of people based on an unbiased and
objective examination of the facts.

However, the important prerequisites for the occurrence of
prejudice in all three of the above definitions are: Being without
knowledge or examination of the facts; preconceived judgement being
unreasonable; and suspicions or hatred being irrational.  In the case
of Slytherin House, doesn't an examination of the facts prove that
their house has many members who either have DEs as family or who
sympathize in theory w/ LV's cause?  Aren't there reasonable and
rational causes for not just Gryffindors but everyone to view
Slytherin House as the House w/ members associated w/ LV?  And with
that information, would the views towards Slytherin House be not
based on prejudice, but simple facts?

Winterfell, who shared Carol's hope that Slytherins and
Gryffindors (and the other two houses) would feel more positively
about each other after the fall of LV but doesn't consider Gryffindor
House to have been prejudiced against Slytherin w/o good reasons to
be.




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon May 26 23:29:42 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 23:29:42 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_CHAPTER_DISCUSSION:_DH_-_Chapter_Twenty-One_=96_The_Tale_of_the_Three_Brothers?=
In-Reply-To: <g1durs+vee8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1fh56+g8r5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183032

> CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
> 
> Chapter Twenty-One ? The Tale of the Three Brothers
<snip summary>

> Questions:
> 
> 1. Do you think Gurdyroot tea is really that bad?

Carol responds:
Okay, third time is the charm! I've lost partial responses twice. I'll
try not to lose this one!

I think Gurdyroot tea is probably like Muggle health food; very few
people like it the first time they try it, but motivated people can
overcome their original aversion. 
> 
> 2. While reading the story of the Tale of the Three Brothers by 
Beedle the Bard did any realisation come to you, as a reader, that the
gifts given by Death were potentially items with which we had 
familiarity?

Carol:
I don't really remember my initial reaction as I was sleep-deprived
and not thinking particularaly clearly at the time. It was clear from
the Trio's reactions that Harry's Invisibility cloak could be one of
the Hallows, but I certainly didn't think about Dumbledore's wand.
(Obviously, Harry's broken holly wand couldn't be the Elder wand.) I
don't think I thought about the Resurrection Stone in connection with
the ring Horcrux or the Snitch. I honestly don't remember.
 
> 3. When Xenophilius named the gifts of Death from the story as the 
Elder Wand, the Resurrection Stone and the Cloak of Invisibility, did
the title of the book you were reading make perfect sense?

Carol:
Well, no. It still doesn't make perfect sense. I knew that the three
objects in Beedle's were the Deathly Hallows and that they were real
objects somehow tied in with Harry's Horcrux quest, and they were
"Deathly" through their association with the allegorical
personification of Death, but I still don't understand in what sense
they can be considered Hallows (holy objects). The Elder Wand in
particular seems evil because it tempts men to do evil to acquire it
and/or to use it for murder and domination after they've obtained it.
> 
> 4. What reaction did you have to the speculation relative to Harry's
Cloak being the cloak from the story and did you find yourself 
agreeing with or dismissing Ron's thoughts about Harry's cloak being
extraordinary?

Carol:
I was and still am somewhat annoyed since Harry's cloak never seemed
extraordinary before. Yes, Invisibility Cloaks are rare, but I never
sensed that his was superior to the ones that the Order used. Nagini
can see or sense people under an IC whether it's Harry's or not. Both
the real and the fake Moody can see Harry under his cloak. True, the
DEs couldn't summon it later, but that's evidence presented *after*
we're told that his cloak is extraordinary rather than the necessary
foreshadowing. Unfortunately, Travers's Homenum Revelio spaell was
performed before they put on the cloak, so I can't tell whether the
cloak would have prevented their detection or not. (Sidenote: One of
Moody's cloaks was supposedly better than the other, but we're not
told why. I wonder whether it was the one he acquired from Barty Jr.,
who had impersonated him all year, after Barty was soul-sucked? Barty
had, of course, lived under an Invisibility Cloak a la Ignatius
Peverell for about twelve years and later used that same cloak to hide
him when he murdered his father.)
> 
> 5. Did the Elder Wand ring a bell at this point in the book or 
alternatively when Harry thought of his wand as the Elder Wand did 
you wonder if the Elder Wand was actually a wand with which we were 
familiar?

Carol:
I think I already answered this question in my response to question 1.
> 
> 6. Xenophilius uses the word 'capture' when describing how ownership
of the wand could be transferred - would that then mean that the wand
does not necessarily have to be defeated in order to transfer its 
allegiance?

Carol responds:
It certainly indicates that the owner doesn't need to be killed, but I
think it does need to be taken by force or cunning. If there's any
truth to the Tale of the Three Brothers, the original owner was
murdered in his sleep before the wand was stolen. Grindelwald, who
should know if anyone does, how the Hallows work, made sure that he
overcame Gregorovitch by Stunning him rather than merely stealing the
wand. Draco didn't capture the wand, exactly, but he did Expel it, and
usually a Wizard who uses Expelliarmus against an enemy (as opposed to
merely duelling an opponent for fun or as part of a DADA class) would
capture the wand. Draco's spell rendered DD defenseless, which was
probably sufficient to change the wand's loyalty, and, in any case,
once DD died, Draco was the only available alternative until Harry
snatched Draco's wand by force. (I think that the wand didn't know
about that Disarming until it heard Harry announce it to Voldemort and
then it chose to transfer its loyalty from Draco to Harry, but I don't
want to argue that point since it relates to a future chapter.) As for
how DD obtained it from Grindelwald, I think he must have surprised GG
amidst a display of fancy spells with a simple and wholly
unanticipated Expelliarmus. Either that or the Elder Wand isn't really
unbeatable against a Wizard as skilled as DD.
> 
> 7. Was the Peverell link thrown in by Hermione rather too convenient
or not? Explain.

Carol:
I don't think so. We'd already been given a Peverell link through
Marvolo Gaunt in HBP. I made *that* connection, at any rate, when
Hermione saw the name on the gravestone. And she'd been thinking about
the symbol--associated in various ways with Grindelwald, Xenophilius
Lovegood, Dumbledore, and the gravestone--for months before she
finally asked to visit Xenophilius. Under the circumstances, I don't
see it as surprising at all that Hermione brought up Ignotus Peverell.
(Now if Harry had brought up the name, remembering Marvolo Gaunt's
ring, I'd have been surprised.)
> 
> 8. Were you relieved to find normal relations amongst the trio 
restored?

Carol:
Of course. And I'm glad that they stayed that way. Thank goodness for
the Doe Patronus and Ron's defeat of his personal demons via the
locket Horcrux. And thank Dumbledore for the Deluminator.

> 9. Are the trio's choices of which Hallow they would like to have 
representative of their personalities?

Carol:
Good question. I think that, given Harry's preoccupation with killing
or being killed by Voldemort and all the loved ones he's lost, his
choice of the Resurrection Stone makes sense, though I could also see
him choosing the wand, wanting the power to defeat LV. Hermione's
dislike of the wand makes sense, but her fear of the Resurrection
Stone seems a bit excessive. (She was also afraid of the Veil in the
DoM without being able to hear the voices.) I suppose that the
Invisibility Cloak, the "normal" choice, makes sense for her, as does
Ron's choice of the wand, thinking simply in terms of what's needed to
defeat an enemy, with no philosophizing involved. He hasn't lost any
loved ones at this point, only some acquaintances like Cedric, Sirius
and Dumbledore, so he wouldn't be drawn to the Resurrction Stone, and
the Invisibility Cloak probably seem like old hat to him and to Harry
at this point.
> 
> 10. Did you, as I did, find the order in which Harry named his dear
departed notable?

Carol:
I don't think I noticed, actually. I think that the order reflects the
degree of pain he feels--most for Sirius, who was his godfather and
never had a funeral, so Harry never got a chance to deal with that
grief; next for Mad-eye, whose death is still recent and tied in with
Hedwig's (all they did for him was drink a toast and later Harry
buried Mad-eye's eye); then Dumbledore, whose motives and background
seeming lack of helpfulness Harry is still struggling with and who
did, at least, have a splendid funeral; and last, his parents, whom he
never really knew. I'm not sure, BTW, that I would class Mad-eye among
Harry's "dear departed" so much as one of those deaths, like Cedric's
and Sirius's and maybe Dumbledore's, for which Harry feels partly
responsible. (I'm not surprised that he's not among the people that
Harry actually summons to accompany him later.)
> 
> 11. By this stage, the trio having being at the Lovegood house for 
some time, were you expecting Xenophilius to betray the trio? Did you
feel some sympathy with Xenophilius and his reasons for being a 
Quisling or not given the status of the WW at the time?

Carol:
Something was clearly wrong, both in his behavior and in Luna's
absence. But I never felt harshly toward Xenophilius. Given a choice
between Harry, whom he has been defending as much out of eccentricity
as principle but does not know, and Luna, his one child and all he has
left of his wife, of course he chose Luna. Most people in his position
would. Yes, he's an old hypocrite, but he's also a father in danger of
losing the daughter he loves. I liked Hermione's gesture of revealing
her presence and Harry's to the DEs to show that Xenophilius wasn't
lying (though it did have consequences later in the Snatcher incident).
> 
> 12. Was it just the stunning spell that blasted the room apart or
was something else also involved?

Carol responds:
The spell hit the Erumpent horn, causing it to explode--and proving
Hermione right. (I still want to know who sold Xeno that horn,
claiming that it belonged to a Crumple-Horned Snorkack.)
> 
> 13. Were you able to make the link between Selwyn and Umbridge at
the time or did it not occur until later, or perhaps not until you
read this question?

Carol:
I had already made the link between Selwyn, who is first mentioned in
"The Seven Potters," and Umbridge, who told Mundungus that she was
related to the (presumably Pure-Blood) Selwyns in relation to
Slytherin's locket (and I suspected him of being the DE who supplied
her with Mad-Eye's eye for her office door as soon as we learned about
it). Travers I remembered from GoF as one of the DEs mentioned by
Karkaroff at his hearing but I couldn't remember his specific crime.
> 
> 14. What is Deprimo, had it been previously heard of, and was its
use necessary?

Carol:

I don't recall Deprimo's being used before. I think that Reducto would
have worked just as well in this instance (to blast a hole in the
floor so that they can escape).

Carol, whose favorite part of the chapter was Luna's portraits and
decorations in primary colors (that girl is a prodigy of some sort!)
but who hated the way the destroyed house reminded her of 9/11






From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Mon May 26 23:40:04 2008
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 23:40:04 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Chapter_Discussion:_DH_-_Chapter_21_=96_The_Tale_of_the_Three_Brothers?=
In-Reply-To: <g1durs+vee8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1fhok+q3bf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183033

---  "Goddlefrood" <gav_fiji at ...> wrote:
>
...
> HPforGrownups-owner @yahoogroups.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
> 
> Chapter Twenty-One ? The Tale of the Three Brothers
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> ...
> 
> Questions:
> 
> 1. Do you think Gurdyroot tea is really that bad?
> 

bboyminn:

Obviously, it is a subjective thing. Some people think 
Scotch taste good, I think it taste like gasoline. So, no, in
a general sense, it was probably not pleasant, especially to
young people who tend to favor things sweet and pleasant.


> 2. While reading the story of the Tale of the Three Brothers
> by  Beedle the Bard did any realisation come to you, as a 
> reader, that the gifts given by Death were potentially items 
> with which we had familiarity?
> 

bboyminn:

Hummm.... Familiarity? I did realize we were finding out about
the namesake 'Deathly Hallows', so in that sense it was 
familiar. It seemed a reasonable and quick connection between
the Hallow Cloak and Harry's invisibility cloak. Notice that
Moody has a Old I-Cloak and a New I-cloak. That means that
the old one was probably getting weathered, worn, and weak.
Harry's however, while we don't know its actual age, seems 
to be in pretty good shape and still very effective. So, that
one was easy.

As to the stone, I quickly made the connection to the Gaunt 
Stone Ring. It is the only stone that had played a significant
role in the story.

But, I had absolutely no clue where the wand was or if I had
ever seen it before in the story. Of course, it had been
hiding in plain sight all along. 


> 3. When Xenophilius named the gifts of Death from the story 
> as the  Elder Wand, the Resurrection Stone and the Cloak of 
> Invisibility, did the title of the book you were reading make 
> perfect sense?
> 

bboyminn:

Well, of course. It was easy to see that these were the
"Deathly Hallows" in the title. Still, while we then knew
what they were, we were no closer to knowing /where/ they
were. 


> 4. What reaction did you have to the speculation relative to
> Harry's Cloak being the cloak from the story and did you find
> yourself agreeing with or dismissing Ron's thoughts about 
> Harry's cloak being extraordinary?
> 

bboyminn:

No, I definitly agreed that it was Harry's cloak, though I
certainly at that point could have told you how or why Harry
ended up with the cloak. 


> 5. Did the Elder Wand ring a bell at this point in the book 
> or alternatively when Harry thought of his wand as the Elder
> Wand did  you wonder if the Elder Wand was actually a wand 
> with which we were familiar?
> 

bboyminn:

I think Harry was merely having a passing thought as he tried
to analyze the possibilities. I don't think he actually thought
his wand might be the one. 

But, of all the Hallows, this one was the greatest mystery. We
had seen some hints of Voldemort traveling, looking for people,
but what or where the wand was, or how it would be revealed in
the story, was a total mystery at that point.


> 6. Xenophilius uses the word 'capture' when describing how 
> ownership of the wand could be transferred - would that then 
> mean that the wand does not necessarily have to be defeated 
> in order to transfer its allegiance?
> 

bboyminn:

As you well know, we have had many deep and dark discussion 
about the Elder Wand. I think we need to be cautious about
to closely assigning the method of its passing to a new 
owner. I don't think the wand was very ethical, and I think
it would switch allegiance very quickly, but I also think there
are stituation where it would refuse to switch allegiance. 

Consider how it was first lost, as told in the story, the owner
was murdered in his sleep. That is hardly a defeat of the owner
or the wand, though it would certainly be a capture. Also, note 
that Grindelwald stole the wand like a thief in the night. Yet,
he hesitated just long enough for Gregorovitch to catch a
glimpse of him, and to try and stop the thief. 

I don't think the means of transfer can clearly be defined,
I think it is esoteric. Also, note that Harry, if he was ever
the Elder Wands Master, never touched the wand, and neither
did Draco, but Harry's /defeat/ of Draco was enough. So,
again, by Ollivander's own admission, how and why that wand,
or any wand, changes allegiance is very deep and mysterious.


> 7. Was the Peverell link thrown in by Hermione rather too 
> convenient or not? Explain.
> 

bboyminn:

Of course, Hermione is holding back information until she can
put some context to it. She saw the symbol on the tombstone
and the name, but, more or less, let it drop until now when
tying that symbol to the Peverel name and the story can have
some meaning. 

I didn't think it was 'rather too convenient', but was a very
timely question under the cicumstance.


> 8. Were you relieved to find normal relations amongst the trio 
> restored?
> 

bboyminn:

I think Hermione was very justifiably angry at Ron, and her
reaction to his return was hysterically funny for the reader.

Remember, when Ron abandon Harry, he also abandon Hermione and
I think that is what hurt the most. I think she could put up
with his complaining for the reasons Harry cited himself. But
to abandon her was unforgivable when things were do dire. And
I think she always had every intention of forgiving him and
knew it, once she got all the anger out of her system.

Still, at this point, what was has been forgotten. They have
too many problems in the here and now to hold on to old 
grudges, and like I said, she always was going to forgive him,
she just needed to be angry first.


> 9. Are the trio's choices of which Hallow they would like to
> have representative of their personalities?
> 

bboyminn:

I think you got Ron's wrong in your summary, but people have
already corrected it in their responses; Ron wanted the Wand,
Hermione wanted the Cloak, Harry wanted the Stone.

I thought their choices were very telling, but telling of what
I'm note sure. Logically, most people would want the Wand 
because it would mean immense power if you could just resist
bragging about it. The Cloak was very practical and being
practical and having proven itself useful, it would seem to
be the one she would choose. But I think she also saw the
danger in the other two. She feared that few people could
possess the Wand and not brag, which as the story and history
show would be a quick road to death. 

And I think Hermione felt a certain fear in Harry wanting the 
Stone, because he would certainly want to bring back his family
and loved ones. I'm sure Harry could have rationalized that he
would only call them back for a while, but once he had them,
could he let them go. He might spend his life clinging to
the dead and forgetting to live his own life. 

So, Ron chose strength that he hoped he could control. 
Hermione made the safe choice according to the story, and 
consistent with her own experience. The Cloak was tried and
proven, the other choices were dangerous. Harry chose the
one thing he couldn't and shouldn't have, the distraction of
his dead friends and family.


> 10. Did you, as I did, find the order in which Harry named his dear 
> departed notable?
> 

bboyminn:

I think I agree with Laura on this one.

"I think he names them in reverse order according to how 
difficult it is to admit that he needs them."

Though I would add that not only how much he needs them, but
how much he wants them. 


> 11. By this stage, the trio having being at the Lovegood house
> for some time, were you expecting Xenophilius to betray the 
> trio? Did you feel some sympathy with Xenophilius and his 
> reasons for being a Quisling or not given the status of the 
> WW at the time?
> 

bboyminn:

I suspected Xenophilius was up to something, but wasn't sure
what until the DE's arrived. Too many hints were dropped
about Xeno seeming to have an internal struggle, and he kept
looking out the window though he shouldn't have been able to
see anything but sky. Now if he had walked to the window
and kept looking out, I would have assumed he was looking for
Luna. 

I do have sympathy for Xeno, I'm sure he struggled greatly 
with his decision, but, if it meant getting his Luna back,
I can see why he would do it. Though, without a doubt, I think
it was a mistake on his part. 

I think Hermione has some sympathy for him too. I think she
knew that Luna was his world. And as the existed, she seemed
to act to protect Xeno. I'm sure Xeno is greatly shamed by 
his action. I suspect it will be years before he is willing
to show his face in public. I like to assume that Harry had
something to do with Xeno being forgiven, but that occurred
after the end of the books. 

> 12. Was it just the stunning spell that blasted the room apart
> or was something else also involved?
> 

bboyminn:

Hermione made such a big deal about the Erumpet(?) horn being
dangerous, that it had to serve some purpose in the moment.
So when the room exploded, it seemed logical that it was 
because the spell hit the volatile horn. 

> 13. Were you able to make the link between Selwyn and Umbridge
> at the time or did it not occur until later, or perhaps not 
> until you read this question?
> 

bboyminn:

Yes, I saw that immediately. It would seem fitting, though
despicable, that Umbridge would align herself with such a low
life, yet pure blood, as Selwyn. 

In OotP Umbridge was just a fanatical pest trying to re-enforce
the party line, but in the next two books, she is clearly
aligning herself, and very willingly, with forces of clear 
evil. She doesn't seem to care who she supports as long as 
she ends up on the winning side. I never hated her so much
as I hated her in DH. 


> 14. What is Deprimo, had it been previously heard of, and was
> its use necessary?
> 

bboyminn:

I think there are several new spell introduced in this book,
but they all seem to be explained by the context of their use
and actions, so I wasn't so much concerned about it.

Steve/bboyminn




From sweenlit at gmail.com  Tue May 27 00:17:23 2008
From: sweenlit at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 17:17:23 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1e8ph+113lh@eGroups.com>
References: <g1des2+cpa8@eGroups.com> <g1e8ph+113lh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <43e41d1e0805261717s4bc0b79ei2ecb21b6c6f48e0@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183034

Potioncat:

Which reminds me of one thing I didn't like about OoP. We knew
someone important was going to die. All through the book were
teasers, and each time I'd breathe a sigh of relief that McGonagall,
or Arthur or whomever, hadn't died. It was starting to feel contrived
before we got to the real event.

Lynda

I agree with the point about teasers all the way through the book. They're
obvious. As for the feeling that they were contrived, no, can't agree with
that. Its a long book and there has to be the stress and relaxation of the
plot there. Now, I did not copy the section in which you write about the
unexpectedness of Sirius death, but for me, it wasn't--not after my first
reading of the death, that is. It makes perfect sense for Sirius to be the
one who dies at that point in the story. He came into Harry's life for a
short time after Harry already has a support network in place, plays a major
role in his life but although he is very important, it is by necessity a
limited role. He's a much easier character to write out of the story at that
time than any of the other adults.

Lynda


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




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Tue May 27 00:44:53 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 00:44:53 -0000
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <43e41d1e0805261717s4bc0b79ei2ecb21b6c6f48e0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <g1fli5+h3te@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183035

 
> Lynda
> 
> I agree with the point about teasers all the way through the book. 
They're
> obvious. As for the feeling that they were contrived, no, can't 
agree with
> that.

Potioncat:
It was to the point that when Serius did die, I thought 'oh good, no 
one important'--but when I re-read the book, the 'teasers' didn't 
feel contrived to me at all, but fit with the plot. Which makes me 
think I wouldn't have been bothered by them in the first place, if it 
hadn't been for the hype.

Lynda:
It makes perfect sense for Sirius to be the
> one who dies at that point in the story. He came into Harry's life 
for a
> short time after Harry already has a support network in place, 
plays a major
> role in his life but although he is very important, it is by 
necessity a
> limited role. He's a much easier character to write out of the 
story at that
> time than any of the other adults.


Potioncat:
I think a lot of HpfGU members had worked that out and were expecting 
it. I resolutely refused to consider the possibilites at all. It 
seemed such a gruesome exercise. By DH I was more open to that sort 
of theorizing.




From gav_fiji at yahoo.com  Tue May 27 02:36:12 2008
From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 02:36:12 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_CHAPTER_DISCUSSION:_DH_-_Chapter_Twenty-One_=96_The_Tale_of_the_Three_Brothers?=
In-Reply-To: <g1e91j+5n8r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1fs2s+e42a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183036

Goddlefrood:

I'll just cut the summary out, as Jayne seems to have liked it 
so much it got quoted in full ;-)

> > 13. Were you able to make the link between Selwyn and Umbridge 
> > at the time or did it not occur until later, or perhaps not 
> > until you read this question?

> Jayne:

> What Link ?

Goddlefrood:

Umbridge claims relation to the Selwyns when we meet her in the 
MoM earlier in DH, one of the Death Eaters at the Lovegood house 
is a Selwyn, hence the link. Her nephew? Brother-in-law? Something 
else?

Sickening though it is to think that the toad might have been 
married.




From sweenlit at gmail.com  Tue May 27 04:49:45 2008
From: sweenlit at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 21:49:45 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1550q+gue2@eGroups.com>
References: <g1147i+uqki@eGroups.com> <g1550q+gue2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <43e41d1e0805262149s3b08890fm1debf0aff88f4efd@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183037

Carol: You are not the only one, who likes "The Other Minister". We
are at least two.

zgirnius:
Make that, three

Lynda:

Four. And, as I know it is also one of my mother's favorite parts of the
story, make that five.

Lynda


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




From sweenlit at gmail.com  Tue May 27 04:58:20 2008
From: sweenlit at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 21:58:20 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g19o6n+f9r3@eGroups.com>
References: <g18ff3+kkfj@eGroups.com> <g19o6n+f9r3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <43e41d1e0805262158x5c7f59v3fb8b75405c19522@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183038

Magpie:

So I was just waiting for Harry to catch up while
the Dursleys ineffectually tried to stop the letters. Also I remember
yelling at Harry not finding a way to just steal one of the damn
things and read it

Lynda:

Well, I didn't know the series well enough at that point to realize that it
was Hagrid who would be sent for Harry. Nor did I know, the first time
through about the snake that Harry releases from the zoo, or exactly how
many letters would come and how the Dursleys would attempt to keep them from
Harry. Every time I watch the movie or read the book though, I do make
numerous comments that Harry should have been able to grab at least ONE
letter!

Lynda


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




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Tue May 27 12:05:52 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 12:05:52 -0000
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <43e41d1e0805262158x5c7f59v3fb8b75405c19522@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <g1gtf0+dai4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183039

 
> Lynda:
> 
> Well, I didn't know the series well enough at that point to realize 
that it
> was Hagrid who would be sent for Harry. Nor did I know, the first 
time
> through about the snake that Harry releases from the zoo, or 
exactly how
> many letters would come and how the Dursleys would attempt to keep 
them from
> Harry. Every time I watch the movie or read the book though, I do 
make
> numerous comments that Harry should have been able to grab at least 
ONE
> letter!
> 
> Lynda


Potioncat:
But all this lays the ground work for imformation we'll need to know 
later. We need to see that Harry is a mediocre kid--who can't seem to 
get even one of the letters. We need to see that the Parseltongue is 
something he just knows how to do. Yet it's without any real control 
or intention. I think for him to have gotten a letter and proceeded 
on to Hogwarts without any help would have made him too strong for 
the role of Every-kid. We need to see he's an ordinary person 
responding to extraordinary situations.

Once I'd made it this far, I was hooked. 
 






From jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com  Tue May 27 13:34:43 2008
From: jaynesmith62 at btinternet.com (Jayne)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 13:34:43 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_CHAPTER_DISCUSSION:_DH_-_Chapter_Twenty-One_=96_The_Tale_of_the_Three_Brothers?=
In-Reply-To: <g1fs2s+e42a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1h2lj+h6ep@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183040

 13. Were you able to make the link between Selwyn and Umbridge 
> > > at the time or did it not occur until later, or perhaps not 
> > > until you read this question?
> 
> > Jayne:
> 
> > What Link ?
> 
> Goddlefrood:
> 
> Umbridge claims relation to the Selwyns when we meet her in the 
> MoM earlier in DH, one of the Death Eaters at the Lovegood house 
> is a Selwyn, hence the link. Her nephew? Brother-in-law? Something 
> else?
> 
> Sickening though it is to think that the toad might have been 
> married.
>
Thank you for that anwser. I will have to re read that to find it.
I hope that Umbridge wasn't married. If she was, then I expect her 
poor husband would have a hard time

Jayne




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Tue May 27 14:26:12 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 14:26:12 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_CHAPTER_DISCUSSION:_DH_-_Chapter_Twenty-One_=96_The_Tale_of_the_Three_Brothers?=
In-Reply-To: <g1fs2s+e42a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1h5m4+me7m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183041

 
> Goddlefrood:
> 
> Umbridge claims relation to the Selwyns when we meet her in the 
> MoM earlier in DH, one of the Death Eaters at the Lovegood house 
> is a Selwyn, hence the link. Her nephew? Brother-in-law? Something 
> else?
> 
> Sickening though it is to think that the toad might have been 
> married.


Potioncat:
I don't think she's currently married. Her simpering on about Fudge 
indicated an interest that was more than political. The Selwyn 
connection was brought up to support her own Blood status, and I'm 
certain there are some Muggle connections a bit too close to home. So I 
suspect the Selwyns are on her mother's side--or else her father's 
maternal side. They must be close enough for favors, at any rate.





From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Tue May 27 15:57:02 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 15:57:02 -0000
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1gtf0+dai4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1hb0e+jtbp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183042

> > Lynda:
>> Every time I watch the movie or read the book though, I do 
> make
> > numerous comments that Harry should have been able to grab at least 
> ONE
> > letter!
> > 
> > Lynda
> 
> 
> Potioncat:
> But all this lays the ground work for imformation we'll need to know 
> later. We need to see that Harry is a mediocre kid--who can't seem to 
> get even one of the letters. We need to see that the Parseltongue is 
> something he just knows how to do. Yet it's without any real control 
> or intention. I think for him to have gotten a letter and proceeded 
> on to Hogwarts without any help would have made him too strong for 
> the role of Every-kid. We need to see he's an ordinary person 
> responding to extraordinary situations.
> 
> Once I'd made it this far, I was hooked.

Montavilla47:

My only problem with the beginning of the first book was with the 
first chapter--which stopped me the first time I tried to read the 
book.  

But I disagree with the idea that we needed to see Harry as unable
to read a letter in order to make him an Everykid.  Every kid in the
world would emphasize with a boy who wanted to read a letter
addressed to him--and, with the hundreds of chances and days 
that the letters kept arriving--even a mediocre kid should have
been able to get hold of one.

I don't think the point was to keep Harry from being normally 
curious and adventurous.  I think the point was to provide humor
through hyperbole.  It's absurd how hard the Dursleys try to avoid
the letters, and that the harder they try to avoid the incriminating
evidence of magic, the more it manifests.

In the meantime, we just have to exercise patience with Harry as
a character so that we can enjoy the joke on the Dursleys.

But, I can't quite see other kid characters waiting around that 
long for Hagrid to come rescue them.  Lyra would never have 
rested until she and Pan had stolen that letter.  Likewise any of 
Frances Hodge Burnett's heroines, or Joan Aiken's.  

Although any attempt on that letter would have been preceded 
by a four-way debate, Amy March would have knicked it within
a day (probably with Laurie's help).  There'd also be a four-way
debate with the Pevensie kids, but once they realized that the
letters were sent by a higher power, they'd be on it like dragons
on gold.  

Later on in the book, Harry proves himself to be more curious
and proactive than he is in the beginning of the book.  I think
we tend to forgive him for his passivity at first, because he 
hasn't figured out that he's the hero yet.  We'd probably be 
a lot less forgiving had he done that sort of thing in later
books, though.

Montavilla47 






From danjerri at madisoncounty.net  Tue May 27 17:26:51 2008
From: danjerri at madisoncounty.net (Jerri/Dan Chase)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 12:26:51 -0500
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
References: <1211899067.1146.83009.m46@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <000401c8c01f$9c86ac90$7fae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>

No: HPFGUIDX 183043

One thing I find interesting as we discuss which of the HP books are 
our personal favorites, is that some people are talking about which 
books are "best".  Am I alone in seeing a major difference?  I would 
not consider ranking one of these books as "better" or "worse" than 
another.  I have my personal favorite, and the one that gives me the 
most dissatisfaction.  But I won't say that PoA is "better" than DH. 
PoA appeals more to me, but that doesn't mean that I consider DH to be 
a "bad" book.

And, in fact, the series is more like one monster story divided into 
seven volumes.  The first books are necessary parts.

It's sort of like a house.  I spend a lot more time in the top floor 
of my house than I do in the foundations, but the foundations aren't 
bad, without them the rest of the house, including the top floor 
wouldn't be worth much!

I would never consider advising anyone to read the later books without 
reading the earlier ones.  I suppose that someone who has seen the 
movies could start with PoA or there abouts and get something out of 
the later books.  But to me SS/PS and CoS are necessary building 
blocks to the entire series.

My interpretation, and obviously not that of others.

Jerri 





From zgirnius at yahoo.com  Tue May 27 18:02:58 2008
From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 18:02:58 -0000
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <000401c8c01f$9c86ac90$7fae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>
Message-ID: <g1hici+v3e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183044

> Jerri:
> One thing I find interesting as we discuss which of the HP books 
are 
> our personal favorites, is that some people are talking about which 
> books are "best".  Am I alone in seeing a major difference? 

Zara:
As someone who recommends people start with PoA, I want to say, I do 
see the difference. I *still* recommend people start with PoA. <g>

> Jerri: 
> And, in fact, the series is more like one monster story divided 
into 
> seven volumes.  The first books are necessary parts.

Zara:
Yes, they are necessary. But that does not mean they are equally well 
executed. The fact that they are sold as separate books, means to me 
that I am entitled to consider them AS books, making them "equal" to 
one another. Even if it did not...I could imagine, in recommending a 
novel to someone, saying "please don't give up until you've read 
Chapter X". But with books, this invloves trips top the library or 
additional expenditures. The fact remains, for me, that neither of 
the first two books made me want to pick up the next. To me, this 
gives permission to call them mediocre. (I did enjoy them, which I 
why I would not call them "bad".)









From zgirnius at yahoo.com  Tue May 27 20:19:23 2008
From: zgirnius at yahoo.com (Zara)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 20:19:23 -0000
Subject: Xeniphilius, Hostages, and Voldemort (WAS: Re: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: )
In-Reply-To: <005301c8bf41$37b77ad0$ccae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>
Message-ID: <g1hqcb+obic@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183045

> Jerri: 
> I may be alone in this, but I feel great sympathy with Xenophilius. 
> His only daughter is a hostage, who knows where with who knows what 
> being done to her.  How many of you parents feel CERTAIN that you 
> would have the strength not to betray a person who you supported in 

Zara:
I agree entirely. Xenophilius was acting under duress. Before Luna 
was kidnapped, he had gone out of his way to support Harry with the 
Quibbler. 

I also think the text encourages us to be sympathetic to him, in 
making the refrence back to the mother killed by Voldemort in DH, and 
to Lily, by having Xeno use a similar arm gesture when he is trying 
to prevent the Trio from escaping. Hermione is also sympathetic - why 
else would she go out of her way to try and prevent Xeno from getting 
into trouble with the Death Eaters?

> Jerri:
> Also, I have wondered ever since DH, why Lord V. didn't take Ginny 
> hostage very soon in the school year.  After all, he did know that 
the 
> Weasley's were closely connected with Harry, or else why the raid 
on 
> the wedding.

Zara:
Apparently Voldemort did not think he needed her to deal with Harry. 
And there was possibly also a feeling that she was there for the 
taking, when she showed up to a DE-run Hogwarts for the school year. 

> Jerri:
> And, what do folks think that the Weasley's and Harry would have
> done if Ginny had been a hostage? 

Zara:
I think we know the answer. "Give me the locket or I kill Ginny", 
addressed at Harry, would result, IMHO, in the locket ending up back 
with Voldemort. Bella used Neville in a similar manner, in OotP. 
Neville bravely told Harry not to give her the Prophecy, but Harry 
was going to. However, Voldemort did not see Harry as someone he 
needed to threaten in this way, because all he thought he needed from 
Harry, was for Harry to be found so he, Voldemort, could kill him. It 
did not seem to occur to him that Harry might get up to something 
dangerous to him, and Harry did not seem to get up to such a thing 
(from Voldmeort's point of view, as well as the general public's, 
Harry was simply hiding out). Whereas, Xeno's publishing of the real 
news apparently got to the Voldemort regime enough to provoke this 
response.

It is in light of this nasty DE habit that I always felt it was fine 
for Harry not to be rallying the rest of the populace to do 
something. Let Voldemort and the DEs continue to think that Harry was 
not a threat, except in a generalized "there is a prophecy about him" 
sort of way.

I have always felt the same way about the criticism of Draco's 
character development, also, the idea that Draco regresses/does not 
progress, after the Tower scene, because he does not choose to fight 
for the Order. I am not saying he would have wanted to fight for the 
other side, but he could not even run and hide, while his parents 
were hostages. The most he could do, was precisely what he did do - 
follow orders (as when he tortured people on Voldemort's orders, with 
a lack of enthusiasm that was evident to Harry) and try not to be 
helpful when he could avoid it (as when he did not identify the Trio 
at Malfoy Manor).


Without the help Dumbledore offered, Draco did not, IMO, have any 
choice but to act as he did.




From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk  Tue May 27 20:51:47 2008
From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 20:51:47 -0000
Subject: On Letters (was Re: Hmmm. What's your favourite *now*?)
In-Reply-To: <g1hb0e+jtbp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1hs93+bh4d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183046

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

Potioncat:
> > But all this lays the ground work for imformation we'll need to know 
> > later. We need to see that Harry is a mediocre kid--who can't seem to 
> > get even one of the letters. 

Montavilla47: 
> My only problem with the beginning of the first book was with the 
> first chapter--which stopped me the first time I tried to read the 
> book.  
> 
> But I disagree with the idea that we needed to see Harry as unable
> to read a letter in order to make him an Everykid.  Every kid in the
> world would emphasize with a boy who wanted to read a letter
> addressed to him--and, with the hundreds of chances and days 
> that the letters kept arriving--even a mediocre kid should have
> been able to get hold of one.

<snip>

> But, I can't quite see other kid characters waiting around that 
> long for Hagrid to come rescue them.  Lyra would never have 
> rested until she and Pan had stolen that letter.  Likewise any of 
> Frances Hodge Burnett's heroines, or Joan Aiken's.  
> 
> Although any attempt on that letter would have been preceded 
> by a four-way debate, Amy March would have knicked it within
> a day (probably with Laurie's help).  There'd also be a four-way
> debate with the Pevensie kids, but once they realized that the
> letters were sent by a higher power, they'd be on it like dragons
> on gold.  

<snip>

Geoff:
Just in passing, I think you meant "empathise".

I don't see Harry as a mediocre kid. We don't see how Uncle Vernon 
dealt with all the letters but he seemed to make it very difficult 
for Harry to obtain one of them...

On the first day:

'That evening when he got back from work, Uncle Vernon did 
something he'd never done before; he visited Harry in his cupboard.
"Where's my letter?" said Harry, the moment Uncle Vernon had 
squeezed through the door. "Who's writing to me?"
"No one. It was addressed to you by mistake," said Uncle Vernon 
shortly. "I have burned it."'
(PS "The Letters from No One" p.32 UK edition)

On the third day:

'...He (Vernon) shouted at Harry for about half an hour and then 
told him to go and make a cup of tea. Harry shuffled miserably off 
into the kitchen and by the time he got back, the post had arrived, 
right into Uncle Vernon's lap. Harry could see three letters 
addressed in green ink.
"I want-" he began but Uncle Vernon was tearing the letters into 
pieces before his eyes.'
(ibid. p.34)

On the fourth day of posting, my true love sent to me:

'On Friday, no fewer than twelve letters arrived for Harry....
...Uncle Vernon stayed at home again. After burning all the letters, 
he got out a hammer and nails and boarded up all the cracks 
around the front and back doors so no one could go out.'
(ibid. p.34)

'On Saturday, things began to get out of hand. Twenty-four letters
to Harry found their way into the house....
..Aunt Petunia shredded the letters in ]her food mixer.'
(ibid. p.34)

'On Sunday morning, Uncle Vernon sat down at the breakfast table 
looking tired and rather ill but happy.
"No post on Sundays," he reminded them happily as he spread 
marmalade on his newspapers, "no damn letters today-"
Something came whizzing down the kitchen chimney as he spoke
and caught him sharply on the back of the head. Next moment,
thirty or forty letters came pelting out of the fireplace like bullets. 
The Dursleys ducked but Harry leapt into the air trying to catch one-
"Out! OUT!"
Uncle Vernon seized Harry round the waist and threw him into the 
hall. When Aunt Petunia and Dudley had run out with their arms
over their faces, Uncle Vernon slammed the door shut. They could 
hear the letters still streaming into the room, bouncing off the walls 
and floor....
...Ten minutes later they had wrenched their way through the boarded
-up doors and were in the car, speeding towards the motorway.'
(ibid. pp.34-35)

And finally, when they were at Cokeworth:

'They had just finished when the owner of the hotel came over to 
their table.
"'Scuse me but is one of you Mr. H. Potter? Only I got about an 'undred 
of these at the front desk."
She held up a letter.....
...Harry made a grab for the letter but Uncle Vernon knocked his hand 
out of the way. The woman stared.
"I'll take them," said Uncle Vernon, standing up quickly and following 
her from the dining-room.'
(ibid. p.36)

Now, where would Harry get the opportunity to (a) get hold of one of 
the letters and (b) get it away to read it?

On a couple of occasions, there is a mel?e involving Harry, Vernon 
and Dudley and in the last incident at Privet Drive on Sunday, Vernon 
physically removes Harry from the room.

In other cases, if Vernon gets his hands on the letters in time, he 
rapidly  destroys them.  Harry is not physically strong enough to take 
on other of the other two so I feel that suggesting he wimps out
is grossly unfair. Comparison with the Pevensies is not feasible. Four 
of them - Peter certainly older and bigger than Harry - could mount 
a much better campaign of diversions and attack than a small eleven 
year-old on his own.

You write, 'I can't quite see other kid characters waiting around that 
long for Hagrid to come rescue them. ' How the heck does he know 
that there is a Plan B? He probably hasn't realised that Plan A /is/ 
Plan A at this point.

After the publication of DH, my well-known organisation the IWHTLC 
(I Want Harry to Live Club) was disbanded since its aims had been 
successful :-)

I think I must launch it successor the QHBC (Quit Harry Bashing Club).

To misquote the timeless words of a great American, 'Ask not what 
Harry can do for you, - ask what you can do for Harry.'




From jkoney65 at yahoo.com  Tue May 27 22:01:00 2008
From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 22:01:00 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_CHAPTER_DISCUSSION:_DH_-_Chapter_Twenty-One_=96_The_Tale_of_the_Three_Brothers?=
In-Reply-To: <g1durs+vee8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1i0as+ph6r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183047

> 
> 1. Do you think Gurdyroot tea is really that bad?

I'm sure it's an acquired taste, much like coffee.

> 
> 2. While reading the story of the Tale of the Three Brothers by 
> Beedle the Bard did any realisation come to you, as a reader, that 
> the gifts given by Death were potentially items with which we had 
> familiarity?

Well obviously the cloak jumped out at me. I was trying to figure out 
how this story related to Harry's situation.


> 
> 3. When Xenophilius named the gifts of Death from the story as the 
> Elder Wand, the Resurrection Stone and the Cloak of Invisibility, 
did 
> the title of the book you were reading make perfect sense?

I made the connection but couldn't figure out how they were going to 
affect Harry's quest.


> 
> 4. What reaction did you have to the speculation relative to 
Harry's 
> Cloak being the cloak from the story and did you find yourself 
> agreeing with or dismissing Ron's thoughts about Harry's cloak 
being 
> extraordinary?

I thought it could be a possibility, but we didn't know much about 
invisibility cloaks in general to make that determination. Since the 
story was included I figured it had to be Harry's cloak.


> 
> 5. Did the Elder Wand ring a bell at this point in the book or 
> alternatively when Harry thought of his wand as the Elder Wand did 
> you wonder if the Elder Wand was actually a wand with which we were 
> familiar?

I figured it couldn't be Harry's wand and the only logical choice was 
that it had to be Dumbledore. He had recently been killed and was 
known as a great wizard. 

> 
> 6. Xenophilius uses the word 'capture' when describing how 
ownership 
> of the wand could be transferred - would that then mean that the 
wand 
> does not necessarily have to be defeated in order to transfer its 
> allegiance?

I think the wand has to be taken forcibly from its owner. Just like 
Harry did to Draco when he took the wand away from him. I believe 
there has to be some sort of consent to have it not change owners 
(like practice dueling in the DA).


> 
> 7. Was the Peverell link thrown in by Hermione rather too 
convenient 
> or not? Explain.

All through out the series Hermione has come up with these facts. By 
now I just come to expect that she will have some other details for 
us.


> 
> 8. Were you relieved to find normal relations amongst the trio 
> restored?

I knew Hermione would eventually forgive Ron. Especially with Harry 
having done so right away. She just needed to simmer for a while. 
Plus, once your life is in danger everything else just kind of goes 
away.


> 
> 9. Are the trio's choices of which Hallow they would like to have 
> representative of their personalities?

I think they each chose what was most important to them. Ron, 
believes that power would make him stand out, Hermione other than in 
school work tends to step back (hide?) and let Ron and Harry be out 
front. Harry's desire was shown to us in the mirror.


> 
> 10. Did you, as I did, find the order in which Harry named his dear 
> departed notable?

I think he named the people he felt most guilty about before building 
up to his greatest desire.


> 
> 11. By this stage, the trio having being at the Lovegood house for 
> some time, were you expecting Xenophilius to betray the trio? Did 
you 
> feel some sympathy with Xenophilius and his reasons for being a 
> Quisling or not given the status of the WW at the time?

I wondered what was keeping Luna and once we saw the mural, I was 
screaming trap in my head. If she had painted a mural of the others, 
she would have been back in a heartbeat to see them.



> 
> 12. Was it just the stunning spell that blasted the room apart or 
was 
> something else also involved?

I just always assumed the spell hit the horn and it caused the 
explosion.


> 
> 13. Were you able to make the link between Selwyn and Umbridge at 
the 
> time or did it not occur until later, or perhaps not until you read 
> this question?

I didn't make the connection. It was just a name to me.


> 
> 14. What is Deprimo, had it been previously heard of, and was its 
use 
> necessary?

Well it worked, so it was necessary in my eyes.

> 
> 15. Any further questions arising.

Jack-A-Roe




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue May 27 22:31:26 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 22:31:26 -0000
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <43e41d1e0805262149s3b08890fm1debf0aff88f4efd@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <g1i23u+qvo8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183048

Lynda quoted:
>
> Carol: You are not the only one, who likes "The Other Minister". We
> are at least two.

Carol responds:
It looks as if you're quoting me here, but I think you're quoting
Mike, who was responding to me. But I'm glad to know that "The Other
Minister" has other fans, regardless.

BTW, I caught my own error of "Ignatius Peverell" for "Ignotus
Peverell" in the chapter discussion thread *after* I hit Send--naturally!

Carol, happy that her car repairs will "only" amount to $700 and that
she'll have a driveable car again tomorrow!





From gav_fiji at yahoo.com  Tue May 27 23:41:10 2008
From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood)
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 23:41:10 -0000
Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: DH - Chapter Twenty-One - The Tale of th
In-Reply-To: <005301c8bf41$37b77ad0$ccae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>
Message-ID: <g1i66m+879u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183049

> Jerri:

> I may be alone in this, but I feel great sympathy with 
> Xenophilius. His only daughter is a hostage, who knows 
> where with who knows what being done to her.  
<SNIP>

Goddlefrood:

I also felt a good deal of sympathy towards Xenophilius. Despite 
his being a little eccentric and quite possibly even barmy, he 
did show a normal parental reaction when Luna was kidnapped. The 
Quibbler went from being pro-Harry to being anti-Harry in a flash, 
and that was realistic. Any parent would most probably have the 
same kind of reaction, I'm sure I probably would, although heaven 
forfend that such a situation ever arose.

One point relative to this, though - and I think a comparison was 
being drawn, albeit perhaps rather tenuous - is the difference 
between what Xenpohilius did and what Sirius stated he would have 
done. In POA, Sirius says he would have died rather than betray 
his friends. I wonder if he had had children this same view would 
have held firm. Something to contemplate, maybe and I'll wait for 
others to take up the gauntlet or not as the case may be.

> Jerri (snipped):

> Also, I have wondered ever since DH, why Lord V. didn't take 
> Ginny hostage very soon in the school year.
> It seems such an obvious thing for him to have done, and long 
> before the time when the family took precautions against it.
> After all soul fragment/memory Tom Riddle understood the power 
> of a young hostage.

Goddlefrood:

The differing pieces of soul have no link to each other, so 
even if the diary revenant was aware of the value of Ginny 
as a hostage it would not mean that the reembodied LV would. 
As I've said before, LV was not terribly bright, and he 
certainly was never logical, so he probably simply never 
thought of this. Having said that, the reason for the 
raid on the wedding may have been for the very purpose 
of kidnapping Ginny or one of the other Weasley children. 
Happily the raid achieved very little for LV and his minions, 
but that was only due to their stumbling across foes who 
were their superiors and able to parry the attack.




From danjerri at madisoncounty.net  Wed May 28 01:59:36 2008
From: danjerri at madisoncounty.net (jerrichase)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 01:59:36 -0000
Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: DH - Chapter Twenty-One - The Tale of th
In-Reply-To: <g1i66m+879u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1iea8+b2te@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183050

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Goddlefrood" <gav_fiji at ...> 
wrote:
> One point relative to this, though - and I think a comparison was 
> being drawn, albeit perhaps rather tenuous - is the difference 
> between what Xenpohilius did and what Sirius stated he would have 
> done. In POA, Sirius says he would have died rather than betray 
> his friends. I wonder if he had had children this same view would 
> have held firm. Something to contemplate, maybe and I'll wait for 
> others to take up the gauntlet or not as the case may be.

I agree with your distinction.  Luna was willing to die before 
betraying her friends.  (Although she would rather live and help them!)

But they were HER friends, not her father's.  He didn't know them at 
all, until they showed up at his door. 

As to what the Weasley's would have done if they had been offered the 
choice to betray Harry vs. the life of Ginny or one of their other 
children, I don't think that they would have betrayed Harry, but it 
would have torn them apart inside, and as soon as Harry realised what 
was happening, he would have turned himself over to Lord V, rather than 
watch the family of his friend/love suffer such a loss for his sake.

That is one reason why JKR couldn't let it happen.

Jerri




From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Wed May 28 02:09:35 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 02:09:35 -0000
Subject: On Letters (was Re: Hmmm. What's your favourite *now*?)
In-Reply-To: <g1hs93+bh4d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1iesv+up3r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183051

> Geoff:
> Just in passing, I think you meant "empathise".

Montavilla47:
Thanks, Geoff.  That was the word I meant.

As for when or how Harry might have gotten one of the 
letters, I think he had a fighting chance to get one on the
second (the day you didn't mention) when Vernon was
fighting Dudley and Harry was choking Vernon.

I think Harry did show some intitiative, by the way, on the 
third day, when he snuck down to get at the post first.

On Saturday, 24 letters arrived.  We don't know how or when,
so it's hard to know what Harry's opportunities could have 
been.  

But, looking over that chapter, something comes to quickly
to mind.  Dudley was as curious as Harry was, and he's 
a lot more effective than Harry at getting his parents to do
stuff.  I know Harry and Dudley don't like each other, but they
have a common goal.  Working together they probably
could have come up with a good plan.

I'm including this snippet from your post:

> 'On Sunday morning, Uncle Vernon sat down at the breakfast table 
> looking tired and rather ill but happy.
> "No post on Sundays," he reminded them happily as he spread 
> marmalade on his newspapers, "no damn letters today-"
> Something came whizzing down the kitchen chimney as he spoke
> and caught him sharply on the back of the head. Next moment,
> thirty or forty letters came pelting out of the fireplace like bullets. 
> The Dursleys ducked but Harry leapt into the air trying to catch one-
> "Out! OUT!"
> Uncle Vernon seized Harry round the waist and threw him into the 
> hall. When Aunt Petunia and Dudley had run out with their arms
> over their faces, Uncle Vernon slammed the door shut. They could 
> hear the letters still streaming into the room, bouncing off the walls 
> and floor....

May I remind everyone that Harry turns out to the most talented 
seeker in one hundred years at Hogwarts?  This scene is like that 
key room, except Harry doesn't have to snatch one special key--
any of them would do.

Another snippet:

> And finally, when they were at Cokeworth:
> 
> 'They had just finished when the owner of the hotel came over to 
> their table.
> "'Scuse me but is one of you Mr. H. Potter? Only I got about an 'undred 
> of these at the front desk."
> She held up a letter.....
> ...Harry made a grab for the letter but Uncle Vernon knocked his hand 
> out of the way. The woman stared.
> "I'll take them," said Uncle Vernon, standing up quickly and following 
> her from the dining-room.'
> (ibid. p.36)
> 
> Now, where would Harry get the opportunity to (a) get hold of one of 
> the letters and (b) get it away to read it?

How about he opens his mouth at the hotel and says, "I'm Harry Potter
and I want my letter!"  At the very least, it would cause a stink in the 
hotel and a visit from the manager, who might very well decide that
H. Potter should get his damn letters, no matter what the irate 
gentleman with the red face and child-abusive mannerisms says.

At best, they'd call child authorities and Harry would be taken 
somewhere nice--like an orphanage.

Geoff:
> In other cases, if Vernon gets his hands on the letters in time, he 
> rapidly  destroys them.  Harry is not physically strong enough to take 
> on other of the other two so I feel that suggesting he wimps out
> is grossly unfair. Comparison with the Pevensies is not feasible. Four 
> of them - Peter certainly older and bigger than Harry - could mount 
> a much better campaign of diversions and attack than a small eleven 
> year-old on his own.

Montavilla47:
I agree that the Pevensies are in a better position than Harry.  But Lyra
isn't (unless you want to count Pan as her helper).  Sara (the Little 
Princess) is quite alone in the world, but she manages to do most of 
what she wants through sheer force of personality.  And Dido Twite 
was foiling anti-monarchist bombing plots and sailing around the 
world as an undersized ten-year-old.

And heck, it's the wrong thing to do, but Edmund does manage to
betray an entire country and find his way through several miles of 
wilderness to reach the White Witch's castle at 10 or 11.  I'll bet
he could have stolen a letter on his own.  (Eustace, too.)

Geoff:
> You write, 'I can't quite see other kid characters waiting around that 
> long for Hagrid to come rescue them. ' How the heck does he know 
> that there is a Plan B? He probably hasn't realised that Plan A /is/ 
> Plan A at this point.

Montavilla47:
Exactly.  Harry has no idea that there's a Plan B.  Which is why he 
needed to concentrate on Plan A--getting the darn letter and reading
it!

Geoff:
> I think I must launch it successor the QHBC (Quit Harry Bashing Club).
> 
> To misquote the timeless words of a great American, 'Ask not what 
> Harry can do for you, - ask what you can do for Harry.'

Montavilla47:
You're mistaking my meaning, Geoff.  I admit it is easy to mistake and
it seems like I'm bashing Harry.  I don't mean to.  My post was in
response to (was it Potioncat or Pippin?  I know it was a "P" post), who 
said that JKR was deliberately making Harry into an "Everykid" by 
having him act in a mediocre way.

My contention was that JKR was mainly interested in that passage with
piling on absurdity upon absurdity to create humor, and that the 
reader needs to cut Harry a break in terms of his inability to snatch and
read a letter in order to enjoy the joke.

I then pointed out that there are plenty of "Everykid" heroes and heroines
from classic children's books who would have applied more energy and
ingenuity to getting a letter, instead of letting things get to the point 
where they are stuck on an island in the middle of a storm.

James (from the Giant Peach) and Charlie (from the Chocolate Factory) 
are likewise alone, tiny, abused, and poor.  But they both take every
chance they are given, and Charlie persists beyond all reason in
hoping and trying to get that Golden Ticket.

But, it you relax and let the joke progress, and don't stress about
Harry's not getting a letter, it's a very enjoyable passage.

And, as I pointed out in the very beginning of my post, the only
real problem I had as a reader in getting into PS/SS was with the 
first chapter.  Since reading the later books, of course, I appreciate
that first chapter much more.  When I first picked up the book, I
read halfway through the first chapter, thought it boring and put
it down.  The second time, I got through the first chapter and
became engaged by the second one.

Montavilla47






From willsonkmom at msn.com  Wed May 28 02:46:00 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 02:46:00 -0000
Subject: On Letters (was Re: Hmmm. What's your favourite *now*?)
In-Reply-To: <g1iesv+up3r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1ih18+gt2f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183052


> 
> Montavilla47:
> You're mistaking my meaning, Geoff.  I admit it is easy to mistake 
and
> it seems like I'm bashing Harry.  I don't mean to.  My post was in
> response to (was it Potioncat or Pippin?  I know it was a "P" 
post), who 
> said that JKR was deliberately making Harry into an "Everykid" by 
> having him act in a mediocre way.

Potioncat:
It wasn't me!
Lynda started it!
She was complaining that Harry didn't manage to get a letter.

> Montavilla47:
> My contention was that JKR was mainly interested in that passage 
with
> piling on absurdity upon absurdity to create humor, and that the 
> reader needs to cut Harry a break in terms of his inability to 
snatch and
> read a letter in order to enjoy the joke.

Potioncat:
I think the joke's still there. My point is that Harry doesn't manage 
to get a letter on his own, because if he had, it would have changed 
the whole ballgame. 

We don't see him successfully get the letter and confront his family 
on his own. He doesn't get powers that allow him to control them. He 
may be a wizard, but he's still just an 11-year-old boy. Just like 
every other 11-year old boy who has to follow the stupid rules the 
adults in his life have laid out for him.

Unless we take note of the title of the book we're reading, all we 
know is that Harry is a typical boy who's just learned he's a wizard. 
We don't know he's made of heroic stuff. To see it too soon would 
make him Hero, rather than the boy who does heroic things.

As for mediocre...well, that's Snape's word for him, isn't it?
> 

>Montavilla47 
> James (from the Giant Peach) and Charlie (from the Chocolate 
Factory) 
> are likewise alone, tiny, abused, and poor.  But they both take 
every
> chance they are given, and Charlie persists beyond all reason in
> hoping and trying to get that Golden Ticket.

Potioncat:
But they don't get anything on their own either. Someone/something 
comes along and helps.(I haven't read James, just seen the movie 
version.) Harry persisted in hoping to obtain a letter, too.

(by the way, Lupin and Sprout are in James and the Giant Peach. For 
what it's worth.)






From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Wed May 28 03:16:30 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 03:16:30 -0000
Subject: On Letters (was Re: Hmmm. What's your favourite *now*?)
In-Reply-To: <g1ih18+gt2f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1iiqe+i40t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183053

 >Montavilla47 
> > James (from the Giant Peach) and Charlie (from the Chocolate 
> Factory) 
> > are likewise alone, tiny, abused, and poor.  But they both take 
> every
> > chance they are given, and Charlie persists beyond all reason in
> > hoping and trying to get that Golden Ticket.
> 
> Potioncat:
> But they don't get anything on their own either. Someone/something 
> comes along and helps.(I haven't read James, just seen the movie 
> version.) Harry persisted in hoping to obtain a letter, too.
> 
> (by the way, Lupin and Sprout are in James and the Giant Peach. For 
> what it's worth.)

Magpie:
Oh, Dido Twite and Lyra would be capable of grabbing a letter, no 
problem, imo. So would Harry himself under different circumstances 
without using magic. Speaking as somebody who used to be a mediocre 
kid, how many of these letters were there? The main place I remember 
being annoyed was with the first one where Harry had to be so shocked 
he let them see the letter to begin with--because obviously he did 
that so that we could start the whole thing. I was mostly pained that 
I, the reader, already started the book with a chapter that told me 
that this is in no way ordinary so why are we dragging out getting on 
with it? 

As I said, maybe if we hadn't already been clued into the kid's being 
important in chapter one there would be some suspense, but since 
there wasn't this chapter was a long one for me. It wasn't so much I 
thought less of Harry's brains for not grabbing a letter, but the 
problem obviously wasn't that it would be impossible for a kid to get 
a letter. It was that nobody was going to get this letter until the 
next chapter. Why would I ever think this kid was an EveryKid when 
the first chapter already told me he wasn't?

-m




From witherwing at sbcglobal.net  Wed May 28 03:33:37 2008
From: witherwing at sbcglobal.net (witherwings999)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 03:33:37 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g0vg66+d7d0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1ijqh+76b5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183054

 Siriusly Snapey Susan: which of the books has become your favorite?

Witherwing:
As of just two weeks ago, I've decided Deathly Hallows is my favorite - and I didn't think it 
possible! I've read it four times, now.  I didn't skip a single chapter, and I have to say I 
really love the camping, as well as Ron leaving (and returning to save Harry), Godric's 
Hollow, Luna's house, Harry reading Voldemort's mind, Dobby's rescue (and burial), 
Harry's Hallows/Horcruxes dilemma, the wandlore, breaking into Gringotts, Snape's 
memories and Harry's walk through the forest again, as master of the three Hallows, Kings 
Cross... I consider it a fabulously fun reread. And there are a few rich details I uncover 
each time.

For example, I discovered on my fourth read that in Snape's memory of Dumbledore telling 
him there will come a time when Voldemort will fear for the life of his snake... when Snape 
is shocked to discover that Harry must give himself up to die... Dumbledore is said *twice* 
to have his eyes closed.(DH Am.Ed.p.686-7)... Hmmm... Now I'm mulling over thoughts of 
why DD would make sure his eyes were closed tightly as he let Snape in on this part of his 
plan...

 Siriusly Snapey Susan:
> > *Are there chapters or scenes (or whole books) that you skip when you 
> > (if you) re-read? 

Well, after DH came out, I finished the series, and then went back to HBP, skipping the first 
five! I will eventually reread them all. I'm quite looking forward to it, after reading all your 
responses to your favorites.

Bbut I often think of skipping chapters, and then never do! Maybe it's because I do a lot of 
rereading individual chapters that I like! I've reread the last four chapters of DH many 
times, partly because I love them, and partly because I've been trying to figure out the 
details of the wands, etc.

-Witherwing, whose favorite used to be OotP - because Harry finally gets to say "Why me? 
This sucks!"




From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk  Wed May 28 06:47:35 2008
From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 06:47:35 -0000
Subject: On Letters (was Re: Hmmm. What's your favourite *now*?)
In-Reply-To: <g1iesv+up3r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1iv67+6vkq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183055

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "montavilla47" <montavilla47 at ...> wrote:
>
> > Geoff:
> > Just in passing, I think you meant "empathise".
> 
Montavilla47:
> As for when or how Harry might have gotten one of the 
> letters, I think he had a fighting chance to get one on the
> second (the day you didn't mention) when Vernon was
> fighting Dudley and Harry was choking Vernon.
> 
> I think Harry did show some intitiative, by the way, on the 
> third day, when he snuck down to get at the post first.
> 
> On Saturday, 24 letters arrived.  We don't know how or when,
> so it's hard to know what Harry's opportunities could have 
> been.  

Geoff:
We do. They were concealed inside two dozen eggs delivered 
by the milkman.

> But, looking over that chapter, something comes to quickly
> to mind.  Dudley was as curious as Harry was, and he's 
> a lot more effective than Harry at getting his parents to do
> stuff.  I know Harry and Dudley don't like each other, but they
> have a common goal.  Working together they probably
> could have come up with a good plan.

Geoff:
I think their realtaionship was beyond "don't like". I think the
only reason he expressed an interest was because Harry, who 
usually was the "Oliver Twist" of the family was actually getting 
something which wasn't a cast-off from him.
 
> I'm including this snippet from your post:
 
<snip>
 
> May I remind everyone that Harry turns out to the most talented 
> seeker in one hundred years at Hogwarts?  This scene is like that 
> key room, except Harry doesn't have to snatch one special key--
> any of them would do.

Geoff: Yes, but there is a subtle difference between jumping up into 
the air off the floor and trying to grab a letter while being assailed by 
Vernon and having the flexibility of being on a broom.
  
Montavilla47:
> I agree that the Pevensies are in a better position than Harry.  But Lyra
> isn't (unless you want to count Pan as her helper).  Sara (the Little 
> Princess) is quite alone in the world, but she manages to do most of 
> what she wants through sheer force of personality.  And Dido Twite 
> was foiling anti-monarchist bombing plots and sailing around the 
> world as an undersized ten-year-old.

Geoff: 
Sadly, I must reveal my literary ignorance.
:-)

Apart from the Pevensies, I am not acquainted with the other folk who 
you name.

Geoff (previously):
> > I think I must launch it successor the QHBC (Quit Harry Bashing Club).
> > 
> > To misquote the timeless words of a great American, 'Ask not what 
> > Harry can do for you, - ask what you can do for Harry.'
> 
> Montavilla47:
> You're mistaking my meaning, Geoff.  I admit it is easy to mistake and
> it seems like I'm bashing Harry.  I don't mean to.  My post was in
> response to (was it Potioncat or Pippin?  I know it was a "P" post), who 
> said that JKR was deliberately making Harry into an "Everykid" by 
> having him act in a mediocre way.
> 
> My contention was that JKR was mainly interested in that passage with
> piling on absurdity upon absurdity to create humor, and that the 
> reader needs to cut Harry a break in terms of his inability to snatch and
> read a letter in order to enjoy the joke.

Geoff:
I appreciate the absurd humour as well - trying to knock in a nail with a 
piece of fruit cake and spreading marmalade on his paper for example.

My Harry-bashing comment wasn't specifically aimed at you. There are a 
number of folk who seem to fit that category. Perhaps I should have put 
a smiley after my QHBC remark.

My IWHTLC posts of last year were usually accepted as being semi-serious.
:-)




From OctobersChild48 at aol.com  Wed May 28 08:52:02 2008
From: OctobersChild48 at aol.com (OctobersChild48 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 04:52:02 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
Message-ID: <c27.3951b382.356e7732@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183056

     
 
 
In a message dated 5/27/2008 12:50:11 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
sweenlit at gmail.com writes:

Carol: You are not the only one, who likes "The Other Minister".  We
are at least two.

zgirnius:
Make that,  three

Lynda:

Four. And, as I know it is also one of my  mother's favorite parts of the
story, make that  five.



Sandy:
 
Make that six. I love that chapter and listen to it over and  over again.





**************Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with 
Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.      
(http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4&?NCID=aolfod00030000000002)


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




From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Wed May 28 16:09:26 2008
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 16:09:26 -0000
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1i23u+qvo8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1k03m+jiuu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183057

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
>
> Lynda quoted:
> >
> > Carol: You are not the only one, who likes "The Other Minister". We
> > are at least two.
> 
> Carol responds:
> It looks as if you're quoting me here, but I think you're quoting
> Mike, who was responding to me. But I'm glad to know that "The Other
> Minister" has other fans, regardless.
 
Hickengruendler:

In fact, she's quoting me. ;-)

I found it an interesting and unexpecting way to start the book. And I 
found Fudge surprisingly funny, especially when he tells the Prime 
Minister about the Dragons and the Sphinx. ;-)




From lwalsh at acsalaska.net  Wed May 28 16:28:26 2008
From: lwalsh at acsalaska.net (Laura Lynn Walsh)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 08:28:26 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] On Letters (was Re: Hmmm. What's your favourite *now*?)
In-Reply-To: <g1iv67+6vkq@eGroups.com>
References: <g1iv67+6vkq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3B88D29E-D85C-4F06-B61E-713AF9C153F9@acsalaska.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 183058


On 2008, May 27, , at 22:47, Geoff Bannister wrote:
>> Montavilla47:
>> May I remind everyone that Harry turns out to the most talented
>> seeker in one hundred years at Hogwarts?  This scene is like that
>> key room, except Harry doesn't have to snatch one special key--
>> any of them would do.
>
> Geoff: Yes, but there is a subtle difference between jumping up into
> the air off the floor and trying to grab a letter while being  
> assailed by
> Vernon and having the flexibility of being on a broom.

I think you also need to remember that, after the first letter, Vernon
Dursley knew what was in the letters, so his top priority is NOT to
go after the letters, but rather to keep Harry away from them.  He
is a very large man; Harry is a scrawny boy, who has been cowed
all of his life.  No matter how the letters arrive, his priority is  
to make
sure Harry doesn't see them.  I think the other medium that must not
be named rather confuses the issue for the sake of a funny scene,
but he really isn't allowed to linger anywhere close to the letters long
enough to snatch one.

LauraW
-- 
Laura Lynn Walsh    lwalsh at acsalaska.net
http://llwcontemplations.blogspot.com



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




From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Wed May 28 16:38:38 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 16:38:38 -0000
Subject: On Letters (was Re: Hmmm. What's your favourite *now*?)
In-Reply-To: <g1iv67+6vkq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1k1qe+2u7n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183059

Montavilla47:
> > But, looking over that chapter, something comes to quickly
> > to mind.  Dudley was as curious as Harry was, and he's 
> > a lot more effective than Harry at getting his parents to do
> > stuff.  I know Harry and Dudley don't like each other, but they
> > have a common goal.  Working together they probably
> > could have come up with a good plan.
> 
> Geoff:
> I think their realtaionship was beyond "don't like". I think the
> only reason he expressed an interest was because Harry, who 
> usually was the "Oliver Twist" of the family was actually getting 
> something which wasn't a cast-off from him.

Montavilla47:
I don't know about that, Geoff.  Dudley and Harry are talking to
each other, which shows that they can carry on a civil 
conversation.  And they both get thrown out of the kitchen when
the first letters arrive, a common outrage that could have built
into cooperation towards a common goal.

Montavilla47 (before):
> > May I remind everyone that Harry turns out to the most talented 
> > seeker in one hundred years at Hogwarts?  This scene is like that 
> > key room, except Harry doesn't have to snatch one special key--
> > any of them would do.
> 
> Geoff: Yes, but there is a subtle difference between jumping up into 
> the air off the floor and trying to grab a letter while being assailed by 
> Vernon and having the flexibility of being on a broom.

Montavilla47:
Quite honestly, jumping into the air and trying to grab one of dozens 
of letters (although why he needs to jump I don't know) seems far 
easier than trying to find and snatch a 2-inch ball in an area the
size of a football field, while flying on a broom and having large
balls hurtling toward your head.

My point was that Harry already possessed two seeker attributes,
speed and fast reflexes, that would later make him a natural 
seeker.  Vernon is older and slower.  And Vernon cannot snatch and
assault at the same time, something Harry could use to his 
advantage.

BUT ALL THIS IS NIT-PICKING!

It's only after reading the books that anyone would really call into
question why Harry can't get the letters--except, as Sister Magpie
notes, JKR is stalling the story.  We already know this kid is magical,
the letters are obviously magical, and we have to spend a chapter
waiting for Harry to figure out what we already know.

I remember thinking that, when I finally did read the first book, that
it would have been better to start the story with the second chapter.

Now, I feel differently, because the first chapter offers that 
tantalizing prospect of ESE!Minerva.  I really loved reading it
with the idea that it was setting the mother of all plot twists.
Even without that, it's fun to go back later and see JKR introducing
the Deliminator, Sirius Black, and other things that come up 
later.

But Magpie's right.  It makes it harder to read the letters section
because we're ahead of Harry the whole time.  

I have this friend who teaches writing and does a lot of reading
for editors and producers (to minnow out promising books or 
screenplays).  He says that first-time writers invariable start their
stories on page 42 of their manuscripts.  So, he usually tells 
them to cut the first 41 pages--and, when they take that
advice, it often makes their stories much more compelling.


> Montavilla47:
> > I agree that the Pevensies are in a better position than Harry.  But Lyra
> > isn't (unless you want to count Pan as her helper).  Sara (the Little 
> > Princess) is quite alone in the world, but she manages to do most of 
> > what she wants through sheer force of personality.  And Dido Twite 
> > was foiling anti-monarchist bombing plots and sailing around the 
> > world as an undersized ten-year-old.
> 
> Geoff: 
> Sadly, I must reveal my literary ignorance.
> :-)

Montavill47:
Well, you know who the Pevensies are, at any rate.  Lyra is from 
the His Dark Materials series (from which The Golden Compass was
made).  When we first see her, she's sneaking to the forbidden
Master's study at Oxford and, within a chapter or two, will foil a 
poisoning attempt. "Pan" is her daemon, a manifestation of her
soul in animal form.  But he is very limited in what he can.  He
cannot, as I recall, move or pick up things, although he can read
and spy in places Lyra can't go.

Sara is from The Little Princess.  When her father dies overseas, she
goes from being the darling of her boarding school to the lowest 
servant.  She survives by deciding to pretend that she is a princess in
disguise.  Eventually she is helped by a kindly neighbor, but she 
spends months surviving abuse, truly hard work, and starvation by
sheer stubbornness.  (Nothing Harry does ever cuts like Sara's 
hardest moral decision.)

Dido Twite first appears in the second book in Joan Aiken's
spawling "Wolves of Willoughby Chase" saga.  The neglected
younger daughter of Simon's landlady in London, she's a total
brat and starts clinging to Simon like a barnacle because he's 
the only person who pays her any attention at all.  

Dido wouldn't hesitate a second before stealing any letter.  And 
if someone tore it up, she'd pick up the pieces and stick them 
back together again.  If Vernon came swinging at her, she'd swing 
right back, and she'd keep swinging until he was the one crying
"Uncle."

I wonder if there's something about gender differences in 
children's books that's coming into play.  All three of those 
aggressive characters are girls.  Is it more acceptable for a 
heroine to be physically aggressive, sneaky, and amoral than 
a male hero?

It's true that Harry, James, and Charlie are more passive than
Lyra, Sara, or Dido (although Dido starts out as a supporting 
character, rather than a heroine like Lyra or Sara).  Simon (who
also starts out as a supporting character) is more active than
the three boys above, but his actions are directed at making
a living, not at making trouble or sneaking around stealing
letters.

Or are heroines more suspicious and sneaky because, 
being politically powerless (until the last century or so),
female characters *had* to eavesdrop and figure things out 
on incomplete information?

Montavilla47
Going on a complete tangent since 2005....




From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Wed May 28 17:48:46 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 17:48:46 -0000
Subject: On Letters (was Re: Hmmm. What's your favourite *now*?)
In-Reply-To: <g1k1qe+2u7n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1k5tu+avsh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183060

> Montavilla47
> Going [off] on a complete tangent since 2005....

Speaking of tangents, I was reading over my post and
this made me laugh out loud:

> I have this friend who teaches writing and does a lot of reading
> for editors and producers (to minnow out promising books or 
> screenplays...

While I can produce an astonishing number of mistakes per
post, it's rare that I can make *two* mistakes in a single word.

I didn't mean "minnow," I meant "winnow," which is incorrect.
If he were winnowing out the promising books, that would
mean he was taking them *out* of consideration.  

I should have said he was "ferreting" out the promising stories.

What would be the proper cliche.






From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Wed May 28 20:17:31 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 20:17:31 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1ijqh+76b5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1kekr+4jhj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183061

Witherwings wrote:
> <snip>
Well, after DH came out, I finished the series, and then went back to
HBP, skipping the first five! <snip>

carol responds:
Skipping the first five chapters? Skipping "Spinner's End"? Although I
happen to like "The Other Minister," and I've recently discovered that
it has other fans, too, I can understand why some readers would skip
it, and I can certainly see skipping Slughorn and "Phlegm" and
possibly even the Dursleys getting hit on the head with mead glasses
and Kreacher having his tantrum. But I can't see going directly to
"Draco's Detour" without first reading "Spinner's End," which in any
case, is one of the best Snape chapters ever and has that terrible,
hellish imagery of fiery chains at the end, boding ill for my favorite
character. I can see skipping that part if you're a Snape fan and hate
what it forebodes, but, still, those few lines are compelling in their
own terrible way, much like the later scene on the tower where Snape
fulfills his vow (and his promise to DD). It's painful reading, but
it's crucial to the plot and to the Snape/DD and Snape/Draco arcs.

Carol, just curious as to why Witherwings would skip those five chapters






From lwalsh at acsalaska.net  Wed May 28 20:57:04 2008
From: lwalsh at acsalaska.net (Laura Lynn Walsh)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 12:57:04 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1kekr+4jhj@eGroups.com>
References: <g1kekr+4jhj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <0FD278C1-D25D-460A-B4BE-0407989919EA@acsalaska.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 183062


On 2008, May 28, , at 12:17, Carol wrote:

> Witherwings wrote:
>> <snip>
> Well, after DH came out, I finished the series, and then went back to
> HBP, skipping the first five! <snip>
>
> carol responds:
> Skipping the first five chapters? <snip> It's painful reading, but
> it's crucial to the plot and to the Snape/DD and Snape/Draco arcs.
>
> Carol, just curious as to why Witherwings would skip those five  
> chapters
>

Well, I can't speak for Witherwings, but I know why _I_ skip Spinner's
End.  It is simply too painful to read, and I mean physically  
painful.  I
would actually get physical symptoms when reading it.  Now that I
see its place in the rest of the tale, I CAN read it, but just barely.

LauraW
-- 
Laura Lynn Walsh    lwalsh at acsalaska.net
http://llwcontemplations.blogspot.com



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




From k.coble at comcast.net  Wed May 28 21:22:47 2008
From: k.coble at comcast.net (Katherine Coble)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 16:22:47 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <0FD278C1-D25D-460A-B4BE-0407989919EA@acsalaska.net>
References: <g1kekr+4jhj@eGroups.com> <0FD278C1-D25D-460A-B4BE-0407989919EA@acsalaska.net>
Message-ID: <2C532C2C-F72F-4774-BE2C-767D186F2C65@comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 183063


On May 28, 2008, at 3:57 PM, Laura Lynn Walsh wrote:

> > Witherwings wrote:
> >> <snip>
> > Well, after DH came out, I finished the series, and then went  
> back to
> > HBP, skipping the first five! <snip>
> >
> > carol responds:
> > Skipping the first five chapters? <snip> It's painful reading, but
> > it's crucial to the plot and to the Snape/DD and Snape/Draco arcs.
> >
> > Carol, just curious as to why Witherwings would skip those five
> > chapters
> >
>
> Well, I can't speak for Witherwings, but I know why _I_ skip Spinner's
> End. It is simply too painful to read, and I mean physically
> painful.


Uh, I thought Witherwings meant skipping the first five BOOKS (HBP is  
the sixth.)

Although I do skip several chapters now on my rereads.  God forgive  
me, but I just cannot stand Hagrid's Tale, Grawp, and Snape's Worst  
Memory.   So I understand skipping chapters that are too emotionally  
painful.

Katherine

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




From gav_fiji at yahoo.com  Wed May 28 21:40:40 2008
From: gav_fiji at yahoo.com (Goddlefrood)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 21:40:40 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_CHAPTER_DISCUSSION:_DH_-_Chapter_Twenty-One_=96_The_Tale_of_the_Three_Brothers?=
In-Reply-To: <203A98D3-EAE8-4CAF-AA70-9F99A4333C3F@acsalaska.net>
Message-ID: <g1kjgo+c9ps@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183064

> Laura:

> > 1. Do you think Gurdyroot tea is really that bad?
 
> Undoubtedly. Have you ever tried Lapsang Souchong, or
> something like that. Eww!

Goddlefrood:

I'm sure it's vile, probably akin to Earl Grey tea, or the one 
you said. Excuse me, I'll be back shortly, feeling queasy.

> Laura:

> I was less sure about the stone. Why set an ugly stone in a 
> ring?

Goddlefrood after a brief lie down:

The stone was cracked when we first came across it, and when 
it is noted as being worn by Tom Riddle in HBP (in Chapter 23 
- Horcruxes), it is not described particularly thoroughly. 
Some years ago, in fact as one of the first things I ever 
did in HP fandom I located a picture of a ring that would 
possibly correspond to the Peverell ring. Oddly enough it 
was discovered in the village of Snape in England. Said 
village has a website at which the picture of the ring I'm 
thinking of would be found. This link:

http://www.snapevillage.co.uk/aboutsnape.html

goes to the page with the ring on it. I thought this to be 
a rather charming ring and speculate that the Peverell ring 
was at least its equal, if not superior. Thus, my slightly 
long-winded way of disagreeing that the ring had an ugly 
stone in it. I believe the stone to have been quite attractive.

A direct link to just the picture:

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/8150/goldringax8.jpg

> > 10. Did you, as I did, find the order in which Harry named 
> > his dear departed notable?

> Laura:
> I think he names them in reverse order according to how 
> difficult it is to admit that he needs them.
<SNIP>

Goddlefrood:

That's an interesting idea and certainly worth consideration. 
Thanks.

- Due to the list being a little slow, I'm just drip-feeding 
the responses.

- I thought this was the pivotal chapter in DH.

Toodle oo




From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk  Wed May 28 22:58:57 2008
From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 22:58:57 -0000
Subject: On Letters (was Re: Hmmm. What's your favourite *now*?)
In-Reply-To: <g1k1qe+2u7n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1ko3h+10800@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183065

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

Montavilla47:
> > > I know Harry and Dudley don't like each other, but they
> > > have a common goal.  Working together they probably
> > > could have come up with a good plan.

Geoff:
> > I think their realtaionship was beyond "don't like". I think the
> > only reason he expressed an interest was because Harry, who 
> > usually was the "Oliver Twist" of the family was actually getting 
> > something which wasn't a cast-off from him.
> 
Montavilla47:
> I don't know about that, Geoff.  Dudley and Harry are talking to
> each other, which shows that they can carry on a civil 
> conversation.  And they both get thrown out of the kitchen when
> the first letters arrive, a common outrage that could have built
> into cooperation towards a common goal.

Geoff:
Their behaviour at tis point doesn't suggest a common outrage, 
rather a fierce competition:

'"OUT!" roared Uncle Vernon and he took both Harry and Dudley by 
the scruff of their necks and threw them into the hall, slamming the 
kitchen door behind them. Harry and Dudley promptly had a furious 
but silent fight over who would listen at the keyhole; Dudley won, so 
Harry, his glasses dangling from one ear, lay flat on his stomach to
listen at the crack between door and floor.'
(PS T"he Letters from No One", p.31 UK edition)

This is an interesting outworking of cooperation towards a common goal...
:-)
 
Montavilla47 (before):
> > > May I remind everyone that Harry turns out to the most talented 
> > > seeker in one hundred years at Hogwarts?  This scene is like that 
> > > key room, except Harry doesn't have to snatch one special key--
> > > any of them would do.

Geoff: Yes, but there is a subtle difference between jumping up into 
> > the air off the floor and trying to grab a letter while being assailed by 
> > Vernon and having the flexibility of being on a broom.

 Montavilla47:
> Quite honestly, jumping into the air and trying to grab one of dozens 
> of letters (although why he needs to jump I don't know) seems far 
> easier than trying to find and snatch a 2-inch ball in an area the
> size of a football field, while flying on a broom and having large
> balls hurtling toward your head.

Geoff:
But not when you've got a large, irate uncle trying to clobber you at 
the same moment. He would also then have to escape to somewhere 
in order to read the epistle in safety.
  
Montavilla47:
> > > I agree that the Pevensies are in a better position than Harry.  But Lyra
> > > isn't (unless you want to count Pan as her helper).  Sara (the Little 
> > > Princess) is quite alone in the world, but she manages to do most of 
> > > what she wants through sheer force of personality.  And Dido Twite 
> > > was foiling anti-monarchist bombing plots and sailing around the 
> > > world as an undersized ten-year-old.

Geoff: 
> > Sadly, I must reveal my literary ignorance.
> > :-)

Montavill47: 
> Well, you know who the Pevensies are, at any rate.  

Geoff:
Yes, I said so. They have been friends for many years.

Montavill47:

<snip>

> I wonder if there's something about gender differences in 
> children's books that's coming into play.  All three of those 
> aggressive characters are girls.  Is it more acceptable for a 
> heroine to be physically aggressive, sneaky, and amoral than 
> a male hero?

Geoff:
Oh definitely. That's type casting. <g,d & r>

Montavill47:
> It's true that Harry, James, and Charlie are more passive than
> Lyra, Sara, or Dido (although Dido starts out as a supporting 
> character, rather than a heroine like Lyra or Sara).  Simon (who
> also starts out as a supporting character) is more active than
> the three boys above, but his actions are directed at making
> a living, not at making trouble or sneaking around stealing
> letters.

> Or are heroines more suspicious and sneaky because, 
> being politically powerless (until the last century or so),
> female characters *had* to eavesdrop and figure things out 
> on incomplete information?

Geoff:
Pass.




From witherwing at sbcglobal.net  Thu May 29 13:34:09 2008
From: witherwing at sbcglobal.net (witherwings999)
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 13:34:09 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1kekr+4jhj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1mbch+bag9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183066

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

> Carol, just curious as to why Witherwings would skip those five chapters

Witherwing:

I meant books, not chapters;O).

I don't usually skip chapters as I'm rereading the books, but I do often reread chapters I 
like. Spinners End is one I've reread many times. I've spent a lot of time rereading all 
things Snape, perhaps because I am fascinated by his character, and his baffling behavior 
continues to intrigue, even now!

For those of you who don't reread OotP, because of how painful it is for Harry, the loss of 
Sirius, etc., I recommend looking at chapter 2, A Peck of Owls. To me, it is one of the 
funniest, and wonderfully written shapters of the entire series.

 Do it now. You know you want to!





From foxmoth at qnet.com  Thu May 29 15:00:06 2008
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 15:00:06 -0000
Subject: On Letters (was Re: Hmmm. What's your favourite *now*?)
In-Reply-To: <g1k5tu+avsh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1mgdm+o4g1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183067

> > Montavilla47
> > Going [off] on a complete tangent since 2005....
> 
> Speaking of tangents, I was reading over my post and
> this made me laugh out loud:
> 
> > I have this friend who teaches writing and does a lot of reading
> > for editors and producers (to minnow out promising books or 
> > screenplays...

Pippin:
But this was *perfect* -- conjuring up the image of your friend
fishing in the slushpile for something with a little glimmer of
inspiration that might lead to great things -- I loved it!

Returning to topic...I think it's telling and intentional that Harry
can't get snatch a  letter out of the air but is able to grab
Neville's falling Remembrall once he's on a broom. The first time he
rides a broom is the first time he really feels like a wizard, IMO,
able to do anything, and he'll later remember it as one of the
happiest moments of his life.

Pippin






From jkoney65 at yahoo.com  Thu May 29 22:22:49 2008
From: jkoney65 at yahoo.com (jkoney65)
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 22:22:49 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1ijqh+76b5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1nabp+iqu7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183068

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "witherwings999" 
<witherwing at ...> wrote:
>
> For example, I discovered on my fourth read that in Snape's memory 
of Dumbledore telling 
> him there will come a time when Voldemort will fear for the life of 
his snake... when Snape 
> is shocked to discover that Harry must give himself up to die... 
Dumbledore is said *twice* 
> to have his eyes closed.(DH Am.Ed.p.686-7)... Hmmm... Now I'm 
mulling over thoughts of 
> why DD would make sure his eyes were closed tightly as he let Snape 
in on this part of his 
> plan...

Jack-A-Roe:
I noticed that he closed his eyes the first time I read it. I had 
first thought they he was just trying to remember the facts 
(sometimes it's easier with your eyes closed).

But the more times I review it, I believe he was trying to hide his 
thoughts from Snape. Dumbledore tells him the truth about the piece 
of the soul attaching to Harry and then Dumbledore says 

"We have protected him because it has been essential to teach, to 
raise him, to let him try his strength"

Which is where Harry believes he has been set up and a large part of 
the manipulative Dumbledore comes from.

But I notice that he didn't tell Snape everything. He didn't mention 
the part he says in Kings Cross (Am ed 710) "He took your blood 
believing it would strengthen him. He took into his body a tiny part 
of the enchantment your mother laid upon you when she died for you. 
His body keeps her sacrifice alive, and while that enchantment 
survives, so do you and so does Voldemort's one last hope for 
himself."

I think he closed his eyes so Snape wouldn't figure out that he 
wasn't being told the entire truth.

Jack-A-Roe






From random832 at fastmail.us  Thu May 29 22:24:05 2008
From: random832 at fastmail.us (Random832)
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 18:24:05 -0400
Subject: timetable problem
Message-ID: <483F2D05.9010402@fastmail.us>

No: HPFGUIDX 183069

I was trying to work out a consistent class schedule for a fanfic I'm
working on, and ran into a problem.

Suppose there are 8 hours in the normal "school day", and classes are
only normally on weekdays.

Each core class (the ones that are required in year 1-5) obviously has
one class group per house per year - 20 total - for the OWL years.
assume at least two groups per year for the NEWT years, that's 4. There
would probably also be one remedial OWL group. So, 25 groups total.

Since there's only 40 hours (8 hours times five days), that means there
are only 96 minutes of "professor time" available to each group of
students during normal daylight hours. This doesn't seem nearly enough
to get a proper education (or even the level of education the students
_do_ seem to get) in these subjects. It would also leave each students'
schedules quite empty of actual classroom time, so Hermione shouldn't
have needed a time turner, though she'd have missed out on some small
amount of study time.

-- 
Random832



From willsonkmom at msn.com  Fri May 30 03:12:32 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 03:12:32 -0000
Subject: timetable problem
In-Reply-To: <483F2D05.9010402@fastmail.us>
Message-ID: <g1nrb0+sm2a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183070

 Random832  wrote:
>
> I was trying to work out a consistent class schedule for a fanfic 
I'm
> working on, and ran into a problem.
> 
> Suppose there are 8 hours in the normal "school day", and classes 
are
> only normally on weekdays.


Potioncat:
Keeping this to canon, remember, it's maths. Maths doesn't (don't?) 
have to work out in the Potterverse.

The subjects aren't taught every day. In fact, I think The Lexicon 
has come up with a possible class schedule in the time line section.

Potions has two houses per class. I think Transfiguration has a class 
for each house. And sometimes it appears all 4 houses might be in the 
same class. JKR is rather inconsistent on this.

But, like I said, maths are magical in the Potterverse and they don't 
have to work out.






From sherriola at gmail.com  Fri May 30 03:57:40 2008
From: sherriola at gmail.com (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 20:57:40 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1e9g1+7s45@eGroups.com>
References: <g1e8ph+113lh@eGroups.com> <g1e9g1+7s45@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <01d401c8c209$4eba8540$4001a8c0@Pensieve>

No: HPFGUIDX 183071

> Potioncat:
> How difficult was it to continue reading the series after Sirius died?  
> Given that I'm still here, I suppose I would have continued reading if 
> Snape had died earlier. But I was quite upset at his death, even 
> expecting it. I thought Sirius's was completely unexpected.
>


Sherry:

It was actually difficult for me to continue with the series after Sirius
died.  But, for me, it had always been mostly about Harry, so because I
wanted to know what happened to him, and to see him defeat Voldemort at
last, I stuck with the series and enjoyed the last two books.  But some of
the luster and absolute fun of the series died for me when Sirius died.
Even that goes back to Harry, because I wanted Harry to have his godfather,
someone who was his family, his own parental figure.  And, part of it was
just because I liked Sirius, even with his flaws.

Sherry




From random832 at fastmail.us  Fri May 30 04:17:25 2008
From: random832 at fastmail.us (Random832)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 00:17:25 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: timetable problem
In-Reply-To: <g1nrb0+sm2a@eGroups.com>
References: <g1nrb0+sm2a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <483F7FD5.3010204@fastmail.us>

No: HPFGUIDX 183072

> Potioncat:
> Keeping this to canon, remember, it's maths. Maths doesn't (don't?) 
> have to work out in the Potterverse.
> 
> The subjects aren't taught every day. In fact, I think The Lexicon 
> has come up with a possible class schedule in the time line section.

There's only 96 minutes a week though, and we know that classes meet at 
least twice a week.

Most courses when I was in college had 3-5 hours a week of instructional 
time, and that's not counting office hours, etc.

> Potions has two houses per class. 

I think we're told that the two-house sessions (hp-lexicon implies that 
only one of the potions classes in a week is "double potions") are also 
twice as long, so it works out the same.



From willsonkmom at msn.com  Fri May 30 13:09:46 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 13:09:46 -0000
Subject: timetable problem
In-Reply-To: <483F7FD5.3010204@fastmail.us>
Message-ID: <g1ouaq+4nqo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183073

 Random832:
 
> There's only 96 minutes a week though, and we know that classes meet 
at 
> least twice a week.
> 
> Most courses when I was in college had 3-5 hours a week of 
instructional 
> time, and that's not counting office hours, etc.
> 

Potioncat:
You're right. There's no way one teacher could teach enough classes for 
all the students at Hogwarts, even if we only imagine the 40 or so per 
year that we know about. (Long running debate on the actual number of 
students at Hogwarts.) Although, are there any public school high 
school teachers out there? How many students come through your classes?

Then add the duties of being Head of House for those 4 core teachers. 
Poor McGonagall--teacher, Head of House and Deputy.


It sounds as if you're keeping your fanfic as close to canon as 
possible, but I'd suggest adjusting the class timetable to fit your 
story's needs, even if it doesn't make complete sense. Send me an e-
mail when you've posted it!


Potioncat, adding the disclaimer that I'm as good at math as JKR is. 
I'm not sure why I keep jumping into math related posts.






From sweenlit at gmail.com  Fri May 30 15:49:36 2008
From: sweenlit at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 08:49:36 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1gtf0+dai4@eGroups.com>
References: <43e41d1e0805262158x5c7f59v3fb8b75405c19522@mail.gmail.com>
	 <g1gtf0+dai4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <43e41d1e0805300849g76e72a26re8d241310f1829d0@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183074

Magpie:
We need to see that Harry is a mediocre kid--who can't seem to
get even one of the letters


Lynda:
Never, in any of my readings of the books or viewings of the movies have i
ever seen Harry as just a mediocre kid. The entire point of the story is
that Harry is NOT average. He is, however a kid who has been beaten down by
the circumstances in which he lives at the beginning of the story--a family
that does not care for him as they should, which carries over to school and
social settings. If I was reading about a mediocre kid--well, I wouldn't
read that story, or recommend it to friends and family. Don't see why anyone
would. Too many books, too little time for mediocrity.

Lynda


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




From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Fri May 30 17:06:40 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 17:06:40 -0000
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <43e41d1e0805300849g76e72a26re8d241310f1829d0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <g1pc70+jneh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183075

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lynda Cordova" <sweenlit at ...> 
wrote:
>
> Magpie:
> We need to see that Harry is a mediocre kid--who can't seem to
> get even one of the letters
> 
> 
> Lynda:
> Never, in any of my readings of the books or viewings of the movies 
have i
> ever seen Harry as just a mediocre kid.

Magpie:
Me neither. I don't know who said that line that you quoted as me, 
but it wasn't me.:-)

I made the opposite point. We know from the beginning of the book 
that Harry *isn't* ordinary, so there's no point in ever pretending 
he is. He's not even mediocre at the Dursleys, he's living in this 
exaggerated world where he's the worst thing ever. That's why I find 
all the business with the letters frustrating, because maybe Harry is 
confused and excited by them, but I'm two steps ahead of him.

Though I would read about a mediocre kid. I like reading about 
mediocre people who rise to be something special. Harry, however, is 
the Chosen One who discovers more super powers as he goes.

-m




From danjerri at madisoncounty.net  Fri May 30 18:20:22 2008
From: danjerri at madisoncounty.net (Jerri/Dan Chase)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 13:20:22 -0500
Subject: timetable problem
References: <1212157510.3493.69819.m46@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <002101c8c282$2b898930$bdae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>

No: HPFGUIDX 183076


> Potioncat:
> You're right. There's no way one teacher could teach enough classes 
> for
> all the students at Hogwarts, even if we only imagine the 40 or so 
> per
> year that we know about. (Long running debate on the actual number 
> of
> students at Hogwarts.) Although, are there any public school high
> school teachers out there? How many students come through your 
> classes?
>
> Then add the duties of being Head of House for those 4 core 
> teachers.
> Poor McGonagall--teacher, Head of House and Deputy.

Yes, the "maths" of Hogwarts schedules can't work out.  In addition to 
the issues raised by Potioncat and the rest on this thread, there is 
the fact that the train always leaves to go to Hogwarts on September 
1, and the first day of classes is the next day, and seems to be 
always Monday!  (Or at least it is Monday every time we learn what day 
of the week the first day of class is on.)

One of the other "maths"/Hogwarts schedule issues that had me 
wondering concerns Prof. Umbridge in OoP.  HOW could she have taught 
all those DADA classes (and she seems to have only one house per 
class, only Gryffindor students seem to have been there to hear 
Harry's fuss with her) and inspected all of Hagrid's classes and all 
of the divination classes, plus other inspections of other 
teachers/classes?  I suppose that she may have used prefects or 
someone to monitor her classes reading of the text books in classes 
that don't have Harry Potter in them, but I still feel that her 
schedule, as DADA teacher and Grand Inquisitor was more full than 
possible, even before she added being acting headmistress to the load.

I was certain that the only way Umbridge could have worked the 
schedule that she did was with the aid of a time turner.  However, 
there is no cannon to that effect, I don't know if JKR intended it 
that way or if it is just one of her "maths" problems.

Jerri 





From natti_shafer at yahoo.com  Fri May 30 22:33:27 2008
From: natti_shafer at yahoo.com (Nathaniel)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 22:33:27 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <AFB63E41-CE7B-4748-8E4C-456E5807120C@acsalaska.net>
Message-ID: <g1pvbn+atsb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183078

My favorites is still PoA. I still get tingles when I read the second
half.

My favorite chapter is "The Centaur and the Sneak." It's really the
only chapter that I read out of sequence. You really get to see
Dumbeldore's wit and intelligence in that one. And we get that classic
line from Phineus at the end - sorry don't have my copy with me at
work - "You know, Minister, I disagree with Dumbledore on many counts,
but you cannot deny he's got style."
-Nathaniel




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Fri May 30 23:19:34 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 23:19:34 -0000
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1pc70+jneh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1q226+tsd2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183079

Lynda:
> > Never, in any of my readings of the books or viewings of the
movies have i ever seen Harry as just a mediocre kid.
> 
> Magpie:
> Me neither. <snip> We know from the beginning of the book that Harry
*isn't* ordinary, so there's no point in ever pretending he is. He's
not even mediocre at the Dursleys, he's living in this exaggerated
world where he's the worst thing ever. That's why I find all the
business with the letters frustrating, because maybe Harry is confused
and excited by them, but I'm two steps ahead of him.
> 
> Though I would read about a mediocre kid. I like reading about 
mediocre people who rise to be something special. Harry, however, is 
the Chosen One who discovers more super powers as he goes.

Carol responds:

Ah, well. This idea of Harry's being in some respects ordinary or
average and in others extraordinary is one that people will never
agree on.

Here's my perspective, which I don't expect anyone necessarily to
agree with. the second chapter of SS/PS is written for kids (not
analytical adults) who don't yet know Harry, from the perspective of
not quite-eleven-year-old Harry, who doesn't yet know that he's a
Wizard. It's intended to be comic and at the same time to emphsize
through exaggeration the extent of Uncle Vernon's unfairness to Harry.
Harry's one wrong move is to allow Uncle Vernon to know about the
letter before he himself has read it. Everything goes wrong from
there. We're supposed to see Harry as small, skinny, outnumbered,
bullied, and essentially helpless, but not desperate enough to call up
the accidental magic he doesn't know he possesses. Comic mayhem
ensues, no more realistic than Hagrid's hands being the size of trash
bin lids. (Boarding up the door to prevent the mail from coming in?
And I suppose Uncle Vernon is supposed to climb the back fence or
leave through a window to get to work?)

As for Harry's "mediocrity," that, of course, is Snape's word and no
doubt reflects his perspective. In terms of school marks, it's
perfectly true. (He seems to be averaging an Acceptable, which would
be a C or "Average" in an American school, in most of his subjects in
OoP when he has his career counseling session with McGonagall, with an
E in a few subjects (Charms, IIRC)--and, of course, he's failing that
year's DADA class through no fault of his own.

>From a Muggle perspective (other than that of the Dursleys), he might
be viewed as extraordinary simply by virtue of being a Wizard, but so
would Ron or Colin Creevey or any Wizard who could perform, say, a
Vanishing Spell or even a simple Hover Charm. From the Dursleys'
perspective, magic is evil and must be stamped out. Harry is no better
and no worse than any others of Lily's "sort" or "crowd"--anyone from
Tonks to Dumbledore to the Weasleys is an undesirable with whom they
want no contact.

>From Hermione's point of view, Harry is extraordinary and powerful.
>From his own, he's good at Quidditch and flying but otherwise no
different from any other Wizard kid except that Voldemort wants to
kill him and he has some unwanted powers (Parseltongue and the scar
connection) somehow acquired when Voldemort tried to kill him. While
those powers are sometimes useful, they can sometimes lead him astray
(the false vision of Sirius Black being tortured, the failure to
realize that "Bathilda" is speaking Parseltongue), and the scar
connection can be a real headache. Harry doesn't want to lead the
as-yet unnamed DA because, as he points out, most of his escapes and
exploits involved help from other people and a lot of luck. However,
as Hermione points out, he alone has actually faced Voldemort and
survived, which, in itself, is extraordinary. In DH, she thinks it's
his power that caused his wand to attack Voldemort. Harry knows
better; it was the wand itself.

So, is Harry ordinary or extraordinary? Setting aside the fact that
he's a Wizard, which in itself differentiates him from us Muggles,
he's extraordinary in terms of what has happened to him and in what he
eventually has to face. He can cast a corporeal Patronus (and I'm not
going *there* again!) and play Quidditch exceptionally well (though
luck plays a part even there). OTOH, he does have a more talented
friend (Hermione) who has given him a lot of help and he has more than
the usual quota of luck even without the help of Felix Felicis. He's
not an exceptional student, being rather lazy with a tendency toward
procrastination and no qualms about copying Hermione's notes and
essays (or taking credit for the HBP's Potions improvements). His
popularity has nothing to do with his personality and waxes and wanes
with his Quidditch performance and the Daily Propher's stories about
him (or the mistaken perception that he's the Heir of Slytherin). He's
a small, skinny kid with glasses and unruly hair (and, at least in the
first book, "knobbly" knees)--the type of kid that young readers who
aren't particularly good looking or popular can identify with. (His
friend Ron has red hair and big feet; his other friend Hermione has
bushy hair and, for three and a half books, large and possibly crooked
front teeth, more "ordinary" qualities that kids can identify with.
One is poor and overshadowed by his older brothers; the other is a
"swot." These are not "cool," popular kids.)

So, sure. Harry, through no fault of his own, is the Chosen One
targeted by Voldemort, who just happens to have the particular set of
powers (including a form of Love, Parseltongue, and the soul bit/scar
connection) required to defeat him without having anything near
voldemort's magical power and skill in other respects--all of which
*adds* to his appeal--the little guy against the powerful villain
(David and Goliath; Frodo and Sauron).

What differentiates Harry from Cedric, who is so coldly and ruthlessly
murdered for being "the spare"? Cedric is slightly older, handsomer,
generous, fair, brave, and magically talented, but those things are
not enough: he lacks the magical protection provided by Lily's
sacrifice and Harry's holly wand, which Voldemort's yew wand can't
defeat. In the end, ordinary though he is in many respects (less
intelligent than Hermione, less powerful and skilled than Severus
Snape or Albus Dumbledore, much smaller than Hagrid, much less
experienced than Mad-Eye Moody, etc., etc.), only Harry can defeat
Voldemort--with a lot of luck and the help of his friends, including
even the dead Dumbledore.

Carol, who thinks that if Harry weren't ordinary in many respects and
by no means the equal of Voldemort in power or talent, it would be
difficult to empathize and impossible to sympathize with him




From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Sat May 31 01:26:33 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 01:26:33 -0000
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1q226+tsd2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1q9g9+fpi2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183080

> > Magpie:
> > Me neither. <snip> We know from the beginning of the book that 
Harry
> *isn't* ordinary, so there's no point in ever pretending he is. He's
> not even mediocre at the Dursleys, he's living in this exaggerated
> world where he's the worst thing ever. That's why I find all the
> business with the letters frustrating, because maybe Harry is 
confused
> and excited by them, but I'm two steps ahead of him.
> > 
> > Though I would read about a mediocre kid. I like reading about 
> mediocre people who rise to be something special. Harry, however, 
is 
> the Chosen One who discovers more super powers as he goes.
> 
> Carol responds:
> 
> Ah, well. This idea of Harry's being in some respects ordinary or
> average and in others extraordinary is one that people will never
> agree on.

Magpie:
Oh, well, sure in some ways he's ordinary. So's Superman. I'm not 
saying he's special in every way--he gets tongue tied around girls, 
he can be lazy and not do his homework, he can be snarky etc.

But here I'm talking about the fact that he is the Chosen One. We 
start the book with a whole chapter about this Important Baby, so of 
course it's not a surprise when in the second chapter he turns out to 
be somebody special. I've already been told he's not just any kid in 
the suburbs. I realize that *Harry* doesn't know who he is yet, but 
every kid reading the book knows, just as I did, that he's not 
ordinary, just as they can see that his situation isn't ordinary with 
Uncle Vernon etc. I know it's supposed to be comic, I just find it 
tedious. Sometimes you enjoy watching the person find out something 
you already know, but the chapter full of "Here's a letter. Psych! 
Can't read it!" drove me nuts.

Within this universe Harry is one of these most special people ever, 
hands down. He's never just been ordinary. He doesn't relate to that 
particular perspective of Ron's. He is defininitely not ordinary from 
a Muggle or a Wizard perspective. (And the book opens with Wizards 
discussing just that.) That these things sometimes lead to bad things 
for Harry is not the same as them making Harry ordinary. He still 
retains aspects of his personality that are like any other boy/man, 
of course. There's plenty of ways where he is unexceptional and 
mediocre. It depends on what you're talking about. But in the 
beginning of PS we're told he's somehow special, then wait while he 
finds it out. Sometimes that's fun, like with the snake at the zoo, 
because Harry's doing something. But when it's just a letter giving 
him information and the cartoon mean dad is refusing to let him read 
it over and over, I started skimming. 

As an adult he seems pretty uninteresting (though if you listen to 
interviews his career is extraordinary). He's certainly ordinary 
enough that we can empathize with him, but in the context of the 
opening chapters, I stand by him not being ordinary and the extended 
run from the letters being too long.

-m




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sat May 31 01:59:30 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 01:59:30 -0000
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1q9g9+fpi2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1qbe2+k62v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183081

Magpie wrote:
> <snip>
> Within this universe Harry is one of these most special people ever,
hands down. He's never just been ordinary. He doesn't relate to that
particular perspective of Ron's. He is defininitely not ordinary from
 a Muggle or a Wizard perspective. (And the book opens with Wizards 
discussing just that.) That these things sometimes lead to bad things
for Harry is not the same as them making Harry ordinary. He still 
retains aspects of his personality that are like any other boy/man, 
of course. There's plenty of ways where he is unexceptional and 
mediocre. It depends on what you're talking about. But in the 
beginning of PS we're told he's somehow special, then wait while he
finds it out. <snip>

> As an adult he seems pretty uninteresting (though if you listen to 
interviews his career is extraordinary). He's certainly ordinary 
enough that we can empathize with him, but in the context of the 
opening chapters, I stand by him not being ordinary and the extended
run from the letters being too long.

Carol responds:
Harry's *fate* and *destiny* are not ordinary, nor are the unique
events that led to his becoming the Chosen One. But none of that has
to do with Harry himself; it's more what happened to him. Thanks to a
series of events--Snape's eavesdropping, his revelation of the partial
Prophecy, Voldemort's decision to go after Harry, Snape's request to
save Lily, Wormtail's breach of the Fidelius charm, Voldemort's offer
to let Lily live, Lily's sacrifice, Voldemort's attempt to kill Harry
after the love magic activated--Harry is suddenly famous, having done
nothing except survive through no effort of his own. He's "famous
before he can walk and talk" for something he didn't even do. To
himself, however, he's just a skinny orphan with a scar on his
forehead who sleeps in a cupboard under the stairs. Once he gets to
the WW, he's a celebrity, not because *he* is extraordinary but
because something extraordinary happened to him--and to Voldemort
(though Harry did not defeat LV; he defeated himself by attempting to
kill the magically protected Harry).

Sure, Harry has a soul bit in his forehead, but all it does is enable
him to speak to snakes, feel pain when Voldemort is near or feeling
strong emotions, and, later, see into Voldemort's mind. Handy powers
if you're going to fight Voldemort, and highly unusual, but that's as
far as "extraordinary" goes. I'm by no means undervaluing his willing
self-sacrifice in DH, which is by far my favorite Harry moment, but
you don't have to be magical or have a soul bit in your head to
sacrifice yourself.

At any rate, the WW's view of him as "special" is a bit exaggerated
(on *their* part, I mean). No one knows that Harry is the Chosen One;
they only know that he survived an AK that backfired. DEs wonder
whether it's because Harry himself if a powerful Dark Wizard, but,
nope. It's his *mother's* self-sacrifice made under highly unusual
circumstances (a chance to  live, a choice to die) that saved him.
Harry himself was an ordinary Wizard baby of fifteen months and, had
it not been for Voldemort's promise to Snape and Lily refusal of LV's
offer to let her live if she'd only step aside and let him kill Harry,
Harry would be dead.

Fame for something you didn't even do, something that *happened* to
you, is not the same thing as being extraordinary.

Carol, who was a great deal more disturbed by the celebrations after
the Potters' deaths than by the letters that Harry couldn't catch





From sistermagpie at earthlink.net  Sat May 31 02:44:42 2008
From: sistermagpie at earthlink.net (sistermagpie)
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 02:44:42 -0000
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1qbe2+k62v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1qe2q+p3j8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183082

> Carol responds:
> Harry's *fate* and *destiny* are not ordinary, nor are the unique
> events that led to his becoming the Chosen One. But none of that has
> to do with Harry himself; it's more what happened to him. 

Magpie:
Yes, But we were talking about whether the whole thing with the 
letters is about showing us that Harry is an ordinary boy, which is a 
very specific thing. And I'm saying that the book doesn't start 
with "Meet Harry Potter, ordinary boy." It starts with a chapter 
where there's magical people talking about this baby like he's 
something really special--whether through circumstances or ability 
doesn't really matter. Unlike most babies, he's already got some 
important destiny. So when we then meet Vernon and hear about the kid 
in the cupboard, we already know that about him. He thinks 
he's...well, not ordinary because ordinary boys aren't treated like 
pariahs...but he certainly doesn't think he's a wizard or has any 
special destiny except being crapped on by the Dursleys. But we 
readers know that he is more than that because we were told in the 
first chapter. So we're waiting for him to catch up to us. 
Personality-wise everybody's ordinary on some level if they're at all 
human.

King Arthur is perfectly ordinary as far as he knows before he pulls 
the sword out of the stone, but it's a different story depending on 
whether you start with Merlin arranging for Uther to sleep with 
Ygrain and then placing Arthur with his adopted family, or start with 
Wart trailing after his much flashier brother. In the latter story 
we're meeting an ordinary boy and then being surprised when we find 
out the truth. In the first version we're waiting for him to find out 
who he really is.

-m




From sweenlit at gmail.com  Sat May 31 03:19:17 2008
From: sweenlit at gmail.com (Lynda Cordova)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 20:19:17 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1pc70+jneh@eGroups.com>
References: <43e41d1e0805300849g76e72a26re8d241310f1829d0@mail.gmail.com>
	 <g1pc70+jneh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <43e41d1e0805302019j77f3ebe3ta3c49a93ee60be68@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183083

Magpie:
Me neither. I don't know who said that line that you quoted as me,
but it wasn't me.:-)
I made the opposite point. We know from the beginning of the book
that Harry *isn't* ordinary, so there's no point in ever pretending
he is. He's not even mediocre at the Dursleys, he's living in this
exaggerated world where he's the worst thing ever. That's why I find
all the business with the letters frustrating, because maybe Harry is
confused and excited by them, but I'm two steps ahead of him.

Lynda:
Yikes! That's happened to me before as well. As for reading about mediocre
people--I do the same, I guess, but as you say, something happens to make
them rise above their mediocrity. I read a book recently, in fact, written
by an author local to my area about a kid who seems, at first to be somewhat
mediocre, but then, as the circumstances unfold, he (and a friend) are
simply out of their own place in the universe. I started it, nearly put it
aside, but then it picked up as the book progressed and at the end, although
its nowhere near the best book I've read, neither is it the worst.

Lynda


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




From formerlysane at sbcglobal.net  Sat May 31 02:05:27 2008
From: formerlysane at sbcglobal.net (seventeensilversickles)
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 02:05:27 -0000
Subject: Mourning Snape's life
Message-ID: <g1qbp7+vcld@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183084

Hi everyone,

When Snape died, I was quite upset because I'd become very fond of him 
(despite his basic unpleasantness).  But the emptiness of Snape's life 
was even more disturbing to me than his death.  He was such a great 
character, so many layers and facets to the man.  

I definitely think his death was a necessary action in order to achieve 
the proper conclusion of the series, and we all know the man was 
incapable of finding any kind of happiness in his lifetime (for lots of 
reasons), but I just never expected I'd be this sad!  Poor old Severus, 
I really miss him.   

Seventeen Silver Sickles

  




From montavilla47 at yahoo.com  Sat May 31 06:06:46 2008
From: montavilla47 at yahoo.com (montavilla47)
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 06:06:46 -0000
Subject: Hmmm. What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1qbe2+k62v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1qptm+1eqg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183085

> Carol responds:
> Harry's *fate* and *destiny* are not ordinary, nor are the unique
> events that led to his becoming the Chosen One. But none of that has
> to do with Harry himself; it's more what happened to him. Thanks to a
> series of events--Snape's eavesdropping, his revelation of the partial
> Prophecy, Voldemort's decision to go after Harry, Snape's request to
> save Lily, Wormtail's breach of the Fidelius charm, Voldemort's offer
> to let Lily live, Lily's sacrifice, Voldemort's attempt to kill Harry
> after the love magic activated--Harry is suddenly famous, having done
> nothing except survive through no effort of his own. He's "famous
> before he can walk and talk" for something he didn't even do. 

Montavilla47:
I agree with this greater point, Carol, and I actually thought Dumbledore
was making a good call, leaving Harry with the Dursleys (that was before
I knew how they were going to treat him, of course.) 

I can't help thinking about whats-her-name's baby, who was in the 
headlines for months because no one could figure out who her father
was.  (Did they ever?  I don't know.)  Every time I saw that poor kid's
little feet kicking on the front of a tabloid, I felt sorry for her future,
therapy-ridden self.


Carol again:
>To
> himself, however, he's just a skinny orphan with a scar on his
> forehead who sleeps in a cupboard under the stairs. 

Montavilla47:
That's three extraordinary things right there.  Most kids aren't
orphans, hardly any of them have lightning-shaped scars on 
their foreheads, and, while I slept in the hallway for a year or 
two and in a small closet for a weekend, I'd never heard of 
anyone who slept in a cupboard until the age of 11.

Carol:

> Sure, Harry has a soul bit in his forehead, but all it does is enable
> him to speak to snakes, feel pain when Voldemort is near or feeling
> strong emotions, and, later, see into Voldemort's mind. Handy powers
> if you're going to fight Voldemort, and highly unusual, but that's as
> far as "extraordinary" goes. 

Montavilla47:
I thought Harry got some enhanced magical power as well.  Wasn't 
that pointed out at one time or another?






From gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk  Sat May 31 06:38:14 2008
From: gbannister10 at tiscali.co.uk (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 06:38:14 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <g1pvbn+atsb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <g1qrom+6f65@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183086

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

Nathaniel:
> My favorites is still PoA. I still get tingles when I read the second
> half.

> My favorite chapter is "The Centaur and the Sneak." It's really the
> only chapter that I read out of sequence. You really get to see
> Dumbeldore's wit and intelligence in that one. And we get that classic
> line from Phineus at the end - sorry don't have my copy with me at
> work - "You know, Minister, I disagree with Dumbledore on many counts,
> but you cannot deny he's got style."

Geoff:
Huh? Did you really mean that? Because it's a non-sequitur. "The Centaur 
and the Sneak" is in OOTP.






From elfundeb at gmail.com  Sat May 31 10:14:05 2008
From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb)
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 06:14:05 -0400
Subject: =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?Umbridge's_Selwyn_Connections_(WAS:_CHAPDISC:?= =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?_DH_-_Ch._21_=96_The_Tale_of_the_Three_Brothers?=
Message-ID: <80f25c3a0805310314k613314a2nbc9862bf1613ef21@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183087

Goddlefrood:
>
> Umbridge claims relation to the Selwyns when we meet her in the
> MoM earlier in DH, one of the Death Eaters at the Lovegood house
> is a Selwyn, hence the link. Her nephew? Brother-in-law? Something
> else?
>
> Sickening though it is to think that the toad might have been
> married.

Potioncat:
I don't think she's currently married. Her simpering on about Fudge
indicated an interest that was more than political. The Selwyn
connection was brought up to support her own Blood status, and I'm
certain there are some Muggle connections a bit too close to home. So I
suspect the Selwyns are on her mother's side--or else her father's
maternal side. They must be close enough for favors, at any rate.
Debbie:
Umbridge related to the Selwyns?  I thought she was lying through her teeth
because, as Potioncat says, her Muggle connections are a bit too close to
home.  Her response to Hermione/Mafalda is full of lies -- the locket is not
a family heirloom, and the S does not stand for Selwyn, just as her
interrogation of Mary Cattermole, which immediately precedes it, is full of
accusations Umbridge knows full well are not true. So why should the Selwyn
connection be true?

I think the most likely inference is that Umbridge purchased this old relic
in a pawnshop and made up a story to go with it that panders to
those currently in power.  She may have even deliberately sought to purchase
something she could use to build a story around.  Note that she says she's
related to the Selwyns; if the relationship was close enough for her to know
the Selwyns I think it's more likely she would have claimed that she *is* a
member of the Selwyn family.

It's not so different from her behaviour in OOP, where she referred to Fudge
as "Cornelius", implying a relationship closer than just his
undersecretary.

Debbie


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




From mcrudele78 at yahoo.com  Sat May 31 16:27:56 2008
From: mcrudele78 at yahoo.com (Mike)
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 16:27:56 -0000
Subject: timetable problem
In-Reply-To: <002101c8c282$2b898930$bdae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>
Message-ID: <g1ruac+291l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183088

> > Potioncat:
> > There's no way one teacher could teach enough 
> > classes for all the students at Hogwarts, even if 
> > we only imagine the 40 or so per year that we know 
> > about. (Long running debate on the actual number 
> > of students at Hogwarts.)<snip>
> 
> Jerri
> Yes, the "maths" of Hogwarts schedules can't work out. 
> <SNIP>

Mike:
I'm certainly not one to defend JKR's maths, as it's indefensible. 
But I never had the problem with class schedule that others seem to 
have. <This is all pre-Newt classroom speculation>

We've had this debate on class size, and I've always stuck with the 
figure of around 10 students per House per year. Harry's year might 
have been on the smaller side because VWI was going in high gear 
around the time of his birth. Still, I like the idea of around a 
40-50 student class size making the total student population around 
300-350. 

Some say that we need a lot more (including JKR herself) to fill the 
Quidditch staduim to the amount we were shown. I say go to a Texas 
high school football game and tell me if you think all the people in 
the stands are students. Remember, this is virtually the only sport 
in the WW, and there are only six matches the entire year, and they 
are always played on Saturdays. I'd say the Hogwarts Quidditch 
matches get a lot of alums attending, especially when the Gryff and 
Slyth alums find out their postponed match in year 3 is for all the 
marbles.

Back to the classroom size. Random mentions that only the once-a-week 
double-Potions class is two hours, which doesn't change the maths. I 
think we were shown that all the classes that are mixed stay mixed 
for every class, not just the *double* sessions, which I take as 
equalivent to labs. Besides, Gryffs and Slyths have Potions and CoMC 
together, Gryffs and Huffs have Herbology together. 

As to Umbridge's DADA class, Harry says he never intended to tell his 
Cedric story in front of "30 eagerly listening classmates". When 
Lupin taught the Boggart lesson he said "5 points to *Gryffindor* for 
every person to tackle the Boggart." There were 20-odd tables in 
Trelawney's room and the Trio fit at one table. HRH sit in the back 
of Charms class and gossip together, which they can do because Charms 
is so noisy. Would Charms be that noisy if 3 out of the 10 kids are 
speaking in hushed tones in the back of the class? Could 3 out of 10 
kids go unnoticed for long periods of time? We know Hermione took 
Muggle Studies with Ernie the Huff. And I bet many of the elective 
classes don't have near full rosters from each House.

In short, I think every classroom has at least two Houses in it. 
Meaning each teacher has two sessions per lesson per Class, or 10 
sessions per lesson for the OWL levels. If each discipline meets 
twice per week, that would mean 20 lessons per week for each teacher. 
IOW, 5 Years/Classes times 2 sessions per Year times 2 lessons per 
week = 20 sessions-lessons per week. (again Owl Year levels 1-5).

If there are 6 class periods per day, then 5 days gives the teachers 
30 class periods available per week. Those 10 extra periods could be 
for their double/lab days (don't they start getting *double* sessions 
in their fourth year?) and their NEWT classes, knowing that they 
probably only have one NEWT class for all of the sixth-years and one 
for all of the seventh-years. 
<or 6th lower half and 6th upper half as Geoff would explain ;-)>

Lastly, if Snape can fill in for Lupin, I venture other teachers with 
lighter loads (elective teachers, for instance) could fill-in for 
those with heavier loads.

How's my maths?

Mike, who forgives JKR for only showing Gryff students in many of the 
classes while still knowing that Harry should be able to tell the 
difference between 9 other Gryff classmates and 30 eager classmates 
in Umbridge's classroom, even if 30 is an exaggeration.




From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sat May 31 19:43:31 2008
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol)
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 19:43:31 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Umbridge's_Selwyn_Connections_(WAS:_CHAPDISC:_DH_-_Ch._21_=96_The_Tale_of_the_?=
In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0805310314k613314a2nbc9862bf1613ef21@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <g1s9p3+nto8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183089

Goddlefrood:
> >
> > Umbridge claims relation to the Selwyns when we meet her in the
MoM earlier in DH, one of the Death Eaters at the Lovegood house is a
Selwyn, hence the link. Her nephew? Brother-in-law? Something
> > else?
> >
> > Sickening though it is to think that the toad might have been married.
> 
> Potioncat:
> I don't think she's currently married. Her simpering on about Fudge
indicated an interest that was more than political. The Selwyn
connection was brought up to support her own Blood status, and I'm
certain there are some Muggle connections a bit too close to home. So
I suspect the Selwyns are on her mother's side--or else her father's
maternal side. They must be close enough for favors, at any rate.

> Debbie:
> Umbridge related to the Selwyns?  I thought she was lying through
her teeth because, as Potioncat says, her Muggle connections are a bit
too close to home.  Her response to Hermione/Mafalda is full of lies
-- the locket is not a family heirloom, and the S does not stand for
Selwyn, just as her interrogation of Mary Cattermole, which
immediately precedes it, is full of accusations Umbridge knows full
well are not true. So why should the Selwyn connection be true?
> 
> I think the most likely inference is that Umbridge purchased this
old relic in a pawnshop and made up a story to go with it that panders
to those currently in power.  She may have even deliberately sought to
purchase something she could use to build a story around.  Note that
she says she's related to the Selwyns; if the relationship was close
enough for her to know the Selwyns I think it's more likely she would
have claimed that she *is* a member of the Selwyn family.
> 
> It's not so different from her behaviour in OOP, where she referred
to Fudge as "Cornelius", implying a relationship closer than just his
undersecretary.
> 


Carol responds:
Although I can't disprove what you're saying here, I see the situation
differently. I don't think that even Umbridge would dare to boast
openly of a connection with the Selwyns, one of whom is a DE, if it
weren't true, nor would she have any kind of connection with Lucius
Malfoy, as she clearly does in OoP (which implies that she's a former
Slytherin given the students she recruits for the Inquisitorial Squad)
if she were Muggle-born. I think we're deliberately shown Selwyn twice
(in "The Seven Potters" and "The Deathly Hallows," IIRC) if we weren't
supposed to notice him and connect the two when Umbridge herself
brings up the connection. (BTW, she didn't get the locket in a pawn
shop; she took it from Mundungus as an alternative to sending him to
prison. I think she saw that it was Slytherinish, not to mention
valuable, and I think that the "S" being for Selwyn must have popped
into her mind at the time as a plausible explanation for her wearing
an initial that was not her own. Her fellow MoM officials, including
the DE Yaxley (the brutal-faced DE from the tower in HBP who is trying
in the first chapter of DH to impress LV and oust Snape from the
position of right-hand man), who is sitting right next to Umbridge
when they interrogate Mary Cattermole, seem not to question the Selwyn
connection.

How did Umbridge get Mad-eye Moody's eye if she didn't have a rather
close connection to a DE, the logical candidate being Selwyn? I don't
think it was Yaxley; he'd have taken it for his *own* office. And it
can't be the wandless Lucius, now completely powerless and out of
favor with LV and the MoM.

As for Umabridge's reference to Fudge as "Cornelius" ("What Cornelius
doesn't know won't hurt him"), she's about to go behind her boss's
back to use the Cruciatus Curse on Harry. In any case, as the Senior
Undersecretary to the Minister, not to mention the High Inquisitor and
the Headmistress of Hogwarts (at least in the Ministry's eyes), she's
a very powerful official who would naturally see herself as Fudge's
near-equal. (Besides, IMO, she's been pulling strings behind his back
for some time, not only sending those Dementors without authorization
but apparently stirring up Fudge's fear of Dumbledore's supposed
intention to seize power, fanning the flames of his panic and making
sure that he believes DD to be a liar and Harry to be deluded and
unstable. We know as far back as OoP that she has connections with
Lucius Malfoy, and either he or Selwyn may well have told her that LV
has been resurrected, in which case her indoctrination of the students
(LV's return is a "lie") and her failure to teach them practical DADA
is both what it appears to be in OoP (a bid for Ministry power at
Dumbledore's expense) and undermining of the school by someone in
league with the Death Eaters.)

I don't suspect her of having any sort of crush on "Cornelius" or him
of liking her in any sort of romantic way. (Gag!) I suspect her and
her ally, Lucius Malfoy of manipulating Fudge in OoP, one through
bribes and the other through psychology. I'm not sure that he ever saw
through her, or that Rufus Scrimgeour did, until it was too late and
the MoM had been infiltrated by DEs (at which point, Scrimgeour had
only a short time to live).

As for how Selwyn might be related to Umbridge, I'm sure that she's
not married, but I suppose that he could be her brother-in-law (her
sister's husband). More likely, since we don't hear of any sister, 
he's a cousin on her mother's side.

I hate to say it, but it's like a certain Half-blood *Prince* playing
up his mother's side of the family, if only to himself.

Carol, who suspects that Umbridge was yet another Half-blood Slytherin
with a Witch mother and Muggle father and that her mother's maiden
name was Selwyn




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sat May 31 20:05:12 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 20:05:12 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Umbridge's_Selwyn_Connections_(WAS:_CHAPDISC:_DH_-_Ch._21_=96_The_Tale_of_the_Three_Brothers?=
In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0805310314k613314a2nbc9862bf1613ef21@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <g1sb1o+7vcp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183090


> Debbie:
> Umbridge related to the Selwyns?  I thought she was lying through 
her teeth
> because, as Potioncat says, her Muggle connections are a bit too 
close to
> home.  Her response to Hermione/Mafalda is full of lies -- the 
locket is not
> a family heirloom, and the S does not stand for Selwyn, just as her
> interrogation of Mary Cattermole, which immediately precedes it, is 
full of
> accusations Umbridge knows full well are not true. So why should 
the Selwyn
> connection be true?

Potioncat:
I had the same impression. But someone, proably Carol, convinced me 
there is a Selwyn connection. Umbridge gets Moody's eye and we know 
Selwyn was in that battle. I think there has to be enough of a 
connection, however weak, that her comment can't be determined to be 
a lie. If she's openly claiming the connection, Selwyn could dispute 
it, unless there was something there.


> Deb:
> I think the most likely inference is that Umbridge purchased this 
old relic
> in a pawnshop and made up a story to go with it that panders to
> those currently in power.  She may have even deliberately sought to 
purchase
> something she could use to build a story around.


Potioncat:
Well, 'we' know she took the locket from Mundungus. He's better than 
a pawn shop because he doesn't dare blab about it. The S was very 
convenient in that it had the same initial as a branch she could 
claim. Perhaps she has a Borgen or a Goyle somewhere in her 
tree...had the old locket had those letters, she might have claimed 
those names instead.









From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sat May 31 20:11:18 2008
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 20:11:18 -0000
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
In-Reply-To: <002e01c8bb60$311f79a0$61ae62d8@YOUR37E34C38B1>
Message-ID: <g1sbd6+1rrg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183091


> Jerri wrote in response to SSSusan's question:
> >*Which character would you just love to follow from here on out if
> >you could?  Por que?
> 
> Tonks's mother, who has lost husband and (apparently) only child, and 
> has a grandchild to raise.  How does she deal with her losses and 
> assume her responsibility without being bitter?  I assume/hope that 
> she will be more understanding of Teddy than Neville's grandmother 
> seemed to be prior to DH.  Lots of others as well.  Mostly, I would 
> like more back story about various characters.


Potioncat:
I don't know that we have any canon for Gran's age, but she seems to be 
an older grandmother. Mrs. Tonks, however, is very young. She wasn't 
much older than Lupin. Remember, she's Narcissa and Bellatrix's sister. 
She also has Harry Potter and the Weasley clan as an extended family 
for Teddy. And while she lost her husband and daughter, she doesn't 
have the daily grief of seeing her child in a permanet dementia.  

So I would suspect Teddy had a much happier homelife than Neville did. 





From juli17 at aol.com  Sat May 31 21:59:41 2008
From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 17:59:41 EDT
Subject: Hmmm.  What's your favorite *now*?
Message-ID: <c02.3740a9be.3573244d@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183092

 


>  Mike:
> OTOH, the choices he made while at Hogwarts, when he should have  
> thrived, made me despise the adult Snape even more. He had proved  
> that he was an exceptionally bright youth, he had a strong willed  
> guiding friend in Lily, and he *still* chose Voldemort and the  
Death Eaters; that led eventually to his life of muted  desperation.

Potioncat:
I find this part of the plot, the most  difficult to understand. It 
does sort of mirror a plot found in Southern  historical fiction 
stories set in either Ante-Bellum period or the time of  segregation. 
But I don't think there's enough information to show us why  he made 
those choices.





Julie:
This is a problem for me also, but where I have the problem is with Lily  and 
Sev's
friendship. It's true that here we don't really have enough information  
either. But in
my reading I don't really see where Lily was a "guiding" friend to Severus,  
at least
in any manner that showed she was in any way determined to offer him  other
options. Sure she was "good" in the sense that she didn't hang out with  
future
DEs, but she was in a different House, and we don't have any real  indication 
that she and Severus spent a great deal of quality time together at  
Hogwarts. In
fact it seems quite the opposite to me, as none of the Marauders nor anyone  
else
who was at Hogwarts during that time (including various professors) ever  
brings
up the oh-so-close "best friends" relationship between Lily and Severus.  
They 
got together enough for Lily to chide Severus about his Slytherin  
housemates, 
but we don't see any moments where they are openly enjoying each  other's
friendship at Hogwarts, the opinions of others be damned. And why  not?
 
I feel JKR dropped the ball somewhat here, and I know it was partly because  
she
wanted to keep their BF status a secret. Thus no mention of it throughout  
the books,
and a Pensieve scene where Lily seems to have absolutely no personal  concern 
for
Severus or his feelings (barely avoiding laughing at him hanging  upside down 
with his
grey underwear on display, protesting the Marauders actions on a basis of  
principle
rather than with any specific indignation for her supposed BF,  etc). But in 
DH JKR 
could have shown Lily actually being supportive rather than simply  
judgmental (e.g.,
"Sev, I'm really worried about you. Let's go get a couple of butterbeers  and 
talk, and
I don't care WHO sees us together. I'm your friend, and I want to be there  
for you."
rather than "Your friends in Slytherin are evil jerks. And quit  whining 
about what the
Marauders did to you. If you shape up, let me know, just not when I'm busy  
with my
Gryffindor pals."
 
Okay, I exaggerated and paraphrased (a lot) but you get the idea. It  
wouldn't have
been hard for JKR to insert a moment or two, or a sentence or two showing  
Lily really
caring deeply about Severus and his feelings. This would have certainly  
explained better
why Severus was so fond of her (though with his damaged psyche, I guess him  
being
infatuated with Lily's imagined perfection and blinded to the  fact that she 
was no more
or less compassionate or purehearted--nor any more likely to love  him--than 
any other
teenage girl makes sense. It just doesn't do much for Lily). It would have  
also proved
that Lily truly and deeply cared about Severus, something that just doesn't  
come across
to me in DH. OTOH, Lily being nothing truly special as a  "best" friend 
(.i.e. exceptionally
compassionate or determined about maintaining their friendship), does fit  
better with Severus
falling so easily in with those who interacted with him on a daily  basis, 
his fellow Slytherins.
 
And Mike, I'm not arguing whether you should despise Severus Snape more for  
the choices
he made as a student at Hogwarts. I'm just arguing whether  Lily's influence 
involved either
enough concern or effort to have the effect on Severus that you think it  
would, which would
in effect offer him a very attractive and viable option besides  following 
the same destructive
path as his Slytherin friends. I don't think that level of influence  (or 
interest) was there on
Lily's part. 
 
Julie, who wanted to see Lily express one moment of true affection for  
Severus as a person
and friend, but didn't get it.
 
 
 
 
 



**************Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with 
Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.      
(http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4&?NCID=aolfod00030000000002)


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




From brenwen at verizon.net  Sat May 31 18:19:07 2008
From: brenwen at verizon.net (Brenwen)
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 18:19:07 -0000
Subject: Identity of "that awful boy"
Message-ID: <g1s4qr+100uv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183093

I was re-listening to OOP last night, and in Chapter 2, as the Dursleys
question Harry about Dementors, Petunia replies to Vernon's query -
"What are Dementors?" by saying, "They guard the wizard prison,
Azkeban." At this point Harry, dumbfounded, asks Petunia, "how do
you know that?" and she replies, "we heard about it from that awful
boy". (This is not verbatim as the book is not in front of me).

I always believed the "awful boy" was James Potter who was either
dating or married to Lily.  But now, upon reflecting about post DH re-
reads, I believe she meant Severus Snape.  In the Pensieve memories, he
spends time with Lily telling her all about the wizarding world, and
they are often observed by Petunia, who feels left out and, therefore,
hates Snape.

Brenwen



From g2rm2002 at yahoo.com  Sat May 31 23:15:18 2008
From: g2rm2002 at yahoo.com (Gloria Rodriguez)
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 23:15:18 -0000
Subject: Umbridge's Selwyn Connections (WAS: CHAPDISC: DH - Ch. 21  The Tale of the Three Brothers
In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0805310314k613314a2nbc9862bf1613ef21@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <g1sm66+lsud@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 183094

> Debbie:

> I think the most likely inference is that Umbridge purchased
> this old relic in a pawnshop and made up a story to go with
> it that panders to those currently in power. She may have
> even deliberately sought to purchase something she could
> use to build a story around.


Hey,

Umbridge DID NOT purchase the locket from any pawnshop. She took
it from Mundungus when he was selling stuff stolen from Sirius's
home.

In DH, Mundungus says so to Harry: "I was selling in Diagon Alley
and she came up to me and asks if I've got a license for trading
in magical artifacts. Bleedin' snoop. She was gonna fine me, but
she took a fancy to the locket an' told me she'd take it and let
me off that time, and to fink myself lucky." (Scholastic edition,
p.222)

As per Umbridge relation to the Selwyins...I bet she'd give
anything to be a pure blood as the Malfoys are.

Regards,

Gloria