To kill or not to kill and resolutions of the storylineWAS :Re: Disarming spell

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 185528

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
>
> Carpl (!!) earlier:
> > > I think not. The narrator says, "They [Charlie and Slughorn] 
> *seemed* to have returned at the head of *what looked like* the
> families and friends of every Hogwarts student who had returned to
> fight, along with the shopkeepers and homeowners of Hogwarts." Note
> the narrator's uncertainty, which reflects Harry's. 

Pippin:
Hmmm... my copy definitely says "had remained to fight." 

Certainly if JKR had wanted  the text to make it obvious that there
were Slytherins in the group, she could have. But that doesn't mean
she wanted to make it crystal clear that there weren't any. She could
have done that too, as easily as she did in describing the Room of
Requirement or the empty Slytherin table.

What she wanted the text to do, IMO, is be open to interpretation. If
you divide the world into good people and Slytherins, as Harry used to
do, then you'll never conceive of  the Slytherins coming back to
fight for Hogwarts. 

IMO, that makes the books very simplistic and unsatisfying, and I'm
not sure why anyone who enjoyed them up until DH would opt for that
interpretation, but it's a possibility.

But if the Slytherins are assumed to be capable of learning from their
mistakes, why would they  reject a popular leader, Slughorn, and join
instead what everyone now knows is a  monster who massacres his own
people and makes war on children?

Only Crabbe is that much of an idiot, IMO.


Pippin