From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sat Apr  2 13:54:28 2011
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (willsonteam)
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2011 13:54:28 -0000
Subject: FILK: Snake, Riddle and 'Roy
In-Reply-To: <imov2v+v4aq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <in79qk+muft@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190198


 "Caius" <coriolan at ...> wrote:
>
> Just like the olden days, I present a new HP filk (I used to do this every few days instead of every few years)
> 
> Snake, Riddle and `Roy


Potioncat:
What a wonderful treat! And so clever!--I love it.
More please.....




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sat Apr  2 14:26:12 2011
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (willsonteam)
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2011 14:26:12 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <imu90i+rfll@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <in7bm4+4tcn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190199


>
> Megan:
> Her fear of academic failure is such a recurring theme through the
> series that I thought it was really funny that it was literally
> represented here.

Potioncat:
I don't think I'd ever realized how much doubt Hermione had. I knew she studied hard, but I thought that was a drive to do well, or to be the best. I didn't pick up on the lack of self confidence.


> Megan:
> See above. And for some reason, it was funny to me that they were all
> disinterestedly regurgitating their history lectures on their exams
> just like muggle kids, in contrast to all the other exotic and
> exciting classes.

Potioncat:
Newsweek recently referred to Professor Binns in an article about how boring history is the way it's taught in schools. I have to smile at all the ways HP has worked its way into our culture.
 I wanted to say more about the exams in PoA, it's a very funny section, but I can't find my book?and long gone is the time I could quote word and page number.


> 
> Megan:
> I picture her as someone who has kind of built her own little world
> in her mind and that's where she lives. It's always kind of jarring
> to her when the other world intrudes.

Potioncat:
What jumped out at me was how much Trelawney is into death and gore and misery. It was very creepy the way she was urging Harry to see blood and pain. I know that she always seems to "see" death in her predictions, but this time her own interest came out. 
Lavender comes out of her exam and says she "saw" lots of things; I imagine Trelawney `directed' her vision similar to the way she tried with Harry, but with Lavender being more receptive.

 
> Megan:
> Yep, at the time I thought it was Sirius, and I never really thought
> back to that part again. Maybe it was Wormtail? He was kind of
> trapped as Scabbers since he'd blow his cover if he changed back.

Potioncat:
A self imposed prison, so to speak? I'm not so sure he "breaks free" as he is cast out. Granted he breaks away from his new captors, but now he has no choice but to go to LV.  And I'm not so sure being a rat was a prison to him. He was warm, safe and well fed. What more did Peter want? Although, he might have enjoyed being around Trelawney. Young Peter seemed to like watching others suffer.

> 
> > 5. Trelawney's first prediction was set in motion by Snape blabbing
> > to LV. What set this one in motion? Will Harry do anything because
> > of or in spite of hearing her words?

 Potioncat now:
In past discussions, many readers have said that it was Snape telling LV about the Prophecy that set it into motion. LV would not have gone after Baby Potter if he hadn't heard the prediction. I don't know that anything in the next series of events sets this one off. Unless we think that IF Harry had really heeded it, he might have let Lupin and Black kill Pettigrew.

> 
> Megan:
> I know it distracted me, and it seemed to at least temporarily
> distract Harry.

Potioncat:
Yes, JKR kept things moving. Before anyone can even think about what the prediction means, there's another adventure going on. And if anything, we think it's Black who had broken free and will rejoin his master.  I'm going to keep this prediction close as we go into the next few chapters, just to see what I think. But the part about LV coming back  "greater and more terrible" will especially bear out.


> Megan:
> I think they were already there.

Potioncat:
Me too, and I love the way JKR wrote these scenes. (Buckbeak death or not)





From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Mon Apr  4 16:55:55 2011
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 4 Apr 2011 16:55:55 -0000
Subject: Weekly Chat, 4/4/2011, 1:00 pm 
Message-ID: <1301936155.24.74803.m6@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190200

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

Weekly Chat
Monday April 4, 2011
1:00 pm - 2:00 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  2011 
 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/20110404/dda3584f/attachment.html>

From prenfield at yahoo.com  Fri Apr  8 16:44:00 2011
From: prenfield at yahoo.com (prenfield)
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 16:44:00 -0000
Subject: marxist/materialism?
Message-ID: <inne0g+pa02@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190201

I found this marxist critique of Harry Potter and thought ya'll might be interested. For all the criticism out there on Harry Potter I've never quite seen anything like this: 

http://www.thinqon.com/topic/monetizing_magic




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 10 01:59:32 2011
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 01:59:32 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <imu90i+rfll@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <inr2u4+otia@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190202



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "willsonteam" <willsonkmom at ...> wrote:
><snip of the summary>
> > 
> Questions:
> 
> 1. Hermione finally faces a Boggart?and it turns into McGonagall telling her she
> failed. What does this bit of comic relief tell us about the character?

Alla:

Reveals her insecurities, but actually it was a bit of a surprise to me as well, if I remember correctly. Although I guess I should not have been surprised, because I saw clearly how driven she was to succeed in academics and I suppose a lot of people who have a desire to succeed, also have fear of failure.

 
> 3. Using everything you know about Trelawney, and especially the events of this
> chapter?what makes her tick? What kind of character was JKR writing?

Alla:

Oh, good question, you know what the funny thing is? I am still not completely sure. I mean, we know that she was not writing a complete fraud, thats for sure and I think based on Half Blood Prince as well she is also someone who really wants to be taken seriously in her profession. Come to think of it, I think she and Hermione have it in common. 

> 
> 4. OK, everyone thought this prediction was about Sirius Black the first time
> they read it. (If you didn't, why not?) So, now that we know the future?how
> true or accurate is this prediction? What does "chained these twelve years"
> mean?

Alla:

I totally thought it was about Sirius Black when I read it at first. Hm, "chained these twelve years", I thought at the end that it meant Peter chained by his rat's body, metaphorically speaking? I did not realize there is other interpretation? I mean, I would love to know it, this one just feels obvious?


> 
> 
> 5. Trelawney's first prediction was set in motion by Snape blabbing to LV. What
> set this one in motion? Will Harry do anything because of or in spite of hearing
> her words?

Alla:

Actually I am not sure if this one has the direct correlation to any of the events. Harry after he hears the prediction wonders:

"...had he just heard Professor Trelawney make a real prediction? or had that been her idea of an impressive end to the test?"

So, it is not like her prediction helps him to think that oh, I will do something right now, or that old hack knows nothing, let me ignore her anyway. it felt to me that he pretty much ignored the prediction afterwards, since he was too occupied by Buckbeak's execution. So I suppose Buckbeak's plight set the wheels in motion, I would say?


> 6. How does the prediction set the reader up, or set the mood? Would the events
> (both in the book and the series) seem different if the reader had not been
> exposed to the prediction?

Alla:

I would say yes, it would feel less foreshadowed when we go back and reread.



> 7. Did the sudden switch to Hagrid's problems distract the reader (or Harry)
> from the prediction?

Alla:

It absolutely distracted me!


> 8. The Trio hears the ax fall, and Hermione says, "They did it." Did Buckbeak
> lose his head?or was the Trio already there?

Alla:

HAHA. I wish I know, it always makes my head spin when I start thinking about time travel.

Thanks for the great questions.




From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Sun Apr 10 16:56:31 2011
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 10 Apr 2011 16:56:31 -0000
Subject: Weekly Chat, 4/10/2011, 1:00 pm 
Message-ID: <1302454591.603.34732.m15@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190203

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

Weekly Chat
Sunday April 10, 2011
1:00 pm - 2:00 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  2011 
 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/20110410/3e686750/attachment.html>

From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sun Apr 10 17:24:27 2011
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (willsonteam)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 17:24:27 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <inr2u4+otia@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <insp4b+f78b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190204

> 
> Alla:
> 
> Oh, good question, you know what the funny thing is? I am still not completely sure. I mean, we know that she was not writing a complete fraud, thats for sure and I think based on Half Blood Prince as well she is also someone who really wants to be taken seriously in her profession. Come to think of it, I think she and Hermione have it in common. 

Potioncat:
Oddly enough, something Trelawney said to Harry made me begin to wonder about the fraud part. I've always thought she was sincere yet insecure in her craft--and not particularly good at it. But when Harry tells her she just made a prediction about LV, she says something alon the lines of "I wouldn't be so bold as to make that sort of prediction..." (sorry, am not at home, no book.) The wording made me think she "made up predictions" on a regular basis.
> 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> I totally thought it was about Sirius Black when I read it at first. Hm, "chained these twelve years", I thought at the end that it meant Peter chained by his rat's body, metaphorically speaking? I did not realize there is other interpretation? I mean, I would love to know it, this one just feels obvious?

Potioncat:
Someone pointed out that Peter was chained to his alias since he had no way of safely becoming Peter again. So, while it's a stretch, he is freed from his bondage to his animagus form (I almost said animorph form, any one here read those books?) Predictions and prophecies generally ride on stretches of meaning. Coward that he is, he would never leave that "prison" without good reason. As I said before, it was a very comfortable prison.
> 
> 
> Alla:
 
> So, it is not like her prediction helps him to think that oh, I will do something right now, or that old hack knows nothing, let me ignore her anyway. it felt to me that he pretty much ignored the prediction afterwards, since he was too occupied by Buckbeak's execution. So I suppose Buckbeak's plight set the wheels in motion, I would say?

Potioncat:
I don't suppose every Potterverse prophecy has to work in the same way. I don't see that any action on Harry's part set it in motion. It's just that The Prophecy generated so much discussion--granted the plot hinged on it---but we rarely look at this one.
This prediction says the servant will help LV become greater and more terrible than before; should Harry have done anything differently? DD gets a lot of flack from readers because he didn't stop Snape from telling LV The Prophecy.  Harry allowing Peter to live and then Peter's escaping did permit LV to gain strength.
> 
> 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> I would say yes, it would feel less foreshadowed when we go back and reread.

Potioncat: In retrospect this prediction also explains why reborn LV seems so different than his reputation. He's grown more evil and less sane over the years--and this last transformation took him even farther along.
> 
> 
>





From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net  Mon Apr 11 16:35:43 2011
From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (Susan A)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 16:35:43 -0000
Subject: FILK: Snake, Riddle and 'Roy
In-Reply-To: <in79qk+muft@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <invakv+kfv0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190205

CMC:
> Just like the olden days, I present a new HP filk (I used to do 
> this every few days instead of every few years)
> 
> Snake, Riddle and `Roy
> 
> To the tune of Shake, Rattle and Roll by Bill Haley and the Comets
> 
> Dedicated to the great and glorious Pippin
> 
> THE SCENE: HARRY sings of three of his Year Two antagonists
> 
> HARRY: 
> Way down in the chamber Tom Riddle would Potter damn
> Way down in the chamber Tom Riddle would Potter damn
> And Gilderoy will show he's a total sham
<snip> 


Potioncat:
> What a wonderful treat! And so clever!--I love it.
> More please.....


SSSusan:
I've not been hanging around the place much these days either, but how exciting to see a Caius FILK once more. I add to Potioncat's "More please!" 

I wonder... do you have an absolute, all-time favorite FILK -- either you, CMC, or anybody here?  As for me, this was one of my favs, We Will Know All the Story Wrote by Jo:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/165850

It didn't hurt that it was both a Tom Lehrer song and that it was dedicated to yours truly, heh.  

Another favorite was Wham! Went the Pan on His Head:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/179308

Siriusly Snapey Susan

 




From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net  Mon Apr 11 16:56:23 2011
From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (Susan A)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 16:56:23 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <insp4b+f78b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <invbrn+vnop@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190206

Megan:
> And for some reason, it was funny to me that they were all
> disinterestedly regurgitating their history lectures on their exams
> just like muggle kids, in contrast to all the other exotic and
> exciting classes.

Potioncat:
> Newsweek recently referred to Professor Binns in an article about 
> how boring history is the way it's taught in schools. I have to 
> smile at all the ways HP has worked its way into our culture.

SSSusan:
As a former history teacher myself, I take modest offense at this... same way I get a little tired of the Marian the Librarian stereotypes.  MY students weren't bored to death, nosiree Bob.  Hmmmphff!  *grumble, grumble, grumble*


Potioncat:
> 3. Using everything you know about Trelawney, and especially the 
> events of this chapter?what makes her tick? What kind of character 
> was JKR writing?

Alla:
> I am still not completely sure. I mean, we know that she was not 
> writing a complete fraud, thats for sure and I think based on Half 
> Blood Prince as well she is also someone who really wants to be 
> taken seriously in her profession.

Potioncat:
> Oddly enough, something Trelawney said to Harry made me begin to 
> wonder about the fraud part. I've always thought she was sincere 
> yet insecure in her craft--and not particularly good at it. But 
> when Harry tells her she just made a prediction about LV, she says 
> something alon the lines of "I wouldn't be so bold as to make that 
> sort of prediction..." (sorry, am not at home, no book.) The
> wording made me think she "made up predictions" on a regular basis.

SSSusan:
Interesting!  It never occurred to me that Trelawney might have been semi-admitting that she makes things up here.  I took her more as 'sincere and insecure... not particularly good,' and essentially clueless.  

*We* get to see that only a couple of times did she make really big, really accurate predictions, but she doesn't even get to experience or know about those, since she's in the (necessary) trance-like state when they come to her.  Still, I think she believed in Divination, even if she didn't recognize her true experiences with it nor acknowledged consciously the ways in which she was faking it most of the time.

Potioncat:
> 4. OK, everyone thought this prediction was about Sirius Black the
> first time they read it. (If you didn't, why not?) So, now that we 
> know the future?how true or accurate is this prediction? What 
> does "chained these twelve years" mean?

Alla:
> I totally thought it was about Sirius Black when I read it at 
> first. Hm, "chained these twelve years", I thought at the end that 
> it meant Peter chained by his rat's body, metaphorically speaking? 

Potioncat:
> Someone pointed out that Peter was chained to his alias since he 
> had no way of safely becoming Peter again. So, while it's a 
> stretch, he is freed from his bondage to his animagus form...

SSSusan:  
Absolutely, I have taken it the way you two have suggested ? that it referred to Peter's being chained to his rat's body.  I think that's exactly it -- that he had no *safe* way of returning to his Peter Pettigrew self and was thus metaphorically chained to his Wormtail/Scabbers self.  Like Alla, I can't quite imagine another interpretation.


Potioncat:
> 8. The Trio hears the ax fall, and Hermione says, "They did it."
> Did Buckbeak lose his head?or was the Trio already there?

Megan:
> I think they were already there.

SSSusan:
Like Alla, time-turning gives me a headache and makes my head spin, but on this one, I'm absolutely certain that they were already there.  There wasn't a bloody Buckbeak decapitated head lying there that somehow got `fixed' the `second time around.'  Nope, there was no second time around; the TT!trio was there the first time and prevented the beheading altogether.  

I think.  :)

Siriusly Snapey Susan,
wondering if anybody's found my pitcher of margaritas around here....





From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Tue Apr 12 00:39:45 2011
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 00:39:45 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <insp4b+f78b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <io070h+b2mo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190207



> > Alla:
> > 
> > Oh, good question, you know what the funny thing is? I am still not completely sure. I mean, we know that she was not writing a complete fraud, thats for sure and I think based on Half Blood Prince as well she is also someone who really wants to be taken seriously in her profession. Come to think of it, I think she and Hermione have it in common. 
> 
> Potioncat:
> Oddly enough, something Trelawney said to Harry made me begin to wonder about the fraud part. I've always thought she was sincere yet insecure in her craft--and not particularly good at it. But when Harry tells her she just made a prediction about LV, she says something alon the lines of "I wouldn't be so bold as to make that sort of prediction..." (sorry, am not at home, no book.) The wording made me think she "made up predictions" on a regular basis.


Alla:

Ok, I decided to look it up in British version:

"Professor Trelawney looked thoroughly startled.
"The Dark Lord?" He Whow Must not be Named? My dear boy, that's hardly something to joke about...rise again, indeed..."
"But you just said it! You said the Dark Lord-"
"I think you must have dozed off too, dear!" said Professor Trelawney. "I would certainly not presume to predict anything quite as far-fetched as that!" - p.238

I don't know, I see your interpretation, but to me it sounds more like her disbelieving that she made this prediction, rather than reference that she was consciously making stuff up before, you know?

But I definitely see your interpretation, especially since most of her predictions are so silly and do not come true, one cannot help but wonder whether she did made them up.


> Potioncat:
> Someone pointed out that Peter was chained to his alias since he had no way of safely becoming Peter again. So, while it's a stretch, he is freed from his bondage to his animagus form (I almost said animorph form, any one here read those books?) Predictions and prophecies generally ride on stretches of meaning. Coward that he is, he would never leave that "prison" without good reason. As I said before, it was a very comfortable prison.

Alla:

I completely agree with you here.

> Potioncat:
> I don't suppose every Potterverse prophecy has to work in the same way. I don't see that any action on Harry's part set it in motion. It's just that The Prophecy generated so much discussion--granted the plot hinged on it---but we rarely look at this one.
> This prediction says the servant will help LV become greater and more terrible than before; should Harry have done anything differently? DD gets a lot of flack from readers because he didn't stop Snape from telling LV The Prophecy.  Harry allowing Peter to live and then Peter's escaping did permit LV to gain strength.

Alla:

OOOOOO, I see. I remember discussion as to whether Harry should have done something differently and I waver on this. It is to me one of the episodes which highlights Harry in the most noble and generous light, however believe me I am totally agreeable with AU scenario where Sirius and Remus would have kindly told Harry to shut up and killed Peter right there. I would not have cried much about that for sure. Yes, I know the trouble is we would have had no story then, but from within the story, I would have been very pleased with Peter's death. I would think that since Ministry so fast pardoned dead Sirius, I would think dead Peter would have been a very fine proof that nobody indeed killed him thirteen years ago.


> Potioncat: In retrospect this prediction also explains why reborn LV seems so different than his reputation. He's grown more evil and less sane over the years--and this last transformation took him even farther along.

Alla:

Agreed.




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Tue Apr 12 00:49:17 2011
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 00:49:17 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <invbrn+vnop@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <io07id+6nho@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190208



> Potioncat:
> > 8. The Trio hears the ax fall, and Hermione says, "They did it."
> > Did Buckbeak lose his head?or was the Trio already there?
> 
> Megan:
> > I think they were already there.
> 
> SSSusan:
> Like Alla, time-turning gives me a headache and makes my head spin, but on this one, I'm absolutely certain that they were already there.  There wasn't a bloody Buckbeak decapitated head lying there that somehow got `fixed' the `second time around.'  Nope, there was no second time around; the TT!trio was there the first time and prevented the beheading altogether.  
> 
> I think.  :)


Alla:

YAY. You are posting :). Okay, so if they were already there and I know we can't, but that means that you think that the events in the book in this episode happened the same way as in the "Medium that cannot be named"? At some point in time I actually thought that I got the time travel in PoA pretty well and that JKR explained it so well, but after not rereading the book for so much I think I am getting confused again. I think I may go dig up some old posts on this topic.



> 
> Siriusly Snapey Susan,
> wondering if anybody's found my pitcher of margaritas around here....
>

Alla:

Can I have one too? :)




From bart at moosewise.com  Tue Apr 12 01:26:00 2011
From: bart at moosewise.com (Bart Lidofsky)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 21:26:00 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch
 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <io07id+6nho@eGroups.com>
References: <io07id+6nho@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4DA3AA28.5000407@moosewise.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190209

Alla:
> YAY. You are posting :). Okay, so if they were already there and I know we can't, but that means that you think that the events in the book in this episode happened the same way as in the "Medium that cannot be named"? At some point in time I actually thought that I got the time travel in PoA pretty well and that JKR explained it so well, but after not rereading the book for so much I think I am getting confused again. I think I may go dig up some old posts on this topic.

     OK, here's time travel 101: When you time travel into the past, you 
cannot change anything in your own past, particularly the fact that you 
had traveled back in time. However, you can do something that appears to 
have changed the past as long as everything happens the way you 
remembered it.

     JKR, of course, broke the rule by having Harry save his own life, 
because there is no explanation of what happened at the beginning of the 
time loop; how Harry survived to go back to the past to save himself. 
But it's her story.

     Bart




From fenneyml at gmail.com  Tue Apr 12 03:57:24 2011
From: fenneyml at gmail.com (Margaret Fenney)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 23:57:24 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch
 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <io070h+b2mo@eGroups.com>
References: <insp4b+f78b@eGroups.com>
	<io070h+b2mo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinVK25vhbWyR0jRbQyeQ-xauNoO5g@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190210

> Alla: 
> > Oh, good question, you know what the funny thing is? I am
> > still not completely sure. I mean, we know that she was not 
> > writing a complete fraud, thats for sure and I think based 
> > on Half Blood Prince as well she is also someone who really 
> > wants to be taken seriously in her profession. Come to think 
> > of it, I think she and Hermione have it in common. 
> 
> Potioncat:
> Oddly enough, something Trelawney said to Harry made me begin 
> to wonder about the fraud part. I've always thought she was 
> sincere yet insecure in her craft--and not particularly good 
> at it. But when Harry tells her she just made a prediction 
> about LV, she says something alon the lines of "I wouldn't be 
> so bold as to make that sort of prediction..." (sorry, am not 
> at home, no book.) The wording made me think she "made up 
> predictions" on a regular basis.

> Alla:
> Ok, I decided to look it up in British version:
>
> "Professor Trelawney looked thoroughly startled.
> "The Dark Lord?" He Whow Must not be Named? My dear boy, that's 
> hardly something to joke about...rise again, indeed..."
> "But you just said it! You said the Dark Lord-"
> "I think you must have dozed off too, dear!" said Professor 
> Trelawney. "I would certainly not presume to predict anything 
> quite as far-fetched as that!" - p.238
>
> I don't know, I see your interpretation, but to me it sounds 
> more like her is believing that she made this prediction, 
> rather than reference that she was consciously making stuff up 
> before, you know?
>
> But I definitely see your interpretation, especially since most 
> of her predictions are so silly and do not come true, one cannot 
> help but wonder whether she did made them up.


Margie:

My take on Trelawney is that she has spent her life being 
intimidated by being the Great-great-granddaughter of the "very 
famous, very gifted Seer Cassandra Trelawney".  She has never 
seen herself as being anywhere near as talented as her famous 
ancestor and thus has tried to compensate by creating her "aura" 
of poufs, other-worldly voice, reclusive habits, etc.  I think 
she both believes in divination and that she has a gift, and at 
the same time, sees herself as a bit of a fraud.  She does have 
a real gift but not enough confidence in it to really "perform" 
as she could.  She does make the two prophecies while in a trance, 
and she also, in The Half Blood Prince, predicts to some degree, 
the invasion of the death-eaters:

'If Dumbledore chooses to ignore the warnings the cards show --' 
Her bony hand closed suddenly around Harry's wrist. 'Again and 
again, no matter how I lay them out --'  And she pulled a card 
dramatically from underneath her shawls.  '-- the lightning-struck 
tower,' she whispered. 'Calamity. Disaster. Coming nearer all the 
time ...'

It seems to me that this part of the story shows she does have 
some confidence in her reading of the cards since she seems to 
have tried to discuss it with Dumbledore more than once and is 
clearly convinced by it.

Margie



From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net  Tue Apr 12 15:14:16 2011
From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (Susan A)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 15:14:16 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <4DA3AA28.5000407@moosewise.com>
Message-ID: <io1q88+ots3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190211

Alla:
> > YAY. You are posting :). Okay, so if they were already there and 
> > I know we can't, but that means that you think that the events in 
> > the book in this episode happened the same way as in the "Medium 
> > that cannot be named"? At some point in time I actually thought 
> > that I got the time travel in PoA pretty well and that JKR 
> > explained it so well, but after not rereading the book for so 
> > much I think I am getting confused again. I think I may go dig up 
> > some old posts on this topic.

Bart: 
> OK, here's time travel 101: When you time travel into the past, you 
> cannot change anything in your own past, particularly the fact that 
> you had traveled back in time. However, you can do something that 
> appears to have changed the past as long as everything happens the 
> way you remembered it.

SSSusan:
Uh oh, I think the head-spinning is beginning again.  (Not blaming you, Bart, but sometimes the language of it just gets my brain synapses misfiring.)

And to answer your question, Alla, yes, I think TMWSNBN did a fine job with this.  It was just the visual representation of the text that I had needed in order to sort it out.  I never really could, simply from the words.  

Then again, those folks who readily understand TT might step forward and argue that Cuaron's film *didn't* handle it the same way the book did.  (And if they do, I'm screwed again....)


Bart:
> JKR, of course, broke the rule by having Harry save his own life, 
> because there is no explanation of what happened at the beginning 
> of the time loop; how Harry survived to go back to the past to save 
> himself. 
> But it's her story.

SSSusan:
*grabs head* Oh dear, it's definitely spinning again.  I wish I could wrap myself around this whole concept, and I will be forever grateful to those group members who tried so valiantly -- and slowly and patiently -- to explain it to me back in my early days at HPfGU.  But I'm definitely deficient in this particular kind of logical thinking.    

> > Siriusly Snapey Susan,
> > wondering if anybody's found my pitcher of margaritas around 
> > here....

Alla:
> Can I have one too? :)

SSSusan:
Absolutely!  I think I may need a couple at this point.

Siriusly Snapey Susan








From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Tue Apr 12 16:15:27 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 09:15:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <4DA3AA28.5000407@moosewise.com>
Message-ID: <331404.7202.qm@web113910.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190212

Bart:
> OK, here's time travel 101: When you time travel into the past, you
> cannot change anything in your own past, particularly the fact that
> you had traveled back in time. However, you can do something that
> appears to have changed the past as long as everything happens the
> way you remembered it.
>
> JKR, of course, broke the rule by having Harry save his own life,
> because there is no explanation of what happened at the beginning
> of the time loop; how Harry survived to go back to the past to save
> himself.
> But it's her story.


June:
Personally I believe since time travel is not a reality, that the rules are in the hands of the person who is writing at that time. So H.G. Wells may have had his rules about time travel and J.K. Rowling has her rules about time travelling and neither of them in my opinion are wrong because it is their story and they make the rules.






From margdean56 at gmail.com  Tue Apr 12 16:34:32 2011
From: margdean56 at gmail.com (Margaret Dean)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 10:34:32 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch
 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <io1q88+ots3@eGroups.com>
References: <4DA3AA28.5000407@moosewise.com>
	<io1q88+ots3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=30WU4-nt-ZzbkjOhwf12b1_M3Vw@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190213

> Bart:
> > OK, here's time travel 101: When you time travel into the past, you
> > cannot change anything in your own past, particularly the fact that
> > you had traveled back in time. However, you can do something that
> > appears to have changed the past as long as everything happens the
> > way you remembered it.

Well, that's apparently how it works in JKR's wizarding world, anyway.
 Time travel has been a fictional trope for a long time, and SF
writers have rung many, many changes on it and how it works.

Just sayin'.


--Margaret Dean
  <margdean56 at gmail.com>



From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Tue Apr 12 16:11:52 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 09:11:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <io07id+6nho@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <265254.62262.qm@web113913.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Potioncat:
> > 8. The Trio hears the ax fall, and Hermione says, "They did it."
> > Did Buckbeak lose his head???or was the Trio already there?

Megan:
> > I think they were already there.

SSSusan:
> Like Alla, time-turning gives me a headache and makes my head spin,
> but on this one, I'm absolutely certain that they were already
> there. There wasn't a bloody Buckbeak decapitated head lying there
> that somehow got `fixed' the `second time around.' Nope, there was
> no second time around; the TT!trio was there the first time and
> prevented the beheading altogether.
>
> I think. :)

Alla:

> YAY. You are posting :). Okay, so if they were already there and I
> know we can't, but that means that you think that the events in the
> book in this episode happened the same way as in the "Medium that
> cannot be named"? At some point in time I actually thought that I
> got the time travel in PoA pretty well and that JKR explained it so
> well, but after not rereading the book for so much I think I am
> getting confused again. I think I may go dig up some old posts on
> this topic.


June
Wow what an interesting question. I really wonder about things like that. Travelling through time is a wonderful and confusing concept lol. You would have to think that there has to be a reality where buckbeak lost his head and Sirius got the Dementors kiss or why would Harry and Hermione have to go back in the first place (In the british version Ron is in the? hospital wing and it isn't the trio but just Hermione and Harry). The question then would be which reality did we first see? Was the the first time it happened, in which case it stands to reason that Buckbeak was beheaded or was this the second, third ect. Personally I got the impression that this was not the first and therefore Buckbeak was not beheaded.






From bart at moosewise.com  Wed Apr 13 15:39:21 2011
From: bart at moosewise.com (Bart Lidofsky)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 11:39:21 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch
 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinVK25vhbWyR0jRbQyeQ-xauNoO5g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <insp4b+f78b@eGroups.com>	<io070h+b2mo@eGroups.com> <BANLkTinVK25vhbWyR0jRbQyeQ-xauNoO5g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DA5C3A9.2090707@moosewise.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190215

Alla:
>> I don't know, I see your interpretation, but to me it sounds
>> more like her is believing that she made this prediction,
>> rather than reference that she was consciously making stuff up
>> before, you know?
>>
>> But I definitely see your interpretation, especially since most
>> of her predictions are so silly and do not come true, one cannot
>> help but wonder whether she did made them up.
> Margie:
>
> It seems to me that this part of the story shows she does have
> some confidence in her reading of the cards since she seems to
> have tried to discuss it with Dumbledore more than once and is
> clearly convinced by it.

     What I see is a running joke: Trelawny's methods do work, but she 
lacks confidence in her own abilities, and often makes the wrong 
interpretation, and apparently due to timidity. When she is going 
through the cards while unaware that Harry is listening, or even in her 
first appearance,
where she sees Sirius in Harry's tea leaves and treats it as a Grim.

     Bart



From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 13 16:40:56 2011
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 16:40:56 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <4DA5C3A9.2090707@moosewise.com>
Message-ID: <io4jmo+gsct@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190216

Bart wrote:
>      What I see is a running joke: Trelawny's methods do work, but she
lacks confidence in her own abilities, and often makes the wrong  interpretation, and apparently due to timidity. When she is going through the cards while unaware that Harry is listening, or even in her first appearance, where she sees Sirius in Harry's tea leaves and treats it as a Grim.

Carol responds:

It's a rather sad joke, then. She really does see a black dog in the crystal ball and assumes, based on the standard interpretation of such figures in the WW, that it really is a Grim and therefore really means that Harry is in danger of dying (which, of course, being Harry, he is). Trelawney also knows that an ordinary black dog wouldn't appear in a crystal ball--but then Sirius as an Animagus isn't an ordinary black dog, and he *is* closely connected to Harry's fate. There's no way, really, that Trelawney could have interpreted the black dog correctly. Possibly, similar incidents have occurred before, leading others to suspect that Trelawney is a fraud. On some level, she would begin to doubt her own abilities even though on another level, she knows that she sees things, so she withdraws into her own misty and mysterious world with as little contact with the "mundane" (and skeptics like McGonagall) as possible. Later, as she's going through the cards in HBP, she knows what they say but doubts her own reading (especially after she's informed Dumbledore, who knows perfectly well that she's right--calamity *is* coming to Hogwarts and it involves his own death). So poor Trelawney doesn't know what to think. I wonder if, on some level, she feels vindicated when tragedy does come to Hogwarts. But, of course, that's an instance in which she doesn't want to be right.

Carol, who thinks that Trelawney is rather like Neville: a bit more confidence in her abilities from those around her (even perhaps Great-Grandma Cassandra when Sibyl was a child) might have gone a long way to helping her develop her abilities and interpret her own predictions without having to fudge some of them along the way





From bart at moosewise.com  Wed Apr 13 18:05:54 2011
From: bart at moosewise.com (Bart Lidofsky)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:05:54 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch
 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <331404.7202.qm@web113910.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <331404.7202.qm@web113910.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4DA5E602.9020502@moosewise.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190217

On 4/12/2011 12:15 PM, June Ewing wrote:
> Bart:
>> OK, here's time travel 101: When you time travel into the past, you
>> cannot change anything in your own past, particularly the fact that
>> you had traveled back in time. However, you can do something that
>> appears to have changed the past as long as everything happens the
>> way you remembered it.
>>
>> JKR, of course, broke the rule by having Harry save his own life,
>> because there is no explanation of what happened at the beginning
>> of the time loop; how Harry survived to go back to the past to save
>> himself.
>> But it's her story.
>
> June:
> Personally I believe since time travel is not a reality, that the rules are in the hands of the person who is writing at that time. So H.G. Wells may have had his rules about time travel and J.K. Rowling has her rules about time travelling and neither of them in my opinion are wrong because it is their story and they make the rules.

Bart:
     Harry Potter and the Time Turner

     Harry smiled at his parents. "It was really a great idea to take 
Hermione's Time Turner and go back in time with the evidence that Tommy 
Riddle had opened the Chamber of Secrets. I learned at Hogwarts that he 
passed away in Azkaban 15 years ago."

     "Who knows what would have happened if he had gotten away with 
it?", asked James.

     Harry smiled.

     The End.

In other words, there have to be SOME rules with time travel.

Bart



From teebee86627 at yahoo.ca  Tue Apr 12 18:17:06 2011
From: teebee86627 at yahoo.ca (teebee86627)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 18:17:06 -0000
Subject: teachers' personal lives
Message-ID: <io24v2+i7r4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190218

I'm not sure if this was discussed earlier but I was wondering if
anyone had thoughts on personal lives of professors at Hogwarts.
JKR never mentioned if any of them was married or had kids. They
lived in the castle 10 months out of 12. If they were married,
were the spouses allowed to live with them at Hogwarts?

teebee



From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Wed Apr 13 18:48:04 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 11:48:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <4DA5C3A9.2090707@moosewise.com>
Message-ID: <683047.77677.qm@web113906.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190219

Bart:
What I see is a running joke: Trelawny's methods do work, but she
lacks confidence in her own abilities, and often makes the wrong
interpretation, and apparently due to timidity. When she is going
through the cards while unaware that Harry is listening, or even
in her first appearance, where she sees Sirius in Harry's tea
leaves and treats it as a Grim.


June:
Actually her thinking that it is a grim she is seeing in Harry's
tea cup would be an easy mistake to make because Sirius appears
in the tea cup in his dog form so although at that time it is
scary for some and just plain ridiculous to others, it is not
ridiculous at all. In fact a lot of her predictions do come true
(the cards later on come to mind) and even the prediction of
Lavander's Rabbit. True she was not really worried about the
rabbit but what if she is just a chronic worrier. She could have
been worried that something horrible would happen and Trelawny
could have picked up on that and could have been right. She isn't
the fraud everyone thinks she is and to be honest I actually
thought she would have a much bigger part in the final outcome of
the books.








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




From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Wed Apr 13 18:58:40 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 11:58:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <4DA5E602.9020502@moosewise.com>
Message-ID: <15538.13844.qm@web113911.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

>> June:
>> Personally I believe since time travel is not a reality, that the
rules are in the hands of the person who is writing at that time. So
H.G. Wells may have had his rules about time travel and J.K. Rowling
has her rules about time traveling and neither of them in my opinion
>> are wrong because it is their story and they make the rules.

> Bart:
> Harry Potter and the Time Turner
>
> Harry smiled at his parents. "It was really a great idea to take
> Hermione's Time Turner and go back in time with the evidence that
> Tommy Riddle had opened the Chamber of Secrets. I learned at
> Hogwarts that he passed away in Azkaban 15 years ago."
>
> "Who knows what would have happened if he had gotten away with
> it?", asked James.
>
> Harry smiled.
>
> The End.
>
> In other words, there have to be SOME rules with time travel.


June:
I never said there didn't have to be rules in time travel. What I
said was that there is not really any such thing as time travel
(when was the last time you traveled in time Bart?) so the writers
can make their own rules when writing their stories. How can there
be set rules for something that does not exist? JK Rowling broke
no rules because there are no rules. It is like in some movies/books
they will tell you, you cannot come in contact with yourself or a
family member?(Back to the Future comes to mind) because you can
do damage to the time continuum, but in other movies/books you see
people going back in time actually talking to their younger selfs or
forward and talking to their older selfs (Doctor Who I believe
covered that at least one). Which one of these scenarios are you
going to say is wrong? If you say either is wrong then you are wrong
because as a society that has never traveled in time (the closest we
get is traveling from one part of the world to another part with a
different time zone) we don't really know.











From bart at moosewise.com  Wed Apr 13 20:22:15 2011
From: bart at moosewise.com (Bart Lidofsky)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 16:22:15 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <io24v2+i7r4@eGroups.com>
References: <io24v2+i7r4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4DA605F7.1060802@moosewise.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190221

teebee:
> I'm not sure if this was discussed earlier but I was wondering if
> anyone had thoughts on personal lives of professors at Hogwarts.
> JKR never mentioned if any of them was married or had kids. They
> lived in the castle 10 months out of 12. If they were married,
> were the spouses allowed to live with them at Hogwarts?

Bart:
     Well, we don't see all the Hogwarts professors. It would make sense 
if one or more are married and have families; they could certainly live 
in Hogsmeade.

     Bart



From bart at moosewise.com  Wed Apr 13 20:38:46 2011
From: bart at moosewise.com (Bart Lidofsky)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 16:38:46 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch
 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <15538.13844.qm@web113911.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <15538.13844.qm@web113911.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4DA609D6.6060808@moosewise.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190222

June:
>
> I never said there didn't have to be rules in time travel. What I
> said was that there is not really any such thing as time travel
> (when was the last time you traveled in time Bart?)

Bart:

     I'm always traveling in time. Unfortunately, just forwards.

June:

> so the writers
> can make their own rules when writing their stories. How can there
> be set rules for something that does not exist? JK Rowling broke
> no rules because there are no rules.

Bart:
     Well, the short-short story I wrote showed that there have to be 
SOME rules. Here's the basic rule in fantasy writing: outside of the 
fantastic elements, the story and characters have to be as believable as 
possible. Leaving an unresolvable paradox is not believable. There is 
something in fantastic literature called a "time loop"; that is a 
reality that is based on someone traveling back in time and changing the 
past. There is often a question of how the time loop started. The 
easiest way to handle it is to have the person who changes time not 
change their own past (such as saving Buckbeak; whether Buckbeak 
originally lived or died would not have changed the actions of any of 
the time travelers).

     Harry's future self saving his past self creates a problem, because 
if he died before he had a chance to travel back in time, then he 
wouldn't have, and therefore he would have died. The only way to resolve 
the paradox is to assume that somebody else, in the original past, saved 
Harry; seeing that he was drooping down, the image he saw of a stag may 
have been mistaken. My best guess: Dumbledore, who seemed to know 
outside time, but, being a master manipulator, managed to arrange the 
time paradox.

     Bart



From willsonkmom at msn.com  Thu Apr 14 04:14:23 2011
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (willsonteam)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 04:14:23 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <invbrn+vnop@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <io5sav+9uad@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190223

 
> SSSusan:
> As a former history teacher myself, I take modest offense at this... same way I get a little tired of the Marian the Librarian stereotypes.  MY students weren't bored to death, nosiree Bob.  Hmmmphff!  *grumble, grumble, grumble*

Potioncat:
History shouldn't be boring--but my goodness, some people don't know that--and not all teachers are as good as Lupin or Snape!
> 
.
> 
> SSSusan:
> Like Alla, time-turning gives me a headache and makes my head spin, but on this one, I'm absolutely certain that they were already there.  There wasn't a bloody Buckbeak decapitated head lying there that somehow got `fixed' the `second time around.'  Nope, there was no second time around; the TT!trio was there the first time and prevented the beheading altogether.  
> 
> I think.  :)
Potioncat:
Me too.
> 
> Siriusly Snapey Susan,
> wondering if anybody's found my pitcher of margaritas around here....

Potioncat:
Funny you should ask, I started looking  before I even finished reading the FILK...
>





From sartoris22 at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 14 06:00:52 2011
From: sartoris22 at yahoo.com (sartoris)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 23:00:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] teachers' personal lives
Message-ID: <30505.82161.qm@web32903.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190224

teebee:
> I'm not sure if this was discussed earlier but I was wondering if
> anyone had thoughts on personal lives of professors at Hogwarts.
> JKR never mentioned if any of them was married or had kids. They
> lived in the castle 10 months out of 12. If they were married,
> were the spouses allowed to live with them at Hogwarts?

Bart:
Well, we don't see all the Hogwarts professors. It would make sense 
if one or more are married and have families; they could certainly live 
in Hogsmeade.

Sartoris:
?
I've always found it curious how many single adults, not just teachers, seem to exist in the wizarding world. None of the teachers appear to be married. Perhaps teaching is almost like the priesthood. And Sirius, who spends over ten years in Azkaban, never talks about missing or wanting to find a woman. A certain single celibacy seems to hover around many of the adults, which in a way is refreshing. Adults don't seem pressured to couple. (Although Ron does comment that Uncle Bilius never married.)


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




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Thu Apr 14 11:32:17 2011
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (willsonteam)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 11:32:17 -0000
Subject: FILK: Those Were the Threads
Message-ID: <io6m01+bels@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190225

All that talk about olden days..

Those Were the Threads
To the tune of "Those Were the Days" by Mary Hopkin

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KODZtjOIPg

Dedicated to Caius and Siriusly Snapey Susan who inspired this bit of nostalgia.

Those Were the Threads

Once upon a time there was a website
Where we used to raise a glass or two
Remember how we argued all the view points
And wondered at the subplots of our Jo?

Those were the threads, my friend some seemed to never end
We'd post our views forever and a day
We'd cite the quotes we choose
We'd ship through all the clues
For we were bold and sailing Theory Bay.
La la la la la la
La la la la la la

Then the seven books were finally finished
We'd lost our starry theories on the bay
When the old gang met inside the website
We'd smile at one another and we'd say

Those were the threads, my friend some seemed to never end
We'd post our views forever and a day
We'd cite the quotes we choose
We'd ship through all the clues
For we were bold and sailing Theory Bay.
La la la la la la
La la la la la la

Just tonight I came into the website
No one argued like we used to do
On the screen I read a slow discussion
Is this really H.P.4.G.U?

Those were the threads, my friend some seemed to never end
We'd post our views forever and a day
We'd cite the quotes we choose
We'd ship through all the clues
For we were bold and sailing Theory Bay.
La la la la la la
La la la la la la

On the screen I saw familiar subjects
I sang the FILK and joined the 
"Pitcher game"
Oh my friend we're older but no wiser,
For in our hearts the questions still remain


Is Sev'rus foe or friend?
What will be Harry's end?
Is Remus Lupin really ESE!?
Which girl will Harry choose?
Does Albus merely snooze?
It all depends upon "The Prophecy."
La la la la la la
La la la la la la

Those were the threads, my friend some seemed to never end
We'd post our views forever and a day
We'd cite the quotes we choose
We'd ship through all the clues
For we were bold and sailing Theory Bay.
La la la la la la
La la la la la la

Potioncat




From andy at mugglesguide.com  Thu Apr 14 14:45:34 2011
From: andy at mugglesguide.com (Andy Mills)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 15:45:34 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <invbrn+vnop@eGroups.com>
References: <insp4b+f78b@eGroups.com> <invbrn+vnop@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <1685461319.20110414154534@ajm.me.uk>

No: HPFGUIDX 190226

Hello Susan,

> SSSusan:
> As a former history teacher myself, I take modest offense at this...
> same way I get a little tired of the Marian the Librarian stereotypes.
> MY students weren't bored to death, nosiree Bob. Hmmmphff! *grumble, grumble, grumble*

Andy:
You're right, history needn't be boring. I find it interesting these
days and often watch historical stuff on TV.

But at school, the way it was presented was boring. All I can remember
in one particular teacher's class was copying text out of a book, or
writing down what the teacher dictated, which she read out of a text
book. We had to write so fast, you could not *think* about and absorb
what it was you were writing, so it was an utter waste of time.

The other history classes I have no memory of at all (I think I was
there in body, but not spirit).

I grew up only a few miles away (about 10 as the Thestral flies) from
JKR, and she is only a couple of years older than me, so she would have
been under the same educational authority, and I imagine her experience
in history classes would have been very similar to mine.

Other than the general stereotypes of history lessons in school, it
really is no surprise to me that she chose to depict Prof. Binns' lesson
in this manner...

-- 
 Andy Mills




From andy at mugglesguide.com  Thu Apr 14 14:28:36 2011
From: andy at mugglesguide.com (Andy Mills)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 15:28:36 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <4DA605F7.1060802@moosewise.com>
References: <io24v2+i7r4@eGroups.com> <4DA605F7.1060802@moosewise.com>
Message-ID: <1205647969.20110414152836@ajm.me.uk>

No: HPFGUIDX 190227

Hello Bart,

> Bart:
> Well, we don't see all the Hogwarts professors. It would make sense 
> if one or more are married and have families; they could certainly live 
> in Hogsmeade.

Andy:
I've not really thought much about it before, but I guess that not all
the staff (and not just the teachers) would have to live in Hogwarts
itself. They would obviously need a certain number there at all times to
look after the students, but I presume some teachers and other staff
(especially married ones with their own families) could/would live in
Hogsmeade.

As far as that goes, they could live just about anywhere and commute
just like us muggles do; perhaps by broom if they are not too far away,
or via portkey, maybe even by the Knight bus?

My memory is rusty, but I don't think a village or anything existed when
the founders chose the spot to build Hogwarts (or it was not mentioned),
so I presume that Hogsmeade arose from the need to support Hogwarts,
including housing staff that can't or won't live in the school itself.


-- 
 Andy Mills




From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Thu Apr 14 16:48:49 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:48:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Time-traveling ban
In-Reply-To: <io6m01+bels@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <958913.61375.qm@web113920.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190228

This has a little to do with Harry Potter because since China has
now banned time traveling themes on tv you have to wonder what
they will do about the Harry Potter movies have that theme in the
third book.

http://business.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/14/china-bans-time-travel-for-television/

June








From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 14 18:48:43 2011
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 18:48:43 -0000
Subject: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <1205647969.20110414152836@ajm.me.uk>
Message-ID: <io7fib+pdh4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190229






--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Andy Mills <andy at ...> wrote:

> As far as that goes, they could live just about anywhere and commute
> just like us muggles do; perhaps by broom if they are not too far 
> away, or via portkey, maybe even by the Knight bus?

zanooda:

Or they could just step outside the font gate after classes and Apparate home or wherever they wish, and then come back the next morning ... :-).




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 14 19:34:38 2011
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 19:34:38 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <4DA5E602.9020502@moosewise.com>
Message-ID: <io7i8e+obbj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190230






--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky <bart at ...> wrote:
 
>  Harry smiled at his parents. "It was really a great idea to 
>  take Hermione's Time Turner and go back in time with the 
>  evidence that Tommy Riddle had opened the Chamber of Secrets. 
>  I learned at Hogwarts that he passed away in Azkaban 15 years ago."
>  "Who knows what would have happened if he had gotten away with 
>  it?", asked James.

zanooda:

I'm pretty sure time-turners can be used for short-term time travel only. Each turn of Hermione's time-turner sends you back one hour, right? I'm not good with numbers, but there are way too many hours in 50 years to use the time-turner the way you suggest. They would probably need to spend a whole year just turning the hourglass to send Harry 50 years back :-). 

And then, as far as we know, a time-turner can only send you back in time, but not forward, which means that even if Harry *could* go 50 years back (hypothetically, because he can't), he would be stuck in the past for those 50 years. That's not good  :-), and too confusing for my taste...  




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 14 19:59:54 2011
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 19:59:54 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <265254.62262.qm@web113913.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <io7jnq+oeqp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190231





--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, June Ewing <doctorwhofan02 at ...> wrote:

>  You would have to think that there has to be a reality where 
>  buckbeak lost his head and Sirius got the Dementors kiss

zanooda:

I still think that Buckbeak never lost his head. The kids only thought he did, because they heard the thud of the executioner's axe and assumed that Buckbeak was executed. In reality, the disappointed executioner just swung his axe into the fence (into a pumpkin in the movie) - Harry and Hermione witnessed it when they went back in time.

> June wrote:

> or why would Harry and Hermione have to go back in the first place

zanooda:

They went back to prevent this from happening. This was supposed to happen, but didn't, *because* they went back in time :-).


> therefore Buckbeak was not beheaded.

zanooda:

Agreed 100% :-).






From bart at moosewise.com  Thu Apr 14 21:00:57 2011
From: bart at moosewise.com (Bart Lidofsky)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:00:57 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch
 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <io7jnq+oeqp@eGroups.com>
References: <io7jnq+oeqp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4DA76089.2060308@moosewise.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190232

Zanooda:
> I still think that Buckbeak never lost his head. The kids only thought 
> he did, because they heard the thud of the executioner's axe and 
> assumed that Buckbeak was executed. In reality, the disappointed 
> executioner just swung his axe into the fence (into a pumpkin in the 
> movie) - Harry and Hermione witnessed it when they went back in time.

Bart:
     That's the point. Nothing was changed in Harry and Hermione's pasts 
at that point. One could envision a series of events:

1) Harry & Hermoine hear the axe fall, but do not actually see Buckbeak 
get killed. Pre-loop, Buckbeak DOES get killed, but H&H do not know 
about it.

2) H&H save Buckbeak. Time loop is created, in which H&H past still hear 
the axe fall, so future H&H's memories are correct ("theories" of what 
happens when you change your own past range from creating multiple 
memories which can eventually screw up your brain/mind, 
creating/transporting you to an alternate universe where there are now 
two of you, or simply you can't do it).

     The point is that since H&H did not know that Buckbeak was saved, 
it does not change anything in their own past.

    Rowling DOES give a clue that changing the past can create screwed 
up memories. It is implied that Dumbledore is aware that H&H can save 
Buckbeak, and gives them just enough information to do so without 
changing their own pasts. I will have to look it up, but I recall DD 
making a comment about the Pensieve which implies that he can use it to 
get rid of those bothersome double memories.

     To me, the bothersome detail is creating a "1st round" version of 
what happened to Harry when he was attacked by the dementors. There is 
no double memory, and there is still only one Harry, so the first time 
around Harry had to not only survive the dementors, but he would have 
had to have seen the Patronus Stag save him. Here are a few theories:

1) Harry was saved by some other means in round 1. However, this means 
that whoever saved him in the first place had to step down in round 2+, 
and would have needed a motive to do so.

2) In the Rowlingverse, the passed-on dead CAN sort of come back briefly 
for a sufficiently good reason (as DD does in DH). In round 1, James 
DOES come back briefly to save Harry; in Round 2+, Harry is briefly 
possessed/influenced by James which enables him to perform the Patronus. 
This is the theory I like, as it fits in best with the spirit of the books.

3) Rowling sacrificed internal consistency for a better story (I think 
this is the correct theory).

     Bart



From liz.treky at ntlworld.com  Fri Apr 15 11:44:58 2011
From: liz.treky at ntlworld.com (Liz Clark)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 12:44:58 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <4DA76089.2060308@moosewise.com>
References: <io7jnq+oeqp@eGroups.com> <4DA76089.2060308@moosewise.com>
Message-ID: <5A4952026770406E83090E3BDEE01700@TrekyPC>

No: HPFGUIDX 190233

> Zanooda:
>> I still think that Buckbeak never lost his head. The kids only thought
>> he did, because they heard the thud of the executioner's axe and
>> assumed that Buckbeak was executed. In reality, the disappointed
>> executioner just swung his axe into the fence (into a pumpkin in the
>> movie) - Harry and Hermione witnessed it when they went back in time.
>

Taya:
I've been reading for a while, now decided to partiscipate on this time 
issue!
Time is linear, that means it only happens once, even if people have a 
perception of it occuring twice, or more. Therefore, Buckbeak never was 
beheaded because in the single time stream, Harry and Hermione saved him. 
The sound of the axe falling wasn't beheading Buckbeak, but when it swung 
into the fence. The trio assumed Buckbeak was beheaded as from their 
prospective there was no way of saving him. After Harry and Hermione went 
back in time, it then became possible for them from their prospective.
Time travel isn't an easy subject, especially if dealing with non-linear 
line! But thankfully, in the HP series, it is linear. 




From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Thu Apr 14 16:10:10 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:10:10 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <4DA609D6.6060808@moosewise.com>
Message-ID: <99572.72055.qm@web113911.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190234

> June:
>> so the writers
>> can make their own rules when writing their stories. How can
>> there be set rules for something that does not exist? JK Rowling
>> broke no rules because there are no rules.

> Bart:
> Well, the short-short story I wrote showed that there have to
> be SOME rules. Here's the basic rule in fantasy writing: outside
of the fantastic elements, the story and characters have to be as
believable as possible. Leaving an unresolvable paradox is not
believable. There is something in fantastic literature called a
"time loop"; that is a reality that is based on someone traveling
back in time and changing the past. There is often a question of
how the time loop started. The easiest way to handle it is to have
the person who changes time not change their own past (such as
saving Buckbeak; whether Buckbeak originally lived or died would
> not have changed the actions of any of the time travelers).
>
> <snip>


June:
There still cannot be a set rule for imagination. Everyone has
different imaginations and you cannot tell someone that their way
of writing something in their imagination is wrong. This being
said we will never get off this subject if we do not agree to
disagree. I personally thought that J.K. Rowling did an excellent
job in writing the time travel and you don't. That is normal, if
everyone thought the same way, it would be a very boring world
indeed, however make a point but do not put down someone else for
theirs because neither of us is wrong if we have different points
of view which is all you can have concerning time travel because
it does not exist and to be perfectly honest with you, I do not
believe it ever will (although that would be cool).

That being said I do have my own ideas of what could happen if it
did. For instance, if you went back in time and made a change it
does stand to reason (and I think everyone who has ever written
about time travel has included this) that if you do make a change,
the smallest change would change everything that would be connected
to it. For example, let's say that in the past you have a sibling
that passed away so you go back in time and you stop whatever
happened to that sibling (maybe he drowned and you stopped that
from happening) then when you come back to your own time you would
find that in some way every thing around you has changed, even
yourself. Now there is an extra person in the world so whatever
he has done has affected the world. Maybe he became something
amazing and your world has gotten much better, but then maybe he
became a criminal and every thing has turned upside down in your
world because of things he did.

I fully agree with you that in a case like that, that yes there are
rules and it has been noted in most if not all movies and books that
when you go messing around in time like that, things will happen but
I don't think that there are exact rules that everyone has to follow
for some thing that does not exsist. I myself think the idea of time
travel is cool but also think it would be dangerous.




From daveh47 at gmail.com  Fri Apr 15 17:06:47 2011
From: daveh47 at gmail.com (Dave Hardenbrook)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:06:47 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Time-traveling ban
In-Reply-To: <958913.61375.qm@web113920.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <io6m01+bels@eGroups.com>
 <958913.61375.qm@web113920.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4da87c9a.6502440a.3e65.3795@mx.google.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190235

June Ewing:
>
>This has a little to do with Harry Potter because since China has
>now banned time traveling themes on tv you have to wonder what
>they will do about the Harry Potter movies have that theme in the
>third book.
>
><http://business.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/14/china-bans-time-travel-for-television/>http://business.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/14/china-bans-time-travel-for-television/

Dave:
Even though CNN chose to make the heading about Time Travel (more 
sensationalist, I guess), the quoted guidelines mention other things, 
with "fantasy" heading the list, so it seems to me these's a lot in 
Harry Potter that they have to object to, of which time-travel is the least...

(I'm not sure what they mean by, "ambiguous moral lessons, and a lack 
of positive thinking", but I'm guessing that in the mind of such an 
authoritarian regime that that would probably include defying or 
questioning authority, which HP is chock full of...)

Dave



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




From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net  Fri Apr 15 18:13:17 2011
From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (Susan A)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 18:13:17 -0000
Subject: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <30505.82161.qm@web32903.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ioa1rt+6ria@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190236

teebee:
> > I'm not sure if this was discussed earlier but I was wondering if
> > anyone had thoughts on personal lives of professors at Hogwarts.
> > JKR never mentioned if any of them was married or had kids. They
> > lived in the castle 10 months out of 12. If they were married,
> > were the spouses allowed to live with them at Hogwarts?
 
Sartoris:
> I've always found it curious how many single adults, not just 
> teachers, seem to exist in the wizarding world. None of the 
> teachers appear to be married. Perhaps teaching is almost like the 
> priesthood. And Sirius, who spends over ten years in Azkaban, never 
> talks about missing or wanting to find a woman. A certain single 
> celibacy seems to hover around many of the adults, which in a way 
> is refreshing. Adults don't seem pressured to couple. (Although Ron 
> does comment that Uncle Bilius never married.)


SSSusan:
If teaching is almost like the priesthood -- and it does almost seem so, the way JKR doesn't introduce spouses/significant others -- at least thankfully it doesn't appear fraught with some of the scary issues of the RW priesthood.  But we don't really want to go there....

In terms of "the curious" about HP characters, not only is it curious how many single adults there are, there are a bunch of other niggly little things I find curious, such as ICKY TEETH!  I understand that dentists may seem a little bizarre in the WW, but if they see no need for dentists, and since this is a world in which there are all manner of "clean up" and "fix up" spells, such as evanesco and scourgify nd episkey, WHY is there any witch or wizard with rotten or yellowed teeth?  Personal preferences in the realm of personal hygiene aside, there seem to be a large number of people with dental ickiness.  

This is apropos of nothing, I realize, but it comes to me as a little curiosity of the series, the same way the lack of mention of teachers' spouses and children seems odd.

Siriusly Snapey Susan




From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net  Fri Apr 15 18:22:33 2011
From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (Susan A)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 18:22:33 -0000
Subject: FILK: Those Were the Threads
In-Reply-To: <io6m01+bels@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ioa2d9+olnv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190237

Potioncat:
> All that talk about olden days..
> 
> Those Were the Threads
> To the tune of "Those Were the Days" by Mary Hopkin
>
> Dedicated to Caius and Siriusly Snapey Susan who inspired this bit 
> of nostalgia.
> 
> Those Were the Threads
> 
> Once upon a time there was a website
> Where we used to raise a glass or two
> Remember how we argued all the view points
> And wondered at the subplots of our Jo?
> 
> Those were the threads, my friend some seemed to never end
> We'd post our views forever and a day
> We'd cite the quotes we choose
> We'd ship through all the clues
> For we were bold and sailing Theory Bay.
> La la la la la la
> La la la la la la
> 
> Then the seven books were finally finished
> We'd lost our starry theories on the bay
> When the old gang met inside the website
> We'd smile at one another and we'd say
> 
<snip> 

SSSusan:
Ahhhh, I love it!  Thanks, Potioncat! 

And I must say... as lame a little dinghy as it was, and as low as it's currently riding in the bay, DRIBBLE SHADOWS never was outright shot down.  It still stuns me that JKR didn't seem to *get* that for a lot of us there was a missing 24 hours, but hey, she never came out and said, "Oh, poppycock!  NOTHING happened of consequence during that time."  

So, yeah, a lot of starry theories were lost, but it's fun to have one still rocking away... feebly, but rocking. ;)


Potioncat: 
> On the screen I saw familiar subjects
> I sang the FILK and joined the 
> "Pitcher game"
> Oh my friend we're older but no wiser,
> For in our hearts the questions still remain

> 
> Is Sev'rus foe or friend?
> What will be Harry's end?
> Is Remus Lupin really ESE!?
> Which girl will Harry choose?
> Does Albus merely snooze?
> It all depends upon "The Prophecy."
> La la la la la la
> La la la la la la
> 
> Those were the threads, my friend some seemed to never end
> We'd post our views forever and a day
> We'd cite the quotes we choose
> We'd ship through all the clues
> For we were bold and sailing Theory Bay.
> La la la la la la
> La la la la la la


SSSusan:
Reminiscing is a fun, fun thing.  And can I just say right now how very, very happy I am that ESE!Lupin didn't pan out? Or have I missed Pippin defending that in all these months I've stayed away?

Pass that pitcher of 'ritas, Potioncat.

Siriusly Snapey Susan






From bart at moosewise.com  Fri Apr 15 19:33:29 2011
From: bart at moosewise.com (Bart Lidofsky)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:33:29 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <ioa1rt+6ria@eGroups.com>
References: <ioa1rt+6ria@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4DA89D89.4090103@moosewise.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190238

SSSusan:
> If teaching is almost like the priesthood -- and it does almost seem so, the way JKR doesn't introduce spouses/significant others -- at least thankfully it doesn't appear fraught with some of the scary issues of the RW priesthood.  But we don't really want to go there....

  Bart:
      But, since you did, please note that virtually all the accusations 
came from the sexually freer time of the 60's and 70's. And even then, 
it on the order of one out of a thousand priests, which means that zero 
incidents in Hogwarts is comparable (and, frankly, I'm not so sure about 
Slugworth).

Sssusan:

> In terms of "the curious" about HP characters, not only is it curious how many single adults there are, there are a bunch of other niggly little things I find curious, such as ICKY TEETH!  I understand that dentists may seem a little bizarre in the WW, but if they see no need for dentists, and since this is a world in which there are all manner of "clean up" and "fix up" spells, such as evanesco and scourgify nd episkey, WHY is there any witch or wizard with rotten or yellowed teeth?

Bart:

     It's a Brit thing.

     Bart



From geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com  Fri Apr 15 20:02:11 2011
From: geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com (Geoff)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 20:02:11 -0000
Subject: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <4DA89D89.4090103@moosewise.com>
Message-ID: <ioa883+9re1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190239

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky <bart at ...> wrote:
>
> SSSusan:
> > If teaching is almost like the priesthood -- and it does almost seem so, the way JKR doesn't introduce spouses/significant others -- at least thankfully it doesn't appear fraught with some of the scary issues of the RW priesthood.  But we don't really want to go there....
> 
>   Bart:
>       But, since you did, please note that virtually all the accusations 
> came from the sexually freer time of the 60's and 70's. And even then, 
> it on the order of one out of a thousand priests, which means that zero 
> incidents in Hogwarts is comparable (and, frankly, I'm not so sure about 
> Slugworth).
> 
> Sssusan:
> 
> > In terms of "the curious" about HP characters, not only is it curious how many single adults there are, there are a bunch of other niggly little things I find curious, such as ICKY TEETH!  I understand that dentists may seem a little bizarre in the WW, but if they see no need for dentists, and since this is a world in which there are all manner of "clean up" and "fix up" spells, such as evanesco and scourgify nd episkey, WHY is there any witch or wizard with rotten or yellowed teeth?
 
> Bart:
> 
It's a Brit thing.
 
Geoff:
What, what, what, what, what.....?

Would you care to enlarge on that statement, good sir?





From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Fri Apr 15 20:20:46 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 13:20:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <io7fib+pdh4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <261560.17214.qm@web113904.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190240




zanooda:

Or they could just step outside the font gate after classes and Apparate home or wherever they wish, and then come back the next morning ... :-).

June
I always got the impression that they lived in the castle during school and elsewhere in the summer. I know it is true that Trelawney and Hagrid live in the school and with the late nights Snape and Filch had at the school they too must live in the school, not to mention the fact that all the teachers were present when the school was attacked and Dumbledore was killed tells me that it is likely they all live in the school durring the school year.







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




From bart at moosewise.com  Fri Apr 15 22:38:12 2011
From: bart at moosewise.com (Bart Lidofsky)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 18:38:12 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <ioa883+9re1@eGroups.com>
References: <ioa883+9re1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4DA8C8D4.2090004@moosewise.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190241

Sssusan:
>>> In terms of "the curious" about HP characters, not only is it curious how many single adults there are, there are a bunch of other niggly little things I find curious, such as ICKY TEETH!  I understand that dentists may seem a little bizarre in the WW, but if they see no need for dentists, and since this is a world in which there are all manner of "clean up" and "fix up" spells, such as evanesco and scourgify nd episkey, WHY is there any witch or wizard with rotten or yellowed teeth?
>
>> Bart:
>>
> It's a Brit thing.
>
> Geoff:
> What, what, what, what, what.....?
>
> Would you care to enlarge on that statement, good sir?

Bart:
     It's an old stereotype, but one that I have heard the British tell 
on themselves. There are various reasons, most recently because of the 
difficulty in getting NHS dental care; rather than put up a bunch of 
links, just type british bad teeth into any search engine and you will 
get dozens of sites discussing it. Even the Beatles made fun of it in 
the George Harrison song, "Savoy Truffle".

     Bart




From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Fri Apr 15 20:26:18 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 13:26:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Buckbeak  (was: Chapter Discussion:)
In-Reply-To: <io7jnq+oeqp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <708250.4365.qm@web113914.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190242


> > June wrote:

> > or why would Harry and Hermione have to go back in the first place

> zanooda:

> They went back to prevent this from happening. This was supposed to
> happen, but didn't, *because* they went back in time :-).


June

I see your point. Dumbledore no doubt knew what would happen and at some point decided that he would send them back, however there is just one flaw. Because he sent them back to do it then at some point it would have happened. In order to avoid it happening at all, he would have had to have sent them forward in which case they could have stopped it in the future so it would never have happend.



From geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com  Sat Apr 16 07:37:16 2011
From: geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com (Geoff)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 07:37:16 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Chapter 17: Cat, Rat and Dog
Message-ID: <iobgvc+8dt4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190243

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 off-list (to email inboxes) 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 HPforGrownups-owner @yahoogroups.com (minus 
that extra space)
-----------------------------------------------------------

Prisoner of Azkaban Chapter 17: Cat, Rat and Dog

After hearing the fall of the axe, the Trio decide that they must return to the 
castle. During their walk back, Scabbers becomes very restless, bites Ron's 
hand  and runs away from Crookshanks. Ron pursues the rat and recaptures 
him but then, an enormous black dog emerges from the darkness, knocks 
Harry over, turns on Ron, seizes him by the arm and drags him into the now 
active Whomping Willow, breaking his leg en route.

While Harry and Hermione try to avoid the Willow's attack, Crookshanks 
shows that he knows how to stop the tree thrashing around. They follow a 
tunnel from the roots and find themselves in the Shrieking Shack. Searching
 the building they find a room with Ron in it and also Sirius Black who is 
revealed to be an Animagus.

Black disarms Harry and Hermione but a furious Harry  tries to attack him 
and in the resulting mel?e, regains his wand and advances threateningly on 
Black; an impasse occurs when Crookshanks sits on Sirius Black's chest 
blocking Harry's potential spell. 

At this point, footsteps are heard and the door bursts open to reveal Remus 
Lupin, who uses an Expelliarmus spell to gain control of the wands.  He holds 
a conversation with Black which is incomprehensible to the others and then, 
to their horror, embraces him. Hermione accuses him of betraying their 
trust and reveals that he is in fact a werewolf.

After attempting to explain to an unbelieving and furious Harry, Lupin 
returns their wands in an attempt to gain their attention; he reveals that he 
was Moony, one of the creators of the Map and had followed their progress 
by using it. He then makes a request to see Scabbers and reveals that the 
rat is Peter Pettigrew in Animagus form.

QUESTIONS

1. When the dog attacked the group, what were your thoughts about where 
it had come from and what it was? For example, did your mind return to the 
Grim? 

2. Did you assume that it was attempting to get at Harry? If that was the 
case, what was your reaction that, after Ron pushed Harry aside, it then 
apparently focussed its attack on him instead?

3. Crookshanks pushed the knot on the trunk of the tree which caused its 
flailing to stop. What were your thoughts at that point about Crookshanks 
and his actions? Accidental? More to the Kneazle than meets the eye?

4. In the Shrieking Shack, the dog is then revealed to be Sirius Black. Had 
any sort of possibility like this crossed your mind previously?

5. Many of Sirius' actions and words at the outset still seemed to indicate 
that he was after Harry. Do you think that he took a very great risk to 
himself in increasing that perception by saying to Harry "Going to kill me?". 
If so, why did he behave in this way? Would Harry have really attempted 
to do this if Crookshanks had not intervened?

6. To me, this is the most interesting chapter in the whole book because 
there are so many questions answered, so many puzzles resolved and, as 
a result,  so many pieces of the jigsaw fall into place. Would you agree 
and, if so, what was for you the most illuminating information that was 
revealed?

7. Please add any additional questions if you feel they may be relevant.

Geoff















From geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com  Sat Apr 16 16:45:49 2011
From: geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com (Geoff)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 16:45:49 -0000
Subject: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <4DA8C8D4.2090004@moosewise.com>
Message-ID: <ioch3u+u8au@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190244



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky <bart at ...> wrote:
>
> Sssusan:
> >> WHY is there any witch or wizard with rotten or yellowed teeth?

 Bart:
> > It's a Brit thing.

Geoff:
> > What, what, what, what, what.....?

> > Would you care to enlarge on that statement, good sir?
 
Bart:
>
> It's an old stereotype, but one that I have heard the British tell 
> on themselves. There are various reasons, most recently because of the 
> difficulty in getting NHS dental care; rather than put up a bunch of 
> links, just type british bad teeth into any search engine and you will 
> get dozens of sites discussing it. Even the Beatles made fun of it in 
> the George Harrison song, "Savoy Truffle".

Geoff:
This is going dangerously OT and will probably have to be deported to 
OTC before much longer, but I might just say that I haven't heard Brits 
telling this kind of thing against themselves - and I'm English. HAnds off 
our NHS.

If you do look for links, there's quite a lot of criticism on the way that
some Americans have to have teeth which are too perfect to be natural 
and too white also.

This link reflects your comment to a point but also has a few sharp things 
to say about the US nice teeth fixation.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7633254.stm

I had crowns some years ago because I needed them but the rest of my teeth 
are my own, bless 'em. They are not yellowed and I may have a crooked one 
or so, but so what?

OK, so Fenrir probably has grotty teeth; there are one or two references to them
but one might expect that judging by the sort of character he  is.











From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sat Apr 16 17:45:14 2011
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (willsonteam)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 17:45:14 -0000
Subject: Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <ioch3u+u8au@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <iockja+hela@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190245

>
> > Sssusan:
> > >> WHY is there any witch or wizard with rotten or yellowed teeth?

Potioncat:
I thought it was in keeping with sterotypes of witches. JKR seems to dance all around stereotypes--she sticks close, reverses or sometimes ignores them. I picture (or used to anyway) a witch as being stooped, hook nosed, bad teeth and wild or stringy hair (sounds like Snape except for the back).

> 
> Geoff:> 
> This link reflects your comment to a point but also has a few sharp things 
> to say about the US nice teeth fixation.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7633254.stm

Potioncat:
Good article. Dentists have been after me for years to whiten my teeth--victims of tea, cola and tetracycline--but they'd have to remove several fillings in order to get the teeth uniform in color---no thanks. I have to admit, the rest of the US seems to have teeth that are whiter than white.

Dentists in the article sound like the Grangers--who didn't want Hernione changing her teeth. I can't remember if they didn't want it done at all, or not till she was older. A healthy attitude if you ask me. (Is this enough to keep the thread legal?)
> 
> Geoff:
> OK, so Fenrir probably has grotty teeth; there are one or two references to them
> but one might expect that judging by the sort of character he  is.

Potioncat:
Agreed. I think in many ways Snape's appearance also reflects his character in the sense that he probably doesn't take care of himself.


>





From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sat Apr 16 17:52:42 2011
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (willsonteam)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 17:52:42 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <io4jmo+gsct@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <iocl1a+27g1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190246


> 
> Carol responds:
snip
 On some level, she would begin to doubt her own abilities even though on another level, she knows that she sees things, so she withdraws into her own misty and mysterious world with as little contact with the "mundane" (and skeptics like McGonagall) as possible. 

Potioncat:
I agree, she came so close, just sort of interpreted things a bit off. Remember she also did some sort of reading of Harry but actually described Tom Riddle--it "was" correct, but who would know?

I have to admit I love the Christmas interaction between McGonagall and Trelawney. Some of the joke in that conversation is that Trelawney didnt "foresee" that Lupin would be sick. Well, all the staff knew his furry little secret and she of all people should have known the moon was full---it didn't even take "sight" to know Lupin wouldn't be there. What I also like is that we readers didn't know that at the time either.

> 
> Carol, who thinks that Trelawney is rather like Neville: a bit more confidence in her abilities from those around her (even perhaps Great-Grandma Cassandra when Sibyl was a child) might have gone a long way to helping her develop her abilities and interpret her own predictions without having to fudge some of them along the way

Potioncat:
I think you're right. She comes so close. I'd love to know what she intended with Lavender --the thing you're dreading will happen on a certain date?--I wonder if she "saw" Lavender getting bad news and dressed it up too much.
>





From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sat Apr 16 18:20:47 2011
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (willsonteam)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 18:20:47 -0000
Subject: FILK: Those Were the Threads
In-Reply-To: <ioa2d9+olnv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <iocmlv+aus4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190247

 
> SSSusan:
> Ahhhh, I love it!  Thanks, Potioncat! 
> 
> And I must say... as lame a little dinghy as it was, and as low as it's currently riding in the bay, DRIBBLE SHADOWS never was outright shot down.  It still stuns me that JKR didn't seem to *get* that for a lot of us there was a missing 24 hours, but hey, she never came out and said, "Oh, poppycock!  NOTHING happened of consequence during that time."  
> 
> So, yeah, a lot of starry theories were lost, but it's fun to have one still rocking away... feebly, but rocking. ;)

Potioncat:
I don't suppose anyone ever went back and counted how many boats are still afloat?--or maybe merely grounded a little? The good ship LOLLIPOPS is the only one that escaped with minimal damage that I can think of.
> 
> 
> SSSusan:
> Reminiscing is a fun, fun thing.  And can I just say right now how very, very happy I am that ESE!Lupin didn't pan out? Or have I missed Pippin defending that in all these months I've stayed away?
> 
> Pass that pitcher of 'ritas, Potioncat.

Potioncat:
I am happy that he wasn't ESE!Lupin, but boy did Pippin make a good argument for it.  

Hmm, the pitcher could use a refill....you should come around more often.




From omegafold at yahoo.com  Sat Apr 16 19:38:33 2011
From: omegafold at yahoo.com (omegafold)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 19:38:33 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Chapter 17: Cat, Rat and Dog
In-Reply-To: <iobgvc+8dt4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <iocr7p+mkph@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190248

 One thing does disappoint me about Harry. He never seems to evolve, he just grows up slowly and aside from trite incursions, he lacks any true planning genius and ends up needing rescue from friends. It's getting repetitive and predictable.

I wish the writer would really dig deep here, if I were writing things, at this point I would have written it so Harry really thinks hard to plan ahead, something a more mature Harry would. He would have cast spells of some kind before being detained by the hand of evil to circumvent this type of thing rather than risk lives. He would have maybe dug deep into the roots of magic to actually make a device as others have made, like the invisible cloak. I would have had him make something clever and odd, like a ring with a slide away cover revealing an eye. Whenever the eye sees light, any living being that is touching the ring will be instantly transported to wherever the wearer is thinking of. Or how about this; a root from a special tree that each time it splits, a vapor is released which protects it's holder within a given radius from any types of spells, etc....

Well just my thoughts. I'd hate to see him act like a little boy in every movie never really growing up to do something truly spectacular.

omegafold



From teebee86627 at yahoo.ca  Sun Apr 17 02:10:34 2011
From: teebee86627 at yahoo.ca (teebee86627)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 02:10:34 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Chapter 17: Cat, Rat and Dog
In-Reply-To: <iocr7p+mkph@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <iodi6q+j88m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190249


> omegafold wrote:
>  One thing does disappoint me about Harry. He never seems to
evolve, he just grows up slowly and aside from trite incursions,
he lacks any true planning genius and ends up needing rescue from
friends. It's getting repetitive and predictable.
> <snip>
> Well just my thoughts. I'd hate to see him act like a little boy
in every movie never really growing up to do something truly
> spectacular.


teebee:
Let's not forget he is only 13 in this book. I think he reacted
pretty well for his age.



From geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com  Sun Apr 17 07:26:29 2011
From: geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com (Geoff)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 07:26:29 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Chapter 17: Cat, Rat and Dog
In-Reply-To: <iocr7p+mkph@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ioe4n5+70p6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190250

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "omegafold" <omegafold at ...> wrote:
>
>  One thing does disappoint me about Harry. He never seems to evolve, he just grows up slowly and aside from trite incursions, he lacks any true planning genius and ends up needing rescue from friends. It's getting repetitive and predictable.

<snip>
 
> Well just my thoughts. I'd hate to see him act like a little boy in every movie never really growing up to do something truly spectacular.

Geoff:
I note your comments about Harry - which I might say I don't entirely agree 
with, but I wonder why you've written them under the Chapter 17 discussion 
heading since they don't seem to link to any of the story summary I wrote or
relate to any of the questions I posed?

I would have expected the comments you made would have been posted as a 
new thread.
>





From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Sun Apr 17 16:55:59 2011
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 17 Apr 2011 16:55:59 -0000
Subject: Weekly Chat, 4/17/2011, 1:00 pm 
Message-ID: <1303059359.13.21810.m8@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190251

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

Weekly Chat
Sunday April 17, 2011
1:00 pm - 2:00 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  2011 
 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/20110417/09594cd3/attachment.html>

From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Sun Apr 17 19:18:32 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 12:18:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Chapter 17: Cat, Rat and Dog
In-Reply-To: <iobgvc+8dt4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <929470.78801.qm@web113917.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190252

1. When the dog attacked the group, what were your thoughts about
where it had come from and what it was? For example, did your mind
return to the Grim?

June:
I like Hermione didn't believe there was a grim and Harry had
already said that if Crookshanks can see it too that it must not
be a grim so that didn't come to mind. My thought was that it had
been hiding? and watching them for a while and waiting for it's
time to pounce, however I? was shocked that it was Ron it went
for instead of Harry and wondered if it had grabbed the wrong
person.

2. Did you assume that it was attempting to get at Harry? If that
was the case, what was your reaction that, after Ron pushed Harry
aside, it then apparently focussed its attack on him instead?

June:
As I said in the first question I was shocked and wondered if it
had grabbed the wrong person.

3. Crookshanks pushed the knot on the trunk of the tree which
caused its flailing to stop. What were your thoughts at that
point about Crookshanks and his actions? Accidental? More to the
Kneazle than meets the eye?

June:
I thought there was more to him than meets the eye and was
concerned that he might have been on the wrong side. I had also
thought it possible he was an animagi because he was just too
smart even for a cat lol

4. In the Shrieking Shack, the dog is then revealed to be Sirius
Black. Had any sort of possibility like this crossed your mind
previously?

June:
At this point I was starting to think that these two animals
(Crookshanks and the dog) where way too smart lol and was
thinking that both of them were animagi and was sure the dog was
Sirius and thought maybe the cat was someone who was going to
help them.

5. Many of Sirius' actions and words at the outset still seemed
to indicate that he was after Harry. Do you think that he took a
very great risk to himself in increasing that perception by
saying to Harry "Going to kill me?". If so, why did he behave in
this way? Would Harry have really attempted to do this if
Crookshanks had not intervened?

June:
I think Sirius knew Harry couldn't bring himself to do it and I
feel that way too. I also think Sirius was amused by Harry trying
to because he could see James in Harry.

6. To me, this is the most interesting chapter in the whole book
because there are so many questions answered, so many puzzles
resolved and, as a result, so many pieces of the jigsaw fall into
place. Would you agree and, if so, what was for you the most
illuminating information that was revealed?

June:
I totally agree with you here. I loved this chapter but for me
the most illuminating information was the discovery that Ron's
pet rat who had been in the family for years was really Peter
Petigrew. That just floored me, didn't see it coming.



From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Sun Apr 17 19:25:47 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 12:25:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <iockja+hela@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <237278.68107.qm@web113908.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190253

> Potioncat:
> <snip> Dentists in the article sound like the Grangers--who
> didn't want Hernione changing her teeth. I can't remember if
> they didn't want it done at all, or not till she was older.
> A healthy attitude if you ask me. (Is this enough to keep the
> thread legal?)

June:
In Goblet of Fire, Hermione said that her parents wanted her to
stick with her braces. It had nothing to do with her teath being
rotten, she had buck teeth and that is one of the things braces
fix. I myself had the teeth that Hermione is described as having
and I had braces and now have perfectly straight teeth and I am of
British decent (for the person who swears that brits have rotten
teeth).




From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Sun Apr 17 19:33:53 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 12:33:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Chapter 17: Cat, Rat and Dog
In-Reply-To: <iocr7p+mkph@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <262620.61617.qm@web113902.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190254

omegafold:
One thing does disappoint me about Harry. He never seems to evolve,
he just grows up slowly and aside from trite incursions, he lacks
any true planning genius and ends up needing rescue from friends.
It's getting repetitive and predictable.

I wish the writer would really dig deep here, if I were writing
things, at this point I would have written it so Harry really
thinks hard to plan ahead, something a more mature Harry would.
He would have cast spells of some kind before being detained by
the hand of evil to circumvent this type of thing rather than
risk lives. He would have maybe dug deep into the roots of magic
to actually make a device as others have made, like the invisible
cloak. <snip>

Well just my thoughts. I'd hate to see him act like a little boy
in every movie never really growing up to do something truly
spectacular.


June:
This was only the 3rd book and he was only 13. Harry doesn't invent
things but that is not what he is supposed to do. The books weren't
Harry the inventor. He is supposed to grow up with enough strength
and knowledge to face the most evil and dangerous wizard who ever
lived and the books are also about friendship. When you have read
the books to the end (or watched all the movies) you will
understand. He does grow and evolve, but that is all I am going to
say because I don't want to give anything away.








From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sun Apr 17 21:22:36 2011
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (willsonteam)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 21:22:36 -0000
Subject: Hopes for Harry (was Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Chapter
In-Reply-To: <iocr7p+mkph@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ioflms+3c40@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190255



 "omegafold"  wrote:
>
>  One thing does disappoint me about Harry. He never seems to evolve, he just grows up slowly and aside from trite incursions, he lacks any true planning genius and ends up needing rescue from friends. It's getting repetitive and predictable.
> omegafold

Potioncat:
I don't think you're alone in this; someone else has said the same thing in a slightly different way---Severus Snape.

He feels Harry is merely ordinary,  who succeeds entirely because of incredible good luck and the support of friends. Snape himself comes from a generation of extraordinary wizards/witches. At Harry's age he was inventing spells and counterspells; the Marauders were inventing magical devises and teaching themselves to be animagi--Snape wouldn't know that, but McGonagall commented on how tallented young Potter and Black were. Young Barty Crouch also seemed to be very tallented.

I don't agree with your hopes for Harry, partly because I think JKR purposely made him Everyman (is that Geoff's term?)--he doesn't succeed because of great skill but because of his great character.

I do however understand your disapointment in a character's arc. I think many of us had particular characters that we wanted to see do certain things or have a certain outcome, who did not. One thing I would have liked to see was for Snape to survive. In my case, I think JKR's version is better, even if I still regret it.

I took the liberty of adding a different subject to this thread.





From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sun Apr 17 23:59:00 2011
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (willsonteam)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 23:59:00 -0000
Subject: Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <237278.68107.qm@web113908.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <iofus4+i7qp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190256



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, June Ewing <doctorwhofan02 at ...> wrote:
>
> > Potioncat:
> > <snip> Dentists in the article sound like the Grangers--who
> > didn't want Hernione changing her teeth. I can't remember if
> > they didn't want it done at all, or not till she was older.
> > A healthy attitude if you ask me. (Is this enough to keep the
> > thread legal?)
> 
> June:
> In Goblet of Fire, Hermione said that her parents wanted her to
> stick with her braces. It had nothing to do with her teath being
> rotten, she had buck teeth and that is one of the things braces
> fix. I myself had the teeth that Hermione is described as having
> and I had braces and now have perfectly straight teeth and I am of
> British decent (for the person who swears that brits have rotten
> teeth).
>
Potioncat:
I didn't say anything about Hermione having rotten teeth. SSSusan started out by asking why so many witches are described as having rotten or yellow teeth and wondered why that would be.

Several posts later Geoff offered an article about British attitudes on elective dental care and how that compares to the US attitude. I brought it back to canon by discussing Hermione's parents who are British dentists and their opinion about adjusting Hermione's teeth. I don't think Hermione had braces at all, but I don't have the book available to check. Anyway, she was able to use magic, so it was done without their input.




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Mon Apr 18 00:32:43 2011
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (willsonteam)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:32:43 -0000
Subject: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <io24v2+i7r4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <iog0rb+5bql@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190257



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "teebee86627" <teebee86627 at ...> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure if this was discussed earlier but I was wondering if
> anyone had thoughts on personal lives of professors at Hogwarts.
> JKR never mentioned if any of them was married or had kids. They
> lived in the castle 10 months out of 12. If they were married,
> were the spouses allowed to live with them at Hogwarts?
> 
> teebee
>
Potioncat:
We know Headmaster Black was married and had a family; and Professor Longbottom is (will be) married and will live at the Three Broomsticks (per a JKR interview. We know Professors Hagrid, Slughorn, Snape, Lupin, Trelawney and Dumbledore were single. McGonagall is at every Christmas dinner that I can recall--so I think she is currently single. I don't think Sprout or Flickwick are ever at the Christmas dinner--they have someplace to go over the holidays and could have spouses.

All I know about living arrangements for teachers at British boarding schools I learned from "To Serve Them all my Days"--and the married teacher had a house or apartment at the school. I don't see why that wouldn't work at Hogwarts and there would be no reason for Harry to even know about it.

But it's anyone's guess.




From blackcatnocturne at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 18 00:45:58 2011
From: blackcatnocturne at yahoo.com (likesblackcats)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:45:58 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Chapter 17: Cat, Rat and Dog
In-Reply-To: <929470.78801.qm@web113917.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <iog1k6+adgn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190258

1. When the dog attacked the group, what were your thoughts about
where it had come from and what it was? For example, did your mind
return to the Grim?

Even though Crookshanks could see it, I thought it *was* a Grim. Thinking about this in hindsight, I was either just really silly or I was assuming that animals in the wizarding world were more in tune with magical phenomena that wizards themselves. (I've always liked animals...) Then again, I was still in primary school at the time, plus I've never been very good at going behind mysteries to clear them up before the author reveals it. I guess I was just going along for the ride.

2. Did you assume that it was attempting to get at Harry? If that
was the case, what was your reaction that, after Ron pushed Harry aside, it then apparently focussed its attack on him instead?

I did assume that it was trying to get at Harry, because let's face it, the books are not entitled "Ronald Weasley and the Something of Somethings". I just thought it had dragged off the wrong person in all the kerfuffle.

3. Crookshanks pushed the knot on the trunk of the tree which
caused its flailing to stop. What were your thoughts at that
point about Crookshanks and his actions? Accidental? More to the
Kneazle than meets the eye?

I definitely did *not* think that Crookshanks' actions were accidental. I mean, even Harry realises that Crookshanks is in league with the dog...

4. In the Shrieking Shack, the dog is then revealed to be Sirius
Black. Had any sort of possibility like this crossed your mind
previously?

I'm going to seem like a real idiot, but I never even entertained the possibility! And there was all that mention of Animagi earlier in the book, too...

5. Many of Sirius' actions and words at the outset still seemed
to indicate that he was after Harry. Do you think that he took a
very great risk to himself in increasing that perception by
saying to Harry "Going to kill me?". If so, why did he behave in
this way? Would Harry have really attempted to do this if
Crookshanks had not intervened?

I think he did. Harry was truly furious and not exactly in control of himself. Going after Black with his *fists* when Black was holding two wands, I ask you... but Harry raised his wand to hurt Sirius before Sirius actually said that. I think Harry would have continued, and perhaps even managed to hurt Sirius. I don't think Sirius was under the impression that Harry was helpless to do anything (I mean, look at the contrast with Bellatrix Lestrange later in the series). Why do I think Sirius said it? I think his sense of humour had become rather warped and bitter in Azkaban. I think he found the *irony* amusing that here he was trying to save Harry's life, and Harry hates him and is trying to kill him! I really like Sirius, but he is just a little... deranged...

6. To me, this is the most interesting chapter in the whole book
because there are so many questions answered, so many puzzles
resolved and, as a result, so many pieces of the jigsaw fall into
place. Would you agree and, if so, what was for you the most
illuminating information that was revealed?

I adored this chapter. I reached the sudden twist that "Sirius is innocent and the real villain is disguised as Ron's rat" and... I don't know... I was instantly completely hooked. I mean, Black as the villain worked well enough, but finding out so dramatically that for the entire book I had been completely and utterly *wrong* about him was amazing. But I think the strongest feeling was that of fear for Sirius. I found out he was innocent and instantly started worrying - I remembered Hagrid's comment that innocence didn't matter to the Dementors, and I remembered Lupin's explanation of the Dementor's Kiss... I wasn't as optimistic as Harry; I didn't think Sirius would get out alive, let alone be cleared. I thought it would be too easy if it was a happily-ever-after-no-more-Dursleys deveolpment.

blackcatnocturne



From thedossetts at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 03:52:23 2011
From: thedossetts at gmail.com (rtbthw_mom)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 03:52:23 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Chapter 17: Cat, Rat and Dog
In-Reply-To: <iobgvc+8dt4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <iogchn+2j3c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190259



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff" <geoffbannister123 at ...> wrote:
Snip excellent summary of the chapter. Thanks, Geoff!
> QUESTIONS
> 
> 1. When the dog attacked the group, what were your thoughts about where 
> it had come from and what it was? For example, did your mind return to the 
> Grim? 

No, I was just going along for the ride at this point, waiting to see what JKR had in store for us.

> 
> 3. Crookshanks pushed the knot on the trunk of the tree which caused its 
> flailing to stop. What were your thoughts at that point about Crookshanks 
> and his actions? Accidental? More to the Kneazle than meets the eye?

I am not certain, but I'm pretty sure that JKR hadn't discussed Kneazles yet, so I didn't even know that there could have been such a thing (didn't read FBAWTFT until later.)
> 
> 4. In the Shrieking Shack, the dog is then revealed to be Sirius Black. Had 
> any sort of possibility like this crossed your mind previously?

No. The reveal was so much fun though!
> 
> 5. Many of Sirius' actions and words at the outset still seemed to indicate 
> that he was after Harry. Do you think that he took a very great risk to 
> himself in increasing that perception by saying to Harry "Going to kill me?". 
> If so, why did he behave in this way? Would Harry have really attempted 
> to do this if Crookshanks had not intervened?

My impression has always been that, while Harry thought he wanted to kill Sirius, he really had no idea how to go about it, and was pretty much stalling for time, trying to figure out something he could do. We haven't seen Harry do too many things outside of what we've seen him learn in class (with the possible exception of the tickling charm he does on Draco at the dueling club in CoS.)  
> 
> 6. To me, this is the most interesting chapter in the whole book because 
> there are so many questions answered, so many puzzles resolved and, as 
> a result,  so many pieces of the jigsaw fall into place. Would you agree 
> and, if so, what was for you the most illuminating information that was 
> revealed?

This chapter all by itself cemented my HP fandom. I was a late-comer to the whole HP world: HBP was just about to be published when I started reading. While I had enjoyed PS/SS and CoS, I really started noticing all of the "little extras" that JKR puts into the books. When we discover that Sirius is the dog in animagi form, I made the connection that the star Sirius is called the dog-star. When it's revealed that Remus is a werewolf, his name suddenly made perfect sense to me. And I started looking for all the other things that are to be found in the HP books. So, as you say, so many pieces of the jigsaw fell into place and suddenly I couldn't get enough of Harry Potter!
> 

> 
> Geoff
>

Thanks again for a great summary and great questions!
Pat




From happyjoeysmiley at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 18 06:10:11 2011
From: happyjoeysmiley at yahoo.com (Joey Smiley)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 06:10:11 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Chapter 17: Cat, Rat and Dog
In-Reply-To: <iogchn+2j3c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <iogkk3+u89g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190260

> 1. When the dog attacked the group, what were your thoughts about where it had come from and what it was? For example, did your mind return to the Grim? 

Joey:

I thought it was either LV again or Sirius or some crazy, sinister pet of theirs akin to a Basilisk.


> 6. To me, this is the most interesting chapter in the whole book because there are so many questions answered, so many puzzles resolved and, as a result,  so many pieces of the jigsaw fall into place. Would you agree and, if so, what was for you the most illuminating information that was revealed?

Joey:

Certainly - it sort of prepared me for even time-turners, I guess. LOL. Most illuminating information would be a tough competition between the following:

1. Sirius never betrayed James after all 
2. Pettigrew was the culprit all along
3. Remus is a werewolf 

When each of the above-mentioned facts were revealed, I remember staring wide-eyed at the book and blinking for a couple of moments before continuing to read. :-)

Thanks for the summary and interesting questions!

Cheers,
~Joey :-)




From happyjoeysmiley at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 18 07:30:09 2011
From: happyjoeysmiley at yahoo.com (Joey Smiley)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 07:30:09 -0000
Subject: Hopes for Harry (was Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Chapter
In-Reply-To: <ioflms+3c40@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <iogpa1+65on@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190261

>  "omegafold"  wrote:
> >
> >  One thing does disappoint me about Harry. He never seems to evolve, he just grows up slowly and aside from trite incursions, he lacks any true planning genius and ends up needing rescue from friends. It's getting repetitive and predictable.
> > omegafold
> 
> Potioncat:
> I don't think you're alone in this; someone else has said the same thing in a slightly different way---Severus Snape.
> 
> He feels Harry is merely ordinary,  who succeeds entirely because of incredible good luck and the support of friends. Snape himself comes from a generation of extraordinary wizards/witches. At Harry's age he was inventing spells and counterspells; the Marauders were inventing magical devises and teaching themselves to be animagi--Snape wouldn't know that, but McGonagall commented on how tallented young Potter and Black were. Young Barty Crouch also seemed to be very tallented.
> 
> I don't agree with your hopes for Harry, partly because I think JKR purposely made him Everyman (is that Geoff's term?)--he doesn't succeed because of great skill but because of his great character.

Joey:

I'd agree with Potioncat here. While Harry may not have invented spells or thinking maps, meeting LV face-to-face twice, when almost entire WW refuses to say his name, could have given Harry enough food for the drive to prove himself. Yes, this wasn't done by pure individual skill but it was certainly done by strength of character. 

Also, I think the way a person's life flows [past events and current priorities] and interests will play a part in deciding what he or she goes after. For example, Snape and Marauders did not hear voices from walls whose source they wanted to decipher. Their past and future goals were different from Harry's. Snape already wanted to be part of "brainy" Slytherin, wanted to carve a niche for himself - I guess these drove him to invent spells. Whle the Marauders didn't seem to have much of ambitions [initially], they wanted to look cool and so, kept inventing things for their own "fun" needs. That wasn't the case for Harry who was first keen to belong to WW in the real sense, to keep himself away from too much of attention from the WW and to pay attention to the puzzling things going around him. So, his reactions and responses were different.

JMO. :-)




From fenneyml at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 16:11:59 2011
From: fenneyml at gmail.com (Margaret Fenney)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 12:11:59 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hopes for Harry (was Re: Chapter Discussion:
 Prisoner of Azkaban Chapter
In-Reply-To: <iogpa1+65on@eGroups.com>
References: <ioflms+3c40@eGroups.com>
	<iogpa1+65on@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimciogxB1506XyfTssHKe-AV_=akw@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190262

> > > "omegafold" wrote:
> > > One thing does disappoint me about Harry. He never seems 
to evolve, he just grows up slowly and aside from trite incursions, 
he lacks any true planning genius and ends up needing rescue from 
friends. It's getting repetitive and predictable.

> > Potioncat:
> > I don't think you're alone in this; someone else has said the 
same thing in a slightly different way---Severus Snape.
> 
> > He feels Harry is merely ordinary, who succeeds entirely 
because of incredible good luck and the support of friends. 
> <snip>
> > I think JKR purposely made him Everyman (is that Geoff's term?)
--he doesn't succeed because of great skill but because of his 
great character.

> Joey:
> I'd agree with Potioncat here. While Harry may not have invented 
spells or thinking maps, meeting LV face-to-face twice, when almost 
entire WW refuses to say his name, could have given Harry enough 
food for the drive to prove himself.
>
> Yes, this wasn't done by pure individual skill but it was 
certainly done by strength of character. <snip>


Margie:

I think Harry does evolve in the regular sense of the word "mature" 
and in the sense of his magical abilities.  One example is his 
success in teaching Dumbledore's Army which involved quite a lot of 
maturity and magical as well as non-magical skills.

I also think it is important to consider that Harry started from 
scratch when it came to the magical world; even kids from Muggle 
homes like Hermione had some knowledge but Harry didn't know 
anything at all.  He also had a great many things to occupy his 
time outside of school work every year with the various mysteries 
he and his friends worked to solve where most kids can use their 
discretionary time however they choose.  Even beyond that, he had
to deal with being "the boy who lived" after a life of being taught 
he was a waste of space, then being vilified and then with being 
recognized as "the chosen one" by the besieged wizarding community. 
That kind of stuff is especially difficult to deal with at those 
ages, even without the rest of it.

I agree with the statements about Harry succeeding primarily because 
of his great character but he did develop some extraordinary skills 
such as being able to perform the Patronus charm, perform magic 
under highly stressful conditions, fly well enough to earn Krum's 
respect, etc.

I would also like to note that all of the kid-developed magic in 
the books was motivated either by the desire for fun (the marauder's 
map, the Weasley twins inventions and Snape's upside-down spell) or 
the desire for revenge (Sectumsempra), which indicate a lack of 
maturity rather than the reverse.

JMO, too.  :)

Margie





From Walabio at MacOSX.COM  Mon Apr 18 09:23:53 2011
From: Walabio at MacOSX.COM (alabio)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 09:23:53 +0000
Subject: =?windows-1252?Q?Re=3A_teachers=92_personal_lives?=
Message-ID: <0A8F1CCB-03E3-4E48-B436-2E9DC5201D29@MacOSX.Com>

Hello!
How fare you?

I tried to stay out of this tempest in a teapot, but I have to get
involved:

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

The books never show us the living quarters of the Professors. All
we know is that many Professors such as the HouseHeads definitely
live in Hogwarts.

For all we know, most Professors are married with children and live
in Hogsmeade. Do I believe this? No, I do not believe this, or
anything else, because we do not have enough information to know.

Peace!

--
Walabio? <Walabio at MacOSX.Com>
Skype:	Walabio

The first Intactivistic wiki on Earth devoted to Peaceful
Beginnings:   HTTP://Intact.Wikia.Com/

"You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to
your own facts.?	Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan



From margdean56 at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 19:25:00 2011
From: margdean56 at gmail.com (Margaret Dean)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 13:25:00 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hopes for Harry (was Re: Chapter Discussion:
 Prisoner of Azkaban Chapter
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimciogxB1506XyfTssHKe-AV_=akw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ioflms+3c40@eGroups.com>
	<iogpa1+65on@eGroups.com>
	<BANLkTimciogxB1506XyfTssHKe-AV_=akw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTik=f_50jdGuDRp2iyjhc54nOM_MCA@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190264

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:11 AM, Margaret Fenney <fenneyml at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > > "omegafold" wrote:
> > > > One thing does disappoint me about Harry. He never seems
> to evolve, he just grows up slowly and aside from trite incursions,
> he lacks any true planning genius and ends up needing rescue from
> friends. It's getting repetitive and predictable.
>
> > > Potioncat:
> > > I don't think you're alone in this; someone else has said the
> same thing in a slightly different way---Severus Snape.
> >
> > > He feels Harry is merely ordinary, who succeeds entirely
> because of incredible good luck and the support of friends.
> > <snip>
> > > I think JKR purposely made him Everyman (is that Geoff's term?)
> --he doesn't succeed because of great skill but because of his
> great character.
>
> > Joey:
> > I'd agree with Potioncat here. While Harry may not have invented
> spells or thinking maps, meeting LV face-to-face twice, when almost
> entire WW refuses to say his name, could have given Harry enough
> food for the drive to prove himself.
> >
> > Yes, this wasn't done by pure individual skill but it was
> certainly done by strength of character. <snip>

You might also think about the fact that Harry's strength of character
is something that can be emulated by readers.  Nobody in our world can
do the kind of magic the wizarding-world characters can do; only some
people are gifted and talented in the ways that allow them to make
great inventions and discoveries.  But anyone can learn how to make
the choice of what is right over what is easy.


--Margaret Dean
  <margdean56 at gmail.com>



From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Mon Apr 18 20:39:14 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 13:39:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <iofus4+i7qp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <51730.42257.qm@web113919.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190265

> Potioncat:
> I didn't say anything about Hermione having rotten teeth. SSSusan
> started out by asking why so many witches are described as having
> rotten or yellow teeth and wondered why that would be.
>
> Several posts later Geoff offered an article about British
> attitudes on elective dental care and how that compares to the
> US attitude. I brought it back to canon by discussing Hermione's
> parents who are British dentists and their opinion about adjusting
> Hermione's teeth. I don't think Hermione had braces at all, but I
> don't have the book available to check. Anyway, she was able to
> use magic, so it was done without their input.


June:
Page 352 to 353, Chapter The Yule Tide Ball, British/Canadian
version Hermione, said Ron looking sideways at her, suddenly
frowning, 'your teeth..." "What about them? " she said. Well,
they're different...I've just noticed..." "Of course they are -
Did you expect me to keep those fangs Malfoy gave me?" "No, I
mean, they're all...straight and-and normal-sized" Hermione
suddenly smiled very mischievously, and Harry noticed it too:
it was a very different smile to the one he remembered. "Well...
when I went up to Madam Pomfrey to get them shrunk, she held up a
mirror, and told me to stop her when they were back to how they
normally were,' she said. And I just...let her carry on a bit.
She smiled even more widely. "Mum and Dad won't be too pleased.
I've been trying to persuade them to let me shrink them for ages,
but they wanted me to carry on with my brace. You know they're
dentists, they just don't think teeth and magic should-look!
Pigwidgeon's back!"






From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 21 06:24:01 2011
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 06:24:01 -0000
Subject: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <io24v2+i7r4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <iooii1+p1rh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190266

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "teebee86627" <teebee86627 at ...> wrote:
>
> ...any... thoughts on personal lives of professors at Hogwarts.
> JKR never mentioned if any of them were married or had kids. They
> lived in the castle 10 months out of 12. If they were married,
> were the spouses allowed to live with them at Hogwarts?
> 
> teebee
>

Boarding schools are not every well known in the USA, but consider this, the kids are away from their parents for 10 months out of 12, though there is Christmas and Easter Holiday. 

Most Americans simply can't fathom that idea for kids of this age. Certainly for kids of University age, this is common, but for the 11 year old to 17 year old range, I don't think many American would go for that. 

But, in the UK, there is a long tradition of boarding schools for younger children. 

What does that have to do with the staff at Hogwarts? Only to illustrate that what seems odd to us, is common place to others.

I'm sure there is a range of staff living situations. Certainly the Heads of House always have to be available. Though, that does not mean they couldn't take a weekend off. 

There are also Hogsmeade visits that would give staff spouses a chance to reconnect. Most of the staff seems somewhat older, so I don't see romance as a big part of their lives; if you know what I mean. 

So, some staff like Hagrid, Trelawney, Filch, and Madam Pomfrey live their full time. Other staff, that we don't really see much of, could live in Hogsmeade or commute. Certainly Heads of Houses need to be around continually during the school year. However, the mere fact that they live at school, does not mean they couldn't be married and have kids. 

Also keep in mind the exceptionally long life of wizard and witches. Though pure speculation, McGonagall could be a sprightly 100 years old, given that Dumbledore is about 150. 

That long life, in a sense, gives them far more opportunity in their lives to do things. They can have multiple careers. Plus when you have a life protential of approaching 200, you can be in less of a hurry in life. 

So, I think there is a variety of staff accommodations. Some are there only as needed. Others live their full time, still other only during the school year. 

If we can expect kids to be away from family for roughly 10 months, why is it so strange for certain members of the staff to do the same? 

Steve/bboyminn 





From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 21 06:49:50 2011
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 06:49:50 -0000
Subject: Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <iockja+hela@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <iook2e+dmen@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190267

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "willsonteam" <willsonkmom at ...> wrote:
...
> 
> Potioncat:
> Agreed. I think in many ways Snape's appearance also reflects his character in the sense that he probably doesn't take care of himself.
> 
> 

I think this touches on it the most, when JKR describes teeth, it is part of a character study. It sets the mood and tone for that character. 

As to teeth in general, though most Brits will deny it, this is something of a running joke. Craig Ferguson (Scotish) makes jokes about it all the time. As do many other comedians, but like many joke of this nature, it is part truth and part hyper exaggerated stereo type. 

I think part of the problem is the the British don't put fluoride in their water, or at least not to my knowledge. Fluoride really strengthens and re-calcifies teeth, but if you get too much, it can hyper-calcify your teeth thought that take a lot of fluoride. 

I (USA) have one filling and one crown, and the only reason I have a crown is because that tooth broke, not because it was decayed. I think I'm something of a freak in my family as I've got about the best teeth of any one around. No, not perfectly white, and not perfectly straight, but this original equipment has served me well for many decades.  

Some of that is fluoride, part good genetics, and part good care.

As to the stereo type of bad British teeth, look at the teeth of the primary young characters in the HP films. They are all British, and they all have excellent teeth. Tom Felton has had braces for years, but the braces are white and barely noticeable. 

I've a theory, though I've admittedly strayed even farther off topic, but I think the British have narrow jaws, and that crowds their teeth and causes problems. But, of course, that's certainly not universal.

Rambling again ...

Steve/bboyminn





From bart at moosewise.com  Thu Apr 21 21:01:55 2011
From: bart at moosewise.com (Bart Lidofsky)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 17:01:55 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <iooii1+p1rh@eGroups.com>
References: <iooii1+p1rh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4DB09B43.4020301@moosewise.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190268

On 4/21/2011 2:24 AM, Steve wrote:
> Also keep in mind the exceptionally long life of wizard and witches. 
> Though pure speculation, McGonagall could be a sprightly 100 years 
> old, given that Dumbledore is about 150.

Bart:
     Finally have an opportunity to write this again: "There are three 
kinds of people in this world. Those who can count, and those who 
can't." - J. K. Rowling

     Around the time DH came out, we had a conversation about 
Dumbledore's age; the history just does not match an age of 150, or even 
close. We could go into again, I guess.

     Oh, also, I'm pretty sure Madam Pomfrey is married. Unless "Madam" 
is her first name...

     Bart




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Fri Apr 22 06:33:24 2011
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 06:33:24 -0000
Subject: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <4DB09B43.4020301@moosewise.com>
Message-ID: <ior7fk+8dqm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190269



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky <bart at ...> wrote:
>
> On 4/21/2011 2:24 AM, Steve wrote:
> > ...., given that Dumbledore is about 150.
> 
> Bart:
> Finally have an opportunity to write this again: "There are
> three kinds of people in this world. Those who can count, 
> and those who can't." - J. K. Rowling
> 
> Around the time DH came out, we had a conversation about 
> Dumbledore's age; the history just does not match an age of
> 150, or even close. We could go into again, I guess.
> 
> Oh, also, I'm pretty sure Madam Pomfrey is married. Unless 
> "Madam" is her first name...
> 
>  Bart
>

I was aware of this controversy as well, but I never worked out the details, though I assume someone has. 

Can someone explain the logistics of it? Presumable is has to do with when Dumbledore and Grindelwald were boys together, but how do we know when that was? 

A quick check of the HP Lexicon by Steve Vander Ark has created this Time Line -

http://www.hplex.info/timelines/timeline_dumbledore.html

Though I'm not sure where all the information comes from, it seems if we work out the time line, it seems Dumbledore was only 116 when he died. 

I think in JKR's imagination, she saw him as much older (~150yrs), and it is just by coincidence that the "MATH" doesn't bare her out. 

As to Madam Promfrey, I think she is a Madam out of respect. The professors all have the title "Professor" and it seems to be granted based simply on having the job of teacher. So, any woman in a position that demands a degree of respect would automatically be addresses as Madam. 

Madam Mulkin's Robes for all Occasions
Madam Puddifoot's Tea Shop
Madam Pomfrey - School Nurse
Madam Prince - Hogwarts Librarian
Madam Hooch - Quidditch Referee & Broom Flying Instructor
Madam Maxime - Head Mistress of Beauxbatons Academy of Magic
Madam Z. Nettles of Topsham - Quoted in the Quickspell Course
Madam March - old witch on Knight Bus
Madam Rosmerta - Proprietor of the Three Broom Sticks Pub

While it could be an indication of marital status, I don't necessarily think it has to indicate that, but merely and older woman in a position of respect. 

Just a few thoughts. 

PS:

Though I had long forgotten about it, I had an essay published in the Lexicon about the size of Hogwarts and how it could fit on the Maraunder's Map. For those interested -

http://www.hplex.info/essays/essay-marauders-map.html

Steve/bboyminn








From willsonkmom at msn.com  Fri Apr 22 14:01:23 2011
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (willsonteam)
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 14:01:23 -0000
Subject: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <iooii1+p1rh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ios1nj+m82u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190270



 "Steve" <bboyminn at ...> wrote:
 
> 
> There are also Hogsmeade visits that would give staff spouses a chance to reconnect. Most of the staff seems somewhat older, so I don't see romance as a big part of their lives; if you know what I mean. 

Potioncat:
Sir, you vastly underestimate the role of romance (if you know what I mean)in the lives of those who seem somewhat older.
 
> Steve:
> So, I think there is a variety of staff accommodations. Some are there only as needed. Others live their full time, still other only during the school year. 


Potioncat:
Agreed. And I don't see why spouses might not live at Hogwarts as well, or that even Heads of House might not be away on a rotating basis. 






From willsonkmom at msn.com  Fri Apr 22 14:12:49 2011
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (willsonteam)
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 14:12:49 -0000
Subject: Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <51730.42257.qm@web113919.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ios2d1+s458@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190271

> 
> 
> June:
> Page 352 to 353, Chapter The Yule Tide Ball, British/Canadian
> version Hermione, said Ron looking sideways at her, suddenly
> frowning, 'your teeth..." "snip
.
> She smiled even more widely. "Mum and Dad won't be too pleased.
> I've been trying to persuade them to let me shrink them for ages,
> but they wanted me to carry on with my brace. You know they're
> dentists, they just don't think teeth and magic should-look!
> Pigwidgeon's back!"

Potioncat:
Good catch. I recalled it that they were waiting to apply braces, not that she already had them. Why did JKR wait for 352 pages to tell us that Herminione was wearing braces? And then, just as they were off? 

But still, Hemione's parents were taking a conservative approach to dental care--braces rather than magic. 




From fenneyml at gmail.com  Fri Apr 22 14:56:11 2011
From: fenneyml at gmail.com (Margaret Fenney)
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 10:56:11 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <ios1nj+m82u@eGroups.com>
References: <iooii1+p1rh@eGroups.com>
	<ios1nj+m82u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikUP9nTTTLKDYg_noyuU3f6u3BnYQ@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190272

> "Steve" <bboyminn at ...> wrote:
> > There are also Hogsmeade visits that would give staff spouses 
a chance to reconnect. Most of the staff seems somewhat older, so 
I don't see romance as a big part of their lives; if you know what 
I mean.
>
> Potioncat:
> >Sir, you vastly underestimate the role of romance (if you know 
> what I mean)in the lives of those who seem somewhat older.


Margie:

I heartily agree with Potioncat.  Some things just keep getting 
better with practice.  :)

Margie







From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Fri Apr 22 19:54:17 2011
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 19:54:17 -0000
Subject: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <ior7fk+8dqm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <iosmd9+qjun@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190273






--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky <bart@> wrote:
 
> > Around the time DH came out, we had a conversation about 
> > Dumbledore's age; the history just does not match an age of
> > 150, or even close. 

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

> Can someone explain the logistics of it? 


zanooda:

As far as I remember, JKR never *wrote* that DD was 150 years old, she just *said* it - it was a transcript of a live chat. There was a theory that whoever transcribed the chat mistook JKR's "one hundred and fifteen" for "one hundred and fifty" :-). Besides, JKR said it in 2001, and that was a long time ago... She could have changed her mind about DD's age since then :-).





From lynde at post.com  Fri Apr 22 20:26:04 2011
From: lynde at post.com (lynde at post.com)
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 16:26:04 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <4DB09B43.4020301@moosewise.com>
References: <iooii1+p1rh@eGroups.com> <4DB09B43.4020301@moosewise.com>
Message-ID: <8CDCF42A3629E56-248C-4D8A@web-mmc-m04.sysops.aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190274






 


Around the time DH came out, we had a conversation about 
Dumbledore's age; the history just does not match an age of 150, or even 
close. We could go into again, I guess.

Oh, also, I'm pretty sure Madam Pomfrey is married. Unless "Madam" 
is her first name...

Bart


----------------------------

I always thought Madam was a title for a Hogwarts affiliated staff who was a female who was not an actual teacher. Therefore Madam Pomfrey, the nurse and Madam Hooch, who isn't a proper teacher but the quidditch and flying coach.

Lynda




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




From bart at moosewise.com  Fri Apr 22 21:52:10 2011
From: bart at moosewise.com (Bart Lidofsky)
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 17:52:10 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <ior7fk+8dqm@eGroups.com>
References: <ior7fk+8dqm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4DB1F88A.9010702@moosewise.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190275

Bart:
>> Finally have an opportunity to write this again: "There are
>> three kinds of people in this world. Those who can count,
>> and those who can't." - J. K. Rowling
>>
>> Around the time DH came out, we had a conversation about
>> Dumbledore's age; the history just does not match an age of
>> 150, or even close. We could go into again, I guess.
>>
Steven:
> I was aware of this controversy as well, but I never worked out the details, though I assume someone has.
>
> Can someone explain the logistics of it? Presumable is has to do with when Dumbledore and Grindelwald were boys together, but how do we know when that was?
>
> A quick check of the HP Lexicon by Steve Vander Ark has created this Time Line -
>
> http://www.hplex.info/timelines/timeline_dumbledore.html
>
> Though I'm not sure where all the information comes from, it seems if we work out the time line, it seems Dumbledore was only 116 when he died.

Bart:
     The information on the birthdate came from JKR"s website, when DD 
was Wizard of the Month. And, while JKR's opinion certainly counts, JKR 
either can't or often chooses not to count herself. I don't remember the 
details, but between the 40 odd year gap and several other problems, the 
timeline does not work.

     Of course, the stories are allegorical rather than realistic. 
Still, considering the tiny clues she planted, she had more of an 
obligation to ensure that logistical errors do not creep into the books.

     Bart



From puduhepa98 at aol.com  Sat Apr 23 02:35:48 2011
From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (nikkalmati)
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2011 02:35:48 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <5A4952026770406E83090E3BDEE01700@TrekyPC>
Message-ID: <iotdu4+13oh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190276



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Liz Clark" <liz.treky at ...> wrote:
>
> > Zanooda:
> >> I still think that Buckbeak never lost his head. The kids only thought
> >> he did, because they heard the thud of the executioner's axe and
> >> assumed that Buckbeak was executed. In reality, the disappointed
> >> executioner just swung his axe into the fence (into a pumpkin in the
> >> movie) - Harry and Hermione witnessed it when they went back in time.
> >
> 
> Taya:
> I've been reading for a while, now decided to partiscipate on this time 
> issue!
> Time is linear, that means it only happens once, even if people have a 
> perception of it occuring twice, or more. Therefore, Buckbeak never was 
> beheaded because in the single time stream, Harry and Hermione saved him. 
> The sound of the axe falling wasn't beheading Buckbeak, but when it swung 
> into the fence. The trio assumed Buckbeak was beheaded as from their 
> prospective there was no way of saving him. After Harry and Hermione went 
> back in time, it then became possible for them from their prospective.
> Time travel isn't an easy subject, especially if dealing with non-linear 
> line! But thankfully, in the HP series, it is linear.
>

Nikkalmati




From puduhepa98 at aol.com  Sat Apr 23 02:50:31 2011
From: puduhepa98 at aol.com (nikkalmati)
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2011 02:50:31 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <5A4952026770406E83090E3BDEE01700@TrekyPC>
Message-ID: <iotepn+40pj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190277



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Liz Clark" <liz.treky at ...> wrote:
>
> > Zanooda:
> >> I still think that Buckbeak never lost his head. The kids only thought
> >> he did, because they heard the thud of the executioner's axe and
> >> assumed that Buckbeak was executed. In reality, the disappointed
> >> executioner just swung his axe into the fence (into a pumpkin in the
> >> movie) - Harry and Hermione witnessed it when they went back in time.
> >
> 
> Taya:
> I've been reading for a while, now decided to partiscipate on this time 
> issue!
> Time is linear, that means it only happens once, even if people have a 
> perception of it occuring twice, or more. Therefore, Buckbeak never was 
> beheaded because in the single time stream, Harry and Hermione saved him. 
> The sound of the axe falling wasn't beheading Buckbeak, but when it swung 
> into the fence. The trio assumed Buckbeak was beheaded as from their 
> prospective there was no way of saving him. After Harry and Hermione went 
> back in time, it then became possible for them from their prospective.
> Time travel isn't an easy subject, especially if dealing with non-linear 
> line! But thankfully, in the HP series, it is linear.
>
Nikkalmati

What happened? Oh well, I will just go back in time, I guess.

I agree with June that there are different ways to write time travel and with Taya that JKR writes it as linear - that is-  there is no loop, no double memories, nothing is changed, things only happen once, although one person may see the same events at the same time from different perspectives.  That means Bb never died, and it really was Harry saving Harry at the lake.  Harry never lived through it a first time and came back - he only lived through it from two different perspectives.  
Now we must consider how DD knew Harry and Hermione went back (and that he should suggest it to Hermione).  I can't be sure, but I might suggest that through some form of divination or arathmancy, he knew that Sirius was alive in the future. If DD had his own time-turner, he could go back and observe what happened and then tell HP and HG to do what they had already done.

Query:  What other methods could DD use to know the past?  Even if we could go back, could we ever go forward?  After all, there is no there there, right?   What is so terrible about meeting yourself in the past?  What was it Hermione had been warned about?

Nikkalmati




From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Sun Apr 24 16:56:27 2011
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 24 Apr 2011 16:56:27 -0000
Subject: Weekly Chat, 4/24/2011, 1:00 pm 
Message-ID: <1303664187.510.12532.m15@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190279

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

Weekly Chat
Sunday April 24, 2011
1:00 pm - 2:00 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  2011 
 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/20110424/d94d50f1/attachment.html>

From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 24 18:33:32 2011
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 18:33:32 -0000
Subject: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <ios1nj+m82u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ip1qds+cqt3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190280

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "willsonteam" <willsonkmom at ...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
>  "Steve" <bboyminn@> wrote:
>  
> > 
> > ... Most of the staff seems somewhat older, so I don't see romance as a big part of their lives; if you know what I mean. 
> 
> Potioncat:
> Sir, you vastly underestimate the role of romance (if you know what I mean)in the lives of those who seem somewhat older.
>  

Steve:

Didn't mean to imply that amour would never come into play, only that the boiling burning searing passions of youth tend to tame themselves in later years. Again did not mean to imply that the fire had been completely extinguished, only that older people are more able to restrain their passions. 

Steve/bboyminn




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 24 18:59:22 2011
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 18:59:22 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <iotepn+40pj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ip1rua+cb27@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190281

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nikkalmati" <puduhepa98 at ...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Liz Clark" <liz.treky@> wrote:
> >
> > > Zanooda:
> > >> I still think that Buckbeak never lost his head. The kids
> > >> only thought he did,...
> > >
> > 
> > Taya:
> > I've been reading for a while, now decided to participate on
> > this time issue!
> >
> > Time is linear, that means it only happens once, even if people have a 
> > perception of it occurring twice, or more. Therefore, Buckbeak
> > never was  beheaded because in the single time stream, ...
> >
> Nikkalmati
> 
> ...
> 
> I agree with June that there are different ways to write time travel and with Taya that JKR writes it as linear - that is-  there is no loop, no double memories, nothing is changed, things only happen once, although one person may see the same events at the same time from different perspectives.  ....
> 
> Query:  What other methods could DD use to know the past?  Even if we could go back, could we ever go forward?  After all, there is no there there, right?   What is so terrible about meeting yourself in the past?  What was it Hermione had been warned about?
> 
> Nikkalmati
>

Steve:

On every issue up for discussion, there is always a group in the descenting camp. Some refuse to believe that Fred and George are not horrible evil bullying monsters, and some refuse to believe that TIME happened once, Harry and Hermione happened twice. 

JKR even drops clues the first time we view the time line indicating that the second Harry and Hermione are already there and have already joined that time line. 

I'm very much in the time happens ONCE catagory, and have spend many a long hour and many a LONG post trying to explain it to people who are entrenched in an alternate view. 

TIME ONLY HAPPENED ONCE. 

Keep in mind that Hermione had been time turning all year, are we really to suppose she spawned hundreds of new unique time lines simply by going to multiple classes? And if so, what happens to all those many many new time lines? DO they converge? Do they keep on going independently? Are there now hundreds of Hermiones living in hundred of different spawned time lines? 

No, the path with the least problems says, Time happens one. 


As to what Dumbledore knew about the future, I don't think he KNEW anything, but I think, as any intelligent person would, he understood what COULD happen in the future. 

Given the situation, there was only one solution, and that was Hermione's time turner. However, he was likely going to be involved in a lot of Ministry activities, given what had happened, so I don't think he was really in a position to do the time traveling himself. So given is position in the wizard world, I think he needed 'plausible deniability'.   

The alternative was to send Harry and Hermione, and though there certainly was a degree of risk to them, they had proved themselves in the past, and if things went right, the dangers, and even the legal risks, were presumably minimal. 

So, Dumbledore did not know what DID happen, he only knew what MIGHT happen if things went well. 

But then, that's just my opinion.

Steve/bboyminn





From bart at moosewise.com  Sun Apr 24 20:07:09 2011
From: bart at moosewise.com (Bart Lidofsky)
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 16:07:09 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch
 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <ip1rua+cb27@eGroups.com>
References: <ip1rua+cb27@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4DB482ED.2030604@moosewise.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190282

Steve:
>
> Keep in mind that Hermione had been time turning all year, are we really to suppose she spawned hundreds of new unique time lines simply by going to multiple classes? And if so, what happens to all those many many new time lines? DO they converge? Do they keep on going independently? Are there now hundreds of Hermiones living in hundred of different spawned time lines?

Bart:
     Hermione's warnings imply that alternative timelines can be 
generated, and that, in the WW, it is what is widely regarded as a Bad 
Idea. It would not be unreasonable to assume that insanity or death 
would be a likely outcome. And Harry did create a paradox.

     The problem with this and many other inconsistencies (for example, 
Dumbledore's age, that the relative value of a galleon seems to range 
from about $100 in the earlier books to more like about $10 in the later 
ones, that people who are obsessed with "racial purity" are contemptuous 
of the racially pure who have lots of children) is the level of 
attention to detail that JKR uses when she is planting clues. In short, 
when anything might be a clue, logical inconsistencies stand out far more.

     Bart



From k12listmomma at comcast.net  Sun Apr 24 21:23:10 2011
From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (Shelley Gardner)
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 15:23:10 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <ios2d1+s458@eGroups.com>
References: <ios2d1+s458@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4DB494BE.9000505@comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 190283


>> June:
>> Page 352 to 353, Chapter The Yule Tide Ball, British/Canadian
>> version Hermione, said Ron looking sideways at her, suddenly
>> frowning, 'your teeth..." "snip
> .
>> She smiled even more widely. "Mum and Dad won't be too pleased.
>> I've been trying to persuade them to let me shrink them for ages,
>> but they wanted me to carry on with my brace. You know they're
>> dentists, they just don't think teeth and magic should-look!
>> Pigwidgeon's back!"
> Potioncat:
> Good catch. I recalled it that they were waiting to apply braces, not that she already had them. Why did JKR wait for 352 pages to tell us that Herminione was wearing braces? And then, just as they were off?
>
> But still, Hemione's parents were taking a conservative approach to dental care--braces rather than magic.
Shelley now:
It is very possible that they were doing braces in stages. It's not an 
uncommon practice to have braces on, get them off, and then rebrace the 
teeth after all the adult teeth have come in. But, given her age, she 
would have been old enough to already have had the braces on for the 2nd 
time.

Frankly, I took this passage to mean that Rowlings hadn't done her 
homework when mentioning the dental care- either she had intended 
Hermione to currently have braces on her teeth already, or maybe she was 
envisioning a retainer or device that comes out of the mouth, which 
wouldn't correct the buck or big teeth at all.  It's really hard to know 
what was in her mind when she writes mistakes or inconsistencies that 
appear in the book.

Shelley



From k12listmomma at comcast.net  Sun Apr 24 21:37:52 2011
From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (Shelley Gardner)
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 15:37:52 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <iooii1+p1rh@eGroups.com>
References: <iooii1+p1rh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4DB49830.5060809@comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 190284


> So, I think there is a variety of staff accommodations. Some are there only as needed. Others live their full time, still other only during the school year.
>
> If we can expect kids to be away from family for roughly 10 months, why is it so strange for certain members of the staff to do the same?
>
> Steve/bboyminn

Here's the adult means of transportation we see:
Floo Powder
Apparition
Brooms (since flying carpets were outlawed)

I can see certain teachers/staff having permanent accomodations at the 
castle, Trelawney, and Hagrid, but certainly there is no reason at all 
why the other staff isn't free to come and go as they please or as 
needed. A Head of House might have the requirement of having a permanent 
residence at the castle, but I can see a married teacher being free to 
go home to their families every night except those nights that they were 
on duty. Teachers could be summoned to return to the castle in a matter 
of a seconds with the Patronus, and with near instant transportation in 
a fireplace, would the students even know that they weren't in the castle?

Shelley

Shelley



From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 25 15:04:08 2011
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67)
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 15:04:08 -0000
Subject: Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <4DB494BE.9000505@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <ip42h8+2bmq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190286

Shelley wrote:
<snip>
> Frankly, I took this passage to mean that Rowlings hadn't done her  homework when mentioning the dental care- either she had intended  Hermione to currently have braces on her teeth already, or maybe she was envisioning a retainer or device that comes out of the mouth, which wouldn't correct the buck or big teeth at all.  It's really hard to know what was in her mind when she writes mistakes or inconsistencies that appear in the book.

Carol responds:

I agree that she's inconsistent here as in many places (especially those involving elementary addition and subtraction!), but what seems most illogical to me is that Madam Pomfrey's teeth-shrinking spell somehow straightens Hermione's teeth at the same time.

Carol, who certainly would have used a tooth-*straightening* spell had she been Hermione




From lynde at post.com  Mon Apr 25 18:43:37 2011
From: lynde at post.com (lynde at post.com)
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 14:43:37 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <ip42h8+2bmq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <8CDD18FD219D596-17D4-169D@web-mmc-m01.sysops.aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190287












I agree that she's inconsistent here as in many places (especially those involving elementary addition and subtraction!), but what seems most illogical to me is that Madam Pomfrey's teeth-shrinking spell somehow straightens Hermione's teeth at the same time.

Carol, who certainly would have used a tooth-*straightening* spell had she been Hermione

------------------

Answering again for myself, family members and others (it's good to share days off with friends and family, which we are doing!) The text says Hermione has buck teeth, which the spell took care of. That's not inconsistent. And why couldn't the spell straighten the teeth as it shrunk them? There's no problem there. We all think it would, in fact, straighten the teeth as it shrank them, realigning the teeth in her mouth. Just us, we know and we've had a lot of discussions about the inconsistencies in her books, especially in the last few months. This just doesn't bug us!

Lynda and friends






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




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 25 19:19:37 2011
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 19:19:37 -0000
Subject: Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <4DB494BE.9000505@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <ip4hg9+eu60@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190288

"...they wanted me to carry on with my brace. "

I wonder if we aren't stumbling into a variation of common usage of UK English here. 

It is possible that Hermione is NOT saying that her parents want her to continue on with braces, but more so that her parents would like he to follow a more traditional approach to dentistry (ie: braces). 

What I'm getting at is that even though Hermione is using language that implies the past and present, she could be talking about proposed future events. 

Again, I don't know if that is a reasonable interpretation of UK English usage, but it is a possibility. 

Watched "Son of Rambow" last night, and there is one scene where a gang of kids are sitting around sniffing "smelly rubbers". Obviously that has a very different meaning in the USA. Not really important, but I thought is was funny when they pointed it out in the commentary. Actually, I wasn't sure what was going on in that scene when I saw it without the commentary. 

Steve/bboyminn




From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Mon Apr 25 20:06:13 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 13:06:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <4DB09B43.4020301@moosewise.com>
Message-ID: <905400.22411.qm@web113903.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190289

Bart:
Finally have an opportunity to write this again: "There are three
kinds of people in this world. Those who can count, and those who
can't." - J. K. Rowling

June:
Haha, I never read this one before Bart, it's good, thank you for
quoting it.








From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Mon Apr 25 20:14:17 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 13:14:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <ios2d1+s458@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <620682.50574.qm@web113906.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190290

Potioncat:
> Good catch. I recalled it that they were waiting to apply braces,
> not that she already had them. Why did JKR wait for 352 pages to
> tell us that Herminione was wearing braces? And then, just as they
> were off? <snip>

June:
I had to put up with braces myself so believe me when I say, if she
had pointed out in The Philosipher's Stone that Hermione had braces,
we would have known why she was so crabby some times lol







From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Tue Apr 26 13:56:44 2011
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67)
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 13:56:44 -0000
Subject: Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <8CDD18FD219D596-17D4-169D@web-mmc-m01.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <ip6ius+suvr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190291

Carol earlier:
> I agree that she's inconsistent here as in many places (especially those involving elementary addition and subtraction!), but what seems most illogical to me is that Madam Pomfrey's teeth-shrinking spell somehow straightens Hermione's teeth at the same time.
> 
> Carol, who certainly would have used a tooth-*straightening* spell had she been Hermione
> 
Lynda responded:
> 
> Answering again for myself, family members and others (it's good to share days off with friends and family, which we are doing!) The text says Hermione has buck teeth, which the spell took care of. That's not inconsistent. And why couldn't the spell straighten the teeth as it shrunk them? There's no problem there. We all think it would, in fact, straighten the teeth as it shrank them, realigning the teeth in her mouth. Just us, we know and we've had a lot of discussions about the inconsistencies in her books, especially in the last few months. This just doesn't bug us!

Carol again:

I'm afraid that we'll have to agree to disagree here. Madam Pomfrey is merely shortening the two front teeth enlarged by the spell. Hermione has her continue shortening them past the point where they originally were. That process would not, in itself, straighten even the front teeth, much less the other teeth, which were not affected by the shortening spell. Nor would *shortening* any or all of the teeth affect the amount of room in her mouth.

Carol, who had to have four bicuspids pulled to have enough room in her small mouth for all her teeth as a prelude to braces




From k12listmomma at comcast.net  Tue Apr 26 15:32:27 2011
From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (Shelley Gardner)
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 09:32:27 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <ip6ius+suvr@eGroups.com>
References: <ip6ius+suvr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4DB6E58B.8040907@comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 190292


> Lynda responded:
>> Answering again for myself, family members and others (it's good to share days off with friends and family, which we are doing!) The text says Hermione has buck teeth, which the spell took care of. That's not inconsistent. And why couldn't the spell straighten the teeth as it shrunk them? There's no problem there. We all think it would, in fact, straighten the teeth as it shrank them, realigning the teeth in her mouth. Just us, we know and we've had a lot of discussions about the inconsistencies in her books, especially in the last few months. This just doesn't bug us!
> Carol again:
>
> I'm afraid that we'll have to agree to disagree here. Madam Pomfrey is merely shortening the two front teeth enlarged by the spell. Hermione has her continue shortening them past the point where they originally were. That process would not, in itself, straighten even the front teeth, much less the other teeth, which were not affected by the shortening spell. Nor would *shortening* any or all of the teeth affect the amount of room in her mouth.
>
> Carol, who had to have four bicuspids pulled to have enough room in her small mouth for all her teeth as a prelude to braces

Shelley now:
I have to agree with Carol! I have THREE kids in braces, and it's not 
just about the length of the tooth. Shrinking a tooth would not 
straighten the root of the tooth, which is the real problem with buck 
teeth- the tooth is angled wrong in the mouth. You have to first 
straighten the tooth, and then allow the root of the tooth to straighten 
too. Two of my kids are at the point where they keep checking x-rays to 
see if the roots are now pointed in the right direction. My son in 
particular looked from the outside to have straight teeth, but won't get 
his braces off until the roots are in full alignment, and it's been 6 
months longer treatment than we had originally planned for.

And, even if there is now room for the rest of her teeth, it was only 
one month since the fronts were shrunk. Not enough time for the rest to 
adjust to the new room and move over. It's taken 3-4 months with wires 
and rubber bands to pull both of my daughter's teeth down and into place 
from the overcrowding, and then there will be more time needed to finish 
straightening them.

I still think Hermione needed to continue with orthodontics, even with 
shrunken front teeth and new room.

Shelley




From lynde at post.com  Tue Apr 26 18:29:18 2011
From: lynde at post.com (lynde at post.com)
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 14:29:18 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <ip4hg9+eu60@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <8CDD256FD623B15-1B40-4D19@web-mmc-d01.sysops.aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190293






As I've said before, that's how my friends, family and I myself interpret this passage.

Lynda


 

"...they wanted me to carry on with my brace. "

I wonder if we aren't stumbling into a variation of common usage of UK English here. 

It is possible that Hermione is NOT saying that her parents want her to continue on with braces, but more so that her parents would like he to follow a more traditional approach to dentistry (ie: braces). 

What I'm getting at is that even though Hermione is using language that implies the past and present, she could be talking about proposed future events. 





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




From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Tue Apr 26 15:15:49 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:15:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: teachers' personal lives / ''Madam''
In-Reply-To: <8CDCF42A3629E56-248C-4D8A@web-mmc-m04.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <409713.31677.qm@web113919.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190294

>Bart:
><snip> Oh, also, I'm pretty sure Madam Pomfrey is married. Unless
>"Madam" is her first name...

> Lynda:
> I always thought Madam was a title for a Hogwarts affiliated
> staff who was a female who was not an actual teacher. Therefore
> Madam Pomfrey, the nurse and Madam Hooch, who isn't a proper
> teacher but the quidditch and flying coach.

June:
Exactly, Lynda is correct about this. To use Madam as a title to
show someone as married, that would be France or Quebec, Canada.
Madam meaning Mrs is French not British.




From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Tue Apr 26 15:30:13 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:30:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <iotdu4+13oh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <467960.74883.qm@web113916.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190295

> > Zanooda:
> >> I still think that Buckbeak never lost his head. The kids only
thought he did, because they heard the thud of the executioner's axe
and assumed that Buckbeak was executed. In reality, the disappointed
executioner just swung his axe into the fence (into a pumpkin in the
movie) - Harry and Hermione witnessed it when they went back in time.
> >
>
> Taya:
> Time is linear, that means it only happens once, even if people
have a perception of it occuring twice, or more. Therefore, Buckbeak
never was beheaded because in the single time stream, Harry and
Hermione saved him. The sound of the axe falling wasn't beheading
Buckbeak, but when it swung into the fence. The trio assumed Buckbeak
was beheaded as from their prospective there was no way of saving
him. After Harry and Hermione went back in time, it then became
possible for them from their prospective. Time travel isn't an easy
subject, especially if dealing with non-linear line! But thankfully,
> in the HP series, it is linear.


June:
I know time travel isn't possible, however I love shows and movies
that deal with it, but I will tell you this...it confuses the heck
out of me lol. I have a very logical way of thinking which tells me
to need to go back in time to fix something, it would have had to
have gone wrong in the first place, which would have to mean that on
some timeline Buckbeak would have had to have lost his head. I think
the best explanation was given by Christopher Lloyd (Doctor Emmett
Brown) in Back to the Future 2. He explains that when he and Marty
went to the future and Biff stole the DeLorean and went back in time
and made changes an alternative timeline was created. This is the
only possible way that any changes in time could make sense
logically. Therefore for Buckbeack to have lost his head there would
have been a Harry and Hermione who had gone back in time and created
the alternative timeline, however the only way that alternative time
line would stay is by Hermione and Harry going back in time in every
instance, otherwise (in my opinion) Buckbeak would lose his head.
Wow time travel is confusing, lol.








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




From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Tue Apr 26 16:08:18 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 09:08:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <iotepn+40pj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <214692.61674.qm@web113913.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Nikkalmati:
> I agree with June that there are different ways to write time
travel and with Taya that JKR writes it as linear - that is- there
> is no loop, no double memories, nothing is changed, things only
happen once, although one person may see the same events at the
same time from different perspectives. That means Bb never died,
> and it really was Harry saving Harry at the lake. Harry never
lived through it a first time and came back - he only lived through
> it from two different perspectives.

<snip>

Query: What other methods could DD use to know the past? Even if we
> could go back, could we ever go forward? After all, there is no
there there, right? What is so terrible about meeting yourself in
> the past? What was it Hermione had been warned about?


June:
Nikkalmati, I liked what you had to say, it really got me thinking.
There are a few answers to why you should not meet yourself in the
past or the future. In Back to the Future 2 Doc Brown tells Marty "I
foresee two possibilities. One, coming face to face with herself 30
years older would put her into shock and she'd simply pass out. Or
two, the encounter could create a time paradox, the results of which
could cause a chain reaction that would unravel the very fabric of
the space time continuum, and destroy the entire universe! Granted,
that's a worst case scenario. The destruction might in fact be very
localized, limited to merely our own galaxy. In Time Cop they say
that coming into contact with yourself in the past that you could
wipe out your own existence and in fact when?Ron Silver's character
bumps into his past self he vanishes from existence.








From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Tue Apr 26 16:26:17 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 09:26:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <4DB494BE.9000505@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <211466.57308.qm@web113912.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190297


> Potioncat:
> Good catch. I recalled it that they were waiting to apply braces,
not that she already had them. Why did JKR wait for 352 pages to
tell us that Herminione was wearing braces? And then, just as they
> were off?

> Shelley now:
> <snip> Frankly, I took this passage to mean that Rowling hadn't
done her homework when mentioning the dental care- either she had
intended Hermione to currently have braces on her teeth already,
or maybe she was envisioning a retainer or device that comes out
of the mouth, which wouldn't correct the buck or big teeth at all.
It's really hard to know what was in her mind when she writes
> mistakes or inconsistencies that appear in the book.


June:
I seriously doubt that it was a mistake, but even if it was (doubt
that) she still wrote that as I wrote it, it is quoted directly
from the book and therefore Hermione had braces and your claim that
it was an error in the book does not change that fact.







From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Tue Apr 26 19:37:27 2011
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 19:37:27 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <4DB482ED.2030604@moosewise.com>
Message-ID: <ip76tn+3bhm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190298



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky <bart at ...> wrote:
>
> Steve:
> >
> > Keep in mind that Hermione had been time turning all year, are we really to suppose she spawned hundreds of new unique time lines simply by going to multiple classes? ...
> 
> Bart:
>      Hermione's warnings imply that alternative timelines can be 
> generated, and that, in the WW, it is what is widely regarded as
> a Bad Idea. It would not be unreasonable to assume that insanity
> or death would be a likely outcome. And Harry did create a paradox.
> 
>     ...
> 
>      Bart
>

Steve responds:

Certainly I'm just picking at semantics here, but I'm not sure Hermione's warning implies the possibility of multiple time lines or alternate time lines, but more so an alteration of the existing time line. It is the classic paradox of going back in time and killing your grandfather. 

If we start with the assumption that time happened twice, meaning that Harry and Hermione's interference spawned a second time line, then we must assume the first time line continues on as if there had been no interference, and the second new time line creates the outcome that we ultimately see in the book; Sirius escapes. However, the multiple time theory implies that the first time line carried on and Sirius was subjected to the Dementor's kiss and ultimately died. 

As complicated as time travel is, it is massively more complicated if we assume multiple times or multiple time lines. The simplest solution is a single time line with multiple characters. Though a mistake in time travel could potentially alter the one existing time line, which is why Hermione insists that the be so careful. 

Although, as I read the story, I do not see Harry/Hermione creating a paradox. As I said, JKR drops subtle hints in the book that the second TT!Harry and TT!Hermione are already there the first time we read through the story. And the second time we travel through the story, those subtle hints are, more or less, confirmed. 

Though, on the boarder and more general scale, I do agree with what you said. I'm just nitpicking here. 

Steve/bboyminn




From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Tue Apr 26 16:57:25 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 09:57:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <ip4hg9+eu60@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <369517.83878.qm@web113906.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190299

> Steve/bboyminn:
> "...they wanted me to carry on with my brace. "

I wonder if we aren't stumbling into a variation of common usage of
UK English here.

It is possible that Hermione is NOT saying that her parents want her
to continue on with braces, but more so that her parents would like
he to follow a more traditional approach to dentistry (ie: braces).

What I'm getting at is that even though Hermione is using language
that implies the past and present, she could be talking about
> proposed future events. <snip>


June:
Her parents wanted her to carry on with her brace, which means she
has them already (or is in the process of having them). If it was
past tense she would have said I had braces (and this conversation
would not be taking place lol) and if it was future (as in she has
not begun with the brace in any way) it would have been more like
"My parents wanted me to have braces" (or get braces).










From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Tue Apr 26 19:55:55 2011
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 19:55:55 -0000
Subject: Teeth, Braces, and the English Language or Variations there of.
In-Reply-To: <369517.83878.qm@web113906.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ip780b+cvp4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190300



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, June Ewing <doctorwhofan02 at ...> wrote:
>
> > Steve/bboyminn:
> > "...they wanted me to carry on with my brace. "
> 
> I wonder if we aren't stumbling into a variation of common usage of
> UK English here.
> 
> It is possible that Hermione is NOT saying that her parents want her
> to continue on with braces, but more so that her parents would like
> he to follow a more traditional approach to dentistry (ie: braces).
> 
> What I'm getting at is that even though Hermione is using language
> that implies the past and present, she could be talking about
> > proposed future events. <snip>
> 
> 
> June:
> Her parents wanted her to carry on with her brace, which means
> she has them already .... If it was past tense she would have 
> said I had braces ... and if it was future ... it would have 
> been more like "My parents wanted me to have braces" (or get 
> braces).
>

Steve responds:

Yes, if we assume prefect and proper English, but in everyday conversation people do not speak in perfect and proper English. In many cases the intentionally use grammatical errors. 

Though, I think far more likely is the fact that JKR, and every other author out there, never imagined the level of scrutiny and nitpicking that these books ultimately spawned. 

In most books, we are so caught up in the flow of the story we are not concerned about minor logical inconsistencies, as long as the story keeps reasonably moving forward. 

To write a book imagining the level of scrutiny these books have gotten, I suspect, would be beyond any author out there. If you start imagining that every phase and statement is going to be given detailed scholarly examination, they would never start writing the book at all. 

So, yes in proper perfect English, it is stated in the present tense, but that does not necessarily mean it was intended in the present tense. Which is why I asked about common UK English speech in everyday usage. We have people who live or have lived in the UK here in the group, and I wonder if, in common language, it was fair or even possible to assume future tense in Hermione's statement?

Steve/bboyminn 

 





From geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com  Tue Apr 26 20:28:59 2011
From: geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com (Geoff)
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 20:28:59 -0000
Subject: Teeth, Braces, and the English Language or Variations there of.
In-Reply-To: <ip780b+cvp4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ip79ub+kts1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190301



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

Steve:

>So, yes in proper perfect English, it is stated in the present tense, but that does not necessarily mean it was intended in the present tense. Which is why I asked about common UK English speech in everyday usage. We have people who live or have lived in the UK here in the group, and I wonder if, in common language, it was fair or even possible to assume future tense in Hermione's statement?

Geoff:
As a native speaker of UK English, I would ONLY interpret this comment by 
Hermione as a reference to an event in the past continuing on. In no way 
would it indicate to me that it was a future possibility suggested by Mr. and 
Mrs. Granger.

I would also agree with Shelley, bearing in mind the treatment my younger 
had twenty years or so ago 





From geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com  Tue Apr 26 20:33:49 2011
From: geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com (Geoff)
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 20:33:49 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <467960.74883.qm@web113916.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ip7a7d+rbt9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190302

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, June Ewing <doctorwhofan02 at ...> wrote:

 June:
> I know time travel isn't possible, however I love shows and movies
> that deal with it, but I will tell you this...it confuses the heck
> out of me lol. 

<snip>

> Wow time travel is confusing, lol.

Geoff:
Mea culpa, but I am possibly going to go seriously OT. In one of the 
Star Trek DS9 episodes, Chief O'Brien met up with himself five years 
previously and in the course of the action makes the classic remark:
"I hate temporal mechanics!".
:-)




From lynde at post.com  Wed Apr 27 04:22:55 2011
From: lynde at post.com (lynde at post.com)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 00:22:55 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: teachers' personal lives / ''Madam''
In-Reply-To: <409713.31677.qm@web113919.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <8CDD2A9EA5D9F25-2750-60B7@web-mmc-m03.sysops.aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190303


I remembered, from reading, that the title Mrs. was granted to housekeepers of English landholders (and perhaps cooks as well) whether or not they were married and projected that at Hogwarts the same type of thing was done for female staff members who were not full professors.

Lynda








> Lynda:
> I always thought Madam was a title for a Hogwarts affiliated 
> staff who was a female who was not an actual teacher. Therefore 
> Madam Pomfrey, the nurse and Madam Hooch, who isn't a proper 
> teacher but the quidditch and flying coach.

June:
Exactly, Lynda is correct about this. To use Madam as a title to 
show someone as married, that would be France or Quebec, Canada. 
Madam meaning Mrs is French not British.







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




From lynde at post.com  Wed Apr 27 04:40:54 2011
From: lynde at post.com (lynde at post.com)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 00:40:54 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Teeth, Braces, and the English Language or
 Variations there of.
In-Reply-To: <ip79ub+kts1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <8CDD2AC6D7F6C93-2750-6117@web-mmc-m03.sysops.aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190304










Geoff:
As a native speaker of UK English, I would ONLY interpret this comment by 
Hermione as a reference to an event in the past continuing on. In no way 
would it indicate to me that it was a future possibility suggested by Mr. and 
Mrs. Granger.

-----------------------

As a person who works with kids with different levels of speech fluency and reads almost all the time that she's not working, talking to someone, writing or crocheting something or other and who listens to something or other all the time because a noiseless enviroment is creepy, I think that Hermione, like many kids her age was using a common phrase for something that had not yet happened. I see it all the time with more speech confident Special Ed and Regular Ed kids. We're always having to ask them if something has occurred yet only to have them say "No. After school" or "this weekend" or "Next year" or something. Granted, a lot of the kids I work with are SE which means they're verbal skills aren't always the greatest, but I hear this not only at work, but at church, at Jr. orchestra workshops (which are with RE kids) with kids (and adults) on the bus. People just don't always live in a straight timeline verbally. They're speech isn't always perfect and that's what I think happened with Hermione/Rowling here.

Lynda




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




From lynde at post.com  Wed Apr 27 04:06:03 2011
From: lynde at post.com (lynde at post.com)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 00:06:03 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <ip6ius+suvr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <8CDD2A78F031CAD-2750-6074@web-mmc-m03.sysops.aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190305











I'm afraid that we'll have to agree to disagree here. Madam Pomfrey is merely shortening the two front teeth enlarged by the spell. Hermione has her continue shortening them past the point where they originally were. That process would not, in itself, straighten even the front teeth, much less the other teeth, which were not affected by the shortening spell. Nor would *shortening* any or all of the teeth affect the amount of room in her mouth.

Carol, who had to have four bicuspids pulled to have enough room in her small mouth for all her teeth as a prelude to braces


--------------------------------

Yes, we will have to disagree. I just know what the text says to me and what I know from personal experience.

Lynda--whose had a lot of teeth straightening done herself.






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




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 27 17:12:14 2011
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 17:12:14 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <467960.74883.qm@web113916.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ip9ipe+r1op@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190306





--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, June Ewing <doctorwhofan02 at ...> wrote:

> I have a very logical way of thinking which tells me
> to need to go back in time to fix something, it would have had to
> have gone wrong in the first place, which would have to mean that on
> some timeline Buckbeak would have had to have lost his head.

zanooda:

Buckbeak was about to be executed, and there was no way to save him - that's what has "gone wrong" :-), and without Buckbeak Sirius was doomed as well. But this doesn't mean that Buckbeak lost his head.

There is only one timeline in this case, because Harry and Hermione went back in time *before* Buckbeak was executed. *If* the kids saw the executioner behead him, *if* he actually died, and only *after* that H&H went back to prevent this from happening, then yes, there would have been a second timeline (I suppose :-)), where Buckbeak died and Sirius was Kissed. 

But that's not what happened in the book. H&H went back in time *before* Buckbeak was killed and prevented it, therefore he was never killed. JMO :-).






From k12listmomma at comcast.net  Wed Apr 27 18:23:35 2011
From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (Shelley Gardner)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:23:35 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Teeth, Braces, and the English Language or
 Variations there of.
In-Reply-To: <8CDD2AC6D7F6C93-2750-6117@web-mmc-m03.sysops.aol.com>
References: <8CDD2AC6D7F6C93-2750-6117@web-mmc-m03.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <4DB85F27.4080506@comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 190307


> Geoff:
> As a native speaker of UK English, I would ONLY interpret this comment by
> Hermione as a reference to an event in the past continuing on. In no way
> would it indicate to me that it was a future possibility suggested by Mr. and
> Mrs. Granger.
>
> -----------------------
>
> As a person who works with kids with different levels of speech fluency and reads almost all the time that she's not working, talking to someone, writing or crocheting something or other and who listens to something or other all the time because a noiseless enviroment is creepy, I think that Hermione, like many kids her age was using a common phrase for something that had not yet happened. I see it all the time with more speech confident Special Ed and Regular Ed kids. We're always having to ask them if something has occurred yet only to have them say "No. After school" or "this weekend" or "Next year" or something. Granted, a lot of the kids I work with are SE which means they're verbal skills aren't always the greatest, but I hear this not only at work, but at church, at Jr. orchestra workshops (which are with RE kids) with kids (and adults) on the bus. People just don't always live in a straight timeline verbally. They're speech isn't always perfect and that's what I think happened with Hermione/Rowling here.
>
> Lynda
Shelley now:
I have a big beef with this interpretation! It's not consistent with how 
the educated and intelligent Hermione speaks, and secondly, it's not 
consistent with how Rowling wrote the rest of the series.

I'm not a native of UK English, my English is only American English, and 
I'd have to agree with Geoff 100%: Hermione's comment is one of having a 
treatment plan for her teeth and continuing with that treatment plan in 
the future. What she may be calling a "brace"- note the singular form- 
may have been a nighttime headgear or retainer of sort, although the 
nighttime headgear was usually worn with braces and attached with rubber 
bands. A retainer or a single mouthpiece worn only at night would not 
have been seen by the boys (Ron or Harry) during the day, and thus might 
have more "believability" to the story line that "braces" were not 
mentioned at all before that point. It's a stretch- Buck teeth take more 
work to correct than other deformities, and most kids I knew who had 
that correction had constant daytime and additional nighttime appliances 
to contend with.

Even if it were a single nighttime appliance, still, I would have a hard 
time with the fact that there were nighttime events and sleepovers and 
still Harry never saw any sort of headgear or retainer or braces ever 
mentioned with Hermione. Given as thorough as Hermione was for packing 
for their extended camping trip in Book 7, I hardly think she's the type 
to just "skip it" during sleepovers at the Weasley house or at the 
Sirius's on the days they spent together before term started again or at 
Christmastime.

Shelley




From k12listmomma at comcast.net  Wed Apr 27 19:01:33 2011
From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (Shelley Gardner)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 13:01:33 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch
 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <ip9ipe+r1op@eGroups.com>
References: <ip9ipe+r1op@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4DB8680D.4070001@comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 190308

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, June Ewing <doctorwhofan02 at ...> wrote:
>> I have a very logical way of thinking which tells me
>> to need to go back in time to fix something, it would have had to
>> have gone wrong in the first place, which would have to mean that on
>> some timeline Buckbeak would have had to have lost his head.
> zanooda:
>
> Buckbeak was about to be executed, and there was no way to save him - that's what has "gone wrong" :-), and without Buckbeak Sirius was doomed as well. But this doesn't mean that Buckbeak lost his head.
>
> There is only one timeline in this case, because Harry and Hermione went back in time *before* Buckbeak was executed. *If* the kids saw the executioner behead him, *if* he actually died, and only *after* that H&H went back to prevent this from happening, then yes, there would have been a second timeline (I suppose :-)), where Buckbeak died and Sirius was Kissed.
>
> But that's not what happened in the book. H&H went back in time *before* Buckbeak was killed and prevented it, therefore he was never killed. JMO :-).
Shelley now:

Think of putting a pencil to paper, and then drawing a circle, and 
continue drawing around without stopping at any point. In this example, 
there is both a "beginning" (a point in time at which you started 
drawing), and a continuous line that appears not to have a beginning, 
because you can't tell where it began.

This timeline example is just that- there is a beginning- a lineline 
where Buckbeak and Sirius died, and then as time continued, Dumbledore 
realized a TimeTurner could indeed change the results. In this 
situation, you do indeed have two Harrys present- as he goes around the 
loop, his current self sees his past self from that earlier trip. We 
don't know what happened to Harry the first time- maybe he was smart 
enough to pull a Patronis out of his wand, but on the 2nd trip around, 
he didn't want to take the chance of himself dying and so he showed up 
to insure that he didn't die.

In the pencil circle example on paper, the top line is the one you see, 
and so it is with the timeline loop- the most recent one is the one that 
appears to be the current reality. (Colinear, is the mathematical term- 
two lines on the same path, but you can draw it as just one line.) But, 
agreeing with June, once upon a beginning, there was a reality of two 
deaths that needed to be corrected with a TimeTurner. If there were no 
deaths, no one would have even needed a TimeTurner to correct it!

Note that time is linear, and happens only ONCE until a TimeTurner is 
used to create a loop in that time. Once the TimeTurner is used, only 
the person(s) who make that trip can be in two places at once, just as 
Hermione attended two classes at the same time, and Harry was able to 
save Harry, and all three kids saw themselves at Hagrid's place. To 
everyone else, they were on a linear time and had only one self in that 
timeline.

zanooda:
Buckbeak was about to be executed, and there was no way to save him - that's what has "gone wrong" :-), and without Buckbeak Sirius was doomed as well.

Shelley again:
Zanooda- think through the order of events- Dumbledore suggests the TimeTurner only AFTER Buckbeak was executed. It wasn't that a future Buckbeak needed to be saved, rather, it was one that had been tragically executed. The TimeTurner allows the person to go back in time. In this case, things didn't go well the first time- logically, there is no reason to go back in time at all if all went well the first time.







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




From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Wed Apr 27 18:42:13 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 11:42:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <4DB6E58B.8040907@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <625690.77369.qm@web113915.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190309


> Lynda responded:
>> <snip> The text says Hermione has buck teeth, which the spell
took care of. That's not inconsistent. And why couldn't the spell
straighten the teeth as it shrunk them? There's no problem there.
We all think it would, in fact, straighten the teeth as it shrank
> them, realigning the teeth in her mouth. <snip>

> Carol again:
> I'm afraid that we'll have to agree to disagree here. Madam
Pomfrey is merely shortening the two front teeth enlarged by the
spell. Hermione has her continue shortening them past the point
where they originally were. That process would not, in itself,
straighten even the front teeth, much less the other teeth, which
were not affected by the shortening spell. Nor would *shortening*
> any or all of the teeth affect the amount of room in her mouth.

> Shelley now:
I have to agree with Carol! I have THREE kids in braces, and it's
not just about the length of the tooth. Shrinking a tooth would
not straighten the root of the tooth, which is the real problem
with buck teeth- the tooth is angled wrong in the mouth. You have
to first straighten the tooth, and then allow the root of the
> tooth to straighten too. <snip>
>
> I still think Hermione needed to continue with orthodontics,
> even with shrunken front teeth and new room.


June:
You guys are both absolutely right (and my logical side said that
to me when I first read it) however, I decided in my mind that
somehow while they were being shrunk the spell moved the teeth
and straightened them or the braces had done most of it and she
was close to having them off anyway. Either that or Hermione is
leaving out the fact that she did some straightening magically
herself or told Madam Pomfrey that the spell she was hit with also
knocked her teeth crooked. I try to ignore the logics sometimes
when I am reading. I would think J.K. Rowling never had braces
herself but they are such good books I do ignore little mistakes
like that and work out in my mind a way they could be right lol.
Also I too had to have the teeth removed to make room and that
wasn't a lot of fun, and my buck teeth were so bad that I couldn't
close my mouth properly because my teeth would sit on my bottome
lip. They look great now though.



From k12listmomma at comcast.net  Wed Apr 27 19:53:24 2011
From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (Shelley Gardner)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 13:53:24 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:  Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <625690.77369.qm@web113915.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <625690.77369.qm@web113915.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4DB87434.6010903@comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 190310

June:
> You guys are both absolutely right (and my logical side said that
> to me when I first read it) however, I decided in my mind that
> somehow while they were being shrunk the spell moved the teeth
> and straightened them or the braces had done most of it and she
> was close to having them off anyway. Either that or Hermione is
> leaving out the fact that she did some straightening magically
> herself or told Madam Pomfrey that the spell she was hit with also
> knocked her teeth crooked.
Shelley:
In my mind, the scene goes like this:
Hermione walks into the infirmary, huge teeth immediately giving away 
the problem. Madam Pomfrey hands Hermione the mirror while she gets out 
her wand and points it as Hermione's face. She tells Hermione to signal 
when they are back to normal, and Hermione lets them shrink to what she 
thought looked like a proper size. Then Pomfrey stands back and says 
"Dear Child, that's still not quite right!" and then proceeded to use a 
different spell- a straightening spell- to finish fixing Hermione's 
teeth. Pomfrey would have no way of knowing what they looked like 
before, but she knows what result she would be happy everyone seeing. 
It's her reputation on the line here, and she doesn't want Hermione 
walking out the door with crooked teeth and have everyone think she's a 
poor healer.

Reminds me of my sister in our teen years, who was in a car accident and 
needed a million stitches on her face. (I'm exagggerating, but the final 
count ended up being over 200.) They called in a plastic surgeon, who 
instead of just slapping down some sloppy stitches as any normal doctor 
would have done, did a wonderful job and gave my sister a really cute 
new nose to go with it. Hers was large and crooked beforehand, but this 
reset of the broken nose was this plastic surgeon's reputation on the 
line, and so the new nose is absolutely perfect and adorably cute. I can 
totally imagine Pomfrey wanting Hermione's teeth to be her walking 
advertisement to the other kids of "go to Pomfrey, she will fix you 
better than new again".

Imagine the horror later for the "Snitch" that Pomfrey couldn't fix 
because it was a curse rather than a hex, but that's a different subject 
matter entirely!

Shelley



From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 27 20:16:27 2011
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 20:16:27 -0000
Subject: Chapt Disc: POA Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <io4jmo+gsct@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ip9tir+ga1a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190311



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> Carol responds:
> 
> ...
> 
> Carol, who thinks that Trelawney is rather like Neville: a bit more confidence in her abilities from those around her (even perhaps Great-Grandma Cassandra when Sibyl was a child) might have gone a long way to helping her develop her abilities and interpret her own predictions without having to fudge some of them along the way
>

Steve responds:

Sorry to cut so much, in general I agree with you. 

But for a brief moment, let's view this from a different perspective to see if that alters our current perspective. 

So, pardon me while I stray off topic for a moment. I've dabbled in fan fiction, and in one of the stories I imagined, but haven't written, Harry and Ron decide to write the story of their adventures at Hoqwarts. So, they hire a muggle ghost writer to whom H/R/H all relay their versions of the story and the ghost writer compiles them into a final version. They are able to use a muggle ghost writer, because that muggle has a cousin who is a witch. This is convenient because, the Ghost Writer is already familiar with the wizarding world. Her name is "J.K. - oh just call me Jo, everyone does". 

Of course, this is happening after the fact, when Harry and Ron are in their, roughly 30's. 

Now, more or less, back on topic. 

Once the wizarding world reads this story (all seven volumes), the very stories that we have all read, what do you think their opinions of Trelawney will be? 

When they see her as we've seen her, and yes she is a bit of a joke, but she has made prophecies and predictions that were vital and critical to the fate of the Wizarding World.

Do you think Trelawney will then be a bigger joke, or do you think the Wizarding World will have a new respect and admiration for her? 

I think the latter. When the see the magnitude of the predictions she has made, and see the smaller prediction in their larger context, I think they will hold her in high, or higher, regard. 

I think this is a question worth asking, and I think it puts Trelawney into her proper perspective. 

If the Wizarding World knew what we know, how would it change their opinion of Trelawney?

Steve/bboyminn 





From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 27 20:24:19 2011
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 20:24:19 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <iocl1a+27g1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ip9u1j+6qk7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190312



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "willsonteam" <willsonkmom at ...> wrote:
> ....
> 
> Potioncat:
> I think you're right. She comes so close. I'd love to know what she intended with Lavender --the thing you're dreading will happen on a certain date?--I wonder if she "saw" Lavender getting bad news and dressed it up too much.
> >
>

Steve:

I think that is part of it. We certainly know that, in her classroom, Trelawney is putting on a dog and pony show. She is dressing everything up to hide her own insecurities. She frequently overdresses thing to make them seem more important than they probably are. Yet, this overdressing actually diminishes the very things that are vitally important. 

Still, as much as Seeing is a skill and talent, so is the interpretation aspect. Trelawney's great great grandmother was not only a gifted seer, but also a gifted interpreter of what she was. Though far more likely she simply conveyed what she saw and left the interpretation to the person she was reading. 

Just a thought.

Steve/bboyminn




From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Wed Apr 27 20:10:41 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 13:10:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <ip9ipe+r1op@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <295153.28061.qm@web113911.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190313

> zanooda:
> Buckbeak was about to be executed, and there was no way to save
him - that's what has "gone wrong" :-), and without Buckbeak
Sirius was doomed as well. But this doesn't mean that Buckbeak
> lost his head.

There is only one timeline in this case, because Harry and Hermione
went back in time *before* Buckbeak was executed. *If* the kids saw
the executioner behead him, *if* he actually died, and only *after*
that H&H went back to prevent this from happening, then yes, there
would have been a second timeline (I suppose :-)), where Buckbeak
> died and Sirius was Kissed.

> But that's not what happened in the book. H&H went back in time
*before* Buckbeak was killed and prevented it, therefore he was
> never killed. JMO :-).

June:
If it never happened in any timeline, what was the point of sending
them back? Think logically for a minute. Let's say for argument
sake that you have had a normal good day and nothing went wrong,
but someone you know and respect tells you that you need to go back
in time to ensure that a friend does not die in the past. One of
two things has to have happened here. Either your friend in some
timeline has died or the person you respect who is telling you to
go back in time to save a friend who was not in danger is suffering
a mental breakdown of sorts. It is like going to the trouble of
fixing a stereo that is sitting right in front of you playing and
sounding great. There is no reason to fix it. So for Dumbledore to
send Harry and Hermione into the past to stop Buckbeak from being
beheaded and to save Sirius from the dementor's kiss, there would
have to be a reason. You don't just fix some thing that hasn't been
broken.



From margdean56 at gmail.com  Wed Apr 27 20:34:01 2011
From: margdean56 at gmail.com (Margaret Dean)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 14:34:01 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch
 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <295153.28061.qm@web113911.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <ip9ipe+r1op@eGroups.com>
	<295153.28061.qm@web113911.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTin6=nRoHD+MpR05ONKV6vehM_YRkg@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190314

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 2:10 PM, June Ewing <doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca> wrote:

> June:
> If it never happened in any timeline, what was the point of sending
> them back? Think logically for a minute. Let's say for argument
> sake that you have had a normal good day and nothing went wrong,
> but someone you know and respect tells you that you need to go back
> in time to ensure that a friend does not die in the past. One of
> two things has to have happened here. Either your friend in some
> timeline has died or the person you respect who is telling you to
> go back in time to save a friend who was not in danger is suffering
> a mental breakdown of sorts. It is like going to the trouble of
> fixing a stereo that is sitting right in front of you playing and
> sounding great. There is no reason to fix it. So for Dumbledore to
> send Harry and Hermione into the past to stop Buckbeak from being
> beheaded and to save Sirius from the dementor's kiss, there would
> have to be a reason. You don't just fix some thing that hasn't been
> broken.

You do if you know there's a strong possibility that the bad thing
*will* happen--as Dumbledore certainly might, knowing the people
involved.


--Margaret Dean
  <margdean56 at gmail.com>



From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Wed Apr 27 19:32:36 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:32:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Teeth, Braces, and the English Language or Variations there of.
In-Reply-To: <ip780b+cvp4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <934455.18377.qm@web113906.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190315

> June:
> Her parents wanted her to carry on with her brace, which means
> she has them already .... If it was past tense she would have
> said I had braces ... and if it was future ... it would have
> been more like "My parents wanted me to have braces" (or get
> braces).

> Steve responds:
> Yes, if we assume prefect and proper English, but in everyday
conversation people do not speak in perfect and proper English.
> In many cases the intentionally use grammatical errors.
<snip>
> So, yes in proper perfect English, it is stated in the present
tense, but that does not necessarily mean it was intended in the
present tense. Which is why I asked about common UK English speech
in everyday usage. We have people who live or have lived in the UK
here in the group, and I wonder if, in common language, it was fair
> or even possible to assume future tense in Hermione's statement?


June:
Not everyone uses poor English, why assume they do, you can just
as easily assume the use good English. I think it is silly to make
an assumption based on the fact that you don't want something to
be true. The logical thing is to take it at face value until you
know that the person you are talking about is using poor grammar.
I myself don't see J.K. Rowling as someone with limited grammar
skills and believe that she has very good English having seen her
in a few interviews, but if you want to go with the assumption that
she has poor grammar, that is your right and you may do that. I
myself do understand that a lot of people do not use proper English
all the time. For instance, I use proper English when talking to
people who could better my situation (bosses who can promote me
etc.), I use proper English when at an event where I am to be on my
best behavior, however get me at a party with friends and my words
are ain't got and radical and words like that.

I wrote at one of the colleges at UofT and I believe that one place
it is very important to use proper grammar is when you are writing
a publication that will be read by many people. I beleive most
writers feel that way and as I said, I have seen J.K. Rowling in
interviews and she comes across as very educated, so I would not
assume that she is using poor grammar in her books. Besides, you
know what happens when you assume.



From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 27 20:46:21 2011
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 20:46:21 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTin6=nRoHD+MpR05ONKV6vehM_YRkg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ip9vat+b49d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190316



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Margaret Dean <margdean56 at ...> wrote:
>
> ...
> 
> You do if you know there's a strong possibility that the bad thing
> *will* happen--as Dumbledore certainly might, knowing the people
> involved.
> 
> 
> --Margaret Dean
>   <margdean56 at ...>
>

Steve:

Keep in mind that JKR has intentionally HIDDEN Buckbeaks execution from Harry/Ron/Hermione's eyes, and therefore from our eyes.

We assume Buckbeak was executed as H/R/H assume he was executed.

However, Dumbledore knows the truth. He knows that Buckbeak got away. As time moves forward, it occurs to Dumbledore how Buckbeak managed to get away, and that leads him to suggest that Harry and Hermione save Buckbeak and use Buckbeak as a means of saving Sirius. 

Some can assume that a timeline exists in which Buckbeak was killed, but the story doesn't bare it out. The story implies it, we and the characters assume it, but there is no real evidence to the fact. 

Far more likely is that once seeing Buckbeak was save, Dumbledore began asking himself how. Then he realize that in the castle at the very moment was the very device that could facilitate Buckbeaks rescue and also save Sirius; Hermione's time turner. 

Again, JKR is very careful to lay clues the first time we read through the events, clues that we later know to be Harry and Hermione already in the time line. She is also very careful NOT to confirm any of the events that are ultimately changed. And to finally full explain events that were clouded by Harry's perception the first time we see them. 

Everything is Illuminated.

Steve/bboyminn
 





From bart at moosewise.com  Wed Apr 27 21:02:17 2011
From: bart at moosewise.com (Bart Lidofsky)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 17:02:17 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Teeth, Braces, and the English Language or
 Variations there of.
In-Reply-To: <4DB85F27.4080506@comcast.net>
References: <8CDD2AC6D7F6C93-2750-6117@web-mmc-m03.sysops.aol.com> <4DB85F27.4080506@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <4DB88459.3000701@moosewise.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190317

Shelley now:
> the future. What she may be calling a "brace"- note the singular form-
> may have been a nighttime headgear or retainer of sort, although the
> nighttime headgear was usually worn with braces and attached with rubber
> bands.

Bart:
     Or behind the teeth, or "invisible" braces (clear plastic).

     Also, the teeth didn't seem to get any wider with the initial 
spell, nor did they get any narrower after the "shrinking" spell. So we 
already know that it was a misnomer; the spell shortened the teeth, 
rather than shrinking them. So why can't it straighten them at the same 
time?

     Bart




From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Wed Apr 27 20:20:53 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 13:20:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Teeth was Re: teachers' personal lives
In-Reply-To: <4DB87434.6010903@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <817212.83490.qm@web113920.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190318

> Shelley:
In my mind, the scene goes like this:
Hermione walks into the infirmary, huge teeth immediately giving away
the problem. Madam Pomfrey hands Hermione the mirror while she gets out
her wand and points it as Hermione's face. She tells Hermione to signal
when they are back to normal, and Hermione lets them shrink to what she
thought looked like a proper size. Then Pomfrey stands back and says
"Dear Child, that's still not quite right!" and then proceeded to use a
different spell- a straightening spell- to finish fixing Hermione's
teeth. Pomfrey would have no way of knowing what they looked like
before, but she knows what result she would be happy everyone seeing.
It's her reputation on the line here, and she doesn't want Hermione
walking out the door with crooked teeth and have everyone think she's a
> poor healer.

> Reminds me of my sister in our teen years, who was in a car accident and
needed a million stitches on her face. (I'm exagggerating, but the final
count ended up being over 200.) They called in a plastic surgeon, who
instead of just slapping down some sloppy stitches as any normal doctor
would have done, did a wonderful job and gave my sister a really cute
new nose to go with it. Hers was large and crooked beforehand, but this
reset of the broken nose was this plastic surgeon's reputation on the
line, and so the new nose is absolutely perfect and adorably cute. I can
totally imagine Pomfrey wanting Hermione's teeth to be her walking
advertisement to the other kids of "go to Pomfrey, she will fix you
> better than new again". <snip>


June:
Good one Shelley, that is the best explanation I have seen and it
makes total sense. I am willing to go with that one.







From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Wed Apr 27 20:01:25 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 13:01:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Teeth, Braces, and the English Language or Variations there of.
In-Reply-To: <8CDD2AC6D7F6C93-2750-6117@web-mmc-m03.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <195238.71318.qm@web113913.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190319

> Geoff:
> As a native speaker of UK English, I would ONLY interpret this
comment by Hermione as a reference to an event in the past
continuing on. In no way would it indicate to me that it was a
> future possibility suggested by Mr. and Mrs. Granger.

> Lynda:
> As a person who works with kids with different levels of speech
fluency and reads almost all the time that she's not working,
talking to someone, writing or crocheting something or other and
who listens to something or other all the time because a noiseless
enviroment is creepy, I think that Hermione, like many kids her
age was using a common phrase for something that had not yet
happened. I see it all the time with more speech confident Special
Ed and Regular Ed kids. We're always having to ask them if
something has occurred yet only to have them say "No. After school"
or "this weekend" or "Next year" or something. Granted, a lot of
the kids I work with are SE which means they're verbal skills
aren't always the greatest, but I hear this not only at work, but
at church, at Jr. orchestra workshops (which are with RE kids) with
kids (and adults) on the bus. People just don't always live in a
straight timeline verbally. They're speech isn't always perfect
> and that's what I think happened with Hermione/Rowling here.


June:
I am with Geoff here, Lynda. You are referring to kids with
learning disabilities. At what point did you get the idea that
Hermione had one? Hermione is a student beyond her years and it
is likely that she would speak with proper or near proper English
and grammar because of this. Also personally I don't know anyone
who speaks in the present about future events, to me that is just
plain silly.




From doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca  Wed Apr 27 20:26:41 2011
From: doctorwhofan02 at yahoo.ca (June Ewing)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 13:26:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Chapt Disc: POA Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <ip9tir+ga1a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <23441.36381.qm@web113914.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190320


Steve responds:
> <snip> When they see her as we've seen her, and yes she is a bit
of a joke, but she has made prophecies and predictions that were
> vital and critical to the fate of the Wizarding World.

> Do you think Trelawney will then be a bigger joke, or do you think
the Wizarding World will have a new respect and admiration for her?

> I think the latter. When the see the magnitude of the predictions
she has made, and see the smaller prediction in their larger context,
> I think they will hold her in high, or higher, regard. <snip>


June:
Exactly. Trelawney does seem at first to be a bumbler, but in the
end she is much more than what meets the eye. Mind you I thought
after reading Prisoner of Azkaban that there was more to her than
meets the eye.



From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 27 21:39:29 2011
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 21:39:29 -0000
Subject: Teeth, Braces, and the English Language or Variations there of.
In-Reply-To: <934455.18377.qm@web113906.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ipa2eh+itfq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190321



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, June Ewing <doctorwhofan02 at ...> wrote:
>
> > ...
> 
> > Steve responds:
> > Yes, if we assume prefect and proper English, but in everyday
> conversation people do not speak in perfect and proper English.
> > In many cases the intentionally use grammatical errors.
> <snip>
> > ....
> 
> 
> June:
> Not everyone uses poor English, why assume they do, you can just
> as easily assume the use good English. I think it is silly to make
> an assumption based on the fact that you don't want something to
> be true. ...
> 
> ... I beleive most writers feel that way and as I said, I have
> seen J.K. Rowling in interviews and she comes across as very 
> educated, so I would not assume that she is using poor grammar
> in her books. Besides, you know what happens when you assume.
>

Steve:

First, I'm not entrenched in any view, I am simply presenting or proposing as POSSIBLE explanation. I leave it to other to confirm or deny that possibility. And Geoff, our resident UK member, seems to have denied the possibility.

But, you are presenting a distorted view here. The 'level' of English we use is very situation dependent. Certainly with authority figure, or in formal settings like school or the office, we use a high class of English than when we are having a casual beer with our friends. There is no need for that level of properness and formality in very casual situations with friends. And, this is even more true among kids than it is with adults. Outside the view of adults, kids use levels and types of language that would make a sailor blush.

There is a reason why common speech is call 'common' and it is not just 'posh' vs 'common'. Common speech is statistically common; everybody does it in the right situation. And there are situational levels and degrees of it. 

Though, I've strayed far off topic. 

Again, I'm not entrenched in that view. I simply proposed it as something I didn't know, but projected that it could be an explanation.

Again, I think the real explanation is that no author, living or dead, ever in their wildest dreams expected or anticipated the level of scrutiny we are giving these books. 

Steve/bboyminn

 





From liz.treky at ntlworld.com  Thu Apr 28 19:21:39 2011
From: liz.treky at ntlworld.com (Liz Clark)
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 20:21:39 +0100
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <214692.61674.qm@web113913.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <214692.61674.qm@web113913.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <F6B97D515AA24257BE66C7A54431311D@TrekyPC>

No: HPFGUIDX 190322

Nikkalmati:
Query: What other methods could DD use to know the past? Even if we
> could go back, could we ever go forward? After all, there is no
there there, right? What is so terrible about meeting yourself in
> the past? What was it Hermione had been warned about?


June:
Nikkalmati, I liked what you had to say, it really got me thinking.
There are a few answers to why you should not meet yourself in the
past or the future. In Back to the Future 2 Doc Brown tells Marty "I
foresee two possibilities. One, coming face to face with herself 30
years older would put her into shock and she'd simply pass out. Or
two, the encounter could create a time paradox, the results of which
could cause a chain reaction that would unravel the very fabric of
the space time continuum, and destroy the entire universe! Granted,
that's a worst case scenario. The destruction might in fact be very
localized, limited to merely our own galaxy. In Time Cop they say
that coming into contact with yourself in the past that you could
wipe out your own existence and in fact whenRon Silver's character
bumps into his past self he vanishes from existence.

Taya:
I have just had a thought. Dumbledore always seems to know what is going on 
at Hogwarts, could he therefore know (or have seen) Harry and Hermione in 2 
seperate locations at the same time? Then he must surely know they had gone 
back in time, and this would probably lead him to thinking it was he who 
sent them back, owing to how seriously Hermione took not breaking rules.

I will also mention (carefully, as it's not mentioned in the books but we 
can speculate!) that it may be possible that some of the gadgets in 
Dumbledore's office, keep track of all things at Hogwarts, students 
included, or indeed that he may have a Marauder's Map himself. 




From geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com  Thu Apr 28 22:55:17 2011
From: geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com (Geoff)
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 22:55:17 -0000
Subject: Teeth, braces, and the English Language or variations thereof.
In-Reply-To: <8CDD2AC6D7F6C93-2750-6117@web-mmc-m03.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <ipcr8l+of7e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190323

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, lynde at ... wrote:
 
Geoff:
> As a native speaker of UK English, I would ONLY interpret this comment by 
> Hermione as a reference to an event in the past continuing on. In no way 
> would it indicate to me that it was a future possibility suggested by Mr. and 
> Mrs. Granger.

Lynde: 
> As a person who works with kids with different levels of speech fluency and reads almost all the time that she's not working, talking to someone, writing or crocheting something or other and who listens to something or other all the time because a noiseless enviroment is creepy, I think that Hermione, like many kids her age was using a common phrase for something that had not yet happened. I see it all the time with more speech confident Special Ed and Regular Ed kids. We're always having to ask them if something has occurred yet only to have them say "No. After school" or "this weekend" or "Next year" or something. 

Geoff:
Your example here is just what I might say when asked something. For example,
my daughter might say to me "Have you looked for that information on the Web 
yet?" And I might reply "No. Probably tonight". The context is that we are looking 
at something which we expect to happen and get a reply that it hasn't yet but...

I worked for 32 years in a school in South-West London, dealing initially with 
boys in the 11-15 range and latterly in a mixed environment with students of 
13-18 and that is how I would interpret your suggestion from my experience 
of being bi-lingual, speaking both UK English and School Playground English.

Going back to the original quote in GoF which June supplied, it was:

>> '(Hermione speaking) "Mum and Dad won't be too pleased. I've been trying
>> to persuade them to let me shrink them for ages, but they wanted me to 
>> carry on with my brace."'
(GOF "The Yule Ball" p.353 UK edition)

Hermione had been trying to persuade her parents in the past, but it is obvious
that they did not approve, in the past, and wanted her to continue with the 
brace and their wish had not been countermanded up to the point in the story 
which we had reached, which, as I said previously, a different scenario to the 
one which you envisage.

By the by, brace is used in both the singular and plural in UK English. My younger
son had *a brace* in his early to middle teens.




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 28 23:00:59 2011
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 23:00:59 -0000
Subject: Time travel/ was:Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16
In-Reply-To: <4DB8680D.4070001@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <ipcrjb+bhp7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190324






--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Shelley Gardner <k12listmomma at ...> wrote:

> Dumbledore suggests the TimeTurner only AFTER Buckbeak was executed.

zanooda:

I disagree :-). DD *knew* that Buckbeak managed to escape and he guessed how. Actually, it's possible he not only guessed it after the fact - he already knew what was going on when he came to Hagrid's with Fudge and the executioner, because he was trying to delay the execution in order to give Harry and Hermione more time.

> Shelley wrote:

> It wasn't that a future Buckbeak needed to be saved, rather, 
> it was one that had been tragically executed.

zanooda:

How do you know that? We never saw Buckbeak die, no one did. By the time the kids heard the executioner's ax, back-in-time Harry and Hermione already took Buckbeak to the Forest.

> Shelley wrote:

> The TimeTurner allows the person to go back in time. In this 
> case, things didn't go well the first time- logically, there 
> is no reason to go back in time at all if all went well the 
> first time.


zanooda:

There was no way for things to "go well" for Sirius. It is not necessary to wait until the actual Kiss to know for sure that Sirius will be Kissed. You can go back in time not only to change what already happened, but also to prevent something inevitable from happening.




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Thu Apr 28 23:30:23 2011
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 23:30:23 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16: Professor Trelawney's prediction
In-Reply-To: <295153.28061.qm@web113911.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ipctaf+r4b8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190325





--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, June Ewing <doctorwhofan02 at ...> wrote:

> If it never happened in any timeline, what was the point of sending
> them back? 

zanooda:

It never happened only *because* DD sent Harry and Hermione back. If he didn't send them back, it would have happened :-).

> June wrote:

> Let's say for argument sake that you have had a normal good 
> day and nothing went wrong,but someone you know and respect 
> tells you that you need to go back in time to ensure that a 
> friend does not die in the past. 

zanooda:

Or that someone could tell you that your friend will be executed in five minutes and the only way to prevent it from happening is for you to go back in time and do something there that will make it possible for your friend to escape :-).






From fenneyml at gmail.com  Thu Apr 28 23:26:19 2011
From: fenneyml at gmail.com (Margaret Fenney)
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 19:26:19 -0400
Subject: Teeth, braces, and the English Language or variations thereof.
In-Reply-To: <ipcr8l+of7e@eGroups.com>
References: <8CDD2AC6D7F6C93-2750-6117@web-mmc-m03.sysops.aol.com>
	<ipcr8l+of7e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinXbXx-zFY3jWs5sk+YKCUaSGE5Bg@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190326

Geoff:

Going back to the original quote in GoF which June supplied, it was:

>> '(Hermione speaking) "Mum and Dad won't be too pleased. I've been trying
>> to persuade them to let me shrink them for ages, but they wanted me to
>> carry on with my brace."'
(GOF "The Yule Ball" p.353 UK edition)

Hermione had been trying to persuade her parents in the past, but it 
is obvious that they did not approve, in the past, and wanted her to 
continue with the brace and their wish had not been countermanded up  
to the point in the story which we had reached, which, as I said 
previously, a different scenario to the one which you envisage.


Margie:

I respectfully submit that if Hermione was speaking of the future, 
she would be unlikely to use "my brace" but would instead refer to "a 
brace".

Margie






From lynde at post.com  Fri Apr 29 04:14:15 2011
From: lynde at post.com (lynde at post.com)
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 00:14:15 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Teeth, braces, and the English Language or
 variations thereof.
In-Reply-To: <ipcr8l+of7e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <8CDD43B09619A12-1B40-BD45@web-mmc-d01.sysops.aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190327









I worked for 32 years in a school in South-West London, dealing initially with 
boys in the 11-15 range and latterly in a mixed environment with students of 
13-18 and that is how I would interpret your suggestion from my experience 
of being bi-lingual, speaking both UK English and School Playground English.

Going back to the original quote in GoF which June supplied, it was:

>> '(Hermione speaking) "Mum and Dad won't be too pleased. I've been trying
>> to persuade them to let me shrink them for ages, but they wanted me to 
>> carry on with my brace."'

-------------------

Your point is well taken, Geoff and I would agree under most circumstances. I do have one niggling question, though. Wouldn't Hermione have mentioned that she wore a brace or the presence of a brace on her teeth have been mentioned during the books if she was wearing one? I don't think buck teeth like Hermione's would have used merely a retainer she wore at night. So the presence of a brace on her teeth would have been noticeable and should have been mentioned. Rowling is not that poor a writer that she would leave out that detail!

Lynda 




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




From bboyminn at yahoo.com  Fri Apr 29 06:10:11 2011
From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 06:10:11 -0000
Subject: Teeth, braces, and the English Language or variations thereof.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinXbXx-zFY3jWs5sk+YKCUaSGE5Bg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ipdko3+u6g5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190328



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Margaret Fenney <fenneyml at ...> wrote:
>
> Geoff:
> 
> Going back to the original quote in GoF which June supplied, it was:
> 
> >> '(... they wanted me to carry on with my brace."'
> (GOF "The Yule Ball" p.353 UK edition)
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> Margie:
> 
> I respectfully submit that if Hermione was speaking of the future, 
> she would be unlikely to use "my brace" but would instead refer 
> to "a brace".
> 
> Margie
>

Steve:

Oh... good catch. It seems, given what you said, Hermione is speaking in the present tense, but is also 'possessive'. "My bace" implies something she possesses right now, not something she might possess in the future.

Truthfully, I don't know what to think. But none the less, very good point.

Steve/bboyminn





From geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com  Fri Apr 29 08:00:28 2011
From: geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com (Geoff)
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 08:00:28 -0000
Subject: Teeth, braces, and the English Language or variations thereof.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinXbXx-zFY3jWs5sk+YKCUaSGE5Bg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ipdr6s+fmn1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190329



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Margaret Fenney <fenneyml at ...> wrote:

Geoff: 
 > Hermione had been trying to persuade her parents in the past, but it 
> is obvious that they did not approve, in the past, and wanted her to 
> continue with the brace and their wish had not been countermanded up  
> to the point in the story which we had reached, which, as I said 
> previously, a different scenario to the one which you envisage.

Margie:
 > I respectfully submit that if Hermione was speaking of the future, 
> she would be unlikely to use "my brace" but would instead refer to "a 
> brace".

Geoff:
Which underlines the exact point I have made that Hermione is speaking 
of a situation which already exists.





From geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com  Fri Apr 29 08:07:30 2011
From: geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com (Geoff)
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 08:07:30 -0000
Subject: Teeth, braces, and the English Language or variations thereof.
In-Reply-To: <8CDD43B09619A12-1B40-BD45@web-mmc-d01.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <ipdrk2+bne7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190330

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, lynde at ... wrote:
 
Geoff:
> I worked for 32 years in a school in South-West London, dealing initially with 
> boys in the 11-15 range and latterly in a mixed environment with students of 
> 13-18 and that is how I would interpret your suggestion from my experience 
> of being bi-lingual, speaking both UK English and School Playground English.
> 
> Going back to the original quote in GoF which June supplied, it was:
> 
> >> '(Hermione speaking) "Mum and Dad won't be too pleased. I've been trying
> >> to persuade them to let me shrink them for ages, but they wanted me to 
> >> carry on with my brace."'

Lynda: 
> Your point is well taken, Geoff and I would agree under most circumstances. I do have one niggling question, though. Wouldn't Hermione have mentioned that she wore a brace or the presence of a brace on her teeth have been mentioned during the books if she was wearing one? I don't think buck teeth like Hermione's would have used merely a retainer she wore at night. So the presence of a brace on her teeth would have been noticeable and should have been mentioned. Rowling is not that poor a writer that she would leave out that detail!

Geoff:
We have had discussions similar to this over the years. This hasn't been 
mentioned because it has not been a vital part of the story line.  It has been 
pointed out in the past that we are not told when such events as Harry 
going to the toilet or Ron changing his socks occur because they are part 
and parcel of everyday life.

I had friends at school who wore braces or starting wearing glasses but 
you didn't make a point of talking extensively about this. These are not 
unique occurrences.





From lynde at post.com  Fri Apr 29 19:58:27 2011
From: lynde at post.com (lynde at post.com)
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 15:58:27 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Teeth, braces, and the English Language or
 variations thereof.
In-Reply-To: <ipdrk2+bne7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <8CDD4BEF0C31B80-2290-4AE7@web-mmc-d02.sysops.aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190331







I had friends at school who wore braces or starting wearing glasses but 
you didn't make a point of talking extensively about this. These are not 
unique occurrences.


---------------------------------

Glasses and braces were always talked about in my schools when I was a kid. Both by those of us who wore them and others. That's why the lack of such conversation makes me think she hadn't started with them yet. It's not unique, but glasses and braces are so common but usually mentioned. We all know Harry wears glasses, for instance, although they're common among students, surely. And that Ron has red hair and is freckled. We know that Hermione has thick unmanageable hair, etc. It just seems that braces would be in the same category. But that's just my friends and I. 

Lynda




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




From k12listmomma at comcast.net  Fri Apr 29 21:07:35 2011
From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (Shelley Gardner)
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 15:07:35 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Time travel/ was:Chapter Discussion: Prisoner
 of Azkaban Ch 16
In-Reply-To: <ipcrjb+bhp7@eGroups.com>
References: <ipcrjb+bhp7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4DBB2897.1050702@comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 190332


> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Shelley Gardner<k12listmomma at ...>  wrote:
>> Dumbledore suggests the TimeTurner only AFTER Buckbeak was executed.
> zanooda:
>
> I disagree :-). DD *knew* that Buckbeak managed to escape and he guessed how. Actually, it's possible he not only guessed it after the fact - he already knew what was going on when he came to Hagrid's with Fudge and the executioner, because he was trying to delay the execution in order to give Harry and Hermione more time.
Shelley:
But how do you "know" that either? It's a conjecture, a presumption on 
your part.

That facts are that both Buckbeak and Sirius were scheduled for 
execution. The logical path is to assume that all went as scheduled, and 
that they were executed as scheduled, thus prompting the NEED TO CHANGE 
IT, which is exactly what a Time Turner gives a person a 2nd chance to do.

I find it hard to believe, as you suggest, that Dumbledore guesses that 
he will have, in a future time, allowed Hermione the use of the 
Time-Turner, and thus he alone knew, as it was happening, that there 
were two Grangers, two Potters and two Weasleys present that he needed 
to stall for with a cup of tea at Hagrids.

Shelley



From k12listmomma at comcast.net  Fri Apr 29 21:14:28 2011
From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (Shelley Gardner)
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 15:14:28 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Teeth, braces, and the English Language or
 variations thereof.
In-Reply-To: <8CDD43B09619A12-1B40-BD45@web-mmc-d01.sysops.aol.com>
References: <8CDD43B09619A12-1B40-BD45@web-mmc-d01.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <4DBB2A34.1030708@comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 190333


> Your point is well taken, Geoff and I would agree under most circumstances. I do have one niggling question, though. Wouldn't Hermione have mentioned that she wore a brace or the presence of a brace on her teeth have been mentioned during the books if she was wearing one? I don't think buck teeth like Hermione's would have used merely a retainer she wore at night. So the presence of a brace on her teeth would have been noticeable and should have been mentioned. Rowling is not that poor a writer that she would leave out that detail!
>
> Lynda
I disagree on that last point- Rowling has plenty of other small details 
she overlooks, and it is well known that as she wrote the later books 
she would look up some facts from previous books on the internet so she 
could try and keep things consistent, after she learned how detail 
oriented her readers were. It's not a matter of "poor writer" as much as 
juggling many balls and she dropped this small one. It's not a major 
plot point, really. Maybe she thought she had mentioned braces with 
Hermione's buck teeth before. It's such a tiny detail that is forgivable 
with respect to the story line, unlike Lupin's changes with the moon cycle.

Shelley



From geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com  Fri Apr 29 22:29:38 2011
From: geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com (Geoff)
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 22:29:38 -0000
Subject: Time travel/ was:Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16
In-Reply-To: <4DBB2897.1050702@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <ipfe4i+gfm2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190334

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Shelley Gardner <k12listmomma at ...> wrote:

Shelley:
> I find it hard to believe, as you suggest, that Dumbledore guesses that 
> he will have, in a future time, allowed Hermione the use of the 
> Time-Turner, and thus he alone knew, as it was happening, that there 
> were two Grangers, two Potters and two Weasleys present that he needed 
> to stall for with a cup of tea at Hagrids.

Geoff:
I hope you will forgive my being pedantic - and a pain in the backside for 
being so - but the Dramatis Personae for this scene were two Grangers,  
two Potters and ONE Weasley. 




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Fri Apr 29 23:19:30 2011
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (willsonteam)
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 23:19:30 -0000
Subject: Teeth, braces, and the English Language or variations thereof.
In-Reply-To: <4DBB2A34.1030708@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <ipfh22+r6di@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190335

> >
> > Shelley:
 Maybe she thought she had mentioned braces with 
> Hermione's buck teeth before. It's such a tiny detail that is forgivable 
> with respect to the story line, unlike Lupin's changes with the moon cycle.
> 

Potioncat:
Well, I was surprised after all these years, to discover that Hermione wore braces. although I agree it's not an important detail in the plot.

I am curious at different posters views of Hermione's dental issues--buck teeth, crooked teeth, crowded  mouth...I only remember her teeth being mentioned twice (there are probably more times) One is when Harry first meets her and one is when she is hit by Draco's curse in Snape's class. I always thought her teeth were large, not protruding or crooked.

I can't get to my SS/PS (part of the storage boxes while we paint)Could someone look in SS/PS and tell us just how her teeth are described? Does anyone know of other cannon about her teeth?
>





From fenneyml at gmail.com  Fri Apr 29 23:34:36 2011
From: fenneyml at gmail.com (Margaret Fenney)
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 19:34:36 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Teeth, braces, and the English Language or
 variations thereof.
In-Reply-To: <ipfh22+r6di@eGroups.com>
References: <4DBB2A34.1030708@comcast.net>
	<ipfh22+r6di@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=dm1MKW9yVn6qCfUxvmqezU1e-JQ@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190336

> Potioncat:
> >Well, I was surprised after all these years, to discover that Hermione
> wore braces. although I agree it's not an important detail in the plot.
>
> >I am curious at different posters views of Hermione's dental issues--buck
> teeth, crooked teeth, crowded mouth...I only remember her teeth being
> mentioned twice (there are probably more times) One is when Harry first
> meets her and one is when she is hit by Draco's curse in Snape's class. I
> always thought her teeth were large, not protruding or crooked.
>
> >I can't get to my SS/PS (part of the storage boxes while we paint)Could
> someone look in SS/PS and tell us just how her teeth are described? Does
> anyone know of other cannon about her teeth?
> >


Margie:

I don't have the quote from SS/PS, but the full quote from The Goblet of
Fire (pg. 205) is below - note the "They're all... straight and-- and
normal-sized." which, I think, would indicate that Hermione's teeth were not
straight prior to Madam Pomfrey's work on  her:

"Hermione" Ron said, looking sideways at her, suddenly frowning, "Your
teeth..."
"What about them?" she said.
"Well, they're different... I've just noticed...."
"Of course they are-- did you expect me to keep those fangs Malfoy gave me?"
"No, I mean, they're different to how they were before he put that hex on
you.... They're all... straight and-- and normal-sized."
Hermione suddenly smiled very mischievously, and Harry noticed it too: It
was a very different smile from the one he remembered.
"Well... when I went up to Madam Pomfrey to get them shrunk, she held up a
mirror and told me to stop her when they were back to how they normally
were," she said. "And I just... let her carry on a bit." she smiled even
more widely. (now pay attention to this part) "Mum and Dad won't be too
pleased. I've been trying to persuade them to let me shrink them for ages,
but they wanted me to carry one with my braces. You know, they're dentists,
they just don't think teeth and magic should-- look! Pigwidgeon's back!"

Margie





From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Sat Apr 30 02:21:20 2011
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 02:21:20 -0000
Subject: Time travel/ was:Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16
In-Reply-To: <4DBB2897.1050702@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <ipfrn0+lpp2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190337





--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Shelley Gardner <k12listmomma at ...> wrote:

> But how do you "know" that either? It's a conjecture, a presumption > on your part.

zanooda:

Right, DD knowing what was going on and stalling the execution *is* just an assumption, but Buckbeak staying alive is not. The Trio heard the thud of the executioner's axe, but later back-in-time Harry and Hermione found out he just hacked at the fence. This is one and the same event: the first time they heard it, and the second time they saw it. Buckbeak was never beheaded, just the fence destroyed :-).

> Shelley wrote:

> That facts are that both Buckbeak and Sirius were scheduled for 
> execution. The logical path is to assume that all went as 
> scheduled, and that they were executed as scheduled

zanooda:

They were not executed *because* H&H went back in time! OK, you can argue that Buckbeak lost his head, but how can you argue that Sirius was Kissed? He definitely still had his soul when H&H went back in time. By the time they returned to the hospital wing he was already flying away... He was never Kissed. 


> Shelley wrote:
 
> I find it hard to believe, as you suggest, that Dumbledore 
> guesses that he will have, in a future time, allowed Hermione 
> the use of the Time-Turner

zanooda:

I see it this way: DD guessed (or knew somehow) what was going on outside the windows when he was at Hagrid's. I suppose he didn't know at first that Harry outside was back-in-time Harry (Harry-2). He could have thought it was just our meddlesome as always Harry-1 trying to save Buckbeak. Would it be so hard to believe :-)? (Actually, it's harder to believe that Harry *didn't* try to save Buckbeak, I remember I was surprised that he didn't. He had the Cloak, why didn't he try?) 

Anyway, DD stalled for time, and Harry managed to save Buckbeak. DD still thought it was Harry-1. Later, when Snape brought Harry, Hermione, Ron and Sirius to the castle, DD talked to Sirius and realized that it couldn't be Harry-1 who stole Buckbeak, because Harry-1 was already (or almost) in the Shrieking Shack at that time. *Then* DD guessed that it must have been Harry-2, and he came up with the plan to send Harry and Hermione back.

You are absolutely right to say that all this is just an assumption. However, Buckbeak's disappearance from the pumpkin patch is not an assumption, it's a fact. Both Harry-1 and Harry-2 witnessed it: Harry-2 stole Buckbeak himself, and Harry-1 heard the executioner hack at the fence to show his anger and disappointment about Buckbeak's escape.




From k12listmomma at comcast.net  Sat Apr 30 04:36:20 2011
From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (Shelley Gardner)
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 22:36:20 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Time travel/ was:Chapter Discussion: Prisoner
 of Azkaban Ch 16
In-Reply-To: <ipfe4i+gfm2@eGroups.com>
References: <ipfe4i+gfm2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4DBB91C4.3020807@comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 190338

On 4/29/2011 4:29 PM, Geoff wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Shelley Gardner<k12listmomma at ...>  wrote:
>
> Shelley:
>> I find it hard to believe, as you suggest, that Dumbledore guesses that
>> he will have, in a future time, allowed Hermione the use of the
>> Time-Turner, and thus he alone knew, as it was happening, that there
>> were two Grangers, two Potters and two Weasleys present that he needed
>> to stall for with a cup of tea at Hagrids.
> Geoff:
> I hope you will forgive my being pedantic - and a pain in the backside for
> being so - but the Dramatis Personae for this scene were two Grangers,
> two Potters and ONE Weasley.

Oh sorry, you are totally right! Ron was back at the hospital wing.....

Shelley



From k12listmomma at comcast.net  Sat Apr 30 04:46:29 2011
From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (Shelley Gardner)
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 22:46:29 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Time travel/ was:Chapter Discussion: Prisoner
 of Azkaban Ch 16
In-Reply-To: <ipfrn0+lpp2@eGroups.com>
References: <ipfrn0+lpp2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4DBB9425.9080407@comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 190339

On 4/29/2011 8:21 PM, zanooda2 wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Shelley Gardner<k12listmomma at ...>  wrote:
>> But how do you "know" that either? It's a conjecture, a presumption>  on your part.
> zanooda:
>
> Right, DD knowing what was going on and stalling the execution *is* just an assumption, but Buckbeak staying alive is not. The Trio heard the thud of the executioner's axe, but later back-in-time Harry and Hermione found out he just hacked at the fence. This is one and the same event: the first time they heard it, and the second time they saw it. Buckbeak was never beheaded, just the fence destroyed :-).
Shelley again:
I already explained how a circle, once started and continues around, 
appears from an outside to "have no beginning". Thus, this time loop 
"appears" that the kids going back in time prevented two executions, but 
we know that once upon a beginning, two were scheduled to be executed, 
prompting the need for a TimeTurner to change those events.

You can keep your theory that neither were ever executed, but then that 
presents to me a much more unbelievable situation, how after the fact of 
no executions, Dumbledore commanded Hermione to use her TimeTurner to 
save those two lives.

Fact is this, there is a beginning to every circle, a point at which you 
started to draw it, even in later it's impossible for the outside 
observer to know where it was begun.

Shelley



From justcarol67 at yahoo.com  Sat Apr 30 16:37:55 2011
From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67)
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 16:37:55 -0000
Subject: teachers' personal lives / ''Madam''
In-Reply-To: <409713.31677.qm@web113919.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <iphdt3+mamp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190340

Lynda wrote:
> > I always thought Madam was a title for a Hogwarts affiliated
> > staff who was a female who was not an actual teacher. Therefore
> > Madam Pomfrey, the nurse and Madam Hooch, who isn't a proper
> > teacher but the quidditch and flying coach.
> 
> June:
> Exactly, Lynda is correct about this. To use Madam as a title to
> show someone as married, that would be France or Quebec, Canada.
> Madam meaning Mrs is French not British.
>
Carol responds:

And yet Madame Maxime, the French witch who's headmistress of Beauxbatons, isn't married. It seems that both "Madam" and "Madame" function as titles of respect that a professional woman (or even a glorified seamstress like Madam Malkin or a pub owner like Madam Rosmerta, who combines "Madam" with her first name) can choose to use. It seems to function something like "Ms.", allowing a woman to hide her marital status, except that it adds a hint of increased social status as well. OTOH, happy housewives like Molly Weasley are addressed as "Mrs." (with no indication that the term is derogatory) and young, unmarried girls are addressed as "Miss" by their teachers, just as the boys are addressed as "Mr." (I think it would have been "Master" in Victorian England and maybe even into the 1950s, at least for Muggles, but the Wizards seem to have a slightly different terminology.

Most likely, JKR didn't think it out. She may have started with the nicely alliterative "Madam Malkin" and gone from there. In any case, the use of "Madam" extends beyond Hogwarts into the British WW in general.

Carol, just thinking on her keyboard and arriving at no real conclusions




From zanooda2 at yahoo.com  Sat Apr 30 17:36:30 2011
From: zanooda2 at yahoo.com (zanooda2)
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 17:36:30 -0000
Subject: Time travel/ was:Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Ch 16
In-Reply-To: <4DBB9425.9080407@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <iphhau+td8s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190341





--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Shelley Gardner <k12listmomma at ...> wrote:

> I already explained how a circle, once started and continues 
> around, appears from an outside to "have no beginning". 

zanooda:

I can see your point, but, as someone already explained up-thread, time travel can be linear too. I'll just stick with linear in this case :-).

> Shelley:

> You can keep your theory that neither were ever executed

zanooda:

I most certainly will, LOL. Only this is not *my* theory (I'm usually not very good at making up theories), this is just one of the existing theories that I happen to find the most convincing and credible :-).

> Shelley:

> but then that presents to me a much more unbelievable situation, 
> how after the fact of no executions, Dumbledore commanded Hermione > to use her TimeTurner to save those two lives.

zanooda:

What do you mean by "after the fact of no executions"? DD sent H&H back in time not *after*, but *before* - ten or fifteen minutes *before* Sirius was supposed to be executed. 




From k12listmomma at comcast.net  Sat Apr 30 17:53:34 2011
From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (Shelley Gardner)
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 11:53:34 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Time travel/ was:Chapter Discussion: Prisoner
 of Azkaban Ch 16
In-Reply-To: <4DBB9425.9080407@comcast.net>
References: <ipfrn0+lpp2@eGroups.com> <4DBB9425.9080407@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <4DBC4C9E.6040201@comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 190342


> On 4/29/2011 8:21 PM, zanooda2 wrote:
>> zanooda:
>> Right, DD knowing what was going on and stalling the execution *is* just an assumption
> Shelley again:
> You can keep your theory that neither were ever executed, but then that
> presents to me a much more unbelievable situation, how after the fact of
> no executions, Dumbledore commanded Hermione to use her TimeTurner to
> save those two lives.
I am badly snipping these threads to make another observation. In 
talking to my husband about time travel, he wisely pointed out that this 
discussion is illustrating two popular theories of time travel. I was 
arguing one, Zanooda another. Zanooda is using Novikov self-consistency 
principle, in which it must always have been true that Buckbeak was 
rescued by a time traveller, there would be no "original" history in 
which he was actually killed. Wikipedia has a nice entry on this principle.

My husband also pointed out that Dumbledore, in order to stall at 
Hagrid's "intentionally" to allow Harry and Hermione time to rescue 
Buckbeak, must have been aware of the Time travel, and that is also 
consistent with the Novikovian theory. Extrapolating that thought, it 
occured to me that this would also explain an event later in the books- 
how Dumbledore would know that Ron would leave camping and need a way to 
return, and how his gift of the device that puts out lights would be 
used by Ron to come back at precisely the same time as Harry was 
drowning in a pool of water with the sword at the bottom. (Sorry, I 
don't have my books in front of me to give the chapters and 
correspondingly quote the relevant passages of Book 7.) It would also 
explain, in part, Dumbledore's talk to Harry in his after-death 
conversation with Dumbledore at King's Cross- at having said that "his 
guesses were often correct", and why he would put people in situations 
in which he trusted the outcome, despite everyone else's hesitation. 
Notice Lupin in an earlier discussion with Harry about Snape stated that 
he trusted Dumbledore, as if Dumbledore knew more than the average 
person would, and indeed, if he were aware of the flow of time and it's 
outcomes, it would explain his certainty at picking the correct course 
of action.

If this were true, that Dumbledore was aware of time, then why the death 
of Harry's parents? And then we come right back to either Dumbledore 
knew and let it happen anyway so that all the other events could unfold, 
or, at that time he was not aware and truly thought the precautions they 
took to hide Lilly and James were adequate. It's possible that maybe you 
have to go back in time once to become aware of time, and that happened 
for Dumbledore somewhere between Harry's tragic loss of his parents and 
when we start to see Dumbledore manipulating key events.

Anyway, sorry if the discussion about time makes people's brains hurt. 
It is a rather complex subject!

Shelley



From k12listmomma at comcast.net  Sat Apr 30 18:08:19 2011
From: k12listmomma at comcast.net (Shelley Gardner)
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 12:08:19 -0600
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Time travel/ was:Chapter Discussion: Prisoner
 of Azkaban Ch 16
In-Reply-To: <iphhau+td8s@eGroups.com>
References: <iphhau+td8s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <4DBC5013.5070906@comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 190343


>> Shelley: But then that presents to me a much more unbelievable situation,
>> how after the fact of no executions, Dumbledore commanded Hermione to use her TimeTurner to save those two lives.
> zanooda:
>
> What do you mean by "after the fact of no executions"? DD sent H&H back in time not *after*, but *before* - ten or fifteen minutes *before* Sirius was supposed to be executed.
Shelley:
If Buckbeak had not been executed, (because he was saved by H&H), and 
the execution of Sirius was still 10 or 15 minutes off, is not that then 
"no executions"? At that point in time that Dumbledore is speaking to 
Hermione, by your theory, that statement is true- a future execution 
hasn't happened yet.





From kenadams705 at btinternet.com  Sat Apr 30 18:53:56 2011
From: kenadams705 at btinternet.com (KEN ADAMS)
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 19:53:56 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: teachers' personal lives / ''Madam''
In-Reply-To: <iphdt3+mamp@eGroups.com>
References: <iphdt3+mamp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <178490.30955.qm@web87014.mail.ird.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190344

>
Carol responds:

And yet Madame Maxime, the French witch who's headmistress of Beauxbatons, isn't
married. It seems that both "Madam" and "Madame" function as titles of respect
that a professional woman (or even a glorified seamstress like Madam Malkin or a
pub owner like Madam Rosmerta, who combines "Madam" with her first name) can
choose to use. It seems to function something like "Ms.", allowing a woman to
hide her marital status, except that it adds a hint of increased social status
as well. OTOH, happy housewives like Molly Weasley are addressed as "Mrs." (with
no indication that the term is derogatory) and young, unmarried girls are
addressed as "Miss" by their teachers, just as the boys are addressed as "Mr."
(I think it would have been "Master" in Victorian England and maybe even into
the 1950s, at least for Muggles, but the Wizards seem to have a slightly
different terminology.

Most likely, JKR didn't think it out. She may have started with the nicely
alliterative "Madam Malkin" and gone from there. In any case, the use of "Madam"
extends beyond Hogwarts into the British WW in general.

Carol, just thinking on her keyboard and arriving at no real conclusions.

Ken:
The prefix Madam is commonly used in British English as a term of respect
towards a lady, so that a schoolchild would be expected to refer to a teacher as
madam. This applies whether the lady is married or not hence Madam Maxine. In
the case of Madam Malkin it would no doubt indicate respect for an accomplished
robe maker who also had the acumen to hold a business together, the same would
apply to Madam Rosmerta. A shop assistant especially in a more quality shop
would be expected to refer to a female customer as madam, as in those shoes fit
you very well Madam do you know they are on a special offer this week. It is
thus perfectly possible for a Mrs Bloggs to also be referred to as Madam Bloggs,
especially in a school setting. This term almost certainly has French origins,
probably from the days of the Norman conquest when the villains would be
expected to refer to their newly acquired Norman mistresses as Madam. This may
be more familiar to American readers in its commonly shortened form of Maam. It
really is very common in Britain.
Ken



________________________________


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




From fenneyml at gmail.com  Sat Apr 30 19:23:30 2011
From: fenneyml at gmail.com (Margaret Fenney)
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 15:23:30 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Time travel/ was:Chapter Discussion: Prisoner
 of Azkaban Ch 16
In-Reply-To: <4DBC4C9E.6040201@comcast.net>
References: <ipfrn0+lpp2@eGroups.com>
	<4DBB9425.9080407@comcast.net>
	<4DBC4C9E.6040201@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimDLAf+vye5zpsn1a7ugMBN5K_h_Q@mail.gmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190345

Shelley

>
> >My husband also pointed out that Dumbledore, in order to stall at
> >Hagrid's "intentionally" to allow Harry and Hermione time to rescue
> >Buckbeak, must have been aware of the Time travel.
>
>

Margie:

 Dumbledore didn't suggest tea in order to stall, he suggested tea after
they found Buckbeak had escaped.  As you can see from the following quotes
from the relevant section, the text can be taken to mean that Dumbledore
stalled and then that he knew Buckbeak would be gone, but it doesn't
actually say that.  It could be interpreted in multiple ways:

(when Harry and Buckbeak were 10 feet from the forest)
"One moment, please, McNair" came Dumbledore's voice.  "You need to sign
too." (Fudge said earlier that Hagrid and McNair had to sign the execution
order)

(just before H & B reached the forest)
"Harry could still hear Dumbledore's voice talking from within the cabin."

(Then after they found Buckbeak had escaped)
"How extradordinary" said Dumbledore.  There was a note of amusement in his
voice.

(After McNair says they should search, Dumbledore says they would have flown
away then)
"Hagrid, I could do with a cup of tea or a large brandy."

(and they go back into Hagrid's hut)


Margie


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




From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sat Apr 30 21:31:29 2011
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (willsonteam)
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 21:31:29 -0000
Subject: Chapter Discussion: Prisoner of Azkaban Chapter 17: Cat, Rat and Dog
In-Reply-To: <iobgvc+8dt4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <iphv3h+dcs6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190346

> Geoff wrote:
> QUESTIONS
> 1. When the dog attacked the group, what were your thoughts about where 
> it had come from and what it was? For example, did your mind return to the 
> Grim? 
Potioncat:
All along Harry has seen a Grim-like animal?I thought we were about to learn more about it. By now I was pretty sure the dog was something else, but I wasn't sure what.
> 
> 2. Did you assume that it was attempting to get at Harry? If that was the 
> case, what was your reaction that, after Ron pushed Harry aside, it then 
> apparently focussed its attack on him instead?
Potioncat:
At first I thought it had made a mistake. Then I thought Black had used Ron as bait to get Harry to follow into the Shrieking Shack. I think it took me a long to work out that the dog grabbed Ron to get to Scabbers.
> 
> 3. Crookshanks pushed the knot on the trunk of the tree which caused its 
> flailing to stop. What were your thoughts at that point about Crookshanks 
> and his actions? Accidental? More to the Kneazle than meets the eye?

Potioncat:
 This chapter grew more confusing as it went along. I wasn't sure whose side Crookshanks was on.
> 
> 4. In the Shrieking Shack, the dog is then revealed to be Sirius Black. Had 
> any sort of possibility like this crossed your mind previously?
Potioncat:
 Oh yeah. I had also worked out that the rat was Pettigrew----Of course not. I had no inkling. But it's really fun to look back now and see how it all came together. Not so much clues as you first read it, but little details all along that verify the outcome.
> 
> 5. Many of Sirius' actions and words at the outset still seemed to indicate 
> that he was after Harry. Do you think that he took a very great risk to 
> himself in increasing that perception by saying to Harry "Going to kill me?". 
> If so, why did he behave in this way? Would Harry have really attempted 
> to do this if Crookshanks had not intervened?
Potioncat:
 I think Sirius is still emotionally unstable. Just as he allowed himself to be locked up in Azkaban, he seems resigned to the fact that Harry would want to kill him. I don't know if Harry would have tried, but I don't think he would have been successful. It's also important that we see Harry's rage now, and the intense feeling of wanting to kill someone. This is a sort of a foreshadowing   to casting Unforgivables.
> 
> 6. To me, this is the most interesting chapter in the whole book because 
> there are so many questions answered, so many puzzles resolved and, as 
> a result,  so many pieces of the jigsaw fall into place. Would you agree 
> and, if so, what was for you the most illuminating information that was 
> revealed?
Potioncat:
 I'd like to hear more of your thoughts on this. It seems to me that as we get new information in this chapter, we end up with more questions. But I do love the slow unfolding ?especially as Lupin works out Pettigrew's story---leaving the Trio and the first time reader more confused than ever.
These three chapters, "Cat, Rat, and Dog," "Moony, Wormtail , Padfoot, and Prongs," and "The Servant of Lord Voldemort" make a whole section that we used to refer to as the Shrieking Shack. (not to be confused with the Prank) and we discussed it endlessly. This section is one of my favorites.



Thanks for a great discussion! I wanted to join in sooner, but was determined to read the chapter first for a fresh viewpoint.




From geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com  Sat Apr 30 22:27:24 2011
From: geoffbannister123 at btinternet.com (Geoff)
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 22:27:24 -0000
Subject: teachers' personal lives / ''Madam''
In-Reply-To: <178490.30955.qm@web87014.mail.ird.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ipi2cc+kio7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 190347



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, KEN ADAMS <kenadams705 at ...> wrote:

Ken:
> The prefix Madam is commonly used in British English as a term of respect
> towards a lady, so that a schoolchild would be expected to refer to a teacher as
> madam. This applies whether the lady is married or not hence Madam Maxine. 

Geoff:
I'm not sure which part of the UK you are in but in my experience - both as 
a pupil and as a teacher in the London area - female teachers are referred
to either as just "Miss" or by their full title "Mrs. Smith" or "Miss Jones". At
Hogwarts, it is normal to use their qualification of "Professor" where that is
the case. I had a teacher at my grammar school who was addressed as
Dr. Cavell.

Ken:
> In the case of Madam Malkin it would no doubt indicate respect for an accomplished
> robe maker who also had the acumen to hold a business together, the same would
> apply to Madam Rosmerta. A shop assistant especially in a more quality shop
> would be expected to refer to a female customer as madam, as in those shoes fit
> you very well Madam do you know they are on a special offer this week. It is
> thus perfectly possible for a Mrs Bloggs to also be referred to as Madam Bloggs,
> especially in a school setting. 

Geoff:
As per my previous comment, the assistant would only refer to the customer 
as "Madam" without the family name. Otherwise if the assistant knows the 
name of the customer, a similar situation to the teaching pattern obtains. The 
usage for the owner or manageress of a shop is as you outline. I presume that
Madam Hooch is given this courtesy title because she is not a Professor.

Ken:
> This may be more familiar to American readers in its commonly shortened form of
> Maam. It really is very common in Britain.

Geoff:
Interestingly, I believe that where people have to meet the Queen, they are told 
that, for the first time they speak top her, they call her "Your Majesty" but, after 
that, they use "Ma'am".