[the_old_crowd] Re: A BIAS in the Pensieve: A Batty Idea About Snape

[Charme]

>> A good point about Snape and his wand, however where did canon say
> vampires
>> couldn't carry wands?
>
>
> It's in Fantastic Beasts etc. I'd look it up but I'd have to go into
> my kid's rooms for it and I'm not prepared to risk my life over it.
> Vampires are classified as beings and like house-elves and other
> non-human magical creatures may not carry wands.
>
Charme:

Lucky for me, I've got my own copy, so no life risking necessary. :) There's 
only one mention of vampires (as they are not a beast, but a being as you 
said) and that is actually in a small footnote on page xiii explaining that 
centaurs didn't like being classified as a "being" with hags and vampires, 
so they bugged out to manage their own affairs. I'm still looking for where 
it explains this specifically what you've stated, because I'm very 
interested to see it.  Should you come across it down the road, I'd love to 
know where you found it (it's not even on Lexicon - and they have a vampire 
"section" and "code of wand use" under the MoM pages.)  In the mean time, 
I'll keep looking. Weird, though.  Goblins are mentioned a bit, along with 
hags, centaurs and trolls, but no mention of elves or vampires in the 
opening "history" portion of the book.  Just makes you wonder.


> I wish I knew the remainder of this sentence from
>> GoF:
>>
>> "That woman's got it in for the Ministry of Magic!"  said Percy
> furiously.
>> "Last week she was saying we're wasting our time quibbling about
> cauldron
>> thickness, when we should be stamping out vampires!  As if it wasn't
>> specifically stated in paragraph twelve of the Guidelines for the
> Treatment
>> of Non-Wizard Part-Humans-"
>
> I fail to see how this relates to Severus Snape in any way, shape or
> form. Actually it points to a huge flaw in how vampires are treated in
> Rowlings world. They're non-human magical creatures and thus
> marginalized. We're told there are Vampire Hunters who go around
> "stamping out" vampires (or at least there are folk who think they
> should be) and while all that's going on, as you noted, Honeydukes is
> selling them blood-flavored lollies. Or are they. IIRC, it's stated
> that someone "thinks" that's what/who they're for.

Charme:

It's Hermoine who specifies they're for vampires, she "expects" in PoA. 
Forgive me for posting that quote to you in the first place, but I thought 
perhaps it might relate if we knew what the "Guidelines" were, that's all. 
As there is no entry in Fantastic Beasts for them, and there is for 
werewolves, I thought it might be someplace else in the books and I missed 
it.

>  The other thing I'd like to ask is
>> what exactly do you not consider a "dead issue?" I mean, what would
> you like
>> to see that would be different and intriguing for you?
>
> There are Far, FAR more interesting topics to discuss and always have
> been. My two favorite topics from my days on that other list (this is
> The "Old Crowd" isn't it?) are: 1) what went on at Godric's Hollow and
> what was Snape's role in it--as I am one of those convinced he was
> there; and 2) Was Snape in fact the eavesdropper?
>
> Discuss amongst yourselves.

Charme:

Thanks - I'll keep those in mind.