Views on clues Re: A BIAS in the Pensieve: A Batty Idea About Snape

[Barry Arrowsmith]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> wrote:
> 
> Pippin:
> Were you furious when you realized that if you had recognized 
> that Tom Marvolo Riddle was an anagram of 'I am Lord 
> Voldemort'  you could have figured everything out? JKR didn't tell 
> us she was going to use anagrams, but she did give us a hint 
> with the legend over the Mirror of Erised. The clue is that like 
> Erised, Marvolo is a nonsense word.
> 

Kneasy:
No, I wasn't fussed about the anagram, as a plot device I thought it
a bit creaky and contrived, and I did spot the Erised thing straight 
away - mirror writing on a mirror is hardly rocket science.

Pippin:
> I maintain that some of JKR's interview answers are coded, and 
> the coded ones can be spotted just the way lies in the books 
> can. By the use of equivocal language, answers that don't 
> address the question, and hesitancy on the part of the speaker.
> 
> Bluffing is part of the game. The trick is to spot the 'tells'.
> 

Kneasy:
Coded? And I thought I was paranoid.
Why on earth would she 'code' replies?
Code only works if there's a designated receiver with an unscrambler. 
But yes, the trick is to ferret out some sort of reasonable conclusion
from what may be a deliberately obscure reply.

However, I fail to see how "I don't think so" could be classed as
an obscure answer.

> 
> Pippin:
> You mean, if I made the utterly shocking discovery that there are 
> clues in the books which can be deciphered only if their obvious 
> meaning is discarded? Otherwise known as red herrings?  Um, 
> I suppose that will leave my theories exactly where they are now. 
> Unproven and subject to dismantling by unequivocal canon. I do 
> abandon my theories at times, but only when they stop making 
> sense to me.  
> 

Kneasy:
Not my meaning.
Red herrings are expected and part of the fun.
I'm on about something more fundamental.
Suppose for example that after all this time and all the unequivocal 
statements in the books and in Q&As it turned out that Harry *did*  
have other relatives besides the Dursleys. Mark Evans for one.
Many, many fans would be deeply pissed about that and feel that
they'd been cheated.

I class the vampire denial on a par with Mark Evans; an answer that
can only be read one way. 


Pippin:
>  If I'm on the right track with ESE!Lupin then JKR *does* give 
> misleading statements in her interviews. ESE!Lupin has 
> correctly predicted developments in canon, for example that you 
> can see the Quidditch pitch from the DADA office, so you can 
> appreciate that I am not ready to abandon it. 
> 
> horribly afraid that JKR will fake an honorable death for Lupin in 
> Book Six just to further muddy the waters. Now that would be a 
> scurvy trick.

Kneasy:
Nah. Lupin ain't ESE.
Tsk, tsk, tsk. I can see you still haven't got the hang of this. 
Just 'cos he helped Sirius through the veil doesn't mean he's bad.
It was *Sirius* that was ESE.