From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sun May  1 17:52:41 2005
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 17:52:41 -0000
Subject: OT, Personal: New Baby
In-Reply-To: <d4gk32+n2u7@...>
Message-ID: <d53519+dl9e@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "heiditandy" <heidi8 at g...> wrote:
> 
> April 14, Aaron & I welcomed the birth of our third child - Catherine
> Sabrina.

Oh, call her Cat, call her Cat.






From mecki987 at mecki987.yahoo.invalid  Mon May  2 05:35:59 2005
From: mecki987 at mecki987.yahoo.invalid (Mecki)
Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 05:35:59 -0000
Subject: OT- May I come back?
Message-ID: <d54e7v+44t1@...>

Hi there!

Most of you won't even remember me, because I haven't sent a single 
message for over a year now.
In march last year, I had given birth to a wonderful, but very ill 
little girl, Mira Madita. We had a fight for life on the ICU over nine 
months, but we lost this fight in january.

It is hard for me to "go out to people again" and after a few feeble 
tries in the "real world" I decided to try and contact old friend in 
the internet, where you can not see my face, when I'm writing.

So, I might not be cheerful at the moment, or very witty, I might lurk 
more than I write. But I'm back, at least I hope so.

Thanks for reading
Mecki,
with 2 kids and 2 angels







From macloudt at macloudt.yahoo.invalid  Mon May  2 14:01:10 2005
From: macloudt at macloudt.yahoo.invalid (Mary Jennings)
Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 14:01:10 +0000
Subject: [the_old_crowd] OT- May I come back?
In-Reply-To: <d54e7v+44t1@...>
Message-ID: <BAY14-F6A57A5F7986891AF0C578C6270@...>

***Pulls up a comfy chair, fluffs up the pillows, puts a box of chocolates 
on the table and hugs Mecki***

Good to hear from you again.  Welcome back.

Mary Ann, who also does nothing but lurk





From pt4ever at pt4ever.yahoo.invalid  Mon May  2 14:03:20 2005
From: pt4ever at pt4ever.yahoo.invalid (JoAnna Wahlund)
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 07:03:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [the_old_crowd] OT- May I come back?
In-Reply-To: 6667
Message-ID: <20050502140320.81103.qmail@...>

I'm so sorry for your loss, Mecki.  :( *hugs*  

But I'm glad you're back.  :)

--- Mecki <mecki987 at ...> wrote:
> Hi there!
> 
> Most of you won't even remember me, because I haven't sent a single 
> message for over a year now.
> In march last year, I had given birth to a wonderful, but very ill 
> little girl, Mira Madita. We had a fight for life on the ICU over nine 
> months, but we lost this fight in january.
> 
> It is hard for me to "go out to people again" and after a few feeble 
> tries in the "real world" I decided to try and contact old friend in 
> the internet, where you can not see my face, when I'm writing.
> 
> So, I might not be cheerful at the moment, or very witty, I might lurk 
> more than I write. But I'm back, at least I hope so.
> 
> Thanks for reading
> Mecki,
> with 2 kids and 2 angels
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

~JoAnna~ 

 
Elly was born on 01/13/05.
Visit Elanor's website for pictures and updates! 
http://www.geocities.com/j_wahlund







__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 



From pbnesbit at harpdreamer.yahoo.invalid  Mon May  2 18:23:02 2005
From: pbnesbit at harpdreamer.yahoo.invalid (Parker Brown Nesbit)
Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 14:23:02 -0400
Subject: [the_old_crowd] OT- May I come back?
In-Reply-To: <d54e7v+44t1@...>
Message-ID: <BAY107-F32B3E5B37F31BDA700BB2FD0270@...>

Mecki wrote:

>Hi there!
>
>Most of you won't even remember me, because I haven't sent a single
>message for over a year now.
>In march last year, I had given birth to a wonderful, but very ill
>little girl, Mira Madita. We had a fight for life on the ICU over nine
>months, but we lost this fight in january.


Welcome back, Mecki.  And sincerest condolences on your loss--you (all of 
you) are in my thoughts.

Parker





From voicelady at the_voicelady.yahoo.invalid  Mon May  2 23:05:34 2005
From: voicelady at the_voicelady.yahoo.invalid (voicelady)
Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 19:05:34 EDT
Subject: [the_old_crowd] OT- May I come back?
Message-ID: <id.02052005190534.00000@FPE>

Hi there. You may not have been here, but we never let you go. You're one of us. {{{hug}}}

Jeralyn
--------------------------------------------------------------
Hi there!

Most of you won't even remember me, because I haven't sent a single  message for over a year now.
In march last year, I had given birth to a wonderful, but very ill  little girl, Mira Madita. We had a fight for life on the ICU over nine  months, but we lost this fight in january.

It is hard for me to "go out to people again" and after a few feeble  tries in the "real world" I decided to try and contact old friend in  the internet, where you can not see my face, when I'm writing.

So, I might not be cheerful at the moment, or very witty, I might lurk  more than I write. But I'm back, at least I hope so.

Thanks for reading
Mecki,
with 2 kids and 2 angels






------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->  Take a look at donorschoose.org, an excellent charitable web site for anyone who cares about public education!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/O.5XsA/8WnJAA/E2hLAA/.DlolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links



 






From mecki987 at mecki987.yahoo.invalid  Tue May  3 05:33:07 2005
From: mecki987 at mecki987.yahoo.invalid (Mecki)
Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 05:33:07 -0000
Subject: Thank you - Re: OT- May I come back?
In-Reply-To: <d54e7v+44t1@...>
Message-ID: <d572ej+4aik@...>

Thank you all!

I never expected such a warm welcome.
I'm sitting here crying again, but they are "good" tears.


Thanks so much
Mecki
with 2 kids and now 2 angels
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
beyond the door
there's peace I'm sure
and I know there'll be no more
tears in heaven
(Eric Clapton- tears in heaven)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mecki--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Mecki" <mecki987 at y...> 
wrote:
> Hi there!
> 
> Most of you won't even remember me, because I haven't sent a single 
> message for over a year now.
> In march last year, I had given birth to a wonderful, but very ill 
> little girl, Mira Madita. We had a fight for life on the ICU over 
nine 
> months, but we lost this fight in january.
> 
> It is hard for me to "go out to people again" and after a few 
feeble 
> tries in the "real world" I decided to try and contact old friend 
in 
> the internet, where you can not see my face, when I'm writing.
> 
> So, I might not be cheerful at the moment, or very witty, I might 
lurk 
> more than I write. But I'm back, at least I hope so.
> 
> Thanks for reading
> Mecki,
> with 2 kids and 2 angels






From pennylin at plinsenmayer.yahoo.invalid  Wed May  4 03:13:03 2005
From: pennylin at plinsenmayer.yahoo.invalid (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 22:13:03 -0500
Subject: [the_old_crowd] OT- May I come back?
References: <d54e7v+44t1@...>
Message-ID: <002201c55057$33b8c0d0$210110ac@MainDesktop>

Hi Mecki --

I too am very sorry to hear about your loss ------- it's heartbreaking.  I actually tried to email you back in January (I think it was Sheryll who told me about your daughter's death), but it bounced back to me.  I'm glad to have the chance to express my condolences.  I'm glad also that you're back.

Hugs,

Penny
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Mecki 
  To: the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 12:35 AM
  Subject: [the_old_crowd] OT- May I come back?


  Hi there!

  Most of you won't even remember me, because I haven't sent a single 
  message for over a year now.
  In march last year, I had given birth to a wonderful, but very ill 
  little girl, Mira Madita. We had a fight for life on the ICU over nine 
  months, but we lost this fight in january.

  It is hard for me to "go out to people again" and after a few feeble 
  tries in the "real world" I decided to try and contact old friend in 
  the internet, where you can not see my face, when I'm writing.

  So, I might not be cheerful at the moment, or very witty, I might lurk 
  more than I write. But I'm back, at least I hope so.

  Thanks for reading
  Mecki,
  with 2 kids and 2 angels






------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Yahoo! Groups Links

    a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/
      
    b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    the_old_crowd-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
      
    c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



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




From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Wed May  4 12:24:03 2005
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 12:24:03 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_The_Prophecy_From_Voldemort=92s_POV_(long)?=
In-Reply-To: <d4pkja+5cor@...>
Message-ID: <d5aet3+79dc@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" <nkafkafi at y...> wrote:
> 
> "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches".
> 
> Read that again. ALL of Voldemort's strategy since before GH and
> throughout the series has been based on this single sentence. And of
> course on his guess regarding the part that he doesn't know, which
> apparently wasn't a very good guess. 
> 
> If we are ready to take DD's word, he tells us several additional
> things about Voldemort's view of the prophecy. First, it seems that
> before GH Voldy didn't see the prophecy as a threat at all. DD words
> are: "He set out to kill you when you were still a baby, believing he
> was fulfilling the terms of the prophecy. He discovered, to his cost,
> that he was mistaken, when the curse intended to kill you backfired."
> 
> Several paragraphs later DD stresses again that, until GH, Voldy
> didn't realize that baby Harry could be dangerous: "He <the
> eavesdropper> heard only the beginning, the part foretelling the birth
> of a boy in July to parents who had thrice defied Voldemort.
> Consequently, he could not warn his master that to attack you would be
> to risk transferring power to you, and marking you as his equal. So
> Voldemort never knew that there might be danger in attacking you, that
> it might be wise to wait, to learn more. He did not know that you
> would have power the Dark Lord knows not." 
> 

Kneasy:
This passage has bothered me for since I  first read it. Is DD reporting fact
or indulging in a little post-facto rationalisation? And where in the Prophecy
does it mention the transfer of powers that Voldy's little helper couldn't
warn him about? It doesn't so far as I can see, yet DD acts as if it were
an unavoidable adjunct to Voldy's actions at GH.

Can't see how Voldy would jump to the conclusion that knocking off a
snotty rug-rat is a fulfillment of the Prophecy either. Just the opposite - if
I were on the receiving end my interpretation of the fragment whispered
into his shell-like would be "If you want a long, satisfying career killing 
Muggles and terrorising the WW, stay the hell away from H. Potter." 

Our beloved arch-villain is supposed to be intelligent, powerful, all that
good stuff, with a traitor to help fill in the blank spots, yet he tip-toes 
through the Potter's tulips and bursts into the haven of domestic felicity 
like a neophyte numpty who's forgoten that the Potters are DD's ewe-lambs.
"Aha! Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition! Oops! Oh bugger!"
Does not compute.

I've argued previously that Voldy may well have intended rounding off a
pleasant evening's entertainment with a touch of infanticide, but he 
wanted something else first. There's that word, you see. 
The one that'd prick his ears up as if he were the household mutt and 
somebody says "Walkies!" 
Power. 
Isn't that what he's all about?

Dunno if you remember, but about a year back there was a discussion on
HPfGU that resulted in great wailings and gnashings of teeth for some, and
blank incomprehension for others. All about the 'morality' of Harry killing
Voldy and how doing so would 'stain' or 'pollute' his noble character. Ah
well, takes all sorts, I suppose. The argument seems pretty pointless, 'cos 
if the Prophecy is to be taken at face value it'll be Harry or nobody. He's the
one with the power; nobody else - not DD, Dung or Daedelus Diggle - Harry.
(Assuming that the Prophecy is about him.) Which means that Voldy can't be
made to bite the dust by something as mundane as an AK. Lots of wizards, 
good and bad have used that one as the last word in an argument, but 
apparently they're not gonna be successful against ole Snake Eyes. 

We know remarkably little about how an AK works. Yes it kills folk, it's 
forbidden, it takes practice (not the same as 'power', I think) and it leaves a
lovely corpse. Does it stop the heart, coagulate the blood, fry the autonomic
nervous system or turn the brain into a species of molten cheese? We don't 
know. Perhaps it has no physical effect at all but removes what could be 
referred to as anima, the vital principle. (Not to be confused with 'soul'; that's
what Dementors extract and the result is coma, catatonia or something similar,
but not death.) 

Anyway, the Prophecy indicates that young Potter has the 'power', it's 
something innate, not something to be learned once this lisping mite has 
grown up and learned how to handle a wand without blowing his own 
buttocks off. And since our malevolent malefactor has spent years researching
ways to up his survivability index, it's a fair bet that he'd be really interested 
in finding out just what this power was that could scupper his dastardly plans.

It's from this line of thinking that two of my favourite theories can be deduced:
1. Possession
2. DD's trap
They're linked to a certain extent, though each could  stand on it's own.
Voldy wants to find out what this power is, so he invades Harry's mind. DD 
knows or surmises that this will happen and sets up or arranges/suggests 
that the protective charms be emplaced, much to Voldy's embarrassment. 
He probably hoped that they'd knock Voldy out of the game, but they didn't,
not quite. And remember, at this time Voldy was winning; the Potter ploy 
might be the only decent chance that the goodies have for a shot at Voldy. 
'Course to make it work he must make sure that Voldy walks into the trap 
with his eyes wide shut, leading to interesting speculations about the role 
of el ratto grande in the affair. And not just that - did DD see the Prophecy 
as a fortuitous opportunity, or was the Prophecy his idea in the first place? 
A deliberate contrivance whose whole object was to lure Voldy to the bleating 
kid staked out at Godric's Hollow. 

I do like it when discrete theories can be linked into an harmonious thread. 
Not that that makes it right, but it do make it intellectually satisfying. Could 
be a tie-in with Neri's quotes from the Book Festival too; we don't really need
to worry about the contents per se of the Prophecy, just when, where and 
how it was produced.  

> Neri:
> DD also tells us about Voldemort's current guess regarding the second
> half of the prophecy: "And so, since his return to his body, and
> particularly since your extraordinary escape from him last year, he
> has been determined to hear that prophecy in its entirety. This is the
> weapon he has been seeking so assiduously since his return: the
> knowledge of how to destroy you."
> 
> I know I'm not the only member who has a problem with these words of
> DD, "the knowledge of how to destroy you." The second half doesn't
> seem to contain any special knowledge how to destroy Harry. But Voldy
> thinks it does.
> 

Kneasy:
Yeah, it bothers me a bit, too.
My free-floating paranoia suspects a link to Diary!Tom and his assumption
that  "there's nothing special about you at all." Plus his obsession with 
learning the entire Prophecy seems to date (roughly) from his renewed 
association with Peter (him again). Plus he never seems to be worried about
exactly which of his powers have been transplanted into Harry.  Plus why 
couldn't he have gained at least an inkling about the 'power' during the 
Ministry possession? 
Or perhaps he has. 
Only 73 days until we find out.







From fmaneely at fhmaneely.yahoo.invalid  Wed May  4 13:29:10 2005
From: fmaneely at fhmaneely.yahoo.invalid (fhmaneely)
Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 13:29:10 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_The_Prophecy_From_Voldemort=92s_POV_(long)?=
In-Reply-To: <d5aet3+79dc@...>
Message-ID: <d5ain6+9gb1@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Barry Arrowsmith" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" <nkafkafi at y...> 
wrote:
> > 
> > "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches".
> > 
> > Read that again. ALL of Voldemort's strategy since before GH and
> > throughout the series has been based on this single sentence. And 
of
> > course on his guess regarding the part that he doesn't know, which
> > apparently wasn't a very good guess. 
> > 
> > If we are ready to take DD's word, he tells us several additional
> > things about Voldemort's view of the prophecy. First, it seems 
that
> > before GH Voldy didn't see the prophecy as a threat at all. DD 
words
> > are: "He set out to kill you when you were still a baby, 
believing he
> > was fulfilling the terms of the prophecy. He discovered, to his 
cost,
> > that he was mistaken, when the curse intended to kill you 
backfired."
> > 
> > Several paragraphs later DD stresses again that, until GH, Voldy
> > didn't realize that baby Harry could be dangerous: "He <the
> > eavesdropper> heard only the beginning, the part foretelling the 
birth
> > of a boy in July to parents who had thrice defied Voldemort.
> > Consequently, he could not warn his master that to attack you 
would be
> > to risk transferring power to you, and marking you as his equal. 
So
> > Voldemort never knew that there might be danger in attacking you, 
that
> > it might be wise to wait, to learn more. He did not know that you
> > would have power the Dark Lord knows not." 
> > 
> 
> Kneasy:
> This passage has bothered me for since I  first read it. Is DD 
reporting fact
> or indulging in a little post-facto rationalisation? And where in 
the Prophecy
> does it mention the transfer of powers that Voldy's little helper 
couldn't
> warn him about? It doesn't so far as I can see, yet DD acts as if 
it were
> an unavoidable adjunct to Voldy's actions at GH.
> 
> Can't see how Voldy would jump to the conclusion that knocking off a
> snotty rug-rat is a fulfillment of the Prophecy either. Just the 
opposite - if
> I were on the receiving end my interpretation of the fragment 
whispered
> into his shell-like would be "If you want a long, satisfying career 
killing 
> Muggles and terrorising the WW, stay the hell away from H. Potter." 
> 
> Our beloved arch-villain is supposed to be intelligent, powerful, 
all that
> good stuff, with a traitor to help fill in the blank spots, yet he 
tip-toes 
> through the Potter's tulips and bursts into the haven of domestic 
felicity 
> like a neophyte numpty who's forgoten that the Potters are DD's ewe-
lambs.
> "Aha! Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition! Oops! Oh bugger!"
> Does not compute.
> 
> I've argued previously that Voldy may well have intended rounding 
off a
> pleasant evening's entertainment with a touch of infanticide, but 
he 
> wanted something else first. There's that word, you see. 
> The one that'd prick his ears up as if he were the household mutt 
and 
> somebody says "Walkies!" 
> Power. 
> Isn't that what he's all about?
> 
> Dunno if you remember, but about a year back there was a discussion 
on
> HPfGU that resulted in great wailings and gnashings of teeth for 
some, and
> blank incomprehension for others. All about the 'morality' of Harry 
killing
> Voldy and how doing so would 'stain' or 'pollute' his noble 
character. Ah
> well, takes all sorts, I suppose. The argument seems pretty 
pointless, 'cos 
> if the Prophecy is to be taken at face value it'll be Harry or 
nobody. He's the
> one with the power; nobody else - not DD, Dung or Daedelus Diggle - 
Harry.
> (Assuming that the Prophecy is about him.) Which means that Voldy 
can't be
> made to bite the dust by something as mundane as an AK. Lots of 
wizards, 
> good and bad have used that one as the last word in an argument, 
but 
> apparently they're not gonna be successful against ole Snake Eyes. 
> 
> We know remarkably little about how an AK works. Yes it kills folk, 
it's 
> forbidden, it takes practice (not the same as 'power', I think) and 
it leaves a
> lovely corpse. Does it stop the heart, coagulate the blood, fry the 
autonomic
> nervous system or turn the brain into a species of molten cheese? 
We don't 
> know. Perhaps it has no physical effect at all but removes what 
could be 
> referred to as anima, the vital principle. (Not to be confused 
with 'soul'; that's
> what Dementors extract and the result is coma, catatonia or 
something similar,
> but not death.) 
> 
> Anyway, the Prophecy indicates that young Potter has the 'power', 
it's 
> something innate, not something to be learned once this lisping 
mite has 
> grown up and learned how to handle a wand without blowing his own 
> buttocks off. And since our malevolent malefactor has spent years 
researching
> ways to up his survivability index, it's a fair bet that he'd be 
really interested 
> in finding out just what this power was that could scupper his 
dastardly plans.
> 
> It's from this line of thinking that two of my favourite theories 
can be deduced:
> 1. Possession
> 2. DD's trap
> They're linked to a certain extent, though each could  stand on 
it's own.
> Voldy wants to find out what this power is, so he invades Harry's 
mind. DD 
> knows or surmises that this will happen and sets up or 
arranges/suggests 
> that the protective charms be emplaced, much to Voldy's 
embarrassment. 
> He probably hoped that they'd knock Voldy out of the game, but they 
didn't,
> not quite. And remember, at this time Voldy was winning; the Potter 
ploy 
> might be the only decent chance that the goodies have for a shot at 
Voldy. 
> 'Course to make it work he must make sure that Voldy walks into the 
trap 
> with his eyes wide shut, leading to interesting speculations about 
the role 
> of el ratto grande in the affair. And not just that - did DD see 
the Prophecy 
> as a fortuitous opportunity, or was the Prophecy his idea in the 
first place? 
> A deliberate contrivance whose whole object was to lure Voldy to 
the bleating 
> kid staked out at Godric's Hollow. 
> 
> I do like it when discrete theories can be linked into an 
harmonious thread. 
> Not that that makes it right, but it do make it intellectually 
satisfying. Could 
> be a tie-in with Neri's quotes from the Book Festival too; we don't 
really need
> to worry about the contents per se of the Prophecy, just when, 
where and 
> how it was produced.  
> 
> > Neri:
> > DD also tells us about Voldemort's current guess regarding the 
second
> > half of the prophecy: "And so, since his return to his body, and
> > particularly since your extraordinary escape from him last year, 
he
> > has been determined to hear that prophecy in its entirety. This 
is the
> > weapon he has been seeking so assiduously since his return: the
> > knowledge of how to destroy you."
> > 
> > I know I'm not the only member who has a problem with these words 
of
> > DD, "the knowledge of how to destroy you." The second half doesn't
> > seem to contain any special knowledge how to destroy Harry. But 
Voldy
> > thinks it does.
> > 
> 
> Kneasy:
> Yeah, it bothers me a bit, too.
> My free-floating paranoia suspects a link to Diary!Tom and his 
assumption
> that  "there's nothing special about you at all." Plus his 
obsession with 
> learning the entire Prophecy seems to date (roughly) from his 
renewed 
> association with Peter (him again). Plus he never seems to be 
worried about
> exactly which of his powers have been transplanted into Harry.  
Plus why 
> couldn't he have gained at least an inkling about the 'power' 
during the 
> Ministry possession? 
> Or perhaps he has. 
> Only 73 days until we find out.

Fran:  Harry as born with the power to defeat LV. Seems to me this 
has nothing to do with the powers were transfered at GH, but those 
powers are important. When Harry meets Diary!Tom, he kills him by 
plunging the fang into the diary.  Good guess on Harry's part or is 
this part of his innate knowledge of how to defeat LV?  

2 things that bother me are (1)where did Harry get the powers he was 
born with?  Lily, James,or both?  Harry of course would not be Harry 
if he were bornto different parents....or would he?  (2)Why exactly 
dose Harry's scar hurt when Voldie is around or particularly 
mischevious?  Is there a part of LV in Harry trying to get back to 
its master ala LOTR.
Apologies if these questions seem a somewhat lame, but Iwould like 
some input!
Ah yes, 73 days





From fmaneely at fhmaneely.yahoo.invalid  Wed May  4 13:38:18 2005
From: fmaneely at fhmaneely.yahoo.invalid (fhmaneely)
Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 13:38:18 -0000
Subject: OT- May I come back?
In-Reply-To: <d54e7v+44t1@...>
Message-ID: <d5aj8a+kgte@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Mecki" <mecki987 at y...> wrote:
> Hi there!
> 
> Most of you won't even remember me, because I haven't sent a single 
> message for over a year now.
> In march last year, I had given birth to a wonderful, but very ill 
> little girl, Mira Madita. We had a fight for life on the ICU over 
nine 
> months, but we lost this fight in january.
> 
> It is hard for me to "go out to people again" and after a few 
feeble 
> tries in the "real world" I decided to try and contact old friend 
in 
> the internet, where you can not see my face, when I'm writing.
> 
> So, I might not be cheerful at the moment, or very witty, I might 
lurk 
> more than I write. But I'm back, at least I hope so.
> 
> Thanks for reading
> Mecki,
> with 2 kids and 2 angels

Very sorry to hear about your loss! My mother lost a 2 yr old, and a 
friend lost an infant shortly after birth, so I know to an extent 
what you are going through.  My deepest condolences to you and your 
family.
Fran





From nkafkafi at nkafkafi.yahoo.invalid  Thu May  5 00:52:27 2005
From: nkafkafi at nkafkafi.yahoo.invalid (nkafkafi)
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 00:52:27 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Hagrid=92s_professional_experience_and_Weasley=92s_age_group_=96_again?=
Message-ID: <d5bqob+pagp@...>

Several weeks ago we had a discussion whether Hagrid became gamekeeper
immediately after he was expelled, or was he apprenticed first. This
question turned out to be connected with Molly's and Arthur age, which
is never explicitly mentioned in canon. The full discussion was in posts:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/1455
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/1458
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/1470
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/1465

If you don't feel like looking it up now, the dilemma in brief is that
Hagrid, in those rare occasions when he mentions the subject, creates
the impression that he became the gamekeeper immediately after he was
expelled, but Molly remembers Ogg, who was "the gamekeeper before
Hagrid". This forces us to choose between two optional interpretations:

A. Hagrid's was indeed gamekeeper from the beginning and this implies
that the Weasleys are in his and Tom Riddles's age group (around 70)
or older.

B. Hagrid neglected to mention that he was first Ogg's apprentice for
several years. In this case the Weasleys can be younger than Hagrid by
approximately the number of years that he was an apprentice.

There's of course always the third option: JKR got her dates mixed up
again. I don't like this option (although I was forced to resort to it
in the past) so I was glad when I recently came across some evidence
for option B. This is by Tom Riddle who, when bragging about framing
Hagrid in the Chamber of Secrets, says:

(CoS, Ch. 17 p. 312 US)
"Only the Transfiguration teacher, Dumbledore, seemed to think Hagrid
was innocent. He convinced Dippet to keep him and train him as gamekeeper"

This "train him as gamekeeper" suggests, IMO, a period of
apprenticeship. Tom might be lying, of course, but I don't see any
particular motive for him to lie about this. Since evidence for option
B come from two different books, CoS and GoF (in which Molly tells us
about Ogg) I think we can conclude that Hagrid's biography in JKR's
notebook includes a period of being an apprentice of Ogg, and as with
Dean's background or Flitwick's roots she just never got around to
tell us about it. This means the Weasleys can be 60 or even 50 years old.

Neri  






From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Thu May  5 11:50:50 2005
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 11:50:50 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Flitwick_(was:_Hagrid=92s_professional_experience_)?=
In-Reply-To: <d5bqob+pagp@...>
Message-ID: <d5d1aq+jiof@...>

Neri wrote:

> ...as with
> Dean's background or Flitwick's roots she just never got around to
> tell us about it.

Flitwick's roots?  Does he dye his hair?  Surely JKR's silence on this 
point is significant.

David, election-happy





From quigonginger at quigonginger.yahoo.invalid  Thu May  5 12:07:32 2005
From: quigonginger at quigonginger.yahoo.invalid (quigonginger)
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 12:07:32 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Flitwick_(was:_Hagrid=92s_professional_experience_)?=
In-Reply-To: <d5d1aq+jiof@...>
Message-ID: <d5d2a4+puvn@...>

> Neri wrote:
> 
> > ...as with
> > Dean's background or Flitwick's roots she just never got around to
> > tell us about it.

David answered:
> Flitwick's roots?  Does he dye his hair?  Surely JKR's silence on 
this 
> point is significant.

Ginger:  Haven't you heard?  A major character is going to dye in HBP.
(Ginger does a duck and run.)





From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Thu May  5 12:12:04 2005
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 12:12:04 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Flitwick_(was:_Hagrid=92s_professional_experience_)?=
In-Reply-To: <d5d2a4+puvn@...>
Message-ID: <d5d2ik+28de@...>

> > Neri wrote:
> > 
> > > ...as with
> > > Dean's background or Flitwick's roots she just never got around 
to
> > > tell us about it.
> 
> David answered:
> > Flitwick's roots?  Does he dye his hair?  Surely JKR's silence on 
> this 
> > point is significant.
> 
> Ginger:  Haven't you heard?  A major character is going to dye in 
HBP.

David:  Obviously a highlight of one of the plot strands.





From willsonkmom at potioncat.yahoo.invalid  Thu May  5 15:52:47 2005
From: willsonkmom at potioncat.yahoo.invalid (potioncat)
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 15:52:47 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Flitwick_(was:_Hagrid=92s_professional_experience_)?=
In-Reply-To: <d5d2ik+28de@...>
Message-ID: <d5dfgf+5hr9@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" <dfrankiswork at n...> 
wrote:
> > > Neri wrote:
> > > 
> > > > ...as with
> > > > Dean's background or Flitwick's roots she just never got around 
> to
> > > > tell us about it.
> > 
> > David answered:
> > > Flitwick's roots?  Does he dye his hair?  Surely JKR's silence on 
> > this 
> > > point is significant.
> > 
> > Ginger:  Haven't you heard?  A major character is going to dye in 
> HBP.
> 
> David:  Obviously a highlight of one of the plot strands.

Potioncat:
This is the most hair-brained thread I've ever seen! Come on, we've had 
the Heir of Slytherin, we don't need the Hair of Ravenclaw!







From fmaneely at fhmaneely.yahoo.invalid  Thu May  5 18:00:49 2005
From: fmaneely at fhmaneely.yahoo.invalid (fhmaneely)
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 18:00:49 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Flitwick_(was:_Hagrid=92s_professional_experience_)?=
In-Reply-To: <d5dfgf+5hr9@...>
Message-ID: <d5dn0h+3v3t@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" <willsonkmom at m...> 
wrote:
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" 
<dfrankiswork at n...> 
> wrote:
> > > > Neri wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > ...as with
> > > > > Dean's background or Flitwick's roots she just never got 
around 
> > to
> > > > > tell us about it.
> > > 
> > > David answered:
> > > > Flitwick's roots?  Does he dye his hair?  Surely JKR's 
silence on 
> > > this 
> > > > point is significant.
> > > 
> > > Ginger:  Haven't you heard?  A major character is going to dye 
in 
> > HBP.
> > 
> > David:  Obviously a highlight of one of the plot strands.
> 
> Potioncat:
> This is the most hair-brained thread I've ever seen! Come on, we've 
had 
> the Heir of Slytherin, we don't need the Hair of Ravenclaw!

Fran:
I'm sure any plot to doo in Flitwick will be foiled!





From quigonginger at quigonginger.yahoo.invalid  Thu May  5 20:04:59 2005
From: quigonginger at quigonginger.yahoo.invalid (quigonginger)
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 20:04:59 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Flitwick_(was:_Hagrid=92s_professional_experience_)?=
In-Reply-To: <d5dn0h+3v3t@...>
Message-ID: <d5du9b+uctu@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "fhmaneely" <fmaneely at b...> 
wrote:
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" 
<willsonkmom at m...> 
> wrote:
> > --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" 
> <dfrankiswork at n...> 
> > wrote:
> > > > > Neri wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > ...as with
> > > > > > Dean's background or Flitwick's roots she just never got 
> around 
> > > to
> > > > > > tell us about it.
> > > > 
> > > > David answered:
> > > > > Flitwick's roots?  Does he dye his hair?  Surely JKR's 
> silence on 
> > > > this 
> > > > > point is significant.
> > > > 
> > > > Ginger:  Haven't you heard?  A major character is going to 
dye 
> in 
> > > HBP.
> > > 
> > > David:  Obviously a highlight of one of the plot strands.
> > 
> > Potioncat:
> > This is the most hair-brained thread I've ever seen! Come on, 
we've 
> had 
> > the Heir of Slytherin, we don't need the Hair of Ravenclaw!
> 
> Fran:
> I'm sure any plot to doo in Flitwick will be foiled!

Ginger:  Indeed, if Flitwick wigs out, someone will have toupee.





From gypsycaine at deeus2002106703.yahoo.invalid  Fri May  6 03:04:43 2005
From: gypsycaine at deeus2002106703.yahoo.invalid (deeus2002106703)
Date: Fri, 06 May 2005 03:04:43 -0000
Subject: OT, Personal: New Baby
In-Reply-To: <d53519+dl9e@...>
Message-ID: <d5emsb+b02v@...>

(in case this comes twice, forgive me!)

To toss in a "me too," my littlest was born April 24, 12:32p EDT, at 
6#9 and 19".  Erik David is doing fine as is Mommy Dee and brother Ian.
:)

I miss you all terribly!

Dee
(GypsyCaine)





From gypsycaine at deeus2002106703.yahoo.invalid  Fri May  6 03:00:11 2005
From: gypsycaine at deeus2002106703.yahoo.invalid (gypsycaine at deeus2002106703.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 23:00:11 -0400
Subject: [the_old_crowd] OT, Personal: New Baby
Message-ID: <113ab5115093.115093113ab5@...>

Okay guys. I guess this is the "me too" portion?

Grins.

Erik David born April 24, 12:32p, 6 pounds, 9 oz, and 19 inches in 
length. :)

Mommy and big brother Ian are doing fine as is Erik.  

I miss you all!

Dee
(GypsyCaine)


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




From willsonkmom at potioncat.yahoo.invalid  Fri May  6 13:55:52 2005
From: willsonkmom at potioncat.yahoo.invalid (potioncat)
Date: Fri, 06 May 2005 13:55:52 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Flitwick_(was:_Hagrid=92s_professional_experience_)?=
In-Reply-To: <d5du9b+uctu@...>
Message-ID: <d5ft18+u172@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" 
<quigonginger at y...> wrote:
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "fhmaneely" <fmaneely at b...> 
> wrote:
> > --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" 
> <willsonkmom at m...> 
> > wrote:
> > > --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" 
> > <dfrankiswork at n...> 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > Neri wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > ...as with
> > > > > > > Dean's background or Flitwick's roots she just never 
got 
> > around 
> > > > to
> > > > > > > tell us about it.
> > > > > 
> > > > > David answered:
> > > > > > Flitwick's roots?  Does he dye his hair?  Surely JKR's 
> > silence on 
> > > > > this 
> > > > > > point is significant.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Ginger:  Haven't you heard?  A major character is going to 
> dye 
> > in 
> > > > HBP.
> > > > 
> > > > David:  Obviously a highlight of one of the plot strands.
> > > 
> > > Potioncat:
> > > This is the most hair-brained thread I've ever seen! Come on, 
> we've 
> > had 
> > > the Heir of Slytherin, we don't need the Hair of Ravenclaw!
> > 
> > Fran:
> > I'm sure any plot to doo in Flitwick will be foiled!
> 
> Ginger:  Indeed, if Flitwick wigs out, someone will have toupee.

Potioncat:
Either way, it calls for a permanent solution.





From pt4ever at pt4ever.yahoo.invalid  Fri May  6 14:11:26 2005
From: pt4ever at pt4ever.yahoo.invalid (JoAnna Wahlund)
Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 07:11:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [the_old_crowd] OT, Personal: New Baby
In-Reply-To: 6667
Message-ID: <20050506141126.66345.qmail@...>

Congratulations!  I love his name!

--- gypsycaine at ... wrote:
> Okay guys. I guess this is the "me too" portion?
> 
> Grins.
> 
> Erik David born April 24, 12:32p, 6 pounds, 9 oz, and 19 inches in 
> length. :)
> 
> Mommy and big brother Ian are doing fine as is Erik.  
> 
> I miss you all!
> 
> Dee
> (GypsyCaine)
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 

~JoAnna~ 

 
Elly was born on 01/13/05.
Visit Elanor's website for pictures and updates! 
http://www.geocities.com/j_wahlund








		
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html




From pbnesbit at harpdreamer.yahoo.invalid  Fri May  6 23:12:07 2005
From: pbnesbit at harpdreamer.yahoo.invalid (Parker Brown Nesbit)
Date: Fri, 06 May 2005 19:12:07 -0400
Subject: [the_old_crowd] OT, Personal: New Baby
In-Reply-To: <113ab5115093.115093113ab5@...>
Message-ID: <BAY107-F2467F869CD190274CA95ADD01B0@...>


>Okay guys. I guess this is the "me too" portion?
>
>Grins.
>
>Erik David born April 24, 12:32p, 6 pounds, 9 oz, and 19 inches in
>length. :)
>
>Mommy and big brother Ian are doing fine as is Erik.
>
>I miss you all!
>
>Dee
>(GypsyCaine)


Congratulations to all of you!  If I remember correctly, Erik shares a 
birthday with Elizabeth Linsenmeyer, so a double reason to celebrate the day 
;)

Parker
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>





From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sun May  8 00:50:41 2005
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 08 May 2005 00:50:41 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_The_Prophecy_From_Voldemort=92s_POV_(long)?=
In-Reply-To: <d5aet3+79dc@...>
Message-ID: <d5jnp1+n7sl@...>

Welcome back, Mecki. I wish you had a happier reason for returning to
your old friends here.

Kneasy wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_
old_crowd/message/1622 :

<< And where in the Prophecy does it mention the transfer of powers
that Voldy's little helper couldn't warn him about? It doesn't so far
as I can see, yet DD acts as if it were an unavoidable adjunct to
Voldy's actions at GH. >>

Maybe there is special wizarding jargon that we Muggles don't know in
which 'mark as an equal' MEANS 'transfer powers to'. :)

<< Dunno if you remember, but about a year back there was a discussion
on HPfGU that resulted in great wailings and gnashings of teeth for
some, and blank incomprehension for others. All about the 'morality'
of Harry killing Voldy and how doing so would 'stain' or 'pollute' his
noble character. Ah well, takes all sorts, I suppose. The argument
seems pretty pointless, 'cos if the Prophecy is to be taken at face
value it'll be Harry or nobody. He's the one with the power; nobody
else - not DD, Dung or Daedelus Diggle - Harry. (Assuming that the
Prophecy is about him.) >>

IIRC the argument began about whether there is any way to permanently
vanquish Voldy and make sure he never harms anyone again other than to
kill him, not about whether someone other than the Prophecy Boy should
kill him.

<< We know remarkably little about how an AK works. Yes it kills folk,
it's forbidden, it takes practice (not the same as 'power', I think)
and it leaves a lovely corpse. Does it stop the heart, coagulate the
blood, fry the autonomic nervous system or turn the brain into a
species of molten cheese? We don't know. Perhaps it has no physical
effect at all but removes what could be referred to as anima, the
vital principle. >>

We know it has no physical effect at all, because the first chapter of
GoF tells of the report of a bewildered coroner on the three Riddles
who were in perfect health with nothing wrong with them except that
they were dead.





From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Sun May  8 11:27:16 2005
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Sun, 08 May 2005 11:27:16 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_The_Prophecy_From_Voldemort=92s_POV_(long)?=
In-Reply-To: <d5jnp1+n7sl@...>
Message-ID: <d5kt2k+t5ep@...>

Kneasy:

> << And where in the Prophecy does it mention the transfer of powers
> that Voldy's little helper couldn't warn him about? It doesn't so 
far
> as I can see, yet DD acts as if it were an unavoidable adjunct to
> Voldy's actions at GH. >>
> 
> Maybe there is special wizarding jargon that we Muggles don't know 
in
> which 'mark as an equal' MEANS 'transfer powers to'. :)
> 
> << Dunno if you remember, but about a year back there was a 
discussion
> on HPfGU that resulted in great wailings and gnashings of teeth for
> some, and blank incomprehension for others. All about 
the 'morality'
> of Harry killing Voldy and how doing so would 'stain' or 'pollute' 
his
> noble character. Ah well, takes all sorts, I suppose. The argument
> seems pretty pointless, 'cos if the Prophecy is to be taken at face
> value it'll be Harry or nobody. He's the one with the power; nobody
> else - not DD, Dung or Daedelus Diggle - Harry. (Assuming that the
> Prophecy is about him.) >>

Catlady:

> IIRC the argument began about whether there is any way to 
permanently
> vanquish Voldy and make sure he never harms anyone again other 
than to
> kill him, not about whether someone other than the Prophecy Boy 
should
> kill him.

I missed all that on HPFGU.  I think, however, there is undoubtedly 
a valid debate to be had here.

At the end of POA, JKR made it part of the ethics of the story that 
killing is not a valid way to achieve an end.  By Harry's own words, 
he would make himself a murderer by killing Voldemort.  Dumbledore's 
reluctance to share the prophecy with Harry is based, as I 
understand it, on the idea that both *apparent* alternatives - kill 
or be killed - are equally awful.

The task JKR has set herself, then, is to come up with a way of 
permanently neutralising Voldemort, consistent with the prophecy, 
that does not leave Harry morally compromised.  Harry's use of 
Cruciatus in the MOM suggests she will push this one to the wire.

David





From pennylin at plinsenmayer.yahoo.invalid  Sun May  8 12:57:30 2005
From: pennylin at plinsenmayer.yahoo.invalid (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Sun, 8 May 2005 07:57:30 -0500
Subject: [the_old_crowd] OT, Personal: New Baby
References: <BAY107-F2467F869CD190274CA95ADD01B0@...>
Message-ID: <01bd01c553cd$816c32c0$210110ac@MainDesktop>

Hi there --

Proof I'm reading the "new baby" news if not the substantive posts!  <g>

Congratulations, Dee!  Parker was close ------- my daughter Elizabeth was born April 25th.  

Penny
(delighted to report that baby Harry has been sleeping through the night for a month now.......yippee!)

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




From fmaneely at fhmaneely.yahoo.invalid  Sun May  8 15:51:27 2005
From: fmaneely at fhmaneely.yahoo.invalid (fhmaneely)
Date: Sun, 08 May 2005 15:51:27 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_The_Prophecy_From_Voldemort=92s_POV_(long)?=
In-Reply-To: <d5kt2k+t5ep@...>
Message-ID: <d5lchv+ai9o@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" 
<dfrankiswork at n...> wrote:
> Kneasy:
> 
> > << And where in the Prophecy does it mention the transfer of 
powers
> > that Voldy's little helper couldn't warn him about? It doesn't so 
> far
> > as I can see, yet DD acts as if it were an unavoidable adjunct to
> > Voldy's actions at GH. >>
> > 
> > Maybe there is special wizarding jargon that we Muggles don't 
know 
> in
> > which 'mark as an equal' MEANS 'transfer powers to'. :)
> > 
> > << Dunno if you remember, but about a year back there was a 
> discussion
> > on HPfGU that resulted in great wailings and gnashings of teeth 
for
> > some, and blank incomprehension for others. All about 
> the 'morality'
> > of Harry killing Voldy and how doing so would 'stain' 
or 'pollute' 
> his
> > noble character. Ah well, takes all sorts, I suppose. The argument
> > seems pretty pointless, 'cos if the Prophecy is to be taken at 
face
> > value it'll be Harry or nobody. He's the one with the power; 
nobody
> > else - not DD, Dung or Daedelus Diggle - Harry. (Assuming that the
> > Prophecy is about him.) >>
> 
> Catlady:
> 
> > IIRC the argument began about whether there is any way to 
> permanently
> > vanquish Voldy and make sure he never harms anyone again other 
> than to
> > kill him, not about whether someone other than the Prophecy Boy 
> should
> > kill him.
> 
> I missed all that on HPFGU.  I think, however, there is undoubtedly 
> a valid debate to be had here.
> 
> At the end of POA, JKR made it part of the ethics of the story that 
> killing is not a valid way to achieve an end.  By Harry's own 
words, 
> he would make himself a murderer by killing Voldemort.  
Dumbledore's 
> reluctance to share the prophecy with Harry is based, as I 
> understand it, on the idea that both *apparent* alternatives - kill 
> or be killed - are equally awful.
> 
> The task JKR has set herself, then, is to come up with a way of 
> permanently neutralising Voldemort, consistent with the prophecy, 
> that does not leave Harry morally compromised.  Harry's use of 
> Cruciatus in the MOM suggests she will push this one to the wire.
> 
> David

Fran: the prophecy states "power to defeat" not power to kill. IMO 
Harry will defeat LV but not kill him.  I defeated an someone in a 
tennis match but I didn't kill him.





From nkafkafi at nkafkafi.yahoo.invalid  Sun May  8 17:30:38 2005
From: nkafkafi at nkafkafi.yahoo.invalid (nkafkafi)
Date: Sun, 08 May 2005 17:30:38 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_The_Prophecy_From_Voldemort=92s_POV_(long)?=
In-Reply-To: <d5lchv+ai9o@...>
Message-ID: <d5libu+jst2@...>

> > David:
> > I missed all that on HPFGU.  I think, however, there is undoubtedly 
> > a valid debate to be had here.
> > 
> > At the end of POA, JKR made it part of the ethics of the story that 
> > killing is not a valid way to achieve an end.  By Harry's own 
> words, 
> > he would make himself a murderer by killing Voldemort.  
> Dumbledore's 
> > reluctance to share the prophecy with Harry is based, as I 
> > understand it, on the idea that both *apparent* alternatives - kill 
> > or be killed - are equally awful.
> > 
> > The task JKR has set herself, then, is to come up with a way of 
> > permanently neutralising Voldemort, consistent with the prophecy, 
> > that does not leave Harry morally compromised.  Harry's use of 
> > Cruciatus in the MOM suggests she will push this one to the wire.


> Fran: the prophecy states "power to defeat" not power to kill. IMO 
> Harry will defeat LV but not kill him.  I defeated an someone in a 
> tennis match but I didn't kill him.

Neri:
But the prophecy also says "and either must die by the hand of the
other". This is a bit more difficult to wriggle out of, but still
possible.

One way can be if "the hand" is a person, Peter for example. I had
this theory, which might be termed The Shylock Effect: after the
graveyard, Voldy sharing blood with Harry makes them vulnerable to
each other (don't ask me why, but DD's famous gleam hints as much).
However, Voldy shares blood also with Peter, because a severed hand
contains more than several drops of blood. Voldy is thus also
vulnerable to Peter, although he doesn't realize it. After Harry will
vanquish Voldy in the more metaphorical sense, Peter can finish the
dirty work, while (naturally) saving Harry's life and paying his debt.
This can be made to work nicely in several levels.

And yes, I know it's too LOTR, but I can't help it, and it seems JKR
can't either. She might deny it, but DD's speech in the end of PoA 
about why it was OK to spare Wormtail is too similar to Gandalf's
speech about why Bilbo did the right thing when sparing Gollum. 

Neri






From susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid  Sun May  8 18:50:21 2005
From: susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid (susiequsie23)
Date: Sun, 8 May 2005 13:50:21 -0500
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_=5Bthe=5Fold=5Fcrowd=5D_Re:_The_Prophecy_From_Voldemor?=
	=?iso-8859-1?Q?t's_POV_=28long=29?=
References: <d5libu+jst2@...>
Message-ID: <007d01c553fe$ca7597f0$d82cfea9@albrechtuj0zx7>

Neri:
But the prophecy also says "and either must die by the hand of the
other". This is a bit more difficult to wriggle out of, but still
possible.


SSSusan:
Just to throw a bit of a wrench into this, the prophecy actually states "and either must die *at* the hand of the other...."  Technically, this could provide a bit of an out, couldn't it?  Maybe at the end we'll find Voldy lying dead *at* [i.e., alongside, next to] the hand of Harry, but not necessarily *by* [i.e., as a result of, because of] the hand of Harry?

Bit of semantics, I know, but the phrase "at the hand of the other" seems to leave the possibility more open than the word "by the hand of the other," which seems to me to more strongly suggest a causative relationship.

Or maybe not. :-)

Siriusly Snapey Susan




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




From nkafkafi at nkafkafi.yahoo.invalid  Sun May  8 20:14:06 2005
From: nkafkafi at nkafkafi.yahoo.invalid (nkafkafi)
Date: Sun, 08 May 2005 20:14:06 -0000
Subject: The Prophecy From Voldemort's POV (long)
In-Reply-To: <007d01c553fe$ca7597f0$d82cfea9@albrechtuj0zx7>
Message-ID: <d5lrue+tber@...>


> SSSusan:
> Just to throw a bit of a wrench into this, the prophecy actually
states "and either must die *at* the hand of the other...." 
Technically, this could provide a bit of an out, couldn't it?  Maybe
at the end we'll find Voldy lying dead *at* [i.e., alongside, next to]
the hand of Harry, but not necessarily *by* [i.e., as a result of,
because of] the hand of Harry?

Neri:
Well, in this case I hope the hand would still be attached, or it
would be too Star Wars.

Neri





From pt4ever at pt4ever.yahoo.invalid  Mon May  9 14:07:14 2005
From: pt4ever at pt4ever.yahoo.invalid (JoAnna Wahlund)
Date: Mon, 9 May 2005 07:07:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [the_old_crowd] OT, Personal: New Baby
In-Reply-To: 6667
Message-ID: <20050509140714.68527.qmail@...>

> Penny
> (delighted to report that baby Harry has been sleeping through the night for a month
> now.......yippee!)

Lucky duck.  Did you stock up on Sleeping draughts from Madam Pomfrey?  And could you
share?  Elanor has slept through the night once so far (from 1am-7am) and it doesn't look
like it'll be a repeat performance anytime soon...

~JoAnna~ 

 
Elly was born on 01/13/05.
Visit Elanor's website for pictures and updates! 
http://www.geocities.com/j_wahlund







__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 



From fmaneely at fhmaneely.yahoo.invalid  Tue May 10 01:08:06 2005
From: fmaneely at fhmaneely.yahoo.invalid (fhmaneely)
Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 01:08:06 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_The_Prophecy_From_Voldemort=92s_POV_(long)?=
In-Reply-To: <d5libu+jst2@...>
Message-ID: <d5p1hm+nfef@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" <nkafkafi at y...> 
wrote:
> > > David:
> > > I missed all that on HPFGU.  I think, however, there is 
undoubtedly 
> > > a valid debate to be had here.
> > > 
> > > At the end of POA, JKR made it part of the ethics of the story 
that 
> > > killing is not a valid way to achieve an end.  By Harry's own 
> > words, 
> > > he would make himself a murderer by killing Voldemort.  
> > Dumbledore's 
> > > reluctance to share the prophecy with Harry is based, as I 
> > > understand it, on the idea that both *apparent* alternatives - 
kill 
> > > or be killed - are equally awful.
> > > 
> > > The task JKR has set herself, then, is to come up with a way of 
> > > permanently neutralising Voldemort, consistent with the 
prophecy, 
> > > that does not leave Harry morally compromised.  Harry's use of 
> > > Cruciatus in the MOM suggests she will push this one to the 
wire.
> 
> 
> > Fran: the prophecy states "power to defeat" not power to kill. 
IMO 
> > Harry will defeat LV but not kill him.  I defeated an someone in 
a 
> > tennis match but I didn't kill him.
> 
> Neri:
> But the prophecy also says "and either must die by the hand of the
> other". This is a bit more difficult to wriggle out of, but still
> possible.
> 
> One way can be if "the hand" is a person, Peter for example. I had
> this theory, which might be termed The Shylock Effect: after the
> graveyard, Voldy sharing blood with Harry makes them vulnerable to
> each other (don't ask me why, but DD's famous gleam hints as much).
> However, Voldy shares blood also with Peter, because a severed hand
> contains more than several drops of blood. Voldy is thus also
> vulnerable to Peter, although he doesn't realize it. After Harry 
will
> vanquish Voldy in the more metaphorical sense, Peter can finish the
> dirty work, while (naturally) saving Harry's life and paying his 
debt.
> This can be made to work nicely in several levels.
> 
> And yes, I know it's too LOTR, but I can't help it, and it seems JKR
> can't either. She might deny it, but DD's speech in the end of PoA 
> about why it was OK to spare Wormtail is too similar to Gandalf's
> speech about why Bilbo did the right thing when sparing Gollum. 
> 
> Neri

I was not thinking about the dying at the hand of the other part 
obviously. I can't help thinking that LV will not die but will be 
conquered. DD said there were fates worse than death. Sometimes I 
wonder is about 2 different things. Way out there I know....
Fran





From s_ings at s_ings.yahoo.invalid  Tue May 10 17:24:18 2005
From: s_ings at s_ings.yahoo.invalid (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 13:24:18 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [the_old_crowd] OT, Personal: New Baby
In-Reply-To: 6667
Message-ID: <20050510172418.74364.qmail@...>


--- gypsycaine at ... wrote:
> Okay guys. I guess this is the "me too" portion?
> 
> Grins.
> 
> Erik David born April 24, 12:32p, 6 pounds, 9 oz,
> and 19 inches in 
> length. :)
> 
> Mommy and big brother Ian are doing fine as is Erik.
>  
> 
> I miss you all!
> 

That's wonderful news. Congrats!

Sheryll, late as usual

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From dk59us at dk59us.yahoo.invalid  Tue May 10 18:00:40 2005
From: dk59us at dk59us.yahoo.invalid (Eustace_Scrubb)
Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 18:00:40 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Flitwick_(was:_Hagrid=92s_professional_experience_)?=
In-Reply-To: <d5ft18+u172@...>
Message-ID: <d5qss8+jasg@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" <willsonkmom at m...>
wrote:
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" 
> <quigonginger at y...> wrote:
> > --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "fhmaneely" <fmaneely at b...> 
> > wrote:
> > > --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" 
> > <willsonkmom at m...> 
> > > wrote:
> > > > --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" 
> > > <dfrankiswork at n...> 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > Neri wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > ...as with
> > > > > > > > Dean's background or Flitwick's roots she just never 
> got 
> > > around 
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > tell us about it.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > David answered:
> > > > > > > Flitwick's roots?  Does he dye his hair?  Surely JKR's 
> > > silence on 
> > > > > > this 
> > > > > > > point is significant.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Ginger:  Haven't you heard?  A major character is going
to 
> > dye 
> > > in 
> > > > > HBP.
> > > > > 
> > > > > David:  Obviously a highlight of one of the plot strands.
> > > > 
> > > > Potioncat:
> > > > This is the most hair-brained thread I've ever seen! Come on, 
> > we've 
> > > had 
> > > > the Heir of Slytherin, we don't need the Hair of Ravenclaw!
> > > 
> > > Fran:
> > > I'm sure any plot to doo in Flitwick will be foiled!
> > 
> > Ginger:  Indeed, if Flitwick wigs out, someone will have toupee.
> 
> Potioncat:
> Either way, it calls for a permanent solution.

Eustace_Scrubb:
Well, I guess this thread has reached its ends.  But it sure has been
fun watching the words tossed to and 'fro.





From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Fri May 13 09:46:23 2005
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 09:46:23 -0000
Subject: Updated
Message-ID: <d61t1f+dprv@...>


After months of somnolence JKR's site has some updates - unfortunately they 
don't tell us much.

I reckon we've got all we're going to get on long-standing questions until well 
after the book hits the stands. And given JKR's reluctance to discuss spoiler 
aspects of the most recently published book before the slowest reader in the 
universe has inched through it a syllable at a time I'd be surprised if there were 
much in the way of confirmation/denial of fan theories/questions/conclusions 
for quite some time. 

Ah, well, 'twas ever thus. 
As usual it'll probably be the questions (? at the weekend thrash in Edinburgh?)
that she won't answer that'll give us pointers maybe.

Kneasy  





From pennylin at plinsenmayer.yahoo.invalid  Fri May 13 18:29:06 2005
From: pennylin at plinsenmayer.yahoo.invalid (Penny & Bryce)
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 13:29:06 -0500
Subject: [the_old_crowd] OT, Personal: New Baby
References: <20050509140714.68527.qmail@...>
Message-ID: <011a01c557e9$a74ee850$210110ac@MainDesktop>

Hi --

> Penny
> (delighted to report that baby Harry has been sleeping through the night for a month
> now.......yippee!)

JoAnna: <<<Lucky duck.  Did you stock up on Sleeping draughts from Madam Pomfrey?  And could you
share?  Elanor has slept through the night once so far (from 1am-7am) and it doesn't look
like it'll be a repeat performance anytime soon...>>>>>>>>

Sorry, no sage advice or sleeping draughts ..... just dumb luck perhaps!  You might see if you can get her to "stock up" for the night in the early evening hours.  

Good luck!

Penny


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




From kumayama at kumayama.yahoo.invalid  Fri May 13 20:09:25 2005
From: kumayama at kumayama.yahoo.invalid (Lyn J. Mangiameli)
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 20:09:25 -0000
Subject: Updated
In-Reply-To: <d61t1f+dprv@...>
Message-ID: <d631hl+7hcv@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Barry Arrowsmith" <arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> 
> After months of somnolence JKR's site has some updates - unfortunately they 
> don't tell us much.


Ah, but her comment that "Snape doesn't have a daughter" was vintage JKR. She could 
have said he didn't have children. Strikes me as a teaser if there ever was one, particulary 
since the lead in question struck me as superflous.





From Pookie1_uk at pookie1_uk.yahoo.invalid  Fri May 13 20:22:22 2005
From: Pookie1_uk at pookie1_uk.yahoo.invalid (S A H Culfeather)
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 21:22:22 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: Updated
In-Reply-To: 6667
Message-ID: <20050513202222.49629.qmail@...>

*Ah, but her comment that "Snape doesn't have a
daughter" was vintage JKR. She could 
have said he didn't have children*


Just off to look at the site. I have always been
convinced Snape had a child somewhere, maybe this is
the hint - although I had hoped he had a daughter and
not a son

Serena









---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

   To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/
 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
the_old_crowd-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.




From kelleythompson at kelleyscorpio.yahoo.invalid  Fri May 13 21:45:53 2005
From: kelleythompson at kelleyscorpio.yahoo.invalid (Kelley)
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 21:45:53 -0000
Subject: OT:  Where's the cake?
Message-ID: <d6376h+10duf@...>

Just want to give some greetings before it's too late:

Happy birthday to Neil and Parker!!  Hope you both had a great day!

And though I've sent my wishes elsewhere, a mention here that David 
recently had his as well, so another 'happy birthday!' to him. :-)

--Kelley








From pbnesbit at harpdreamer.yahoo.invalid  Fri May 13 22:53:43 2005
From: pbnesbit at harpdreamer.yahoo.invalid (Parker Brown Nesbit)
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 18:53:43 -0400
Subject: [the_old_crowd] OT: Where's the cake?
In-Reply-To: <d6376h+10duf@...>
Message-ID: <BAY107-F19ED4524E28DAC65AF25AED0120@...>

>
>Just want to give some greetings before it's too late:
>
>Happy birthday to Neil and Parker!!  Hope you both had a great day!
>
>And though I've sent my wishes elsewhere, a mention here that David
>recently had his as well, so another 'happy birthday!' to him. :-)
>
>--Kelley


Thanks, Kelley.  It's been a wonderful day, spent at the 225th Anniversary 
of the Seige of Charlestowne.  We're close, so we're commuting ;)  We'll be 
out there tomorrow & Sunday--I'm weaving sailcloth (linen & hemp) & Doug 
will be coopering.  No magic wands, alas, but lots of fun!

Parker, who also wishes Neil a happy birthday





From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sat May 14 18:29:34 2005
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 18:29:34 -0000
Subject: Wizarding Religion (Wizarding Anarchy)
Message-ID: <d65g2e+4of1@...>

A long time, more than a week, ago, there were posts on the HPfGU Main
List explaining/proclaiming that most of the wizarding folk in Britain
are C of E, Hogwarts has a (C of E) chapel at whose services
attendence was at one time compulsory, etc, because Christianity had
become compulsory and C of E established (in the Muggle world) well
before the definitive split between the wizarding world and the Muggle
world. Some of those posts mentioned how annoyed the poster gets when
characters in fanfics use 'Gods!' or 'Goddess!' as expletives, and
other Pagan-style details.

I didn't reply on Main List, because my thoughts are not coherent, but
I don't think that is *totally* right. It appears that the wizarding
world was pretty well split off before C of E was established -- in
the *books*, most of the adult wizards and witches wear medieval-style
robes: why would they have adopted Henry VIII's religion if they
didn't adopt his style of dress?

Some would answer, because 'normal' clothing was not required by law,
but established religion was. But the wizarding folk don't appear to
have any particular respect for law. For example, they have laws
against Dark Magic and they have *many* individuals, and entire
families through the generations, who are universally known to be
totally into Dark Magic and yet are totally accepted. 

I really believe that all the bureaucracy and rigidity of the Ministry
of Magic is just a veneer, and the (British) wizarding world is really
quite anarchic. This makes sense because power in the wizarding world
is magic power, which is inherent in individuals. (That is also why
equal opportunity for witches also makes sense: unlike physical
strength, a witch is just as likely as a wizard to have tremendous
magical strength and duel her way to the top of the heap.) 

If someone objected to their neighbor being a Dark wizard, they could
duel their neighbor. The outcome would be determined by individual
power, not law. They could gather a group of wizards who objected to
that neighbor being a Dark wizard in an attempt to overcome the
neighbor's individual power level by their numbers. 

One aspect of that is how many wizards would be willing to join such a
group: "Why should I put myself at risk for your problem?" "If we
interfere with people for being Dark wizards today, is someone going
to interfere with me for breeding fancy hippogriffs tomorrow?" 

Another aspect is, even if a group assembled (say, they all had their
individual reasons for objecting to the Dark wizard in question),
people with that anarchic attitude wouldn't have much practice at
fighting together as a team. The anarchic society and the anarchic
attitude re-inforce each other. The Ministry *hires* people to be
teams of law-enforcers, but it appears they don't get much support
from the community.

The medieval-style robes also are one clue that the wizarding folk are
choosy about which new customs brought in by Muggle-borns they adopt.

So if the wizarding folk are anarchic, are choosy about changing their
customs, and generally look down on Muggles, to me that is an argument
that especially the old pure-blood families would scorn to change
their religion just because Muggles said so, and no wizard would risk
trying to *force* them to change.

(I realise that the argument I've just presented sounds like an
argument that they're all Roman Catholic, but I have a problem with
that. I just can't picture proud pure-blood wizards bowing to a Muggle
pope.)





From pip at bluesqueak.yahoo.invalid  Sat May 14 19:57:58 2005
From: pip at bluesqueak.yahoo.invalid (bluesqueak)
Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 19:57:58 -0000
Subject: Wizarding Religion (Wizarding Anarchy)
In-Reply-To: <d65g2e+4of1@...>
Message-ID: <d65l86+j6nb@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince 
Winston)" <catlady at w...> wrote:
> A long time, more than a week, ago, there were posts on the HPfGU 
> Main List explaining/proclaiming that most of the wizarding folk 
> in Britain are C of E, Hogwarts has a (C of E) chapel at whose 
> services attendence was at one time compulsory, etc, because 
> Christianity had become compulsory and C of E established (in the 
> Muggle world) well before the definitive split between the 
> wizarding world and the Muggle world. Some of those posts 
> mentioned how annoyed the poster gets when characters in fanfics 
> use 'Gods!' or 'Goddess!' as expletives, and other Pagan-style 
details.
> 

I admit I haven't read the thread, Rita. But technically, most 
English and Welsh wizarding folk *could* be C of E (or Church of 
Wales) if they liked, because in England and Wales the Anglican 
church is parish based, not baptism/membership based - which means 
that anyone resident in an English/Welsh parish can claim 
membership. I suspect that wasn't what the poster meant, though. And 
it certainly doesn't apply to Scotland - the established Church of 
Scotland is Presbyterian, NOT Anglican. Calling a Presbyterian an 
Anglican would be good grounds for having a Bible thrown at you with 
considerable accuracy and great force {g}

The idea of Hogwarts having compulsory chapel is probably based 
around English public schools - but most of those were founded 
either for charitable religious purposes, or had a very strong 
Christian ethos. Hogwarts was *not* founded for religious purposes - 
it was founded to educate those with magical talent. Further, it's 
in Scotland, not England, so the period of compulsory C-of-E 
churchgoing would *never* have applied. 

Catlady writes: 
> The medieval-style robes also are one clue that the wizarding folk 
are
> choosy about which new customs brought in by Muggle-borns they 
adopt.
> 
> So if the wizarding folk are anarchic, are choosy about changing 
their
> customs, and generally look down on Muggles, to me that is an 
argument
> that especially the old pure-blood families would scorn to change
> their religion just because Muggles said so, and no wizard would 
risk
> trying to *force* them to change.

I think, myself, that religiously, the English (and Welsh) Wizarding 
World is probably very like the English (and Welsh) muggle world. 
That will mean that probably many (though maybe not most) of the WW 
would consider themselves various types of Christian, with an 
attendence at church that would vary between weekly and 'weddings 
and funerals'. The rest would be either other non-Pagan religions,  
Pagan, or agnostic/secular (and if it's an exact match with modern 
Britain, that last category will be the majority). The big 
difference might well be that more of the WW kept to pre-Christian 
religions - but since the Hufflepuff ghost is 'the Fat Friar', we 
*know* that some of the WW  had 'careers' within organised 
Christianity.

I'd like to think the pure-blood-ites aren't Christians, but since I 
am a Christian, that would be my prejudices showing. The nasty 
villains of the series can't belong to my religion, that sort of 
thing. ::embarrassed shrug::

And I doubt sincerely that we're ever going to find out in huge 
detail; JKR is exploring prejudice by creating her own type of WW 
prejudice. I've argued before on HPfGU that this, effectively, means 
that religion can't be mentioned except in passing - as soon as she 
mentions a character 
is 'Anglican', 'Catholic', 'Pagan', 'Muslim', 'doesn't believe in 
that rubbish', then many her readers are going to be making 
judgements according to *their* prejudices, and this will affect the 
points she is trying to make.

> Catlady writes:
> (I realise that the argument I've just presented sounds like an
> argument that they're all Roman Catholic, but I have a problem with
> that. I just can't picture proud pure-blood wizards bowing to a
 > Muggle pope.)

And how do you know the Popes were all Muggles? ;-)

Pip (delurking on The Old Crowd. Does this mean I have to write an 
introduction?)





From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sat May 14 23:02:05 2005
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 23:02:05 -0000
Subject: Wizarding Religion (Wizarding Anarchy)
In-Reply-To: <d65l86+j6nb@...>
Message-ID: <d6601d+445n@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pip at e...> wrote:
> 
> I think, myself, that religiously, the English (and Welsh)
Wizarding 
> World is probably very like the English (and Welsh) muggle world. 
> That will mean that probably many (though maybe not most) of the WW 
> would consider themselves various types of Christian, with an 
> attendence at church that would vary between weekly and 'weddings 
> and funerals'. The rest would be either other non-Pagan religions,  
> Pagan, or agnostic/secular (and if it's an exact match with modern 
> Britain, that last category will be the majority). The big 
> difference might well be that more of the WW kept to pre-Christian 
> religions - but since the Hufflepuff ghost is 'the Fat Friar', we 
> *know* that some of the WW  had 'careers' within organised 
> Christianity.
> 
I agree a great deal with you (or you agree a great deal with me)
including that most of the wizarding folk nowdays seem to be agnostic
/secular, but I feel that the religious census of the UK wizarding
world is is not 'an exact match' with that of the Muggle or RL UK. Not
BIG differences:

For example, new/small religions or cults which are relatively new or
small among Muggles probably haven't reached the wizards at all yet,
and there may be more than one small religion/cult among wizards which
hasn't reached Muggles (yet?).

Btw I don't see how there could possibly be any Wicca among wizards.
As something of a Wiccan myself, I wish there *were*, but I just don't
see how our beliefs and practices could relate in a world where magic
is a technology. 

> I'd like to think the pure-blood-ites aren't Christians, but since
I 
> am a Christian, that would be my prejudices showing. The nasty 
> villains of the series can't belong to my religion, that sort of 
> thing. ::embarrassed shrug::

I feel even more embarrassed than you do: I propose that the nasty
villains belong to something related to *my* religion. *sigh*

Because of what I said about the wizards last post, that they are
choosy or slow about adopting new customs, they are anarchic, and they
scorn Muggles, I also think that the pure-blood-ites aren't Christians
(that would mean having adopted a new (less than 2000 year old)
religion brought by Muggles), but have a religion of their own, which
excludes Muggles.

It's probably called 'The Old Religion' or 'Our Religion', and
contains pieces of Druidism, religio Romano, Hellenistic mysteries,
and self-aggrandizement. The various religious elements may have been
brought to Britain by Muggles, but they were brought long enough ago
and were appealing enough to the pure-bloods that they say they were
brought by wizards. Self-aggrandizing elements like, for example that
wizarding humans were created by the highest God, while Muggles and
non-human magical people were created by imitative lesser Gods.

I'm sure Voldemort doesn't believe in any religion at all, and neither
does Lucius, altho' I imagine Lucius goes through whatever motions
('weddings and funerals') are part of his social status. However, I
think Bellatrix might well totally believe in some religion which
attributes all bad things that have happened in the last several
centuries to wizards having given up offering Muggle human sacrifices
to the Ancestral Wizards.






From pt4ever at pt4ever.yahoo.invalid  Mon May 16 14:19:28 2005
From: pt4ever at pt4ever.yahoo.invalid (JoAnna Wahlund)
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 07:19:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Harry Potter essay contest for kids
Message-ID: <20050516141928.16188.qmail@...>

http://www.scholastic.com/harrypotter/essay/

"Ten grand prize winners and one parent/legal guardian per winner will be flown to New
York City on July 14, 2005 to appear on "NBC's Today" and participate in a presentation
ceremony on July 15, 2005. The winner and guardian will then be taken to New York's JFK
Airport and will depart on American Airlines last flight out of JFK Airport to London on
July 15, 2005 and will receive a free copy of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
after midnight."

It's only open to people ages 18 and below.  Think I could enter my four-month-old? 
After all, if not for Harry Potter, who knows if her parents would have ever met?  :)

~JoAnna~ 

 
Elly was born on 01/13/05.
Visit Elanor's website for pictures and updates! 
http://www.geocities.com/j_wahlund







__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 



From heidi8 at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid  Mon May 16 14:36:50 2005
From: heidi8 at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid (Heidi)
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 10:36:50 -0400
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Harry Potter essay contest for kids
In-Reply-To: <20050516141928.16188.qmail@...>
References: <20050516141928.16188.qmail@...>
Message-ID: <5913e6f8050516073659796e30@...>

On 5/16/05, JoAnna Wahlund <pt4ever at ...> wrote:

> It's only open to people ages 18 and below.  Think I could enter my four-month-old?
> After all, if not for Harry Potter, who knows if her parents would have ever met?  :)
This is the time that I need an explanation of whether FictionAlley's
being an affiliate of the WBShop makes us fall under the category of
"employees of Sponsor, American Airlines, Inc., their respective
affiliates, subsidiaries, and their respective advertising, promotion,
and fulfillment agencies, and the immediate families of each" because
if Scholastic is an affiliate of WB's, and FA is an affiliate of the
WB Shop via CommissionJunction.com.... wah, my Harry can't enter!



From nrenka at nrenka.yahoo.invalid  Mon May 16 17:50:52 2005
From: nrenka at nrenka.yahoo.invalid (nrenka)
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 17:50:52 -0000
Subject: FAQ poll answered... (with spoilers for said FAQ poll)
Message-ID: <d6amhs+a2ib@...>

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

...go and read it for yourselves.  Fascinating stuff, really.

Particularly the revelations that if Frank or Alice had been ready or 
able to sacrifice themselves for Neville (if Voldemort had attacked 
him), then the curse would also have rebounded.  I think that 
probably nukes the "Lily did something specifically special" theory.  
She also talks about Voldemort intending to *murder* Harry, which 
seems to put the kibosh on some other ideas.

There's also some commentary which lends strength to the idea that 
she thinks about her characters in terms of their 
character/virtues/what they are, in a deep sense.

Hmmm...

-Nora gets back to packing books





From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Mon May 16 18:52:38 2005
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 18:52:38 -0000
Subject: FAQ poll answered... (with spoilers for said FAQ poll)
In-Reply-To: <d6amhs+a2ib@...>
Message-ID: <d6aq5m+1h1o@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" <nrenka at y...> wrote:
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> 
> ...go and read it for yourselves.  Fascinating stuff, really.
> 
> Particularly the revelations that if Frank or Alice had been ready or 
> able to sacrifice themselves for Neville (if Voldemort had attacked 
> him), then the curse would also have rebounded.  I think that 
> probably nukes the "Lily did something specifically special" theory.  
> She also talks about Voldemort intending to *murder* Harry, which 
> seems to put the kibosh on some other ideas.
> 

Nothing startling there; modern Potter theory (i.e. since OoP) accepts
that charms and ancient magic were the protective agents, not anything
specific to Lily. And since DD was well aware that Neville was also a
possibility he would have been remiss, not to say negligent if he
didn't protect Neville to the same extent as Harry.

And who is to say that if Neville had been the recipient of Voldy powers
he wouldn't be as magically competent as Harry. How much of Harrys
powers are his own, how much from Voldy?

I consider this to be another JKR non-answer, speculating on what
didn't happen while very carefully refraining from telling us what
actually did. Who knows how Neville would have turned out if Frank
and Alice had actually died? Helpless parents are a significant hostage to
fortune in a world with evilly intentioned persons in it.

More appositely, some of us consider the possibility that DD was at least 
partly responsible for pointing Voldy in the direction of Harry, if so the 
whole thing becomes moot.

"Kibosh on other ideas" - Possession Theory you mean?
I can't agree. The idea is - a stroll through Harry's mind picking up anything
useful, then the quiet surcease. SFAIK you can't read the mind of a corpse.
If he wanted to learn of 'the power' he needed a live body.

Besides, in our world murder can arrive in the guise of the poisoned chalice, 
the strangling cord, the bullet, the blunt instrument. 
AK is the equivalent of the bullet.
IMO it demonstrates limited thinking to believe that an AK is the sole snuffer
of life's fluttering flame in the WW. 

Kneasy





From fmaneely at fhmaneely.yahoo.invalid  Tue May 17 02:31:36 2005
From: fmaneely at fhmaneely.yahoo.invalid (fhmaneely)
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 02:31:36 -0000
Subject: FAQ poll answered... (with spoilers for said FAQ poll)
In-Reply-To: <d6aq5m+1h1o@...>
Message-ID: <d6bl28+dl2g@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Barry Arrowsmith" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" <nrenka at y...> wrote:
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > *
> > 
> > ...go and read it for yourselves.  Fascinating stuff, really.
> > 
> > Particularly the revelations that if Frank or Alice had been 
ready or 
> > able to sacrifice themselves for Neville (if Voldemort had 
attacked 
> > him), then the curse would also have rebounded.  I think that 
> > probably nukes the "Lily did something specifically special" 
theory.  
> > She also talks about Voldemort intending to *murder* Harry, which 
> > seems to put the kibosh on some other ideas.
> > 
> 
> Nothing startling there; modern Potter theory (i.e. since OoP) 
accepts
> that charms and ancient magic were the protective agents, not 
anything
> specific to Lily. And since DD was well aware that Neville was also 
a
> possibility he would have been remiss, not to say negligent if he
> didn't protect Neville to the same extent as Harry.
> 
> And who is to say that if Neville had been the recipient of Voldy 
powers
> he wouldn't be as magically competent as Harry. How much of Harrys
> powers are his own, how much from Voldy?
> 
> I consider this to be another JKR non-answer, speculating on what
> didn't happen while very carefully refraining from telling us what
> actually did. Who knows how Neville would have turned out if Frank
> and Alice had actually died? Helpless parents are a significant 
hostage to
> fortune in a world with evilly intentioned persons in it.
> 
> More appositely, some of us consider the possibility that DD was at 
least 
> partly responsible for pointing Voldy in the direction of Harry, if 
so the 
> whole thing becomes moot.
> 
> "Kibosh on other ideas" - Possession Theory you mean?
> I can't agree. The idea is - a stroll through Harry's mind picking 
up anything
> useful, then the quiet surcease. SFAIK you can't read the mind of a 
corpse.
> If he wanted to learn of 'the power' he needed a live body.
> 
> Besides, in our world murder can arrive in the guise of the 
poisoned chalice, 
> the strangling cord, the bullet, the blunt instrument. 
> AK is the equivalent of the bullet.
> IMO it demonstrates limited thinking to believe that an AK is the 
sole snuffer
> of life's fluttering flame in the WW. 
> 
> Kneasy


Fran:
I am confused....if you are born with a power, it is inate no one 
gave it to you. So how can JRK word the prophecy like that, then turn 
around and say the baby born will get powers from LV?  So the elipses 
must add born as the 7th months dies someone is born who can open a 
door into LV's mind if LV tries to kill the someone,and this gives 
that some one the power to vanquish LV. Oh yeah ,btw, there are 2 
baby boys and neither of them can can live if the other,LV, survives.
...so all it takes is getting in LV's head.....
Yeah I know...I go away.....





From kumayama at kumayama.yahoo.invalid  Tue May 17 03:14:03 2005
From: kumayama at kumayama.yahoo.invalid (Lyn J. Mangiameli)
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 03:14:03 -0000
Subject: FAQ poll answered... (with spoilers for said FAQ poll)
In-Reply-To: <d6aq5m+1h1o@...>
Message-ID: <d6bnhr+228p@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Barry Arrowsmith" <arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" <nrenka at y...> wrote:
snip
> 
> "Kibosh on other ideas" - Possession Theory you mean?
> I can't agree. The idea is - a stroll through Harry's mind picking up anything
> useful, then the quiet surcease. SFAIK you can't read the mind of a corpse.
> If he wanted to learn of 'the power' he needed a live body.
> 
> Besides, in our world murder can arrive in the guise of the poisoned chalice, 
> the strangling cord, the bullet, the blunt instrument. 
> AK is the equivalent of the bullet.
> IMO it demonstrates limited thinking to believe that an AK is the sole snuffer
> of life's fluttering flame in the WW. 
> 
> Kneasy

Now Lyn

Again, I am with Kneasy on this. I see nothing in the Rowling discussion that takes away 
from possession theory, as explicated by Kneasy. 

It seems to me that Rowling has set up a spectrum of intrusion into another's being: 
Legilimancy, Possession, and the Soul Sucking of the Dementors. Now we have this 
"magical window into Voldemort's mind."  This status strikes me, at a minimum, as 
somewhere between Legilimancy and Possession, and does not at all preclude the latter.   

It still strikes me as passingly strange that such a "window" would arise from a death 
curse, as opposed to an attempt to possess (or something a bit more). As Kneasy alludes, 
if Voldemort's intent was to first explore and then remove Harry's powers,perhaps even 
soul, then it may well be a death of sorts, and of course, nothing about a possession 
necessarily precludes it being so total as to cause death.





From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Tue May 17 04:59:15 2005
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 04:59:15 -0000
Subject: FAQ poll answered... (with spoilers for said FAQ poll)
In-Reply-To: <d6amhs+a2ib@...>
Message-ID: <d6btn3+gec3@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" <nrenka at y...> wrote:
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> 
> Particularly the revelations that if Frank or Alice had been ready
> or able to sacrifice themselves for Neville (if Voldemort had 
> attacked him), then the curse would also have rebounded.  

And if neither parent had voluntarily flung themselves between Neville
and the killing curse, such as because V had killed them first, then
Neville would have died. She said that.

And I extrapolate that LV would have gone to murder Harry next. And if
LV had simply killed Lily instead of telling her to stand aside, silly
girl, then presumably Harry would also have died. 

And then there would have been no One With The Power to Vanquish the
Dark Lord. And the prophecy would have been false.





From nkafkafi at nkafkafi.yahoo.invalid  Tue May 17 05:05:32 2005
From: nkafkafi at nkafkafi.yahoo.invalid (nkafkafi)
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 05:05:32 -0000
Subject: FAQ poll answered... (with spoilers for said FAQ poll)
In-Reply-To: <d6amhs+a2ib@...>
Message-ID: <d6bu2s+842b@...>

Nora wrote:
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> 
> ...go and read it for yourselves.  Fascinating stuff, really.
> 

Neri:
It is fascinaing, isn't it? But I can't say I'm surprised. More than a
month ago I wrote here in:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/1539

> What if JKR is going to answer something like: "Neville was a 
> possibility, but he is not anymore. I only included him in the 
> prophecy in order to show that it was Voldemort, not blind fate, who 
> determined by his own actions which would be the One".

Now that this is out of the way, I think it's high time to come up
with an updated Neville theory. You know, something with both Bang and
Edge, and maybe even Faith's grudging approval (not active support,
I'm not THAT ambitious). It might even have a memory charm in it. 

Neri






From SongBird3411 at songbird3411.yahoo.invalid  Tue May 17 05:16:35 2005
From: SongBird3411 at songbird3411.yahoo.invalid (songbird3411)
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 05:16:35 -0000
Subject: FAQ poll answered... (with spoilers for said FAQ poll)
In-Reply-To: <d6bnhr+228p@...>
Message-ID: <d6bunj+5o31@...>

 --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Barry Arrowsmith" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:

 >> "Kibosh on other ideas" - Possession Theory you mean? I can't 
agree. The idea is - a stroll through Harry's mind picking up 
anything useful, then the quiet surcease. SFAIK you can't read the 
mind of a corpse.<<

Delurking for a minute here.  I haven't really been a strong believer 
in Posession Theory.  I mean, I personally like it, and I think it 
would be a fascinating turn of events.  However, I feel like in the 
context of these books, it would complicate a story that needs to be 
simplified.  (Still, it would be a welcome complication to me.)

However, I too don't see how JKR's answer would preclude Possession 
Theory.  I say this because I am still quite confused about the 
timline of events at Godric's Hollow.  Honestly, the more the 
books/JKR say about Godric's Hollow, the more confused I become.

Here is what I see in Godric's Hollow, as presented by a straight 
reading of the books/JKR interviews:

Voldy storms into the house, kills James, goes upstairs, argues with 
Lily, kills Lily, tries to AK Harry, AK deflects back on Voldemort 
vaporizing him and somehow creating a mind link with Harry.  And oh 
yeah, the house somehow explodes/collapses.

????  There appear to be some missing links here.  Some 
missing "hows" and "whys".    Ultimate Sacrifice deflects AK?  It 
wasn't the AK that caused the mind link, it was the deflection?  This 
deflection creates a mind link how?  Why?  (One for JKR) So, why 
didn't Voldemort die?

I guess the sequence of magic seems pretty straightforward, as 
presented in the books so far.  However, the results of that magic 
seem anything but straightforward.  So, what happened that produced 
such drastically different results than expected?

One idea is that what has been presented isn't all the magic that was 
attempted and used.  I guess I could see Possession Theory filling 
some blanks here.  

Of course, it could also be some as yet unknown reaction of 
this "blood protection".  Or even, perhaps, an unkown function of 
Voldemort's own powers and protections against death that produce 
some strange reactions when confronted with this ancient magic.

Shrug.  All I know is, this answer of JKR's didn't tell me much.  
Except that it implied the mind link is still open between Harry and 
Voldemort, unless I read it wrong.  Which makes me wonder, again, why 
no one seemed concerned about this at the end of OoTP. 

I also disagree with her/Dumbledore about Neville.  I think he very 
well could have been as successful as Harry has been.  Harry has 
relied on a lot of luck.  Neville's biggest drawback so far seems to 
be his lack of confidence in his own skills.  Something apparently 
reinforced by his family.  What would have happened if Neville had 
been raised as "The Boy Who Lived", the boy Voldemort marked as a 
threat?  Certainly Dumbledore would look at him differently.  I mean, 
according to the prophecy (seemingly) merely being marked by 
Voldemort as the threat is enough to make one the threat.  It would 
be hard to think of Neville as inferior to his parents if he was the 
boy destined to "vanquish" Voldemort.         


Mindy -who will probably go back to lurking until HBP comes out and 
is hoping to get that Godric's Hollow flashback soon





From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Tue May 17 11:30:58 2005
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 11:30:58 -0000
Subject: FAQ poll answered... (with spoilers for said FAQ poll)
In-Reply-To: <d6bnhr+228p@...>
Message-ID: <d6ckli+bndi@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Lyn J. Mangiameli" <kumayama at e...> wrote:
> 
> It seems to me that Rowling has set up a spectrum of intrusion 
> into another's being: 
> Legilimancy, Possession, and the Soul Sucking of the Dementors. 
> Now we have this "magical window into Voldemort's mind."  This 
> status strikes me, at a minimum, as somewhere between Legilimancy
> and Possession, and does not at all preclude the latter.   
> 
> It still strikes me as passingly strange that such a "window" would 
> arise from a death curse, as opposed to an attempt to possess (or 
> something a bit more). As Kneasy alludes, if Voldemort's intent was
> to first explore and then remove Harry's powers,perhaps even 
> soul, then it may well be a death of sorts, and of course, nothing about
> a possession necessarily precludes it being so total as to cause death.


Quite so.

Like Lyn, songbird and others I have difficulty finding a simple congruence
between what we have been led to believe and what may have actually
happened at GH, particularly in regard to an AK being a method of power 
transfer.

Detailed discussion of the apparent discrepancies in the partial(!) explication 
of the GH event have figured in a number of my past posts on the other board
so it's not worth going through it all again except to point to one interesting 
aspect. IIRC only one character has ever stated that Harry survived an AK -  
and that was Crouch!Moody. 

All well and good, except that in the same speech C!M reiterates as fact that
there is no protection against an AK. One of his contentions has to be wrong.
All other references to the episode (and that includes Jo I think), talk of 
murder or of the intention to kill but do not specify the methodology.

This is the sort of loophole that a number of posters, myself included, tend 
to embrace with cries of joy (assuming that is, that it's possible to embrace 
a hole - a zen-like exercise IMO). However, during the past few weeks various
factors have combined to limit the amount of time spent bashing out posts
allowing an opportunity to take, well - sort of an overview, a wider perspective
or appreciation of HP. It's been a bit worrying. 

It's not the possibility that the beloved theories clutched to my bosom may
be wrong, that would mean little more than a rueful admission of error, an
"Ah, well..." post closely followed by a few "I told you so's" from others -
something of no significance or importance whatsoever. No, a deeper
apprehension than that has been slowly growing. Most of the fans assume
that eventually all the "i's" will be dotted, all the "t's" crossed, all discrepancies
resolved, all lacunae filled, all questions answered, and in such a manner
that is wholly satisfying - intellectually if not as regards personal tastes. 
Hmm. Anyone like to offer odds on such an outcome?

It's no secret that a number of fans weren't very happy with OoP for one 
reason or another. Not surprising - you can't please everybody. Time was when
all - no matter what their preferences - could speculate wildly or not so wildly 
on how it would all be resolved. Not so now, and in a couple of months options
will be restricted further. An inevitability, you say. Of course, we all accepted 
that. But what if for many of us the final wrap-up is not just an absence of a
personal wish-list resolution but unsatisfactory in the sense of trite, facile and
with glaring gaps all over the place? What if - and here's an irony - it turns out
that fandom has dreamt up potential story threads that are more interesting, 
comprehensive and substantial than Jo's own?  Shades of Thursday Next in 
"The Eyre Affair". At one time that seemed most unlikely; now it's not so certain.

So much detail has been incorporated into the text, so many hints, allusions,
apparent inconsistencies, unspoken (or at least unexplained) references to
past events that it seems there are more loose ends flapping about than would
do justice to a vat of spaghetti. An ending roughly equating to "... and with one
bound our hero was free..." would be likely to cause a riot. Sure, there have been
some posters (Nora among them) who have posited that our expectations are
unrealistic and that passive acceptance of what the author has to offer is the
way to go. That's all very well *except* when it's the author who has introduced
all these flapping loose ends in the first place. Not to eventually tie them up is
pretty sloppy and frustrating IMO - the equivalent of a joke without the punch-
line. 

We'll see.
Meanwhile I'll offer a new syndrome that'll be sweeping the globe over the
next few weeks - PPAS - Pre-Publication Apprehension Syndrome.
Fortunately there is a possible cure; but it's not certain it'll be available.

Kneasy






From nrenka at nrenka.yahoo.invalid  Tue May 17 13:29:10 2005
From: nrenka at nrenka.yahoo.invalid (nrenka)
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 13:29:10 -0000
Subject: FAQ poll answered... (with spoilers for said FAQ poll)
In-Reply-To: <d6ckli+bndi@...>
Message-ID: <d6crj6+d5su@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Barry Arrowsmith" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:

> So much detail has been incorporated into the text, so many hints, 
> allusions, apparent inconsistencies, unspoken (or at least 
> unexplained) references to past events that it seems there are more 
> loose ends flapping about than would do justice to a vat of 
> spaghetti. An ending roughly equating to "... and with one bound 
> our hero was free..." would be likely to cause a riot. Sure, there 
> have been some posters (Nora among them) who have posited that our 
> expectations are unrealistic and that passive acceptance of what 
> the author has to offer is the way to go. That's all very well 
> *except* when it's the author who has introduced all these flapping 
> loose ends in the first place. 

My dear Kneasy, to a certain extent loose ends are in the eye of the 
beholder.  The fandom has an irrepressible urge to nitpick the most 
straightforward explanations and answers for what they *really* 
mean.  For instance, it's clear that Dumbledore hasn't told us 
everything; however, it's not clear that everything he has told us is 
therefore to be questioned and is radically incomplete.  And do I 
need to get into the level of complication that the maintained 
vampire theory poses?

I am indeed in the crowd that postulates that the most important 
loose ends will be neatly knotted up--if we as readers are willing to 
accept that in fiction, particularly fiction of this sort, the 
explanations that we get as to How This Stuff Went Down are really 
quite authoritative, by the end.  I must admit I don't see much point 
in arguing (to give a hypothetic) that there's a possession loose end 
if the ultimate explanation is that a failed AK murder attempt 
resulted in the connection.

Non disputandum est de gustibus, of course.

-Nora gets back to the late 14th century





From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Tue May 17 15:35:06 2005
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 15:35:06 -0000
Subject: FAQ poll answered... (with spoilers for said FAQ poll)
In-Reply-To: <d6crj6+d5su@...>
Message-ID: <d6d2va+7vfo@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" <nrenka at y...> wrote:
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Barry Arrowsmith" 
> <arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> 
> 
> My dear Kneasy, to a certain extent loose ends are in the eye of the 
> beholder.  The fandom has an irrepressible urge to nitpick the most 
> straightforward explanations and answers for what they *really* 
> mean.  For instance, it's clear that Dumbledore hasn't told us 
> everything; however, it's not clear that everything he has told us is 
> therefore to be questioned and is radically incomplete.  And do I 
> need to get into the level of complication that the maintained 
> vampire theory poses?
> 

Explanations?
Are you referring to those offered by posters or those not offered by JKR?
'Cos she hasn't explained anything much, or not yet anyway. And any
'explanation' submitted by a poster can't be considered as valid until
it receives authorial confirmation.

What DD has or hasn't told us  is a prime case in point; if he wasn't
such an evasive, prevaricating, manipulative old bastard the questions
wouldn't be there in the first place. While not an enthusiast of the
there-must-be-a-vampire-and-it's-Snapey persuasion, I do see where 
they're coming from. FBaWTFT is very definitely an adjunct to canon and
we have already been introduced to one important beastie mentioned in 
passing in the intro but not listed in the alphabetical index that still 
needs much explication (House Elves). So why not the other glaring 
ommision that also gets passing references? 
 
What does depress me is that JKR's site (and comments made elsewhere) 
seem to contain a sub-text that the resolution will be much simpler than 
we assume - or is that just my imagination again? 

> Nora:
> I am indeed in the crowd that postulates that the most important 
> loose ends will be neatly knotted up--if we as readers are willing to 
> accept that in fiction, particularly fiction of this sort, the 
> explanations that we get as to How This Stuff Went Down are really 
> quite authoritative, by the end.  I must admit I don't see much point 
> in arguing (to give a hypothetic) that there's a possession loose end 
> if the ultimate explanation is that a failed AK murder attempt 
> resulted in the connection.
> 

Kneasy:
"the most important loose ends" -  that's not satisfactory. We've been
presented with what amounts to a new universe with its own history -
deliberately so. The amount of unpublished back-story and supporting
notes is reputedly considerable; outlines of families, individual histories,
the development of groups like the DEs etc., etc. Now with all that it'd be
unconscionable if titillating snippets have been strewn at random without 
corresponding clarification to come. 

I've a list of loose ends as long as my arm, starting with the how and why
of Snape, passing through paired wands, prophecies, bloodlines, grandparents,
the Founders, the Hat, Hagrid's throw-away line "why You-Know-Who 
never tried to get 'em on his side before", lots of questions why so-and-so
did/didn't do this/that in those circumstances - it stretches across the floor
and down the hall - and includes the GH event. That one is a doozy - 
because what we've seen and heard in Harry's flashbacks does not allow for
a simple AKing unless the author cheats. But since Jo is an admitted fan of 
Aggie Christie then that can't be ruled out. 

Now I'm hoping it will tied up in a neat bow, but I have to admit that my 
confidence levels are dropping. "Fiction of this sort" you say. Offhand I
can't come up with a reasonably close parallel; seven volumes stuffed full
of detail and twists on the stereotypical norm. Unfortunately Jo doesn't
have a track record we can refer to. It might be seven books but it's only
one unfinished story. And I'm starting to get concerned. I hope it's unjustified.  

> Non disputandum est de gustibus, of course.

Indeed.
Though since Jo has forcefully stated that she writes only to please herself,
"Non assumpsit" might be more appropriate.







From foxmoth at pippin_999.yahoo.invalid  Wed May 18 17:24:21 2005
From: foxmoth at pippin_999.yahoo.invalid (pippin_999)
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 17:24:21 -0000
Subject: Vampire complications? was Re: FAQ poll answered...
In-Reply-To: <d6crj6+d5su@...>
Message-ID: <d6fto5+dr9g@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" <nrenka at y...> wrote:

> My dear Kneasy, to a certain extent loose ends are in the eye of
the 
> beholder.  The fandom has an irrepressible urge to nitpick the most 
> straightforward explanations and answers for what they *really* 
> mean.  For instance, it's clear that Dumbledore hasn't told us 
> everything; however, it's not clear that everything he has told us
is 
> therefore to be questioned and is radically incomplete.  And do I 
> need to get into the level of complication that the maintained 
> vampire theory poses?


Pippin:
Level of complication? My dear Nora, the maintained vampire theory
poses no complication to the canon at all -- it simplifies as all good
explanations should. It only becomes complicated if you insist on 
an explanation congruent with  the reader's "natural" assumptions.

Like -- if there is any startling about a character it will be
revealed by the end of the book in which he is introduced --do I 
need to catalogue all the ways in which this has proved false?

Or -- JKR doesn't give partial answers without indicating that she's 
holding something back. I believe the  Snape doesn't have a daughter 
answer has made even die-hard faith-niks question that one. 

Pippin





From olivier.fouquet at olivierfouquet2000.yahoo.invalid  Thu May 19 08:15:43 2005
From: olivier.fouquet at olivierfouquet2000.yahoo.invalid (olivierfouquet2000)
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 08:15:43 -0000
Subject: Vampire complications? was Re: FAQ poll answered...
In-Reply-To: <d6fto5+dr9g@...>
Message-ID: <d6hhvf+a6ct@...>

 > To a certain extent loose ends are in the eye of
> the beholder.  
>
>Nora
>  
> Level of complication? My dear Nora, the maintained vampire theory
> poses no complication to the canon at all -- it simplifies as all good
> explanations should. It only becomes complicated if you insist on 
> an explanation congruent with  the reader's "natural" assumptions.
> 
> Pippin

Olivier
I believe your points are not entirely contradictory. Many theories (Vampire!Snape, 
MemoryCharmed!Neville, Imperioed!Arthur...) account for many loose ends in a 
satisfactory way, simplify canon and would make a nice story. However, it is still true that 
what one particular reader considers a loose end may not be so loose to another one, and 
more crucially to JKR. 

Some readers would be most disappointed if no further reason were given for Dumbledore 
leaving Harry with the Dursleys. Therefore they think that there MUST be a reason. While I 
can understand their disappointment, I think their logic is flawed. Likewise, you Pippin 
might be disappointed (I don't know if you would) if there were a ton more bat-like 
references to Snape and yet he turned out not to be a vampire. It is still entirely possible 
that those references were just metaphoric.

Now, from a purely probabilistic point of view, I think 99% of even the satisfactory theories 
will be proven false (or at least left hanging, that is not proven right). In two books, you 
can after all confirm a rather small set of theories. So I would expect many readers to feel 
JKR has left loose ends all other the place. Only, I side with Nora in the idea that the only 
things she would have left are avid HP!theorists looking for a new hooby.

Olivier 





From elfundeb at elfundeb2.yahoo.invalid  Fri May 20 10:44:25 2005
From: elfundeb at elfundeb2.yahoo.invalid (elfundeb)
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 06:44:25 -0400
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: FAQ poll answered... (with spoilers for said FAQ poll)
In-Reply-To: <d6bu2s+842b@...>
References: <d6amhs+a2ib@...> <d6bu2s+842b@...>
Message-ID: <80f25c3a050520034497117f8@...>

De-lurking because Neri mentioned memory charms, my favorite theories of all.

Neri:
> It is fascinaing, isn't it? But I can't say I'm surprised. More than a
> month ago I wrote here in:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/1539
> 
> > What if JKR is going to answer something like: "Neville was a
> > possibility, but he is not anymore. I only included him in the
> > prophecy in order to show that it was Voldemort, not blind fate, who
> > determined by his own actions which would be the One".
> 
> Now that this is out of the way, I think it's high time to come up
> with an updated Neville theory. You know, something with both Bang and
> Edge, and maybe even Faith's grudging approval (not active support,
> I'm not THAT ambitious). It might even have a memory charm in it.

Did you say memory charm?  The first thing that occurred to me was
that Dumbledore's belief that Neville could not have done what Harry
did if he had been appointed to Harry's destiny is wrong, and that the
reason Dumbledore (and the reader) can't see Neville's comparable
abilities is that they've been obscured, if not obliterated
altogether, by a memory charm.

And for those of us who like our speculation very dark, there are many
variants of memory charm theories, and a very large cast of suspects. 
Everyone from Bellatrix (to keep toddler Neville from pointing her out
in a lineup) to Fudge (to cover up whatever he did to elicit testimony
from Frank and Alice (i) to enable them to round up the right
suspects, or (ii) against the suspects the MoM had already rounded up
in a desperate attempt to reassure the public that they had found
whoever was responsible), to his own Gran (to prevent Neville from
going down the same path as his father).

Truthfully, I like every one of those theories and there's canon to
support them all.  And at least one of them (the Gran theory) explains
something puzzling about her behavior; you'd think she would be more
sympathetic in her treatment of a grandchild whose parents were
tortured into insanity.  But, most significantly for the current
story, any memory charm theory leaves Neville shrouded in insecurities
that obscure his true abilities.

And it would more aptly demonstrate JKR's point that "Destiny is a
name often given in retrospect to choices that had dramatic
consequences" because it would mean that Neville really could have
been the one but for the effect of others' choices.  He's got the
bravery when it counts.  He was ready to take the Crucio hit in OOP
even though he knew that he could end up like his parents.  He's
willing to fight against impossible odds.  And he has plenty of
magical power, if only he could concentrate enough to remember the
spells, or the ingredients, when he needs them.

Debbie



From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Fri May 20 14:10:03 2005
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 15:10:03 +0100
Subject: How do you rate?
Message-ID: <eb6ea2ee65d9e8134e3cea600727f03a@...>

What sort of Potter fan are you?
Find your definitive classification from Kneasy's handy questionaire.

Yes folks, this is it.
Cunningly contrived questions will elicit answers that reveal what you 
really think about the Potter saga by plumbing the depths of your 
psychosis - or do I mean psychology?

Just check a), b), c) or d) for each question and learn how you rate in 
the Fans of Harry Potter stakes!

1. When strangers see me reading the book:
a) I  laugh and say that it's fun
b) I'm a bit defensive
c) I don't care what they think. Judgemental people are so  negative
d) They don't. It's a solitary vice practiced behind closed doors

2. The worst thing that can happen to Hermione is:
a) She fails her exams
b) She marries Ron
c) The Battered House-Elves Collective condemns her as 'patronising and 
unhelpful'
d) She develops cellulite

3. The worst thing that can happen to Ron is:
a) He dies
b) He marries Hermione
c) He doesn't marry Hermione
d) His colour-blindness is corrected and he realises only a plonker 
would have a bedroom in bright orange

4. I  read Harry Potter because:
a) I like to escape from the real world
b) It  helps me with my latin
c) It depicts a world where individuals are empowered
d) There are so many of the books around that it's the easiest to steal

5. The character in the books I identify with most is:
a) Harry
b) Dumbledore
c) Hermione
d) Are you kidding? Bill Weasley of course! Big bucks in the Finance 
Sector and something hot back at base. Hee! Talk about farting through 
silk!

6. Colin Creevey is:
a) A Muggle who is excited at entering a whole new world
b) An irritating plot device
c) A positive statement against heightism
d) The next one for the chop

7. I wish I'd gone to Hogwarts because:
a) Magic is cool
b) The food is better than at the dump I attended
c) I could use magic to improve society
d) Love potions are cheaper than dinner at a swish restaurant

8. Bella Lestrange is:
a) Evil
b) Hmm...interesting...
c) Obviously based on Margaret Thatcher
d) Founder Member of The Order of the Sisters of Perpetual PMT

9. If I looked in the Mirror of Erised, I'd see:
a) Me surrounded by a loving family
b) Me running the country
c) The answer to world poverty
d) A convincing argument for cosmetic surgery

10. Chocolate is:
a) A good pick-me-up
b) OK in moderation
c) Acceptable if it's from a 'Fair Trade' organisation
d) One of the four major food groups along with caffeine, nicotine and 
alcohol

11. If I was an Animagus, I'd want my animal form to be:
a) A lion
b) A dragon
c) A unicorn
d) That alien that nailed Sigourney Weaver

12. Gred and Forge are:
a) Mischievous but well-meaning
b) An escape fantasy from the pettifogging rules of modern life
c) A depiction of uncaring capitalism typical of patriarchal society
d) Used as examples to frighten couples in contraception clinics

13. Flying on a broomstick is:
a) Traditional, but Quidditch is a great idea
b) A bit Freudian, don't you think?
c) A good way to reduce greenhouse gases
d) Not advisable in the flight-path into Heathrow

14. Owl Post is:
a) A pretty neat idea
b) A good way to reduce junk mail
c) Exploitation of noble birds
d) *Cheep* (Ain't that a hoot?)

15. Voldemort:
a) Will be defeated
b) Is a bit two dimensional
c) Is the product of his upbringing and would respond positively to 
counseling
d) Needs to read, learn and inwardly digest through his watery bowels 
"The Evil Overlord" rules before the last book - otherwise he'll never 
cream that little scrote

16. When the series ends I'll:
a) Join the local Harry Potter group, dress up and be an embarrassment 
to my family
b) Post insightful critiques on websites
c) Recommend that others read HP for its social comment
d) Write a series of TBAY satires

So - how did you do?
Mostly a's - Congratulations! You are a true fan! You appreciate the 
books in the way that Jo obviously intended.

Mostly b's. Still not quite there yet, are you? Little bit picky and 
too ready to compare HP with reality, perhaps? Never mind, immerse 
yourself completely in the next two books and you'll be going to the 
top of the class, too!

Mostly c's. Oh dear. You really should get out more. Not everything is 
meant to be taken seriously, you know. Lighten up, laugh a little; try 
imagining something ridiculous - that Fudge is based on Tony Blair for 
example.

Mostly d's. You're an absolute disgrace. Is nothing sacred?





From Pookie1_uk at pookie1_uk.yahoo.invalid  Fri May 20 15:25:51 2005
From: Pookie1_uk at pookie1_uk.yahoo.invalid (S A H Culfeather)
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 16:25:51 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [the_old_crowd] How do you rate?
In-Reply-To: 6667
Message-ID: <20050520152552.72130.qmail@...>

Oh dear - I think my answers just prove I'm a likely
candidate for Slytherin!! THe Weasley twins should be
most definitely used as a contraceptive aid and
question 5 I had to bypass!!

Serena


Barry Arrowsmith wrote:

What sort of Potter fan are you?
Find your definitive classification from Kneasy's
handy questionaire.

Yes folks, this is it.
Cunningly contrived questions will elicit answers that
reveal what you 
really think about the Potter saga by plumbing the
depths of your 
psychosis - or do I mean psychology?





From saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid  Fri May 20 15:58:23 2005
From: saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid (Saitaina)
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 08:58:23 -0700
Subject: [the_old_crowd] How do you rate?
References: <20050520152552.72130.qmail@...>
Message-ID: <003c01c55d54$c0d44520$01fea8c0@...>

Serena-

<and
question 5 I had to bypass!!>

Same here...but I had a few of those so
my awnsers can't be counted.

And just to prove how sleepy I am, I
can't stop laughing at this: d) Not
advisable in the flight-path into
Heathrow

Saitaina
****
"The new food pyramid looks as if all
you have to do to be healthy in America
is be gay and exercise."

"If you're going to sing in the shower,
don't start with a song that begins
with 'help'."

http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina


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




From nkafkafi at nkafkafi.yahoo.invalid  Fri May 20 17:44:10 2005
From: nkafkafi at nkafkafi.yahoo.invalid (nkafkafi)
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 17:44:10 -0000
Subject: FAQ poll answered... (with spoilers for said FAQ poll)
In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a050520034497117f8@...>
Message-ID: <d6l7la+ddub@...>

Debbie wrote:
 
> Did you say memory charm?  The first thing that occurred to me was
> that Dumbledore's belief that Neville could not have done what Harry
> did if he had been appointed to Harry's destiny is wrong, and that 
the
> reason Dumbledore (and the reader) can't see Neville's comparable
> abilities is that they've been obscured, if not obliterated
> altogether, by a memory charm.
>

Neri:
If DD is wrong in his judgment of Neville, what implications could 
this have on the plot? After all, JKR says that the question is 
completely hypothetical now. Harry is prophecy boy, period.

I understood what JKR had said about DD's assessment of Neville as 
part of what DD said to Fudge in the end of GoF about the pureblood 
ethos and the Crouches (I don't have books with me now). Maybe 
Neville (and the Logbottoms in general) represent the good-but-weak 
portion of the pureblood families. *Someone* has to represent them in 
order to maintain the balanced description, and I don't see any other 
candidates.    

 
> And for those of us who like our speculation very dark, there are 
many
> variants of memory charm theories, and a very large cast of 
suspects. 
> Everyone from Bellatrix (to keep toddler Neville from pointing her 
out
> in a lineup) to Fudge (to cover up whatever he did to elicit 
testimony
> from Frank and Alice (i) to enable them to round up the right
> suspects, or (ii) against the suspects the MoM had already rounded 
up
> in a desperate attempt to reassure the public that they had found
> whoever was responsible), to his own Gran (to prevent Neville from
> going down the same path as his father).
> 
> Truthfully, I like every one of those theories and there's canon to
> support them all.


Neri:
I also like the Memory Charm theories very much. In fact I'm working 
on one now. But I'm searching for thematic sense as well as canon 
support.



 And at least one of them (the Gran theory) explains
> something puzzling about her behavior; you'd think she would be more
> sympathetic in her treatment of a grandchild whose parents were
> tortured into insanity.  But, most significantly for the current
> story, any memory charm theory leaves Neville shrouded in 
insecurities
> that obscure his true abilities.
> 
> And it would more aptly demonstrate JKR's point that "Destiny is a
> name often given in retrospect to choices that had dramatic
> consequences" because it would mean that Neville really could have
> been the one but for the effect of others' choices.  He's got the
> bravery when it counts.  He was ready to take the Crucio hit in OOP
> even though he knew that he could end up like his parents.  He's
> willing to fight against impossible odds.  And he has plenty of
> magical power, if only he could concentrate enough to remember the
> spells, or the ingredients, when he needs them.
>

Neri:
Could Neville's hypothetic Memory Charm parallel Harry's scar? Harry 
didn't choose to have the scar, but once he has it, he faces choices 
regarding all the powers and risks that the scar offers. But what 
choices would a Memory Charm offer Neville?



Neri






From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sat May 21 20:37:15 2005
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 20:37:15 -0000
Subject: AK (was: FAQ poll answered... (with spoilers for said FAQ poll)
In-Reply-To: <d6ckli+bndi@...>
Message-ID: <d6o65r+jrut@...>

Kneasy wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/1666 :

<< IIRC only one character has ever stated that Harry survived an AK -
and that was Crouch!Moody. All well and good, except that in the same
speech C!M reiterates as fact that there is no protection against an
AK. One of his contentions has to be wrong. >>

Well, we have been shown with our own eyes that there is protection
against an AK. In GoF that protection was a grave marker to hide
behind, in OoP it was a bronze statue to hide behind.







From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sun May 22 03:35:20 2005
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 03:35:20 -0000
Subject: Snape'sprogeny/Pomona/TransferredPowers/Names/Post Owls/Scots/Myrtle/HousElv
Message-ID: <d6oulo+rkr6@...>

Potioncat wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/128930 :

<< I mean, I know each and everyone of us has wondered about Snape 
and Luna....No, really, has anyone ever heard this rumor before? >>

While she DIDN'T say anything about whether Luna is related to
Ollivander by their shared silver eyes and eccentricity.

Alla wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG
rownups/message/128932 :

<< I think I will vote for Victor Krum as Snape's son for now. :-) >>

Viktor was 18 during the QWC (according to Ron) so he was 18 to 19
during the rest of GoF, while Harry was 14 in GoF. Severus and James
are the same age. The Lexicon says James and Severus was born in 1960,
there 20 when Harry was born, therefore 15 to 16 when Viktor was born,
therefore still at Hogwarts. Are you suggesting an unusually pleasant
summer holiday in Bulgaria?

KarenTheUnicorn wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/128989 :

<< So Sprout's first name is...isan't that a city? <laughs> >>

Yes, but the city Pomona is named after Pomona the Roman goddess of
apples, and thus moderately relevant to Herbology. I STILL say her
husband's name is Basil and their daughters are Acacia and Jacaranda.

Stephanie musicofsilence wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/129038 :

<< "to give him tools no other wizard possessed ? the scar and the
ability it conferred, a magical window into Voldemort's mind."
JKR implies that the *only* powers which Voldemort has transferred
to Harry are his scar and the mental link. >> 

I think she only meant that the scar and mental link are the only
powers that are unique to Harry, not that they are the only powers he
got from Voldemort.

Tonks_op wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/129089 :

<< Why does DD have so many names? Does he have one for each of his
many incarnations?? >>

Albus Wulfric Brian Percival Dumbledore. The usual reason why a 
person has so many given names is either that the parents had a lot 
of people they wanted to name the child after, or that the person had
a lot of godparents and each godparent gave one name. 

Wherr009 wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/129121 :

<< If all this is true about owls (and I'm not saying it isn't) then
why didn't the MoM just "write a letter" to Sirius and follow the owl
to find out where he was? >>

That's one of JKR's FAQs:
http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=18 :

<< Q: In 'Prisoner of Azkaban', why couldn't the Ministry of Magic
have sent Sirius an owl, and then followed it, to find him?

A: Just as wizards can make buildings unplottable, they can also make
themselves untraceable. Voldemort would have been found long ago if it
had been as simple as sending him an owl! >>

Personally, I prefer MY theory that post owls fly via another
dimension, a dimension which only they can enter, with the result 
that they cannot be followed. Altho' the reason they fly in it is not
to avoid pursuit but because it is a dimension in which they can see
their destination even if he is Unplottable or hidden by Fidelius. 

After all, to me if Sirius was Unplottable, an Auror in Hogsmeade who
saw a big white Snowy Owl swoop down on the same hillside day after
day and walked out onto that hillside wouldn't have been able to find
Sirius any better than an Auror in London who tried to follow an owl,
and it wouldn't have been necessary to hurt Hedwig's feelings by using
school owls instead

Hi, Petra http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/129123 :
the Ministry CAN owl a letter to Sirius, they just can't follow the
owl.

Mira wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG
rownups/message/129194 :

<< Just to add that McGo is the only character with a Scottish name in
the books >>

Death Eater Macnair the executioner? Ernie Macmillan from Dufflepuff?
IIRC there are two MacDougal girls, Morag in Harry's year and Natalie
in the group Sorted during GoF ... 

Steve bboyminn wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/129231 :

<< -I want what ever is holding Moaning Myrtle to an earthly life to
be resolved so she can move on to the next life and rest in peace;
poor girl just breaks my heart. >> 

This is a forbidden "I agree" post.

Pippin wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/129232 :

<< Harry knew that Kreacher didn't wish him or Sirius well, he knew 
as well as JKR that no magic is foolproof, yet it never dawned on him
that the House Elf might be lying. >>

I don't believe that is particularly an example of Harry disrespecting
 House Elves. At the same time, it never dawned on him and he rejected
Hermione's suggestions that the Ministry of Magic building, especially
during the work day, would not be a very sensible place for Voldemort
to torture Sirius. He valued all information by whether it agreed with
his frightening vision.

Hickengruendler wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/129252 :

<< Therefore I really don't think Dobby's behaviour was all that
different. The difference is just that Kreacher's master was on the
good side and fighting for the right cause, while Dobby's was not. >>

This is another forbidden "I agree" post. And another parallelism is
between the two traitors, Snape and Pettigrew. Both betrayed the side
they were on, resulting in the deaths of their friends (okay, we don't
KNOW that it was Snape's information that caused his friend Rosier and
Wilkes to be killed while resisting arrest by Aurors); the difference
is that one's betrayal served bad guys and the other's served good
guys. 

Amiable Dorsai asked in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/129253 :

<< What did you do during the war, Minnie? What did you do for 11 
more years before you started teaching? And what did you teach before
Dumbledore gave up the Transfiguration post? >>

Presumably much of the time between her NEWTs and her teaching job 
was spent earning more and more of Transfiguration and other magic,
whether by apprenticeship, in some kind of Transfiguration school
(which wouldn't be part of a university only because JKR said there is
no wizarding university), or by self-study.





From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sun May 22 03:39:37 2005
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 03:39:37 -0000
Subject: Oh No! I'm sorry....
Message-ID: <d6outp+9beh@...>

I'm not sure HOW my HPfGU post appeared on the_owl_crowd. I must have
screwed up somehow. It wasn't intentional.





From spotthedungbeetle at dungrollin.yahoo.invalid  Wed May 25 13:41:34 2005
From: spotthedungbeetle at dungrollin.yahoo.invalid (dungrollin)
Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 13:41:34 -0000
Subject: Ruddy star-gazers and The Prophecy (long)
Message-ID: <d71vaf+k0j8@...>

I just posted this on HPfGU, and thought that since the TOC homepage 
shows such a lovely downward curve in posting frequency, and that 
I've been enjoying all the posts here wihtout contributing, that I'd 
post it here too.  With some of the errors corrected.



Our first meeting with the centaurs is in PS, in The Forbidden
Forest. We are first introduced to Ronan and Bane by Hagrid in the
lovely "Mars is bright tonight" conversation. Hagrid later
says "... Keep themselves to themselves mostly [...] they know
things ... jus' don' let on much."

Then Firenze rescues Harry, and Bane gets all cross with him,
annoyed that Firenze has stooped to the level of letting a (spit)
human (spit) ride on his back, and miffed that he set himself
against the stars.  So what had they seen? What was Firenze *trying* 
to prevent, and what did he *actually* prevent?

I suspect that what they saw was Harry's blood being used (in
conjunction with unicorn blood, probably) to re-corporate
Voldemort. I suspect that they also saw that Harry would escape
this encounter, thus what Firenze intended was *not* to save Harry,
(that was just a lucky side-effect) but to prevent Voldy's return.
Turns out he comes back anyway. That's the problem with trying to
tell the future, if you're any good at it, the future you predict
ought to take into account your own actions which result from having
predicted that future. So to speak.

So what did Firenze *actually* prevent? Presumably Quirrell!Mort
would have fired some spells at Harry, but with Quirrell's wand, not
Voldy's, so no chance for the reverse spell effect to save his
neck... who knows? Personally I don't think it's that important.


And note Firenze's reaction to Bane getting cross:

Firenze suddenly reared on to his hind legs in anger, so that Harry
had to grab his shoulders to stay on.
"Do you not see that unicorn?" Firenze bellowed at Bane. "Do you
not understand why it was killed? Or have the planets not let you
in on that secret? I set myself against what is lurking in this
Forest, Bane, yes, with humans alongside me if I must."

Firstly, I take from this that Voldemort is not kindly disposed to
centaurs. Firenze expects Bane to immediately understand why he
intervened and saved Harry, because whatislurkingintheforest is
commonly known to be A Bad Thing.
Secondly, I get a sense that no centaur really *likes* humans,
though some are more contemptuous of them than others.
Thirdly it puts Firenze firmly in the "We must all unite and stand
together against evil, whether we happen to like each other's
company or not." (Which in case you need it pointing out, is
Dumbledore's side.)
And fourthly, it's the groundwork for the division amongst the
centaurs (possibly Firenze against all the others), that we saw in
OotP. One side insists they should stay passive and not try to
avert the things foretold (which makes one wonder just what the
point of them telling the future is at all, perhaps centaurs just
enjoy being smug and right), and the other side says "but we might
have got it wrong, and dammit we ought to *try* to make the world a
better place, even if the stars say we will fail." No prizes for
guessing whose side I reckon JKR is on.

I can't remember (and am too lazy to check) whether centaurs were
mentioned in PoA, CoS or GoF. I'm going to move on to what happens
in OotP. GoF and OotP are too long anyway, and JKR insists that she
couldn't cut any of it out because she wants readers to have clues,
so that we don't turn around at the end and say "That's cheating!"
So the big question is: Did JKR introduce a second Divination
teacher to Hogwarts, a teacher of a subject that Harry is *not*
going to take for NEWTs, and left him there, apparently unable to go
home, simply so that we had a way of getting rid of Umbridge and a
clue about Grawp?

We will be starting HBP with *two* divination teachers. Shame
neither of them seem like good candidates for DADA, or I'd bet
one of them switches. But perhaps Trelawney would turn out to be a
good potions teacher, so Snape could move to DADA, and we'd still
have opportunities for Harry-Trelawney interaction and new prophetic
disclosures. (Precisely the sort of thing that is irritatingly
unpredictable from our point of view, unless there's a tradition of
prophecies coming in threes that I don't know about).

Anyway, he didn't move into the castle because the forested
classroom DD offered him came with free climate control ("No, I
don't fancy rain today, move the dial to ... Mediterranean summer
evening"). I'm betting he's got something important to do, and I
suspect that it will be to do with interpreting The Prophecy. Not
because I have any evidence, mind, just because I like the idea that
DD has good reason to stop Voldy knowing the whole thing, over and
above getting him to show himself at the DoM, and not because it's a
nice distraction to keep him busy and out of the Order's hair.

DD says something about Voldy wanting the prophecy so he could find
out how to kill Harry, but the prophecy appears to say no such
thing. What's going on?

It's mostly Sirius' fault that I think like this - they're in the
amphitheatre with the archway, fighting for their lives, the order
have just arrived but Dumbledore hasn't yet, and Sirius
says: "Harry, take the prophecy, grab Neville and run!" Fighting
for their lives, remember? The only kid who can get rid of Voldy
for good is in mortal peril, and his godfather wastes time *making
sure that he takes The Prophecy with him*. Why? Why bother? DD
already knows it, if the information Voldy would gain would not tell
him how to destroy Harry (which is apparently why he spent OotP
trying to get hold of it), why take further risks for no good 
reason? I think there's more to it than a bluff to keep the DEs 
interested and wasting their time.

Let me be clear (or try to be, at any rate): I don't think there is
a way of interpreting the prophecy so that Harry doesn't have to
kill Voldy and/or Voldy doesn't have to kill Harry. I don't think
any of the straightforward reading is negotiable, but then syntactic
gymnastics was never my strong point. It's the "neither can live
while the other survives" that is ambiguous. DD explains all the
other parts to Harry: "Power to vanquish the Dark Lord," "Thrice
defied," "Seventh month," "Marked as equal," "Power the Dark Lord
knows not," and "Either must die at the hand of the other" all get
explained, but not the "Neither can live while the other survives."
I assume this is what JKR was referring to in the FAQ answer.

I can't think what it might mean, but we'll leave that ? even if I
could come up with a guess it would be wrong, so I shan't try. But
IMO *that's* the bit that Voldy would be interested in. He knows
about that sort of thing, see, surviving when you have no business
doing so. That bouncing AK in the face which should have been
permanent.

There has been much speculation about the clue JKR gave us, that we
should be wondering what Voldy did to stop himself dying at GH, and
much of that has concluded that whatever it was he did, Snape knows,
and possibly helped. (For the record, I don't think he
helped: "They, who knew the steps I took, long ago, to guard myself
against mortal death?" Voldy's in his mid-70's, a decade and a half
doesn't really count as *long ago* - but Voldy implies that all the 
DEs knew what he'd done before the GH debacle, so Snape must know 
too.) Which makes the following question leap up and down with its 
hand in the air like Hermione on a sugar high: If Snape knows the 
entire prophecy and he knows about the immortality experiments, 
shouldn't he have picked up on this ambiguous clause? And Snape 
was/is DD's spy, so he should have told DD about the experiments, 
and DD should make the connection, too.

I reckon this is what we need Firenze for, linking two pieces of
information that would have told Voldy how to destroy Harry, but
instead (done by the good guys) telling Harry how to destroy Voldy.
But remember way back in PS: "Never," said Hagrid irritably, "try
an' get a straight answer out of a centaur. Ruddy star-gazers. Not
interested in anythin' closer'n the moon." So it might not be quite
that straightforward.

Firenze has shown himself willing not only to save people when their
lives are in danger, but to actively work against Voldemort. So is
he just teaching, or will he join the Order too? I'll admit to
being intrigued as to how Snape and Firenze get along, since they're
both rather aloof. And how will Snape react when he finds out that
Harry really is the most special little chap in the whole school? I
doubt it'll be pretty. (Hooray!) More importantly, if DD's dead by
then, who's going to keep Harry and Snape from each others'
throats?

Damnation. Is it still only May?

Dungrollin
Begging forgiveness for rambling





From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Thu May 26 10:44:23 2005
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 10:44:23 -0000
Subject: Ruddy star-gazers and The Prophecy (long)
In-Reply-To: <d71vaf+k0j8@...>
Message-ID: <d749a7+la16@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" <spotthedungbeetle at h...> wrote:

> snip> 
> Let me be clear (or try to be, at any rate): I don't think there is
> a way of interpreting the prophecy so that Harry doesn't have to
> kill Voldy and/or Voldy doesn't have to kill Harry. I don't think
> any of the straightforward reading is negotiable, but then syntactic
> gymnastics was never my strong point. It's the "neither can live
> while the other survives" that is ambiguous. DD explains all the
> other parts to Harry: "Power to vanquish the Dark Lord," "Thrice
> defied," "Seventh month," "Marked as equal," "Power the Dark Lord
> knows not," and "Either must die at the hand of the other" all get
> explained, but not the "Neither can live while the other survives."
> I assume this is what JKR was referring to in the FAQ answer.
> 
> more  snips>
 
> Damnation. Is it still only May?
> 

'Fraid so. Bit of a bugger, ain't it?

Since we're blighted by a lack of facts (and I suspect, a total inability
to recognise a clue even when it's staring us in the face) a little
desperate grasping at straws is called for.

It doesn't do to push parallels too far (oh, I don't know though) but
when centaurs are mentioned I can't help but think of Hercules.
*Made* immortal as a reward for his Labours, he was killed - by a shirt 
soaked in poisoned centaur blood.

And somehow I don't feel confident that Firenze is going to be around
at the end of the book. Just a hunch, though it could be considered
significant that he's busy accumulating enemies on all sides. His fellow
humano-equines would be happy to see him gracing supermarket shelves
in dog-food cans; he's the one centaur that the MoM can get at to wreak
some revenge for Dear Dolly; and as a DD supporter the DEs will have him
on their little list too.

As for Firenze and the Prophecy....
He's more than a little ambivalent when it comes to divination, implying
that humans don't understand, that centaurs do - sometimes. That it may
take a decade or more to wheedle meaning from the stars, smoke, whatever.
Forecasting trends is something they feel comfortable with, specific events
are something else again. If asked a question would he give a straight
answer anyway? Or would he answer a riddle with a conumdrum? That's what
Hagrid suggests.

And there's Hermione. Arch-sceptic of divination and the authors avatar in
many things. Should we be as sceptical as Hermione?

Worth remembering something else. When that dozy old bat did her "A tall,
dark stranger will cross your path.." bit, it was a future event. There is no
guarantee that it still refers to the future as of now. 'Cos there is one
interpretation of the Prophecy that would have allowed Voldy to knock off
Harry at GH and gone on his way rejoicing. The "neither can live while the
other survives.." being the key phrase. If the 'neither' are James and Lily and
'the other' is Harry, then the solution to Voldy's problem was to let either
James or Lily (or both) live - it's their deaths that will ensure Harry's survival.
And DD specifically uses the word 'vanquished' for what happened to Voldy 
at GH, just as the prophecy requires.

So - a genuine, accurate Prophecy, but largely irrelevant now?
But it would have been very relevant if Voldy had had it in his sweaty mitts
before GH. 

Yep; I know I've rabbited on about this in past posts, and yes, the syntax of 
the Prophecy can still be demonstrated to contain uncertainties even with
this reading, but I wouldn't put it past Jo to have a bit of fun with what would
be a combination of red herring and explication of back-story.

Kneasy





From nkafkafi at nkafkafi.yahoo.invalid  Thu May 26 14:08:50 2005
From: nkafkafi at nkafkafi.yahoo.invalid (nkafkafi)
Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 14:08:50 -0000
Subject: Ruddy star-gazers and The Prophecy (long)
In-Reply-To: <d749a7+la16@...>
Message-ID: <d74l9i+m394@...>

Kneasy wrote:
> <snipped>
> And there's Hermione. Arch-sceptic of divination and the authors 
avatar in
> many things. Should we be as sceptical as Hermione?
>

Neri:
FWIW we did get the prophecy approved by avatar!Hermione:

OotP, Ch. 38:
"Bet Dumbledore wishes he could've got rid of Trelawney for good," 
said Ron, now munching on his fourteenth Frog. "Mind you, the whole 
subject's useless if you ask me, Firenze isn't a lot better..." 

"How can you say that?" Hermione demanded. "After we've just found 
out that there are real prophecies?"


You see, while being a toy rebel and a skeptic, Hermione does believe 
in institutions. If it's a department of the Ministry, and they had 
all these orbs collected and tagged and properly ordered on shelves 
(why, it's just like a *library*) then it must be OK. 


Kneasy: 
> Worth remembering something else. When that dozy old bat did her "A 
tall,
> dark stranger will cross your path.." bit, it was a future event. 
There is no
> guarantee that it still refers to the future as of now. 'Cos there 
is one
> interpretation of the Prophecy that would have allowed Voldy to 
knock off
> Harry at GH and gone on his way rejoicing. The "neither can live 
while the
> other survives.." being the key phrase. If the 'neither' are James 
and Lily and
> 'the other' is Harry, then the solution to Voldy's problem was to 
let either
> James or Lily (or both) live - it's their deaths that will ensure 
Harry's survival.
> And DD specifically uses the word 'vanquished' for what happened to 
Voldy 
> at GH, just as the prophecy requires.
> 
> So - a genuine, accurate Prophecy, but largely irrelevant now?

Neri:
I suspect it's not a coincidence that the prophecy can be read as if 
it had already came to pass. This reading (and the fact that the orb 
got smashed) was craftily constructed by the Author so as to enable 
the Ministry to keep claiming that Harry isn't the key to winning the 
war, and thus continuing the conflict between DD and the Ministry 
even in Book 6. Using LotR again, I think the conflict between DD and 
the Ministry is analogous to the conflict between the Elerond/Gandalf 
faction and the Minas Tirith faction, represented by Boromir. Boromir 
wanted to use the ring against the enemy, which *was* after all the 
common-sense solution, while Elrond and Gandalf realized that this is 
just a well-intended way to lose, so against the opinion of Minas 
Tirith they came up with this harebrained plot to send the ring to 
Mordor to destroy it. I predict DD will find himself in a similar 
position in Book 6. The Ministry will demand some practical war plan, 
some sensible course of action (like maybe authoring again the aurors 
to use the Unforgivables) while DD will only be able to say to 
them: "well, there was this prophecy that got smashed so I'm the only 
one who knows what it said, and it said it's all depends on this 
strange teenager only I'm not sure how exactly, and yes, these words 
*can* be interpreted as if they had already came to pass but I 
personally don't believe it is so". Under these circumstances it will 
be hardly surprising if the Ministry won't accept DD's "plan" for the 
war. So the Order will have to continue being an underground 
organization, hiding from both the Ministry and the DEs.

Neri 





From editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid  Fri May 27 21:10:27 2005
From: editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid (Amanda Geist)
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 16:10:27 -0500
Subject: Fw: The Geist Predicts
Message-ID: <003201c56300$82860c20$5d59aacf@...>

Oh, I haven't posted over here in ages and there's a serious lack of Snape
discussion. So I'm cross-posting.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Amanda Geist" <editor at ...>
To: <HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com>

:::a wispy vapor drifts into the room. Too late, it notices that there is a
large fan in the corner! Although she struggles, she feels herself pulled
into the suction of the air currents....:::

 Lupinlore:

 > You've made this point several times on various threads, Nora, and I
> find it intriguing.  I know predictions are always dangerous,
> especially (to quote the Zen master, Roshi Yogi Berra) about the
> future.  Still, what kind of rethinking do you think will have to be
> done?  If you were running a betting pool, on what would you bet?
>
> Anyone else want to comment?  I'm talking about things that will be a
> "BANG" in the sense of really revealing important things about Snape's
> character and causing lots of people to rethink things.  What would
> you bet on?

Damn. *sigh* Okay. ::eyes limb and wonders how much weight it will
support:::

We will finally hear that Snape is not a vampire, has never been a vampire,
isn't going to be a vampire, hasn't shared any barroom stories with
vampires, his mother wasn't frightened by a vampire, and he casts a mean
reflection in a mirror. [We will hear this in some inarguable form that will
not cause people to see the light, renounce the error of their ways,
publicly confess, and then later publicly recant the confession and
gleefully fall back into their former evil ways.]

We will learn that he did love Lily; but by that I mean *he* loved *her,*
likely from afar, unless he managed to say something and was let down easy.
I don't think they ever had a relationship. [I still think part of the
strength of the venom he associates with James is due to some neat
sublimation, where he associates all the negative of being let down to
James, and all the positive feelings that remain to Lily. Also the very deep
fear that Lily may have told James; can you imagine his (even imagined)
humiliation, to even consider that James *knew* and could have laughed?]

I think JKR will think of some mechanism as brilliant as Occlumency lessons,
to make Harry and Snape learn still more of each other, without getting one
iota closer.

I think Snape will be injured or otherwise damaged through some attempt to
protect Harry, which Harry does not understand and therefore fights, causing
it to go awry.

I think Harry will fatally misunderstand some action of Snape's, and act
based on his own interpretation of it, to the great harm of both Harry,
Snape, and the cause. JKR depends on Harry's misinterpretation of things as
a plot driver; and this is prime territory. For example, I will be genuinely
surprised should Snape honestly turn out to be wholeheartedly supporting
Voldemort--but since he must give that impression, and Harry is so ready to
believe it, we will likely see more ambiguity (if not wilfull disbelief on
Harry's part) leading to mishap.

I think Snape will have to mentally "shield" Harry from Voldemort at some
point, requiring Harry to trust him, and putting Snape at great risk of
being caught doing so--for only with help from someone as skilled as Snape
would Harry be able to lie or even hold his own in a conversation with
Voldemort (unless Harry's signed up for Kwikspell's Occlumency program over
the summer).

I think Snape has been part of an extensive set of father figures for Harry;
he has been the aspect of father that a child least appreciates. The
disciplinarian, who just doesn't understand, who catches you doing wrong and
will not let you off the hook and whom you therefore resent because you know
he's at least a little bit right. This aspect is appreciated as maturity
increases--and I think Harry is fighting that emotional maturity because to
do otherwise would make him have to realize his own causative role in
Sirius' death. [Harry's doing a neat bit of sublimation himself, associating
all the negative with Snape, who really had nothing to do with it,  allowing
both himself and Dumbledore to "walk free."] ANYway, I think in either book
6 or book 7, Snape will die; and it will only be then that Harry will
realize the positives he got from their relationship.

And yes, I think Snape will die before that infamous last word "scar": all
of his character looks backward. He gives me the impression of someone whose
goals are not ahead, except to rectify mistakes made, and who does not care
much if he dies in that attempt. He can't let the past go, because that's
where he lives; I think he accepted long ago that the future holds only one
task for him and nothing else, and so has made no effort to move past the
past that defined that future.

I would love to see Harry and Snape see each other for each other, and not
for the associations that each have built for the other--but I doubt I will.

::: the shreds of vapor emerge from the other side of the fan and reform.
The hazy shape hurriedly heads out the door on that side of the room, making
a mental effort to tell someone to turn off the Snapefan.:::

~Amandageist





From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Sat May 28 11:29:55 2005
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 11:29:55 -0000
Subject: Fw: The Geist Predicts
In-Reply-To: <003201c56300$82860c20$5d59aacf@...>
Message-ID: <d79knj+kbks@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Geist" <editor at t...> wrote:
> Oh, I haven't posted over here in ages and there's a serious lack of Snape
> discussion. So I'm cross-posting.
> 

Kneasy:
Ah - the Fragrant Fanmistress with the stainless steel claws. Splendid!
I've been mildly entertained with your efforts in another place to educate 
the great unwashed as to the difference between canon and conclusions
(jumping to for the use of). You're on a loser there, I think.

> Amanda:
> 
> We will finally hear that Snape is not a vampire, has never been a vampire,
> isn't going to be a vampire, hasn't shared any barroom stories with
> vampires, his mother wasn't frightened by a vampire, and he casts a mean
> reflection in a mirror. [We will hear this in some inarguable form that will
> not cause people to see the light, renounce the error of their ways,
> publicly confess, and then later publicly recant the confession and
> gleefully fall back into their former evil ways.]
>

Kneasy:
Recidivists all.
Have they no shame? 
V!S Theory delenda est.

> Amanda:
> We will learn that he did love Lily; but by that I mean *he* loved *her,*
> likely from afar, unless he managed to say something and was let down easy.
> I don't think they ever had a relationship. [I still think part of the
> strength of the venom he associates with James is due to some neat
> sublimation, where he associates all the negative of being let down to
> James, and all the positive feelings that remain to Lily. Also the very deep
> fear that Lily may have told James; can you imagine his (even imagined)
> humiliation, to even consider that James *knew* and could have laughed?]
> 

Kneasy:
Dunno about this one. Maybe I'm too sentimentally attached to the perverse
thinking of my AGGIE post (HPfGU 77800) and the idea that the saintly Lily
had the hots for the shy, vulnerable, friendless misfit of their school years.
Not reciprocated of course, but it sparked the jealous rage in James's breast
that made poor Sevvy's schooldays a misery. 
A sad story and a lesson to us all.

I'm no fan of SHIPs (past, present or future) and when musing on the variants
of  LOLLIPOPS I can't see that Harry's reaction to the thought of his dear old
mum being stalked by the Potions Supremo as being anything but total and
irrevocable shock/horror/disgust and probably engendering an even deeper
hatred towards our beloved Mix!Meister.

Now this could go one of two ways: either it all becomes unbearably and
sickeningly fluffy or Half-cocked!Harry does it again and decides that family
honour requires him to wreak restitution for the presumption of this unworthy
suitor. Now  that could be entertaining.

> Amanda:
> I think JKR will think of some mechanism as brilliant as Occlumency lessons,
> to make Harry and Snape learn still more of each other, without getting one
> iota closer.
> 
> I think Snape will be injured or otherwise damaged through some attempt to
> protect Harry, which Harry does not understand and therefore fights, causing
> it to go awry.
> 

Kneasy:
Highly likely - though it may be held over until the last book.
If - in the next one - DD succumbs to terminal Dragonpox, drowns in his own
soft soap or otherwise becomes hors de combat, who takes over the running
of the Order? S. Snape Esq., that's who. And how will Harry react to that?
What fun!

> snip
> Amanda: 
> And yes, I think Snape will die before that infamous last word "scar": all
> of his character looks backward. He gives me the impression of someone whose
> goals are not ahead, except to rectify mistakes made, and who does not care
> much if he dies in that attempt. He can't let the past go, because that's
> where he lives; I think he accepted long ago that the future holds only one
> task for him and nothing else, and so has made no effort to move past the
> past that defined that future.
> 
> I would love to see Harry and Snape see each other for each other, and not
> for the associations that each have built for the other--but I doubt I will.
>

Kneasy:
Yup. Snuffed!Snape. Can't see it any other way.
I'm still of the opinion that Snapey has a very personal bone to pick with Voldy
and that this is his sole motivation for leaving the DEs, joining DD and putting
up with the adolescent  tantrums of Potter Jnr. He sees Weapon!Harry as the
best bet for savouring his revenge. But otherwise I don't think he gives a damn
about Harry as an individual. He's the means to an end, nothing more. He doesn't
like him, thinks him unreasonable, undisciplined and lazy, and if it weren't for 
DD's plan wouldn't piss on him if he caught fire.
 
Harry probably hates Snape but is unable to appreciate that Snape sees things
on an entirely different level. Snape hates Voldy, what he feels about Harry is 
massive frustration that the one foretold to bring Voldy down is so unremittingly
intransigent. Group hugs and male bonding would be a cop-out ending for the
Harry/Snape dynamic IMO.
But that might be because I'm a miserable old bugger.








From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sat May 28 22:57:26 2005
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 22:57:26 -0000
Subject: Ruddy star-gazers and The Prophecy
In-Reply-To: <d71vaf+k0j8@...>
Message-ID: <d7at0m+k7f4@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote:

> I just posted this on HPfGU, and thought that since the TOC
> homepage shows such a lovely downward curve in posting frequency, 

Why aren't people posting? Is it that they don't like my replies to
their posts? 

Anyway, volume seems low enough that I don't have to bother to combine
posts. 

> Anyway, he didn't move into the castle because the forested
> classroom DD offered him came with free climate control ("No, I
> don't fancy rain today, move the dial to ... Mediterranean summer
> evening"). I'm betting he's got something important to do,

He moved in because he knows that he has something important to do at
Hogwarts? Or because he saw in the stars that he would move in? OR
because THE AUTHOR has something important for him to do at Hogwarts?
IMHO good fiction requires the appearance that any character has 
hiser own reasons for hiser actions, not just that The Author needed
himer to do that for the plot.  

> It's mostly Sirius' fault that I think like this - they're in the
> amphitheatre with the archway, fighting for their lives, the order
> have just arrived but Dumbledore hasn't yet, and Sirius
> says: "Harry, take the prophecy, grab Neville and run!" Fighting
> for their lives, remember? The only kid who can get rid of Voldy
> for good is in mortal peril, and his godfather wastes time *making
> sure that he takes The Prophecy with him*. Why? Why bother? DD
> already knows it, if the information Voldy would gain would not tell
> him how to destroy Harry (which is apparently why he spent OotP
> trying to get hold of it), why take further risks for no good 
> reason? I think there's more to it than a bluff to keep the DEs 
> interested and wasting their time.

Is there any canon that Sirius knew the Prophecy? I'm under the
impression that DD told the Order members only what he wanted LV to
believe (if there is a spy in the Order, telling the Order members is
a good way of getting LV to believe it): that there was a Prophecy,
and it's stored in DoM, and LV heard part of it and that is why he
tried to kill Harry, but the part of it he didn't hear tells HOW to
kill Harry. Sirius may have been just as deluded as LV.

Which makes room for a digression on DD's secrecy. Realistically,
giving cover stories to his own operatives is a reasonable part of
security like in real life. Altho' I hope he has a way of passing the
facts to his successor if he is killed or de-souled or de-minded.
Thematically, if he represents God and the Order members represent
people trying to be good, us people trying to be good always are
acting in a great absence of information. But inside the story, DD is
a fallible human being (altho' a wise and learned one) and it seems
pretty arrogant of him to Puppetmaster the people on his own side. 

> Which makes the following question leap up and down with its 
> hand in the air like Hermione on a sugar high: If Snape knows the 
> entire prophecy and he knows about the immortality experiments, 
> shouldn't he have picked up on this ambiguous clause? And Snape 
> was/is DD's spy, so he should have told DD about the experiments, 
> and DD should make the connection, too.

Snape, like Sirius, may not know the entire Prophecy. In addition, I
didn't understand LV to be saying that he had told his followers all
the details of all his immortality spells, just that he told them he
had been working on it for long decades, and a few horrific anecdotes
(brags) of how he had gone to very difficult places, defeated very
difficult obstacles, and done very scary and disgusting things.... 
You make it sound obvious that, unbeknownst to LV, one of the
anecdotes plus Snape's book-learning plus the full prophecy equals 
how to kill LV. (If LV HAD known, he would have skipped telling that
anecdote.)

> being intrigued as to how Snape and Firenze get along, since they're
> both rather aloof. 

It is possible that each will sincerely respect the other.

> And how will Snape react when he finds out that
> Harry really is the most special little chap in the whole school? 

I thought Snape already knew that and was just lying when he said
otherwise.





From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sat May 28 23:02:27 2005
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 23:02:27 -0000
Subject: Fw: The Geist Predicts
In-Reply-To: <003201c56300$82860c20$5d59aacf@...>
Message-ID: <d7ata3+f9ce@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Geist" <editor at t...>
wrote:

> Damn. *sigh* Okay. ::eyes limb and wonders how much weight it will
> support:::

It doesn't need to support ANY; you geists just levitate.





From spotthedungbeetle at dungrollin.yahoo.invalid  Sun May 29 13:13:19 2005
From: spotthedungbeetle at dungrollin.yahoo.invalid (dungrollin)
Date: Sun, 29 May 2005 13:13:19 -0000
Subject: Ruddy star-gazers and The Prophecy
In-Reply-To: <d7at0m+k7f4@...>
Message-ID: <d7cf5f+bbsa@...>

Catlady:
He [Firenze] moved in because he knows that he has something 
important to do at Hogwarts? Or because he saw in the stars that he 
would move in? OR because THE AUTHOR has something important for him 
to do at Hogwarts? IMHO good fiction requires the appearance that 
any character has hiser own reasons for hiser actions, not just that 
The Author needed himer to do that for the plot.

Dungrollin:
Well, IMHO too. But there's no point in pretending that this is a 
moving story about a centaur who is defying the nature of his 
species by meddling in human affairs, about his difficult decision 
to leave his herd and how when his herd found out they banished him 
and cut him off, so he was forced to live in the castle with the 
thickie humans.  Because it's not.  Anything that Firenze is/does 
must affect Harry and his story, otherwise he wouldn't appear in the 
books (they're already too long, she's cutting out backstory right 
left and centre).  

Of course any half-decent author needs to give their characters 
plausible motivations for doing what they do, but at the end of the 
day, they do what they do because the author wants them to, and I 
reckon that in this case it's because the author *needs* Firenze in 
the castle. If, for plot reasons, you need a character to do 
something out of character in plot-driven fiction, it's generally 
much easier to change the character rather than the plot. 

Feel free to disagree, I don't have anything concrete on which I 
base this except that if Firenze is not there for a good reason then 
he's a waste of page-space, and at goodness-only-knows how many 
thousands of words ? OotP must be at least 140,000, right? - she 
doesn't *have* pages to waste.  



Dung, previously:
The only kid who can get rid of Voldy
> for good is in mortal peril, and his godfather wastes time *making
> sure that he takes The Prophecy with him*. Why? Why bother? 

Catlady:
Is there any canon that Sirius knew the Prophecy? I'm under the
impression that DD told the Order members only what he wanted LV to
believe (if there is a spy in the Order, telling the Order members is
a good way of getting LV to believe it): that there was a Prophecy,
and it's stored in DoM, and LV heard part of it and that is why he
tried to kill Harry, but the part of it he didn't hear tells HOW to
kill Harry. Sirius may have been just as deluded as LV.

Dungrollin:
No, no canon at all, more's the pity.  But even if he didn't, it's 
made quite clear (by DD, I think) that he went to the DoM to save 
Harry, either because he knew that Harry is the prophecy boy, or 
because he was extremely fond of him.  Still seems like saving the 
prophecy's a waste of time unless Sirius knows that it's important 
that Voldy doesn't get hold of it.  

What I mean is that either way, he's relying on DD's word. If he 
doesn't know the full prophecy, he believes DD that it could tell 
Voldy how to kill Harry.  If he does know the full prophecy (which 
doesn't appear to tell Voldy how to kill Harry), he believes DD that 
it's still important that Voldy doesn't get hold of it.


Dung, previously:
If Snape knows the
> entire prophecy and he knows about the immortality experiments,
> shouldn't he have picked up on this ambiguous clause? And Snape
> was/is DD's spy, so he should have told DD about the experiments,
> and DD should make the connection, too.

Catlady:
Snape, like Sirius, may not know the entire Prophecy. In addition, I
didn't understand LV to be saying that he had told his followers all
the details of all his immortality spells, just that he told them he
had been working on it for long decades, and a few horrific anecdotes
(brags) of how he had gone to very difficult places, defeated very
difficult obstacles, and done very scary and disgusting things....
 
Dungrollin:
In the graveyard, Voldy first makes it clear that he's speaking to 
*all* those present:

"I see you all, whole and healthy, with your powers intact ? such 
prompt appearances! ? and I ask myself ... why did this band of 
wizards never come to the aid of their master, to whom they swore 
eternal loyalty?"

And later:
"And then I ask myself, but how could they have believed I would not 
rise again? They, who knew the steps I took, long ago, to guard 
myself against mortal death?"  

*They [...] knew the steps*. Course, it could be that Snape was the 
only DE who didn't know, and because he knew Snape wasn't there, he 
could happily address all those present who *did* know.   

Catlady:
You make it sound obvious that, unbeknownst to LV, one of the
anecdotes plus Snape's book-learning plus the full prophecy equals
how to kill LV. (If LV HAD known, he would have skipped telling that
anecdote.)

Dungrollin:
Yup, that's the speculation (in case I didn't make it clear).  I 
can't think of another way of tying in JKR's hint that we should 
want to know what it was Voldy did to guard himself against mortal 
death, with DD saying that Voldy thought the prophecy would tell him 
how to kill Harry, with the only clause of the prophecy that DD 
didn't give Harry an explanation for, and with the fact that we now 
have *two* divination teachers.  DD never does say whether it would 
have told Voldy anything useful or not, but Sirius' words in the DoM 
make me think that DD's orders were that the prophecy was under no 
circumstances to fall into the hands of the DEs, and that there was 
a good reason for it.

Humbly opining,
Dungrolin

P.S. In response to Kneasy, yeah, I know it's boring.  I'm still 
hoping for something hugely bangy that nobody's thought of yet, 
too.  I didn't get into this game until after OotP was published, so 
HBP will be my first experience of Rowling-induced climatic 
disasters.  I'm apprehensive about HBP after that FAQ answer, but 
there's still a glimmer of hope that we're all barking up the wrong 
forest.





From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Tue May 31 13:55:55 2005
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 13:55:55 -0000
Subject: New
Message-ID: <d7hqdb+ahpd@...>

New FAQ on Jo's site.

A bit surprising given that it's only a skip and a jump until
the new book comes out. Mind you it makes up for it by
posing a couple of questions the answers to which won't
have us breathless on the edge of our seats (is the golf-ball
washer on the cover of the US ed. a pensieve in disguise;
how do members of the Order communicate with each other?)

The third (will our eponymous hero continue with Occlumency
either with Snape or someone else) is a bit more interesting
but doesn't compare with the questions that need answering
about *past* lacunae. Being told yes or no would hardly raise 
me to a fever pitch of excitement when we'll be able to read all
about it within days of the answer appearing on the site, if the
speed of response is anything close to average. 

Yet there are some questions that have been on my little list for 
years with no guarantee that they'll ever be answered.
Is it any wonder that I sometimes get disgruntled? 

Kneasy






From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Tue May 31 16:53:40 2005
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 16:53:40 -0000
Subject: New
In-Reply-To: <d7hqdb+ahpd@...>
Message-ID: <d7i4qk+2qrn@...>

Kneasy wrote:

> Being told yes or no would hardly raise 
> me to a fever pitch of excitement when we'll be able to read all
> about it within days of the answer appearing on the site, if the
> speed of response is anything close to average. 

Your childlike optimism warms my heart.  Here are my predictions for 
HBP, based on the existence of this poll:

 - the picture on the front cover has nothing to do with the story;
 - The Order's means of communication will continue to remain obscure;
 - The last words of the the book will be "So, Professor", said Harry 
(insert adverb here), "we never did manage to set up an occlumency 
lesson this year.  Do you think it's still worth trying next year?"

JKR will get round to providing an answer to the poll in October.

David





From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Tue May 31 17:50:06 2005
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 17:50:06 -0000
Subject: New
In-Reply-To: <d7i4qk+2qrn@...>
Message-ID: <d7i84e+k89m@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" <dfrankiswork at n...> wrote:
> Kneasy wrote:
> 
> > Being told yes or no would hardly raise 
> > me to a fever pitch of excitement when we'll be able to read all
> > about it within days of the answer appearing on the site, if the
> > speed of response is anything close to average. 
> 
> Your childlike optimism warms my heart.  Here are my predictions for 
> HBP, based on the existence of this poll:
> 
>  - the picture on the front cover has nothing to do with the story;
>  - The Order's means of communication will continue to remain obscure;
>  - The last words of the the book will be "So, Professor", said Harry 
> (insert adverb here), "we never did manage to set up an occlumency 
> lesson this year.  Do you think it's still worth trying next year?"
> 
> JKR will get round to providing an answer to the poll in October.
> 
> David

Damn!
Now you've ruined it for me - and without  a spoiler warning too!
July will be nothing but a barren desert, a wasteland across which
frustrated fans crawl, begging piteously for succour. How can one
face an Ashes series with equanimity if one's nights are reduced to
sleepless torment giving no answer to the momentous questions of 
the hour? 

Kneasy