From coriolan at coriolan_cmc.yahoo.invalid  Sat Jun  3 22:36:16 2006
From: coriolan at coriolan_cmc.yahoo.invalid (Caius Marcius)
Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2006 22:36:16 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter Filks: New Beatles Album
Message-ID: <e5t2t0+7cpu@...>

At HPF, we've just completed our five-years-in-the-making filking of 
the Beatles' album Revolver, which has been re-titled Reparo:

http://home.att.net/~coriolan/reparo.htm

Thanks to Gail, Pippin, Ginger, ewe2, Randy Estes, RJ Lupin & Jill!

  -	CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm







From heidi8 at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid  Sun Jun  4 16:22:59 2006
From: heidi8 at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 09:22:59 -0700
Subject: Coming to Lumos? Want to get creative?
References: <5913e6f80606020955t19598784k783cbdad77ceea8e@...>
Message-ID: <1149438182.130145C6@...>


FictionAlley and HPANA are thrilled to announce that sign-ups are now
open for The Creativity Booth at Lumos
[http://www.fictionalley.org/lumos_creativity]! If you're registered
to attend Lumos, we'd love to have you take a seat in the Creativity
Booth, which will be situation in the Vendor Room; you'll be part of
the booth staff for a one-hour time-slot, and your fellow attendees
will be able to request a drabble, a sketch, a filk, or a bit of
meta/debate from you. We have almost 100 slots available for artists,
writers and filkers, so we're hoping that a lot of you are able to
take an hour and join in the fun!


Heidi

Http://www.fictionalley.org
Http://www.hpwiki.com



From estesrandy at estesrandy.yahoo.invalid  Sun Jun  4 17:00:34 2006
From: estesrandy at estesrandy.yahoo.invalid (Randy)
Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 17:00:34 -0000
Subject: A link to one of the most Fascinating HP posts you will ever read!
Message-ID: <e5v3ji+bl6j@...>

Everyone in this group has read the HP books for clues.  Some people 
read them with prescription glasses.  Some read them with magnifying 
glasses, and some read them with microscopes.  I stumbled across a 
series of posts that were written by a guy named Superwizard624.  
This guy read these books with an electron microscope.  He has 
figured out so many clues and tied them together so well; it will 
make your head spin!

I just posted about spiders as recurring themes.  He calls these 
themes "running bits".  I have spotted a few of them as many of you 
have done also.  Socks, spiders, slugs, etc....

I have never read a post about bubbles before.  We all know that 
Neville forgot something important. Superwizard624 takes this 
concept and explains almost everything!

Make yourself a pot of coffee or tea, and set aside a couple of 
hours to read the posts in this link.  If you want to figure it out 
yourself, do not read his posts.  I was fascinated by his ability to 
tie so many things together!  

Enjoy!

http://www.hpana.com/forums/topic_view.cfm?tid=58884

Randy







From constancevigilance at constancevigilance.yahoo.invalid  Mon Jun  5 01:08:25 2006
From: constancevigilance at constancevigilance.yahoo.invalid (Constance Vigilance)
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 18:08:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [the_old_crowd] A link to one of the most Fascinating HP posts you will ever read!
In-Reply-To: <e5v3ji+bl6j@...>
Message-ID: <20060605010825.90837.qmail@...>

Interesting. I have a couple of disagreements, but
they are minor. I think that Snape's I'm-Voldys-boy
act at Spinners End was more for Wormtail's benefit
than for Bellatrix's. Snape has been treating Peter
with distain, so there hasn't been opportunity for
long expository speeches, which Snape knows will be
relayed to Voldy.

Superwizard also reminds us that Kreachur likely has
the locket or knows where it is. My guess? I think
Kreachur will have an opportunity to give it to
Hermione, whom he owes a gift debt because of the
Christmas blanket.

CV

--- Randy <estesrandy at ...> wrote:

> Everyone in this group has read the HP books for
> clues.  Some people 
> read them with prescription glasses.  Some read them
> with magnifying 
> glasses, and some read them with microscopes.  I
> stumbled across a 
> series of posts that were written by a guy named
> Superwizard624.  
> This guy read these books with an electron
> microscope.  He has 
> figured out so many clues and tied them together so
> well; it will 
> make your head spin!
> 
> I just posted about spiders as recurring themes.  He
> calls these 
> themes "running bits".  I have spotted a few of them
> as many of you 
> have done also.  Socks, spiders, slugs, etc....
> 
> I have never read a post about bubbles before.  We
> all know that 
> Neville forgot something important. Superwizard624
> takes this 
> concept and explains almost everything!
> 
> Make yourself a pot of coffee or tea, and set aside
> a couple of 
> hours to read the posts in this link.  If you want
> to figure it out 
> yourself, do not read his posts.  I was fascinated
> by his ability to 
> tie so many things together!  
> 
> Enjoy!
> 
> http://www.hpana.com/forums/topic_view.cfm?tid=58884
> 
> Randy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


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



From quigonginger at quigonginger.yahoo.invalid  Mon Jun  5 07:14:40 2006
From: quigonginger at quigonginger.yahoo.invalid (quigonginger)
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 07:14:40 -0000
Subject: PJP (WARNING: adult themes)
Message-ID: <e60ll0+lo1p@...>

Throwing the ball up in the air to see who catches it and what they
do with it:

I have been trolling the archives of HPFGU on the subject of
Polyjuice potion.

Some questions were raised that were never answered back then, and
some new ones have come to my mind.

WARNING!!!!!! THIS MAY TURN NC-17!!!!!!!!!!

But we're all grown-ups here, right?

Ok, here goes:

If you Polyjuice yourself into someone, you only need one hair or
toenail or whatever.  What is to stop you from changing into, say,
Bob, giving yourself (with Bob's hair) a haircut, and staying Bob for
as long as you keep drinking the potion?  Would that have worked for
Crouch?

If you are a woman and change yourself into a man, and <blush> spend
a bit of quality private time with yourself, and change back to a
woman, can you use the <blush> results of the private action to
impregnate yourself?

Would the resulting child of the above action be the child of the man
into whom you had changed?  (Talking geneticly here, not morally or
legally.)

If you had an arm amputated and the arm was too damaged to be
repaired, could you change yourself into a previous version of
yourself using old hair from when you were fully armed, and then
amputate the arm and reattatch it once you reverted back to your
current self?  Or would the arm disappear after an hour as well?

Along the same lines, if you had a disease where you needed a tissue
donor, could change back to a pre-diseased self, donate healthy
tissue, and have it cloned within the hour?  Would the healthy cloned
cells still exist so you could grow your own donor tissue?

If a middle-aged, rotund woman who wasn't much to look at and whose 
biological clock was ticking like a sledgehammer, but was only hit on 
by ugly drunks, and, knowing that both alcoholism and uglyism are 
hereditary, decided not to let one of them impregnate her, could she 
change herself into a beautiful young woman and bag a hot guy?  Given 
that conception doesn't take place immediately, wouldn't the <blush> 
offering of the male just be swimming along towards its goal?  The 
highway stays the same, only the scenery has changed, right?

Or should I just Imperious some poor bastard and Obliviate him?
I know, I came up with a better idea above, but this one sounds like 
so much more fun!

How much would Alan Rickman's hair clippings go for on E-Bay? How
much would his GF's clippings go for? <beg>

What would Kneasy do with Madam W's clippings and an adventurous
friend?

Ok, skip that last one.  There's some things we just don't need to
know.

Any other questions?

Ginger, hoping this generates a conversation as fun and interesting
as the one in the archives. 







From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Mon Jun  5 08:46:26 2006
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 08:46:26 -0000
Subject: PJP (WARNING: adult themes)
In-Reply-To: <e60ll0+lo1p@...>
Message-ID: <e60r12+5fg0@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" <quigonginger at ...> wrote:
> 
> How much would Alan Rickman's hair clippings go for on E-Bay? How
> much would his GF's clippings go for? <beg>
> 
> What would Kneasy do with Madam W's clippings and an adventurous
> friend?
> 
> Ok, skip that last one.  There's some things we just don't need to
> know.
> 
> Any other questions?
> 
> Ginger, hoping this generates a conversation as fun and interesting
> as the one in the archives.
>

Up to my ears in stuff, but must chip in here.
Ever see that old Spike Milligan cartoon?
The one where a surgeon is sawing the legs off a patient?
And the caption - 
"You do realise this won't mean you'll paint like Toulouse Lautrec, don't you?"
Madam W. is a one-off teenager's dream - a sick mind in a healthy body. 
Oooh, yes please!

Kneasy
apologises to Heidi - no, I haven't forgotten you, will get back as soon as.








From foxmoth at pippin_999.yahoo.invalid  Tue Jun  6 13:54:02 2006
From: foxmoth at pippin_999.yahoo.invalid (pippin_999)
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 13:54:02 -0000
Subject: PJP (WARNING: adult themes)
In-Reply-To: <e60ll0+lo1p@...>
Message-ID: <e641dq+v0n2@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" <quigonginger at ...> wrote:
>
> Throwing the ball up in the air to see who catches it and what they
> do with it:
> 
> I have been trolling the archives of HPFGU on the subject of
> Polyjuice potion.
> 

Pippin:
King Uther Pendragon was transformed by Merlin into the likeness of the
Duke of Cornwall so that he could lie with the Lady Igraine. The child
which resulted was undoubtedly Uther's. 

No doubt Mme Whiplash's carries samples catering to every taste. But
would a wizard polyjuiced into a Muggle retain his or her powers?


Pippin






From gbannister10 at geoff_bannister.yahoo.invalid  Tue Jun  6 21:04:00 2006
From: gbannister10 at geoff_bannister.yahoo.invalid (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 21:04:00 -0000
Subject: PJP (WARNING: adult themes)
In-Reply-To: <e641dq+v0n2@...>
Message-ID: <e64qk0+g937@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at ...> wrote:
>
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" <quigonginger@> wrote:
> >
> > Throwing the ball up in the air to see who catches it and what they
> > do with it:
> > 
> > I have been trolling the archives of HPFGU on the subject of
> > Polyjuice potion.
> > 
> 
> Pippin:
> King Uther Pendragon was transformed by Merlin into the likeness of the
> Duke of Cornwall so that he could lie with the Lady Igraine. The child
> which resulted was undoubtedly Uther's. 
> 
> No doubt Mme Whiplash's carries samples catering to every taste. But
> would a wizard polyjuiced into a Muggle retain his or her powers?

Geoff:
Well, there was a child so he certainly retained some powers....

<blushes and rushes off stage left slapping wrists furiously>






From pengolodh_sc at pengolodh_sc.yahoo.invalid  Tue Jun  6 21:11:08 2006
From: pengolodh_sc at pengolodh_sc.yahoo.invalid (pengolodh_sc)
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 21:11:08 -0000
Subject: [OT] Empty digest - digest-readers will want to go to the group site
Message-ID: <e64r1c+sans@...>

Greetings.

It seems that Yahoo!Groups, with their latest alterations of the 
interface on the Yahoo!Groups websites, managed to break some digests 
- those that read the group by digest should go to the group site to 
see if there are posts they did not receive.  On this list, for 
instance, I received a digest (no. 637) that should have contained 
three messages (nos. 4297, 4299, 4300 (message 4298 seems to have been 
deleted?)), but was empty - the messages were not included in the next 
digest.

Best regards
Christian Stub?
Accomplished lurker, who notes that when websites fiddle with 
interfaces, they more often than not break something







From kelley_thompson at kelleyscorpio.yahoo.invalid  Tue Jun  6 21:31:46 2006
From: kelley_thompson at kelleyscorpio.yahoo.invalid (Kelley Thompson)
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 16:31:46 -0500
Subject: [OT] Empty digest - digest-readers will want to go to the group site
References: <e64r1c+sans@...>
Message-ID: <027b01c689b0$9e4c7ca0$4001a8c0@OEMNDSUU8LDS8I>

Christian:
>> It seems that Yahoo!Groups, with their latest alterations of the
interface on the Yahoo!Groups websites, managed to break some digests
- those that read the group by digest should go to the group site to
see if there are posts they did not receive.  <<

Yes, I've gotten a blank digest from the groups I use that setting for, too.
Doesn't look like it will be resent, but ones appearing after are coming
through in the new format.  On the plus side, the search functions looks
to have been improved mightily, though I've yet to fiddle with it...

--Kelley










From nkafkafi at nkafkafi.yahoo.invalid  Tue Jun  6 23:15:39 2006
From: nkafkafi at nkafkafi.yahoo.invalid (Neri)
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 23:15:39 -0000
Subject: PJP (WARNING: adult themes)
In-Reply-To: <e60ll0+lo1p@...>
Message-ID: <e652ar+eo29@...>

Ginger wrote:
> Throwing the ball up in the air to see who catches it and what they
> do with it:
> 

Neri:
Attempting a serious answer here. The mechanism of the Ployjuice
potion is obviously to magically change parts of oneself into a copy
of the genetic information contained in the hair (or whatever) taken
from another person. I'm writing "parts" because the brain, for
example, clearly doesn't change (or the changed Harry would be as
stupid as Goyle and the changed Hermione would start chasing mice).
Clearly, the new copy is chemically unstable and thus returns to its
original composition within an hour. Knowing this I think we can
easily answer the questions below.

> 
> If you Polyjuice yourself into someone, you only need one hair or
> toenail or whatever.  What is to stop you from changing into, say,
> Bob, giving yourself (with Bob's hair) a haircut, and staying Bob for
> as long as you keep drinking the potion?  Would that have worked for
> Crouch?
> 

The new hair would only be an unstable copy. We may assume that it
still retains parts of the original genetic information. However, even
if this copy would be able to withstand the recopying procedure of the
potion, some information is likely to be lost in every copying, and
thus the similarity of the new body to the original hair donor will
exponentially deteriorate with each additional haircut and drinking.

> If you are a woman and change yourself into a man, and <blush> spend
> a bit of quality private time with yourself, and change back to a
> woman, can you use the <blush> results of the private action to
> impregnate yourself?
> 

Assuming that the potion is able to create a haploid sperm cell using
the genetic information in a diploid hair cell, this would still be an
unstable copy DNA that would return to its original composition
(probably a female ovum) within an hour, just as the man is also
changing back into the original woman. Hence the woman would never
have the chance to use the sperm.  

> Would the resulting child of the above action be the child of the man
> into whom you had changed?  (Talking geneticly here, not morally or
> legally.)
> 

N/A (see previous answer).

> If you had an arm amputated and the arm was too damaged to be
> repaired, could you change yourself into a previous version of
> yourself using old hair from when you were fully armed, and then
> amputate the arm and reattatch it once you reverted back to your
> current self?  Or would the arm disappear after an hour as well?
> 

The new self will have two hands, since this genetic information (or
most of it, anyway) is contained in the hair. However, the new copy
and hence its new hand, attached or unattached, would only be an
unstable copy and will return to its original state (i.e., no hand)
within an hour, just as the original body is ready for the transplant.

> Along the same lines, if you had a disease where you needed a tissue
> donor, could change back to a pre-diseased self, donate healthy
> tissue, and have it cloned within the hour?  Would the healthy cloned
> cells still exist so you could grow your own donor tissue?
> 

For the same reason, the healthy tissue will change back to the
original damaged tissue after an hour.

> If a middle-aged, rotund woman who wasn't much to look at and whose 
> biological clock was ticking like a sledgehammer, but was only hit on 
> by ugly drunks, and, knowing that both alcoholism and uglyism are 
> hereditary, decided not to let one of them impregnate her, could she 
> change herself into a beautiful young woman and bag a hot guy?  Given 
> that conception doesn't take place immediately, wouldn't the <blush> 
> offering of the male just be swimming along towards its goal?  The 
> highway stays the same, only the scenery has changed, right?
> 

Assuming the offering had made it to the destination within the time
limit, the DNA from the woman would still change back to the original
rotund DNA after an hour. Even if the new zygote would survive this
drastic change, it would continue developing with the original DNA.

> Or should I just Imperious some poor bastard and Obliviate him?
> I know, I came up with a better idea above, but this one sounds like 
> so much more fun!

Now *this* plan seems actually workable. Can't see any problem with it.

> How much would Alan Rickman's hair clippings go for on E-Bay? How
> much would his GF's clippings go for? <beg>
> 

Sorry, not my department.

> What would Kneasy do with Madam W's clippings and an adventurous
> friend?
> 

Most certainly not my department.


Neri








From quigonginger at quigonginger.yahoo.invalid  Wed Jun  7 12:13:37 2006
From: quigonginger at quigonginger.yahoo.invalid (quigonginger)
Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 12:13:37 -0000
Subject: PJP (WARNING: adult themes)
In-Reply-To: <e652ar+eo29@...>
Message-ID: <e66fth+eg85@...>

I, Ginger previously asked:
> > If a middle-aged, rotund woman who wasn't much to look at and 
whose 
> > biological clock was ticking like a sledgehammer, but was only 
hit on 
> > by ugly drunks, and, knowing that both alcoholism and uglyism are 
> > hereditary, decided not to let one of them impregnate her, could 
she 
> > change herself into a beautiful young woman and bag a hot guy?  
Given 
> > that conception doesn't take place immediately, wouldn't the 
<blush> 
> > offering of the male just be swimming along towards its goal?  
The 
> > highway stays the same, only the scenery has changed, right?
> > 

Neri answered:
> Assuming the offering had made it to the destination within the time
> limit, the DNA from the woman would still change back to the 
original
> rotund DNA after an hour. Even if the new zygote would survive this
> drastic change, it would continue developing with the original DNA.

Ginger now:
So, if the conception took place after the hour was over, it would be 
the male's donation, and the egg of the woman in her own form, so it 
could happen. Hmm, has anyone seen my boomslang skin?

Thank you, Neri, for your answers on the other things as well.  
Astute as usual.

Ginger "Just call me Merope" Gaunt







From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sat Jun 10 20:35:30 2006
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 20:35:30 -0000
Subject: PJP (WARNING: adult themes)
In-Reply-To: <e60ll0+lo1p@...>
Message-ID: <e6faei+c0vl@...>

The new look of Y!Groups webview apparently doesn't empurple the post
titles on the Messages list of posts when I've read those posts. This
will make it harder for me to figure out where I left off last time
*sigh*.

Ginger wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/4299>:

<< If you Polyjuice yourself into someone, you only need one hair or
toenail or whatever. What is to stop you from changing into, say, Bob,
giving yourself (with Bob's hair) a haircut, and staying Bob for as
long as you keep drinking the potion? >>

Unlike Neri, I don't think Polyjuice works by genetics. I think it
works by magical essence of identity. So the hair trimmings from
Moody!Crouch magically essentially are Crouch's hair, so using them in
Polyjuice would unexpectedly turn the drinker into *Crouch*.

I think that using old hair to try to be a younger version of oneself
or a younger version of someone else (which includes trying to be a
live version of a currently dead person) only turns the drinker into
the current version of that person. Because the magical essence of
identity is never split into pieces, that essence in the old hair is
still a peninsula of that essence in the current person.

Which argues that hair cut from or semen ejaculated by or tissue
samples of a Polyjuiced person would transform back either 
.) immediately when separated OR
.) one hour after the person's just-before drink of Polyjuice OR
.) when the person transformed back (in which case, the woman who
wanted to be a father could do it by remaining transformed for the
whole nine months - I believe this magical thing is 'set in stone' by
being born).

Pippin wrote on that matter in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/4301>:

<< King Uther Pendragon was transformed by Merlin into the likeness of
the Duke of Cornwall so that he could lie with the Lady Igraine. The
child which resulted was undoubtedly Uther's. >>

My result (above) seems to agree with you, but We don't even know that
Cornwall!Uther was a case of Polyjuice. It might have been just an
Illusion spell to look/smell/etc like Cornwall.

Before this, I never thought about the semen of a Polyjuiced person,
only about the female reproductive system of a Polyjuiced person,
about which some questions came up in the past.

1) Suppose a man (or an infertile/postmenopausal woman) takes
Polyjuice to change into a fertile woman to get pregnant. I 
said, even if he achieved pregnancy within the hour, it would go away
when he transformed back. Even if he took Polyjuice every hour to
avoid transforming back, it would go away when he took the next dose
of Polyjuice, because he is tranforming into Madam So-and-so even tho'
he is transforming into her *again*, so he is transforming into a
non-pregnant woman. 

2) Suppose someone takes Polyjuice to change into a woman who is
pregnant at the time. Well, I think they would LOOK as pregnant as the
hair donor, or else it wouldn't be very useful for disguise. Whether
they would actually BE pregnant may depend on how the Polyjuice magic
treats the conceptus as part of the womb-mother or as a separate being. 

If the magic treats the conceptus as just part of the womb-mother in
this case, then the transformed person would BE pregnant and a woman
could have identical twins by getting someone to take Polyjuice with
her hair when she was deep in labor to give birth before transforming
back. 

If the magic treats the conceptus in this case as a separate being,
then the transformed person wouldn't actually be pregnant, except
maybe for the special case in which a pregnant person transformed into
a different pregnant person -- maybe the fetus would also transform.
That might work for the man in the previous question to become a
mother. What would happen if he (or a normal pregnant female) went
from being pregnant for one hour to being in full-term labor? I guess
the baby would be born full-term and a clone of the hair donor's baby?
I don't know what would happen to a non-pregnant Polyjuice drinker
while the hair donor gave birth.

If the magic treats the conceptus as separate and the man!woman from
the previous question changed back to himself or transformed into
anyone else who wasn't pregnant, would the conceptus just vanish or
would it die or would it turn into a tumor? A cancerous tumor?

3) Suppose a pregnant woman takes Polyjuice, especially to change into
a man. I think her fetus goes away when she transforms and comes back
unharmed when she transforms back, like Moody!Crouch's eye. Challenged
about the mechanics of this, I said the whole conceptus hides
disguised as a single cell.

The only way that any of that relates to Ginger's question about the
woman who is not yet pregnant when she turns back into herself is IF
the question of whether the conceptus just vanishes sheds any light on
whether the sperm cells just vanish. I can't think of any reason why
the sperm would just vanish... But, Ginger, wouldn't it be easier to
use a Beautifying Potion like Malodora Grymm?

Pippin wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/4301>:

<< But would a wizard polyjuiced into a Muggle retain his or her
powers? >>

More interesting: would a Muggle polyjuiced into a wizard gain wizard
powers?

Nitpick on Neri's
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/4305>:

<< (or the changed Harry would be as stupid as Goyle and the changed
Hermione would start chasing mice). >>

Because Polyjuice Potion doesn't work when used for animal
transformations, the change in Hermione was little more than skin deep. 

I don't know whether the principle on which it doesn't work is
predictable superficial transformation only or 'unpredictable 
results' (as I well remember from my IBM COBOL days!). If the 
former, it could be used as a test to identify whether chimpanzees 
or a (retrieved/reconstructed) Australopithecus or H. erectus is a
person or an animal. Or whether whales and elephants are people so
that killing them is murder...







From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sat Jun 10 20:42:55 2006
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 20:42:55 -0000
Subject: PJP (WARNING: adult themes)
In-Reply-To: <e6faei+c0vl@...>
Message-ID: <e6fasf+4u9j@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)"
<catlady at ...> wrote:
>
> The new look of Y!Groups webview apparently doesn't empurple the post
> titles on the Messages list of posts when I've read those posts. This
> will make it harder for me to figure out where I left off last time
> *sigh*.

In addition, what shows on the preview has a longer line before
breaking for word wrap than the real webview does. *sigh* Checking
line length is the most important thing I use preview for.







From gbannister10 at geoff_bannister.yahoo.invalid  Sun Jun 11 12:09:14 2006
From: gbannister10 at geoff_bannister.yahoo.invalid (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 12:09:14 -0000
Subject: Yahoo!'s latest rush of blood to the head......
In-Reply-To: <e6fasf+4u9j@...>
Message-ID: <e6h15a+aoul@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" <catlady at ...> 
wrote:
>
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)"
> <catlady@> wrote:
> >
> > The new look of Y!Groups webview apparently doesn't empurple the post
> > titles on the Messages list of posts when I've read those posts. This
> > will make it harder for me to figure out where I left off last time
> > *sigh*.
> 
> In addition, what shows on the preview has a longer line before
> breaking for word wrap than the real webview does. *sigh* Checking
> line length is the most important thing I use preview for.
>

Geoff:
I've already made comments on the new layout to the backroom boffins who 
dream up these changes.
 
If you click on the Yahoo! groups news button, there is a facility to comment. Mark you, 
they say that they aggregate replies so I may still contact them more directly as I did when 
they last played silly devils a couple of years ago.

<sigh>






From silmariel at a_silmariel.yahoo.invalid  Mon Jun 12 15:28:11 2006
From: silmariel at a_silmariel.yahoo.invalid (silmariel)
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:28:11 +0200
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Prank bit was Yahoo!'s latest rush of blood to the head......
In-Reply-To: <e6h15a+aoul@...>
References: <e6h15a+aoul@...>
Message-ID: <200606121728.11222.silmariel@...>

El Domingo 11 Junio 2006 14:09, Geoff Bannister escribi?:
> Geoff:
> I've already made comments on the new layout to the backroom boffins who
> dream up these changes.
> ?
> If you click on the Yahoo! groups news button, there is a facility to
> comment. Mark you, they say that they aggregate replies so I may still
> contact them more directly as I did when they last played silly devils a
> couple of years ago.
>
> <sigh>

But the search actually works.... I've found an old question bugging me:

Why Snape trusted DD? - after the prank, that is

I've found it's easier to think it the other way around: He didn't, and he 
outed Lupin. More in character for Snape. Only he did it in a Slytherin way, 
he told Lucius, who told Voldie, and he received a recomendation not to mess 
with werewolves and the invitation to join DEs, so that they actually 
validated him. Snape quietly joined the DEs, became Lucius lapdog, and of 
course, he'll always distrust Lupin.

Silmariel



From quigonginger at quigonginger.yahoo.invalid  Tue Jun 13 12:18:49 2006
From: quigonginger at quigonginger.yahoo.invalid (quigonginger)
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 12:18:49 -0000
Subject: repost from HPfGU-Virus alert
Message-ID: <e6maf9+lfui@...>

Hi all.  I hope I'm not committing a faux pas or doing anything 
illegal or bad in any way, but I'm reposting this for anyone who 
doesn't keep up with TOL and may not know about this.  I have gotten 
several of these in my inbox and was fortunate enough not to have 
opened them.

Ginger



Anyone who gets the "New Graphic Site" message, PLEASE DO NOPT OPEN 
it!!!

It is a virus/worm...DELETE IT!

It replicates itself by sending to everyone in your address book.

It seems to be fairly new, some most antivirus scanners probably
don't have a means of catching...yet.

If you do have it, update your antivirus and scan immediately.

At this time, I don't know what else it does...if anything.

Sorry for the cross post...but this thing seems to be going around
the HP groups pretty fast. It has been spotted in other groups, so
it isn't an HP group only thing...

Kelley Elf again here:
As Markus says, this virus is different to others that are only
launched when you try to open their attachment; this one opens when
you open the message itself.  So, if you see any messages in your
inbox entitled "New Graphics Site" delete them without opening them.








From dontask2much at dontask2much.yahoo.invalid  Wed Jun 14 00:07:43 2006
From: dontask2much at dontask2much.yahoo.invalid (rebecca)
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:07:43 -0400
Subject: [the_old_crowd] repost from HPfGU-Virus alert
References: <e6maf9+lfui@...>
Message-ID: <016e01c68f46$8f94e3a0$6501a8c0@...>


Ginger said:

Hi all.  I hope I'm not committing a faux pas or doing anything
illegal or bad in any way, but I'm reposting this for anyone who
doesn't keep up with TOL and may not know about this.  I have gotten
several of these in my inbox and was fortunate enough not to have
opened them.

Rebecca now:

Just to add to this, here's the alert from Symantec's website:

"Symantec Security Response today identified a new worm that exploits a
vulnerability in Yahoo!'s Web-based e-mail program. The worm -
JS.Yamanner at m - spreads itself to the user's Yahoo! e-mail contacts when the
user opens an e-mail infected by the worm. In addition, the worm also sends
these e-mail addresses to a remote server on the Internet. Only people with
an e-mail address that is on yahoo.com or yahoogroups.com may be impacted by
this worm"

Enjoy :)
Rebecca









From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Tue Jun 20 10:13:15 2006
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 10:13:15 -0000
Subject: HBP review
Message-ID: <e78hnr+mlhr@...>

Maybe you have all come across this already, but this is one of the 
funniest things I have seen for a while.  Hours of fun.

http://pages.prodigy.net/mike_p_smith/hbp/intro.html

David






From gbannister10 at geoff_bannister.yahoo.invalid  Tue Jun 20 21:54:44 2006
From: gbannister10 at geoff_bannister.yahoo.invalid (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 21:54:44 -0000
Subject: HBP review
In-Reply-To: <e78hnr+mlhr@...>
Message-ID: <e79qr4+2n68@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" <dfrankiswork at ...> wrote:
>
> Maybe you have all come across this already, but this is one of the 
> funniest things I have seen for a while.  Hours of fun.
> 
> http://pages.prodigy.net/mike_p_smith/hbp/intro.html
> 
> David

Geoff:
I think we possess different versions of a sense of humour. Yours must be the Mark 2 series. 
I've got a beat-up old Mark 1A with a manual gearbox. 

My reaction to the site was "Huh? Sad."
:-(










From katmac at lagattalucianese.yahoo.invalid  Wed Jun 21 04:38:38 2006
From: katmac at lagattalucianese.yahoo.invalid (Kat Macfarlane)
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 21:38:38 -0700
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: HBP review
References: <e79qr4+2n68@...>
Message-ID: <002d01c694ec$af194760$482fdcd1@...>

Dear one,

Gatta's sense of humor is so old it isn't Mark Anything, and the User's Guide is in Latin. This sort of humor leaves her sad, puzzled, and a little bit sick at her stomach. Whatever happened to humor that was actually witty?

--Gatta

Then there's a pair of us--don't tell!
They'd banish us, you know.



  --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" <dfrankiswork at ...> wrote:
  >
  > Maybe you have all come across this already, but this is one of the 
  > funniest things I have seen for a while. Hours of fun.
  > 
  > http://pages.prodigy.net/mike_p_smith/hbp/intro.html
  > 
  > David

  Geoff:
  I think we possess different versions of a sense of humour. Yours must be the Mark 2 series. 
  I've got a beat-up old Mark 1A with a manual gearbox. 

  My reaction to the site was "Huh? Sad."
  :-(



   

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




From judy at judyserenity.yahoo.invalid  Wed Jun 21 21:04:22 2006
From: judy at judyserenity.yahoo.invalid (Judy)
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 21:04:22 -0000
Subject: HBP review
In-Reply-To: <e78hnr+mlhr@...>
Message-ID: <e7cc8m+43hi@...>

David wrote:
> Maybe you have all come across this already, but this is one of the 
> funniest things I have seen for a while.  Hours of fun.
> http://pages.prodigy.net/mike_p_smith/hbp/intro.html

My sense of humor must match David's, because I followed the link to 
this site and really liked it.  In fact, I stayed up until 6 am last 
night reading it (ah, the joys of summer vacation!) and I'm still not 
done yet.  (It's rather looooong....)

Basically, the author is in a Harry Potter role playing game but has 
never read the Harry Potter books or seen the movies, and knows 
nothing about them.  He decides to start reading the series at Book 
6, with running commentary as he tries to figure out the story.  He 
has an extremely sarcastic sense of humor and makes fun of everything 
in the books, but seeing as I'm a Snape fan, sarcasm doesn't bother 
me.

It's interesting to see what parts of the story he figures out right 
away (he immediately deduces that the Half-Blood Prince is Snape) and 
what he gets totally wrong (for some reason, he keeps thinking that 
Ron is in Hufflepuff.)  My favorite part so far is towards the end of 
Chapter 20, where the author (who had a request from a friend to 
parody the idea that "Lord Voldemort" is an anagram of Tom Riddle's 
original name) comes up with all sorts of alternate anagrams, and 
starts calling Voldemort things like "Overlord Mo, Ltd," "Mr. Todd 
Loverol," and "Dot Rollover, M.D." The author, whose name is Michael 
Patrick Smith, also creates an evil overlord anagram of his own, 
declaring, "I Am Master Hitchplick!"

This inspired me to try anagrams of my own name, but most of the ones 
that I came up with (actually, I used the anagram server at 
www.wordsmith.org) contained words 
like "hardship," "jihad," "trash," "AIDS," and "turd."  Sheesh, would 
it have killed my parents to plan ahead a little when they named me? 
The best anagram I could come up with for myself was, "It's Hip Dr. 
Joshua!" (Which would work OK if I were a guy, I guess.)

My overall opinion of this review of HBP is that it has some very 
good parts, but it also has quite a bit of boring stuff and filler.  
Oddly enough, that is exactly what the site's author thinks of Half-
Blood Prince. 

-- Osiris Jutah, Ph.D.







From joym999 at joywitch_z_curmudgeon.yahoo.invalid  Fri Jun 23 23:29:23 2006
From: joym999 at joywitch_z_curmudgeon.yahoo.invalid (joywitch_z_curmudgeon)
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 23:29:23 -0000
Subject: HBP review
In-Reply-To: <e7cc8m+43hi@...>
Message-ID: <e7htgj+7btg@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Judy" <judy at ...> wrote:
>
> David wrote:
> > Maybe you have all come across this already, but this is one of 
the 
> > funniest things I have seen for a while.  Hours of fun.
> > http://pages.prodigy.net/mike_p_smith/hbp/intro.html
> 
> My sense of humor must match David's, because I followed the link to 
> this site and really liked it.  

[snip]

I guess my sense of humor is equally bad, or good, as David and Judy's 
because I thought it was kind of funny, too, although I only read a 
little bit of it.  More importantly, though, I found a nice anagram 
for my name.

--Wiz Jody Nutmeg Crouch






From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Tue Jun 27 09:54:20 2006
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:54:20 -0000
Subject: HBP review
In-Reply-To: <e79qr4+2n68@...>
Message-ID: <e7qv8c+i2c7@...>

Geoff Bannister wrote:

> My reaction to the site was "Huh? Sad."

I have been reading it over the past few days and while I mostly 
enjoyed it and found it funny I found it did drag at times.

However, he does have interesting insights along the way, e.g. this 
on Chapter 29 about Slughorn (near the bottom of that page 
http://pages.prodigy.net/mike_p_smith/hbp/29.html ):

"Interestingly, he points out that he personally feels that there's 
no more danger at Hogwarts than there is anywhere else, which is a 
complete reversal on the reasons he came back to the school in the 
first place. I suppose Rowling could have forgotten about Slughorn's 
cowardice back in Chapter 4, but I prefer to think she's developing 
his character with this remark. As little as Slughorn has done in 
the book, it's gradually become clear that the reason he was hiding 
from the Death Eaters was because of what he knew about Voldemort 
and Horcruxes, and his fear that Voldemort might kill him to keep 
that connection a secret. Dumbledore convinced him the school was 
more secure than moving from place to place, but this was a lure so 
Harry could find out what he knew, which he eventually did. This is 
really Slughorn's first appearance since he drunkenly provided his 
memory to Harry, which makes me think that even though he probably 
doesn't even remember doing it, he feels unburdened now that his 
secret is out. Now the damage to Voldemort is done, so there's far 
less reason for the Death Eaters to want to kill him, but more than 
that, I think it shows that what Slughorn had really been afraid of 
all along was his own guilt. Now that he's more or less absolved 
himself, he's prepared to stick it out for the school even after a 
night like this."

I think he's right, and I hadn't thought of that.

Also, in the page on Chapter 30 
(http://pages.prodigy.net/mike_p_smith/hbp/30.html about halfway 
down in bold text for some reason) he has a discussion of the 
relationship of the book to Christianity that you might be 
interested in - too long to quote here.

David







From ewetoo at ewe2_au.yahoo.invalid  Wed Jun 28 01:46:33 2006
From: ewetoo at ewe2_au.yahoo.invalid (ewe2)
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 11:46:33 +1000
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Only TWO Die? No, wait...
In-Reply-To: <e7qc1k+srtb@...>
References: <e7qc1k+srtb@...>
Message-ID: <91d14f320606271846k8f6318bkb52e8daa4961654f@...>

On 6/27/06, Talisman <talisman22457 at ...> wrote:
> At first blush I thought the Book 7 Slaughter Spree was off.  Instead,
> happily, it looks as if two additional heads have just tumbled down the
> shute.
>
> Now what I want to know is, who got the bloody reprieve?
>
> Talisman, saying, since Snape is dead, she can gut the lot with my
> blessing.

Damned if she does and damned if she doesn't. Personally I have to
agree, a lot of death now will solve a lot of headaches for JKR
Enterprises later. Kill them all!

Hermione should be left as a focus for fanrage ;)

-- 
Emacs is an alright OS, but it lacks a decent editor.



From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Wed Jun 28 08:45:56 2006
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 08:45:56 -0000
Subject: Only TWO Die? No, wait...
In-Reply-To: <91d14f320606271846k8f6318bkb52e8daa4961654f@...>
Message-ID: <e7tfk4+10efg@...>

Talisman :
> > At first blush I thought the Book 7 Slaughter Spree was off.  
Instead,
> > happily, it looks as if two additional heads have just tumbled 
down the
> > shute.
> >
> > Now what I want to know is, who got the bloody reprieve?
> >
> > Talisman, saying, since Snape is dead, she can gut the lot with 
my
> > blessing.

Ewe2:

> Damned if she does and damned if she doesn't. Personally I have to
> agree, a lot of death now will solve a lot of headaches for JKR
> Enterprises later. Kill them all!
> 
> Hermione should be left as a focus for fanrage ;)

I'm betting Hagrid gets the reprieve.  He's just too cute and 
lovable to kill off.

The final scene will be Hagrid, Grawp, Dobby, and Winky getting 
Hogwarts back on its feet after the apocalypse.  Molly Weasley will 
be Minister for Magic.

I think JKR's comment about 'hate mail' if she reveals who her 
targets are is weird.  Like, of course she'd have been only too 
happy to oblige if she had a *reasonable* fandom.  She's probably 
wishing she'd written Pride and Prejudice instead.  Curse that 
Austen woman for getting her plagiarism in first!

David







From pip at bluesqueak.yahoo.invalid  Wed Jun 28 13:42:32 2006
From: pip at bluesqueak.yahoo.invalid (bluesqueak)
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 13:42:32 -0000
Subject: Only TWO Die? No, wait...
In-Reply-To: <e7tfk4+10efg@...>
Message-ID: <e7u108+rjlm@...>

 
> I think JKR's comment about 'hate mail' if she reveals who her 
> targets are is weird.  Like, of course she'd have been only too 
> happy to oblige if she had a *reasonable* fandom.  She's probably 
> wishing she'd written Pride and Prejudice instead.  Curse that 
> Austen woman for getting her plagiarism in first!
> 
> David
>
Well, given that poor old Dickens kept getting post along the lines 
of 'please let [insert nauseatingly good child character here] 
survive, JKR infering hate mail isn't that far off. The letter writing 
public is probably a lot less polite than it was in Dicken's day {g}. 
It does suggests the deaths include sympathetic characters, and 
probably at least one of the kids. And, of course, Snape - is there 
anyone at all in the Fandom who won't be greatly shocked if he turns 
out to be the one who got a reprieve? Redemption by the end of Book 7 
maybe; survival? Naah! 

I'd bet on Molly for the simple reason that she's *so* scared it will 
be one of her children or Arthur, it feels like a mislead away from 
her being a target herself. But Molly's hand on the clock is also 
pointing at 'mortal peril'; she is the death that will most affect the 
Weasley family - and as Harry's surrogate Mum, she'll also continue 
the theme of his losing all protection.

I think Pippin could tell you that JKR wishes she'd written Emma? The 
plot twists are better than P&P. 

Pip!Squeak









From erisedstraeh2002 at erisedstraeh2002.yahoo.invalid  Wed Jun 28 20:52:22 2006
From: erisedstraeh2002 at erisedstraeh2002.yahoo.invalid (Phyllis)
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 20:52:22 -0000
Subject: Only TWO Die? No, wait...
In-Reply-To: <e7u108+rjlm@...>
Message-ID: <e7uq66+tjv5@...>

David wrote:

<<I think JKR's comment about 'hate mail' if she reveals who her 
targets are is weird.>>  

and Pip!Squeak responded:

<<It does suggests the deaths include sympathetic characters, and 
probably at least one of the kids.>>

Based on my reading of the transcript and viewing of the video, I 
saw the 'hate mail' comment as being in response to a question about 
*Harry's* fate specifically.  I thought it was a bit of a slip, for 
who is going to send her hate mail if she announces that Harry 
survives?  But perhaps this is her way of getting us ready for the 
inevitable.  ::Sniff::

My local paper seems to have done a Rita Skeeter and taken her "two 
die that she didn't intend to die" to mean there will be only two 
deaths in the last book.  But her statement doesn't necessarily mean 
there will only be two deaths in the last book (since she's said 
before that there will be more deaths before the series is over, I'm 
thinking this means there are two new ones added to the ones she 
already had planned).  And the answer was in the context of a 
question regarding the last chapter, so characters could die before 
then (ala Sirius and Dumbledore).
 
Frankly, I'd surprised if it's only two, as I expected many more.   

~Phyllis






From susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid  Wed Jun 28 21:11:08 2006
From: susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid (susiequsie23)
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 17:11:08 -0400
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: Only TWO Die? No, wait...
References: <e7uq66+tjv5@...>
Message-ID: <005301c69af7$60b76870$d82cfea9@albrechtuj0zx7>

David wrote:
<<<I think JKR's comment about 'hate mail' if she reveals who her
> targets are is weird.>> >

and Pip!Squeak responded:
<<It does suggests the deaths include sympathetic characters, and
> probably at least one of the kids.>>

Phyllis:
> Based on my reading of the transcript and viewing of the video, I
> saw the 'hate mail' comment as being in response to a question about
> *Harry's* fate specifically.  I thought it was a bit of a slip, for
> who is going to send her hate mail if she announces that Harry
> survives?  But perhaps this is her way of getting us ready for the
> inevitable.  ::Sniff::

SSSusan:
I've not listened to the actual interview, but I admit this was my take, 
too -- that she's "priming" us.  She's *always* maintained that Harry dying 
is a definite possibility, but somehow this felt more of a "Things are 
leaning that way" kind of thing.


Phyllis:
> My local paper seems to have done a Rita Skeeter and taken her "two
> die that she didn't intend to die" to mean there will be only two
> deaths in the last book.  But her statement doesn't necessarily mean
> there will only be two deaths in the last book (since she's said
> before that there will be more deaths before the series is over, I'm
> thinking this means there are two new ones added to the ones she
> already had planned).  And the answer was in the context of a
> question regarding the last chapter, so characters could die before
> then (ala Sirius and Dumbledore).
>
> Frankly, I'd surprised if it's only two, as I expected many more.

SSSusan:

Okay, Jo said this:
 >>>   "The final chapter is hidden away, although it's now changed very
slightly. One character got a reprieve. But I have to say two die that I 
didn't intend to die,"  she
said. "A price has to be paid. We are dealing with pure evil here. They 
don't target extras do  they?
They go for the main characters. Well, I do."

SSSusan again:
I wonder if she means the final chapter of the *events* of book 7 or whether
she means the *real* final chapter, which she has stated before *will* be an
epilogue.  If she is saying that two characters she didn't intend to kill
off now will be *IN* that last chapter, then does she mean in her epilogue?
Then it could be anyone under any circumstances!  If she means in some final
battle between Good and Evil, between Harry & Co. and Voldy, in the final
chapter of year seven's action, then I think it makes it more likely it's
some people we really care about.  (Dare I suggest it?  Ron & Hermie?  The
twins?  Molly & Arthur?)

As for the character who gets a reprieve, a lot of people have speculated
that she means Snape.  I don't think so, though.  I think he's going to have
to pay some price for his "sins," whether that's dying or not I don't know.
But a "reprieve" almost sounds like she just flat-out changed her mind about
killing someone off, and I think her plans for Snape are SET.  How 'bout
Hagrid?  Could it be possible Jo decided she just couldn't bring herself to
do him in?

Also, does anybody else struggle with just what it is she's saying in the 
last couple of
sentences here?  It's *right* after she says two people she didn't
originally intend to kill off now have to die, that she says "A price has to
be paid.  We are dealing with pure evil."  Does she means she's killing off
two "bad" people who need punishment (Lucius & Narcissa? Lucius & Draco?)? 
Or
does she mean that the baddies are NOT going to leave all the goodies
undamaged?  That because they are evil, they WILL kill some of our
favorites?

I just don't follow the sequence of what she's saying there.  I wonder if
hearing the interview, rather than reading the quotes, would help my
understanding....

Siriusly Snapey Susan






From annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid  Wed Jun 28 21:51:55 2006
From: annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid (annemehr)
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 21:51:55 -0000
Subject: Only TWO Die? No, wait...
In-Reply-To: <005301c69af7$60b76870$d82cfea9@albrechtuj0zx7>
Message-ID: <e7utlr+4m9c@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "susiequsie23" 
<susiequsie23 at ...> wrote:

> I just don't follow the sequence of what she's saying there.  I 
wonder if
> hearing the interview, rather than reading the quotes, would help my
> understanding....
> 
> Siriusly Snapey Susan
>


Here's a link to the video of the Richard & Judy show:

http://www.mugglenet.com/mnnews/06262006/richandjudyjkr.shtml

The whole thing's about thirty minutes, but the "final chapter" bit 
starts at 03:44

Anne










From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Wed Jun 28 23:30:31 2006
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 23:30:31 -0000
Subject: Only TWO Die? No, wait...
In-Reply-To: <e7uq66+tjv5@...>
Message-ID: <e7v3en+ujq9@...>

Phyllis wrote:

> Based on my reading of the transcript and viewing of the video, I 
> saw the 'hate mail' comment as being in response to a question about 
> *Harry's* fate specifically.  I thought it was a bit of a slip, for 
> who is going to send her hate mail if she announces that Harry 
> survives?  But perhaps this is her way of getting us ready for the 
> inevitable.  ::Sniff::

Ah, right.

My point, really, is not that it's weird for her to expect hate mail - 
she will get that whatever she says, because fans locked in mortal 
combat will scapegoat her for not backing *their* side - but that it's 
odd that she cites the probability of getting hate mail as a reason 
for playing things close to her chest.  It's not like she's never done 
that before, is it?

What will happen now is that some fans will say "How dare she accuse 
us of sending hate mail! I'm going to write and explain why I'm 
leaving fandom forever because she has ruined my life! I hate her!"

David







From kking0731 at snow15145.yahoo.invalid  Thu Jun 29 01:44:16 2006
From: kking0731 at snow15145.yahoo.invalid (snow15145)
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 01:44:16 -0000
Subject: What are our expectations?
Message-ID: <e7vb9g+787e@...>


David:

My point, really, is not that it's weird for her to expect hate mail -
 
she will get that whatever she says, because fans locked in mortal 
combat will scapegoat her for not backing *their* side - but that 
it's 
odd that she cites the probability of getting hate mail as a reason 
for playing things close to her chest. It's not like she's never done 
that before, is it?

What will happen now is that some fans will say "How dare she accuse 
us of sending hate mail! I'm going to write and explain why I'm 
leaving fandom forever because she has ruined my life! I hate her!"

David


Snow:

I tend to agree
 many persons I have viewed on the main list have 
already teetered in this direction
in fact some time ago. Many have 
stated that if this or that does or doesn't happen they will sell, 
burn or otherwise mutilate the books. 

How sad that these very people do not acknowledge how much these 
books have accomplished by bringing together so very many different 
ethnicities and religions to a common ground to learn from each 
other. JKR has created much more than a book series, she has 
connected friendships that will last long after the books and its 
world (no matter the outcome) have ceased.  I'm fairly certain that 
no one can say that of Dickens. This is the first time in history 
that fans can and do interact with the author in such a manner as 
this. 

My thoughts after reading her latest interview were that there were 
two unexpected deaths (something even she was stunned by herself; my 
take) but must take place to give the reprieve to the unknown person. 
This, in my estimation, does not mean that there are only two deaths 
in the last book. On the contrary, I believe there will be more than 
the fair share given her statement about evil. 

One last point on her hate mail statement; what comes to mind is her 
much previous statement that she might only have three readers in the 
end (or something to the effect). I feel that she pushed back the 
deaths to the seventh book. Originally she had felt that she would 
have lost many, many readers up to this point but (as she put it 
vaguely before book six) book six and seven are like one big book 
(paraphrased of course). To me, book six should have originally 
incarcerated or outright murdered many but if soooooo many readers 
are to be upset about it then she thought she may just prolong the 
inevitable which would be the only thing I would fault her for

straying from her original intentions no matter how manner readers 
she lost. 

I have, and will remain to be totally gripped to the ending whatever 
she has had in store for any of the characters. JKR is a phenomenal 
writer and whatever place she needs to take me, no matter the 
outcome, I will admire that should stood by her own convictions.  

I think that too many people are missing the forest for the trees. 
When you become too connected with a fictional character that you 
miss the meaning behind the story
well
all that comes to mind is quit 
watching soap operas. 

Snow







From susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid  Thu Jun 29 02:00:11 2006
From: susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid (susiequsie23)
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 22:00:11 -0400
Subject: [the_old_crowd] What are our expectations?
References: <e7vb9g+787e@...>
Message-ID: <012601c69b1f$c1cf7d50$d82cfea9@albrechtuj0zx7>

Snow:
>>> I tend to agree. many persons I have viewed on the main list have
already teetered in this direction.in fact some time ago. Many have
stated that if this or that does or doesn't happen they will sell,
burn or otherwise mutilate the books. <<<

SSSusan:
MANY have stated?  Or just one rather vociferous & forceful person whose 
favorite word is "reprehensible"?

:-)

In all seriousness, I guess over at Main I *haven't* seen so many people 
saying they will ditch, burn, mutilate or barf upon their books, other than 
that one person who insists upon telling us that every whipstitch.


Snow:
>>> How sad that these very people do not acknowledge how much these
books have accomplished by bringing together so very many different
ethnicities and religions to a common ground to learn from each
other. JKR has created much more than a book series, she has
connected friendships that will last long after the books and its
world (no matter the outcome) have ceased.  I'm fairly certain that
no one can say that of Dickens. This is the first time in history
that fans can and do interact with the author in such a manner as
this. <<<

SSSusan:
D'accord.  It's a certainty that numerous of us will be peeved or 
disappointed to *some* degree at the end, some seriously so, others (and I 
place myself as most likely being in this group) only slightly so.  Even 
with those annoyances or frustrations, it's been a KICK to be a part of this 
whole experience.  I have made some incredible friendships along the way.  I 
have contemplated things I never dreamed I would contemplate.  Wouldn't 
trade that for the world.

Also, whenever people dish on JKR for her failings, while I am willing to 
listen and to commiserate with some bits of it, overall I'm still stunned at 
what she has done.  Can anyone really imagine pulling off what she is 
pulling off?  An UNpublished author, coming up with an idea she's unsure 
anyone will buy into, then discovering the whole world is interested and 
having to finish the thing?  And not just a trilogy or something, but a 
SEVEN-book series.  Talk about daunting.

Not to mention how truly amazing it is that she has developed a character in 
Severus Snape that has people -- after SIX books of him in a pretty damn 
major role -- arguing tooth & nail about who, what and why he is.  Not just 
kids, but adults.  Intelligent, thoughtful, well-versed-in-the-series 
adults.  We argue for DDM!, ESE!, OFH! possibilities for this man, and 
frankly, each argument has tremendous strong points.  How has she DONE that? 
It's amazing!  She's given us a ton but no true slip-ups.  She's given us 
that brilliant line about "Where would I be if I had not known how to act?" 
and it captures it all.  Aha -- so he's a good actor!  But just when is he 
acting and when is he not?  We. Don't. Know.

No matter where the series goes, how it concludes, what she leaves hanging, 
how annoyed I am with her for what she does or doesn't do, I'm going to 
appreciate the jewel she's given us.

Call me a sap.  I don't care. :-)


Snow:
I have, and will remain to be totally gripped to the ending whatever
she has had in store for any of the characters. JKR is a phenomenal
writer and whatever place she needs to take me, no matter the
outcome, I will admire that should stood by her own convictions.

SSSusan:
Yep.  Me, too, Snow.

Siriusly Snapey Susan





From josturgess at mooseming.yahoo.invalid  Thu Jun 29 08:36:06 2006
From: josturgess at mooseming.yahoo.invalid (mooseming)
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:36:06 -0000
Subject: Only TWO Die? No, wait...
In-Reply-To: <005301c69af7$60b76870$d82cfea9@albrechtuj0zx7>
Message-ID: <e803dm+6hck@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "susiequsie23" 
<susiequsie23 at ...> wrote:
>> 

> 
> Also, does anybody else struggle with just what it is she's saying 
in the 
> last couple of
> sentences here?  It's *right* after she says two people she didn't
> originally intend to kill off now have to die, that she says "A 
price has to
> be paid.  We are dealing with pure evil."  Does she means she's 
killing off
> two "bad" people who need punishment (Lucius & Narcissa? Lucius & 
Draco?)? 
> Or
> does she mean that the baddies are NOT going to leave all the 
goodies
> undamaged?  That because they are evil, they WILL kill some of our
> favorites?
> 
> I just don't follow the sequence of what she's saying there.  I 
wonder if
> hearing the interview, rather than reading the quotes, would help 
my
> understanding....
> 
> Siriusly Snapey Susan

Watching the interview helps a lot in my opinion (although R&J make 
me cringe). Especially for the bit just before the break where they 
are talking about how much JK will miss HP. JK has just said she 
wants to go out leaving the readers wanting more and Judy is 
indirectly asking if JK might revisit the Potterverse sometime in 
the future she says:

J: "Well I think most people will be hoping that at some point in 
your life, that you will come back to him in some way, shape, or 
form...there will be something. `Cause you'll have generations
.."

At which point JK interrupts with a throwaway joke:

JK: "Harry Potter's midlife crisis." (Spoken as a semi question. 
Possibly a passing reference to Adrian Mole??)

Anyway Richard (*not* JK) then offers up the usual caveat:

R: "Should he survive to see it."

To which JK shrugs and smiles in a `of course, of course' type of 
way and says:

JK: "Right." Confirming that Richard is correct to remember to add 
the caveat.

To me this sequence implies that JK has no intention of killing off 
Harry, she forgets to remember it's a possibility as it were.

Still interpreting JK's interviews seems about as accurate as 
Phrenology in my experience so who knows!

As to those other deaths well JK states:

JK: "The last, the final chapter is hidden away although it's now 
changed very slightly."

*Very slightly* to me doesn't suggest a dramatic u-turn regarding 
Harry, Voldy, Ron, Hermione or Snape although Draco, Neville, anyone 
else at all could well be for the chop/reprieve.

The relevent part of the interview is:

JK: Yeah, one character got a reprieve. 
R: Oh really? 
JK: Yeah. 
J: I mean you are, I just... 
JK: But I have to say two die that I didn't intend to die. 
J: Oh no, two much loved ones? 
JK: Well you know, a price has to be paid. 
R: Significant? 
JK: We are dealing with pure evil! So they don't target the extras, 
do they? They go straight for the main characters... Or I do.

A reprieve to me indicates a baddie gets off and the two that die 
are the "price" that has "to be paid", that are targeted by evil, so 
are therefore goodies.

At this point we're firmly into speculation, I imagine JK reviewed 
the chapter and thought "oh oh, I've killed off all the bad guys and 
not nearly enough of the good ones this won't do".

Who's in the red shirts? I couldn't possibly guess but I'd like one 
of the twins (big impact, no real loss) and Dobby (out in a blaze of 
glory) to make it onto the butcher's bill.

Regards
Jo
>







From susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid  Thu Jun 29 11:40:35 2006
From: susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid (susiequsie23)
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 07:40:35 -0400
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: Only TWO Die? No, wait...
References: <e803dm+6hck@...>
Message-ID: <023f01c69b70$d6b0a0e0$d82cfea9@albrechtuj0zx7>

Mooseming/Jo:
>>> Watching the interview helps a lot in my opinion (although R&J make
me cringe). Especially for the bit just before the break where they
are talking about how much JK will miss HP. JK has just said she
wants to go out leaving the readers wanting more and Judy is
indirectly asking if JK might revisit the Potterverse sometime in
the future she says:

J: "Well I think most people will be hoping that at some point in
your life, that you will come back to him in some way, shape, or
form...there will be something. `Cause you'll have generations..."

At which point JK interrupts with a throwaway joke:

JK: "Harry Potter's midlife crisis." (Spoken as a semi question.
Possibly a passing reference to Adrian Mole??)

Anyway Richard (*not* JK) then offers up the usual caveat:

R: "Should he survive to see it."

To which JK shrugs and smiles in a `of course, of course' type of
way and says:

JK: "Right." Confirming that Richard is correct to remember to add
the caveat.

To me this sequence implies that JK has no intention of killing off
Harry, she forgets to remember it's a possibility as it were. <<<

SSSusan:
Thanks much for this, Jo.  I watched the entire show, but I missed a couple 
of the key lines in this exchange you've just provided -- most notably that 
JK said "midlife crisis."  It is interesting, as you say, that *Richard* was 
the one who then brought up the typical caveat regarding "if he survives." 
Maybe that does mean something??


Mooseming/Jo:
>>> As to those other deaths well JK states:

JK: "The last, the final chapter is hidden away although it's now
changed very slightly."

*Very slightly* to me doesn't suggest a dramatic u-turn regarding
Harry, Voldy, Ron, Hermione or Snape although Draco, Neville, anyone
else at all could well be for the chop/reprieve. <<<

SSSusan:
Good catch re: "very slightly."  It does seem it would mean something other 
than a major change of heart regarding the fate of some Big Characters, 
doesn't it?


Mooseming/Jo:
>>> A reprieve to me indicates a baddie gets off and the two that die
are the "price" that has "to be paid", that are targeted by evil, so
are therefore goodies.

At this point we're firmly into speculation, I imagine JK reviewed
the chapter and thought "oh oh, I've killed off all the bad guys and
not nearly enough of the good ones this won't do". <<<

SSSusan:
Makes sense to me.  Given how she handled the DoM battle, with 6 kids taking 
on all those DEs, with so little damage to them all... and again the battle 
at Hogwarts in HBP, I do think she has a tendency (like all the cop shows on 
TV) to have an inordinate number of good guys dodge bullets (well, not 
bullets, but you know what I mean).  Maybe you're right that she realized, 
"Oh, this is ridiculous.  I really do need to kill a couple more here."

Watching & hearing it, vs. reading it, really did bring on a different 
overall response for me.  It felt lighter in tone than I was taking this (as 
well as the bit about Harry and whether he might die).

Siriusly Snapey Susan





From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Thu Jun 29 12:05:54 2006
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 13:05:54 +0100
Subject: Radio TBAY - A new Prophesy?
Message-ID: <5BB34302-AFFB-48F5-BB8D-5BCBC9418BE2@...>

"Evenin' all. Kaynes here, bringing you all that's new in the WW.

"Something a bit different for you to ponder over today with reports  
that someone has been wandering round fore-telling the future. All  
very interesting, as I hope you'll agree. And here to help us make  
some sense of it is Fingus Crost, author of "Dissecting the Future:  
Haruspicy for Fun and Profit" and "Getting it Wrong: Why Nostradamus  
should have stuck to Tea-Leaves".

"So, Fingy, what can you tell us?"

"Hello Kaynes, hello listeners.
Must say it's all fascinating stuff. What seems to have happened is  
that a Muggle by the name of Jay Crolling appeared on some picture  
programme or other and started making predictions about future events  
in the Wizarding World."

"Are we sure he -"

"She."

"Right. Are we sure she is a Muggle?"

"Must be. Wore those silly clothes and talked a lot about that money  
stuff. No witch would do that."

"So this Muggle knows about us?
Hum. How long before the Obliviators pay her a visit, d'you think?"

"Normally they'd have zipped round pretty damn quick, but this is  
such an interesting case that they've been held off - for the time  
being, at any rate."

"Can Muggles be seers?"

"Dunno. It's possible, I suppose, but generally it turns out that  
they're only pretending. And quite often they cheat."

"Cheat? How?"

"Oh, their predictions are couched in vague and probably deliberately  
ambiguous phraseology. Could mean anything. And that's what we see  
here. Supposedly it's all about the Potter kid and Whatsisname -  
forecasting it'll all end in tears before bedtime, death and  
destruction, usual stuff - as if you need to be a seer to figure that  
out. Gringott's Gambles hasn't been accepting bets on that one for  
years."

"Sounds as if it's nothing special, then. So why is it all so  
interesting?"

"Ah. Well. It's the Psycho-Ceramics Specialists at St Mungo's. They  
want a chance to study her. There's a hell of an argument going on  
within the department. See, what's really striking about all this is  
that she claims to have invented the WW and all the people in it."

"She must be barmy."

"That's one possibility, yes. Quite a few of the Healers would go  
along with that - delusional - "I think, therefore it is," sort of  
thing. Though a couple of trouble-making sages stirred the pot by  
positing that the entire WW and its history may well be just the  
transient imaginings of an unbelievably powerful intellect. Soon  
sorted them out. Aurors hit 'em with Arbocrania! spells. Now all  
they've got to worry about is woodpeckers and Death Watch beetles.  
Serve 'em right. Nobody likes a smart-arse."

"There're other possibilities, then?"

"The intriguing bit is her track record. She's been publishing these  
books and they describe exactly what happens *as* it happens. Nobody  
can figure out how she does it."

"Somebody must be passing her information."

"Could be, though it'd have to be a lot more than one person doing it  
to get enough gen to fill six books.

"But the worrying thing, Kaynes, the really crunch bit, is that she  
claims that it's herself that decides who lives and who doesn't - who  
she's going to "kill off", as she puts it. And that the WW will enter  
a sort of limbo at the conclusion of the next, she calls it "the  
last", book. Doesn't she realise that we've got laws about that sort  
of thing? Can't have any old Muggle wandering round knocking off  
respectable witches and wizards, now can we? T'ain't allowed. *And*  
I've got my holidays booked for next year - paid the deposit and  
everything. Kids'd be dreadfully disappointed if we spent 'em in some  
sort of suspended animation instead."

"So what are you doing about it?"

"Intensive investigations, for a start. Get the facts before jumping  
to conclusions."

"And the possibilities?"

"We've come up with five so far:
She's nuts, in which case it's the rubber room and the natty weskit  
that ties neatly up the back;
or,
She's infiltrated and thoroughly compromised the privacy of every  
person and every square inch of the magical world with an army of  
eavesdroppers, spies and informants. That's what's happening in the  
Muggle world, by the way, but we won't stand for it going on here;
or,
She's some sort of super-psychic, mind-reading nosy-parker, in which  
case the Obliviators go on overtime;
or,
She really is a seer of such magnitude that they'll have to build an  
entire new wing in the DoM to house all the globes;
or...."

"You don't think.....!"

"Wouldn't be me thinking it, old boy; it'd be her.
Still, it'd explain why young Potter acts like a plonker so much of  
the time, wouldn't  it?"

"And on that disturbing note, this is Kaynes, signing off for this  
week."

[cue theme]




From josturgess at mooseming.yahoo.invalid  Thu Jun 29 17:21:36 2006
From: josturgess at mooseming.yahoo.invalid (mooseming)
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 17:21:36 -0000
Subject: OT: I wish I could filk
Message-ID: <e81270+t53j@...>

I've had Gilbert and Sullivan's "I've got a little list" from the 
Mikado going through my head all day...can't imagine why...;-)

Regards
Jo






From annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid  Thu Jun 29 17:49:32 2006
From: annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid (annemehr)
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 17:49:32 -0000
Subject: Only TWO Die? No, wait...
In-Reply-To: <e7uq66+tjv5@...>
Message-ID: <e813rc+2t9u@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Phyllis" 
<erisedstraeh2002 at ...> wrote:
 
> My local paper seems to have done a Rita Skeeter and taken 
her "two 
> die that she didn't intend to die" to mean there will be only two 
> deaths in the last book.  But her statement doesn't necessarily 
mean 
> there will only be two deaths in the last book (since she's said 
> before that there will be more deaths before the series is over, 
I'm 
> thinking this means there are two new ones added to the ones she 
> already had planned).  And the answer was in the context of a 
> question regarding the last chapter, so characters could die 
before 
> then (ala Sirius and Dumbledore).
>  
> Frankly, I'd surprised if it's only two, as I expected many 
more.   
> 
> ~Phyllis
>

I think you have the right idea.

I just reread Firenze's first Divination lesson in OoP this morning, 
where he told the class, "In the past decade, the indications have 
been that Wizard-kind is living through nothing more than a brief 
calm between two wars."

I don't think we can call what we've had so far a "war."  Not even a 
little one.  Seems like we ought to be in for a lot of mayhem in the 
next twelve months while Harry is busy collecting Horcruxes.

Or, how would it be if Harry defeats Voldemort only to find that, 
instead of achieving a nice lull in the violence until some future 
evil overlord comes along, he's actually somehow triggered the 
*real* war.  'Cause maybe Voldemort isn't the real problem, and once 
he's really gone for good, a delicate balance shifts and all hell 
breaks loose.  That'd be a twist.

Nah, I suppose not...

It'd be a boon for the shredder manufacturers, though.

Anne






From pip at bluesqueak.yahoo.invalid  Thu Jun 29 20:03:36 2006
From: pip at bluesqueak.yahoo.invalid (bluesqueak)
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:03:36 -0000
Subject: Only TWO Die? No, wait...
In-Reply-To: <e813rc+2t9u@...>
Message-ID: <e81bmo+qqen@...>

 Anne wrote:

> 
> I just reread Firenze's first Divination lesson in OoP this 
> morning, where he told the class, "In the past decade, the 
> indications have been that Wizard-kind is living through nothing 
> more than a brief calm between two wars."
> 
> I don't think we can call what we've had so far a "war."  Not even 
> a little one.  

No,it's a war. It's just that our particular heroes are (until the 
last few chapters) largely on the edges of it - the equivalent of 
schoolkids who'd been evacuated to a safe place in the country, and 
are only seeing the war by the effects on people whose relatives get 
killed. Kids vanish from the school because a parent, or brother, or 
sister has died. Ron gets hit by the equivalent of shrapnel from an 
attack meant on someone else. People are being arrested 'on 
suspicion'. There are attacks on the Order of the Phoenix, all the 
Weasley's are in 'mortal peril', the story starts with a bridge 
being destroyed resulting in people's deaths, it ends with a 
successful enemy invasion of the supposedly safe Hogwarts.

What we're in, in Book Six, is the moment before our heroes are old 
enough to legally say 'stuff school, we're joining in the fight full 
time.' Using a Second World War analogy, it's the moment when 
they're in the Air Cadets and are being used for some of the less 
dangerous tasks, but aren't yet old enough to join the Royal Air 
Force. So there is *a* war - but the Trio themselves aren't yet *at* 
war.



Anne:
>Seems like we ought to be in for a lot of mayhem in the 
> next twelve months while Harry is busy collecting Horcruxes.

I'd agree with that. The difference between on sidelines with bombs 
droppin and being in a full-scale battle. 

Pip!Squeak







From talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid  Fri Jun 30 00:10:08 2006
From: talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid (Talisman)
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 00:10:08 -0000
Subject: Only TWO Die? No, wait...
In-Reply-To: <91d14f320606271846k8f6318bkb52e8daa4961654f@...>
Message-ID: <e81q50+46rt@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, ewe2 <ewetoo at ...> wrote:
ewe2 wrote:

>Hermione should be left as a focus for fanrage ;)

Talisman:
You are a wicked clever penguin.

And quick with those little flippers too, as I had no sooner popped 
my fuzzy head out of my hidey-hole than I deleted the opening salvo.

Yet, with such charming observations, you coax me out again.
 
Then, David, proving that he's a bona fide member of the evil brain 
trust added:
  
>The final scene will be Hagrid, Grawp, Dobby, and Winky getting
>Hogwarts back on its feet after the apocalypse. Molly Weasley will
>be Minister for Magic.

Talisman: Swifter than cursed opals `gainst  those unauthorized 
sequels, that.  Who would touch it ?  You must write her at once.

Pip!Squeak suggested:
>I think Pippin could tell you that JKR wishes she'd written Emma? 
The
>plot twists are better than P&P.

Talisman:
 Pippin notwithstanding, I think JK did write Emma, after a fashion.

Awhile back, in a dark thicket, I disclosed to a few dazed hostages 
my long standing belief that  "structurally" Rowing's plot twists 
emulate those in Emma.  

For example, here is a brief excerpt from that dreary discourse:

************************************************************
 In one famous scene, Emma has consented to paint Harriet Smith's
portrait, at the request of Mr. Elton. Emma perceives Mr. Elton's
attentions as deriving from his interest in Harriet. All of the
humor and subtle irony arise from this mistaken impression, as we
find later that Mr. Elton was interested in Emma and that his
interest in the portrait was to share time with / lavish praise on
Emma.

In a later scene, at Mrs. Weston's, Churchill gives a preference to
Emma by asking her to lead in the evenings musical entertainments.
Emma sings a few songs, and then Jane is asked to take a turn.
Here, Emma thinks that she and Churchill are confidants, and that
Jane is merely the recipient of their courtesy.
She also fears that Mr. Knightly has a romantic interest in Jane--
though we know his interest is in Emma.

Both scenes involve romantic dynamics taking place within artistic
activities.
In both cases, the man who Emma thinks is interested in the other
girl, is really interested in her. The difference is, in the first
case, this interest is unwelcome. In the second, it will end in
marriage.

The major contours are the same, the details are reversed. This is
the "mirror symmetry" found in the plotting of the HP series. Only,
where Austin's patterns play out within the course of one book,
Rowling's span the series.

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

If this has bored and confused you, just think about the poor souls 
who had to listen to the whole thing.


Phyllis added:
>Based on my reading of the transcript and viewing of the video, I
>saw the 'hate mail' comment as being in response to a question about
>*Harry's* fate specifically. I thought it was a bit of a slip, for
>who is going to send her hate mail if she announces that Harry
>survives? But perhaps this is her way of getting us ready for the
>inevitable. ::Sniff::
 >Snip<
>Frankly, I'd surprised if it's only two, as I expected many more.

Talisman:
Definitely more than two, never fear, as my original, now phantom, 
post recognized.

I agree that Rowling?fs comment regarding ?ghate mail?h regarded 
committing to whether Harry will die.  

As it stands, it is too much of a give away to be real (that is, 
most people would read it as an affirmative).  Unfortunately, I 
don't believe he?fll be killed in action (somewhere in the golden 
years of epilogue, sure).  

Nope.  She?fll let the brat live.  That is the point of the story, 
after all.  

But, just for that, I?fm making a note to send her a ?gHow dare you 
let Harry live!?g Howler after Book 7. 


Worse yet, I believe the one who got the reprieve is Ginny.  The 
entrails have long been telling me that that squirt was for the 
block, but now it seems Rowling will let her snog Harry into the 
sunset.  

Two Howlers then. 

Rounding out my pessimism, I expect the The Two (hitherto) 
Unintendeds are the twins.

I think she changed her 1990 scenario a few books ago.  Thus the 
twins have been given their success early and continue to be shown 
as having the balls to mix it up with Voldemort, et al.  

I?fm quite sure she likes the twins, and at one point I?fll bet they 
were going to be allowed to fade away, merrily perfecting the 
reverse whoopee cushion.   

She?fs since recognized that they need to blaze out in swashbuckling 
glory.  A la Book 5, only more so.


Siriusly Snapey Susan queried:
>...she says "A price has to
>be paid. We are dealing with pure evil." Does she means she's 
killing off
>two "bad" people who need punishment (Lucius & Narcissa? Lucius & 
Draco?)?
>Or  does she mean that the baddies are NOT going to leave all the 
goodies
>undamaged? That because they are evil, they WILL kill some of our
>favorites?

Talisman:
I love this part.  

I?fll add Mooseming?fs section for expediency:

>JK: We are dealing with pure evil! So they don't target the extras,
>do they? They go straight for the main characters... Or I do.

>A reprieve to me indicates a baddie gets off and the two that die
>are the "price" that has "to be paid", that are targeted by evil, so
>are therefore goodies.

Talisman:
Actually, she?fs saying that she?fs going to kill off main 
characters because she?fs pure evil.  : ) One of her redeeming 
characteristics.  

Of course she?fll employ the bad guys to do her dirty work.

In context I?fd read that as a goodie gets the reprieve. 
 
Ah, well.


SSSusan:
>Given how she handled the DoM battle, with 6 kids taking
>on all those DEs, with so little damage to them all... and again 
the battle
>at Hogwarts in HBP, I do think she has a tendency (like all the cop 
shows on
>TV) to have an inordinate number of good guys dodge bullets (well, 
not
>bullets, but you know what I mean). Maybe you're right that she 
realized,
>"Oh, this is ridiculous. I really do need to kill a couple more 
here."


In spite of my blood thirst, I  think the low mortality rate in the 
DoM made sense.  I scribbled up something to that effect, but can?ft 
recall if or where I may have posted it.  I?fll dig around for it, 
unless someone stops me. 

David
>What will happen now is that some fans will say "How dare she accuse
>us of sending hate mail! I'm going to write and explain why I'm
>leaving fandom forever because she has ruined my life! I hate her!"


Talisman, who wants David to notice that she was a very good girl, 
and didn?ft send any outraged mail when that so-and-so axed her Dark 
Phoenix.








 


















From talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid  Fri Jun 30 02:40:40 2006
From: talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid (Talisman)
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 02:40:40 -0000
Subject: Only TWO Die? No, wait...
In-Reply-To: <e81q50+46rt@...>
Message-ID: <e822v8+hbcb@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Talisman" <talisman22457 at ...> 
wrote:


Ah, epiphany.  No doubt triggered by the Hermione/fan-rage seed Ewe 
planted. 

Ginny IS the eleventh-hour reprieve. Rowling's payback to those 
legions of vitriolic H/H shippers who have been calling her 
everything but a lady since Book 6.  

Don't cross this ink-fingered demon.

She'll show you and let the "other woman" live. Ha.  Mayhap even rub 
a few well-thumbed noses in it when, as the smoke clears, Harry 
throws long-suffering Ginny across his broom for a mile-high victory 
lap.

(Or some suitably boring version, thereof.)

That'll learn `em.

T









From katmac at lagattalucianese.yahoo.invalid  Fri Jun 30 04:41:07 2006
From: katmac at lagattalucianese.yahoo.invalid (Kat Macfarlane)
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 21:41:07 -0700
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: Only TWO Die? No, wait...
References: <e81q50+46rt@...>
Message-ID: <003f01c69bff$74177d20$482fdcd1@...>

  Talisman, who wants David to notice that she was a very good girl, 
  and didn't send any outraged mail when that so-and-so axed her Dark 
  Phoenix.

Oh, come, girl! I'm sure your Dark Phoenix is out there getting on just fine and taking very good care of BabyPhoenix!Dumbledore until he is ready to rejoin the fight. After which Hermione will ride off into the sunset on his silky black back...

Purrs!

--Gatta






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




From talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid  Fri Jun 30 06:45:37 2006
From: talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid (Talisman)
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 06:45:37 -0000
Subject: Only TWO Die? No, wait...
In-Reply-To: <003f01c69bff$74177d20$482fdcd1@...>
Message-ID: <e82hah+gdr4@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Kat Macfarlane" <katmac at ...> 
wrote:
> Oh, come, girl! I'm sure your Dark Phoenix is out there getting on 
just fine and taking very good care of BabyPhoenix!Dumbledore until he 
is ready to rejoin the fight. After which Hermione will ride off into 
the sunset on his silky black back...

Talisman:
>From your mouth to Rowling's ear.  Unfortunately all the evidence I see 
says Snape took the dive off the tower.

As for that bushy-haired little tart, dang, she's always getting the 
fantasy Snape action. Why can't she ride off on your Reconstituted!DD 
for a change, whatever color fuzz he grows back.

Talisman, not peevish about Snape, or anything. : P






From erisedstraeh2002 at erisedstraeh2002.yahoo.invalid  Fri Jun 30 15:04:58 2006
From: erisedstraeh2002 at erisedstraeh2002.yahoo.invalid (Phyllis)
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 15:04:58 -0000
Subject: Only TWO Die? No, wait...
In-Reply-To: <e7v3en+ujq9@...>
Message-ID: <e83eiq+9umu@...>

David:

<<My point, really, is not that it's weird for her to expect hate 
mail - she will get that whatever she says, because fans locked in 
mortal combat will scapegoat her for not backing *their* side - but 
that it's odd that she cites the probability of getting hate mail as 
a reason for playing things close to her chest.  It's not like she's 
never done that before, is it?>>

What if the 'hate mail' comment wasn't meant to imply that fans 
would send hate mail if she killed off Harry, but that fans would 
send hate mail if she spoiled the ending of the series by telling 
everyone in advance what will happen?  In retrospect, it really was 
a bit of a throw-away line, so I suspect that this isn't her real 
reason for not telling us - think of how many fewer books would 
sell, and how much less hype there would be, if we all knew the 
ending before the book was published?

~Phyllis








From susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid  Fri Jun 30 15:31:57 2006
From: susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid (susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:31:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: Only TWO Die? No, wait...
In-Reply-To: <e83eiq+9umu@...>
Message-ID: <20060630153157.2984.qmail@...>

Phyllis:
>>> What if the 'hate mail' comment wasn't meant to imply that fans 
would send hate mail if she killed off Harry, but that fans would 
send hate mail if she spoiled the ending of the series by telling 
everyone in advance what will happen?  In retrospect, it really was 
a bit of a throw-away line, so I suspect that this isn't her real 
reason for not telling us - think of how many fewer books would 
sell, and how much less hype there would be, if we all knew the 
ending before the book was published? <<< 

 
SSSusan:
I think this is just it, Phyllis -- it was a throwaway line.  I was struck while watching that bit how it came off that way.  It's not like she stopped, thought about how to respond, and then said that.  It came across to me as an attempt at a humorous little add-on.
 
Siriusly Snapey Susan
 



From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Fri Jun 30 17:10:48 2006
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:10:48 -0000
Subject: Only TWO Die? No, wait...
In-Reply-To: <e81q50+46rt@...>
Message-ID: <e83luo+201d@...>

> Talisman, who wants David to notice that she was a very good girl, 
> and didn?ft send any outraged mail when that so-and-so axed her Dark 
> Phoenix.

Of course.  In the sense of the old rhyme: "When she was good, she was 
very very good; when she was bad, she was better".

D