From kking0731 at snow15145.yahoo.invalid  Wed Mar  1 00:33:03 2006
From: kking0731 at snow15145.yahoo.invalid (Kathy King)
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 19:33:03 -0500
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: Who knew that Peter was the Secret Keeper? (Was: After all this time...)
In-Reply-To: <du2gcq+6e17@...>
References: <du2d89+q8c0@...> <du2gcq+6e17@...>
Message-ID: <a1ee8d580602281633x1407973dob4e20d8ee750ff0e@...>

Seems a few people take the secret keeper switch, as though Sirius was Going
to be the secret keeper but changed to Pettigrew at the last moment. Sirius
Was the secret keeper?end sentence. Dumbledore was certain of it and "gave
evidence" to the Ministry (herein is the key words, gave evidence). What
evidence would someone have that could prove that Sirius was indeed the
secret keeper?

Sirius (the secret keeper) would have entrusted certain persons as to the
Potter's whereabouts, such as Dumbledore and Hagrid, being confident that
they were not Order members under suspicion of being an inside spy.



So, the Fidelius charm was in place with Sirius as the keeper before the
switch is a true statement because of Dumbledore's evidence. Sirius divulges
the location with a select few who can be trusted but decides it would be
best to use someone who would not be suspected to hold the key and Switches
to Peter. Would this action change the charm or who knew about it, unlikely?
Likewise with Dumbledore's situation being the secret keeper for the Order.
If Dumbledore was aware that he might die, he could have made a secret
keeper switch with his brother. This wouldn't mean that he had to tell
everyone who knew the secret of the Order's whereabouts or to change the
secret itself, he just has to pass the key and make his brother the keeper.
This action doesn't change the secret or who knows of the secret only the
keeper of the key to the secret.



Hagrid is the keeper of the keys of Hogwarts that is protected by charms as
to its whereabouts. Every first year student goes to Hogwarts by way of
Hagrid via a boat and I would bet that this is Hagrid's way to allocate the
secret of where Hogwarts is located. I very much doubt that Hagrid was the
first keeper of the 'keys' at Hogwarts so I would tend to believe that they
simply switched who held the key previously, which didn't change its
protection or who previously knew how to find it. It is a secret keeper
switch ? the keeper of the key to the secret, the only one who can Tell of
the secret at the time.



Just my two cents worth


Snow


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




From dontask2much at dontask2much.yahoo.invalid  Wed Mar  1 02:00:04 2006
From: dontask2much at dontask2much.yahoo.invalid (Rebecca Bowen)
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 21:00:04 -0500
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Who knew that Peter was the Secret Keeper? (Was:  After all this time...)
References: <20060228184805.39766.qmail@...>
Message-ID: <009801c63cd3$dbf96b00$6401a8c0@...>

From: "Constance Vigilance"

<snip>

> Furthermore, if Peter was the keeper of the secret of Where are the 
> Potters, then does that mean that no one can find the location of Lily and 
> James' bodies unless Peter tells them?

Rebecca:

I think that when the house exploded/imploded or what-have-you, the identity 
of  the Secret Keeper for the Potters didn't matter anymore.  I base this on 
canon in SS/PS:

"No, sir -- house was almost destroyed, but I got him out all right before 
the Muggles started swarmin' around. He fell asleep as we was flyin' over 
Bristol."



Taken at face value, one could assume that those within the vacinity of the 
GH residence could see the wreckage, based on Hagrid's response to DD and no 
one would have told them, I don't think.  Perhaps the charm was broken with 
the explosion.



Rebecca









From talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid  Wed Mar  1 06:15:54 2006
From: talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid (Talisman)
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 06:15:54 -0000
Subject: Let's hope for a battle that can't be won...
Message-ID: <du3e6q+r83j@...>

Not to neglect Rowling's Diary snippet, I, for one,  am happy to hear 
that she is losing the fight to keep to her plan: that chapters are 
multiplying under her fingers.

Say what you will, I've always been irked by her *promises* that Book 7 
will be shorter than OoP.

Now, if only she'd say: *I can't possibly fit that much Snape into two 
chapters...*

 ::sigh::

Talisman






From talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid  Wed Mar  1 09:51:49 2006
From: talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid (Talisman)
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 09:51:49 -0000
Subject: Who knew that Peter was the Secret Keeper? (Was:  After all this time...)
In-Reply-To: <009801c63cd3$dbf96b00$6401a8c0@...>
Message-ID: <du3qrl+1b75@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Rebecca Bowen"
<dontask2much at ...> wrote:
> I think that when the house exploded/imploded or what-have-you,
the identity
> of  the Secret Keeper for the Potters didn't matter anymore.  I
>base this on canon in SS/PS:
>
> "No, sir -- house was almost destroyed, but I got him out all
right before
> the Muggles started swarmin' around. He fell asleep as we was
flyin' over
> Bristol."
> Taken at face value, one could assume that those within the
vacinity of the
> GH residence could see the wreckage, based on Hagrid's response to
DD and no one would have told them, I don't think.  Perhaps the
charm was broken with the explosion.
>

Sure. It's clear that--by the time Hagrid got there--anyone could
find the place. This points back to Anne's suggestion that the
secret was carefully (and perhaps a bit oddly) worded.

Rowling has just gone to the bother of telling us that one Potter
couldn't give away the location of another.  In the same manner, I
don't see why one Potter death should destroy the protection for
any surviving Potters.

Say, if James left the house from time to time, and something
unfortunate happened, Lily and Harry should still be protected.

You would think the wording would take care of such scenarios--with
Harry's life being the most protected of all. But this appears not
to have been the case.

Moreover, if the secret simply gave the Potter street address as
being the hiding place for J, L, and H (jointly and severally) there
would be no reason for the secret to be voided by destruction of the
building.

The plot of land under the rubble would still be identified by the
street address, and any remaining Potter would have been protected.

Of course, in the event that such a surviving Potter was unable to
leave the hiding place under his own power, said Potter would have
been *protected* from rescue by DD & Co.  Can't have that.

If DD instructed the parties involved to use wording that released
the secret once the house had been damaged...or upon the death of
any one Potter...or of a particular Potter... my, wouldn't he be a
far-sighted and cunning old darling, indeed.

Of course Sirius--who wasn't being particularly obedient--might just
have done a sloppy job in giving Wormtail a secret that was voided
as soon as the Potters plural no longer existed.

Still, can you transfer a Fidelius Charm if you have substantially
changed the original wording? Wouldn't that be a different secret?

And, DD does seem to have dispatched Hagrid without needing to
verify the location, himself....

On a related matter, the argument that DD and Hagrid knew the
location of the Potters, thanks to Sirius's pre-transference
disclosure, has already been negated by Rowling.

It's a nice enough argument, but JKR speaks specifically of the
Potters' situation in her FAQ Poll answer:

*The only people who ever knew their [the Potters's] precise location
were those whom Wormtail had told directly...*

That deflates the Wormtail-handed-out-little-notes theory, as well.

Increases the interest in just who was at GH that night though,
doesn't it?

Talisman
For the Fellowship of the D.U.S.T., reminding you that I did call
the F.A.Q. poll answer, with canon, back in the beginning of January,
in messages 3707, 3712.

Since the topic has re-emerged, I'll answer Neri's objection re: If
the secret dies with the keeper, why wouldn't LV just make people
his Hx SKs, and then kill them, thus insuring no one could ever find
the blasted things again:

Because you never know who's going to come back as a ghost, that's
why.

Indeed, it's not at all clear that you would know whether your
victim *had* come back as a ghost, unless they wanted to contact you.

I imagine LV expects most people to fear death, as he does.  That
being the case, he'd expect almost anyone to leave a ghost behind.

Once you've shot your wad, SK-wise, it's out of your hands.  You
can't decide to make another SK for the same secret, because you can
no longer ever tell anyone, yourself.

So there you sit, in your Dark Lord lair, wondering whether a half-
dozen pissed-off ghosts--who are far past fearing you now--are out
there looking for a suitable champion whom they can lead to your
precious little soul buckets.

Sure you've got six chances to make your plan work--and it would
only take one ghost-less death to CY nasty A--but you'd just never,
ever, know...













From josturgess at mooseming.yahoo.invalid  Wed Mar  1 10:59:58 2006
From: josturgess at mooseming.yahoo.invalid (mooseming)
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 10:59:58 -0000
Subject: Who knew that Peter was the Secret Keeper? (Was:  After all this time...)
In-Reply-To: <du3qrl+1b75@...>
Message-ID: <du3ure+k29l@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Talisman" <talisman22457 at ...> 
wrote:
>
>
> >
> 
> Sure. It's clear that--by the time Hagrid got there--anyone could
> find the place. This points back to Anne's suggestion that the
> secret was carefully (and perhaps a bit oddly) worded.
> 
> Rowling has just gone to the bother of telling us that one Potter
> couldn't give away the location of another.  In the same manner, I
> don't see why one Potter death should destroy the protection for
> any surviving Potters.
> 
> Say, if James left the house from time to time, and something
> unfortunate happened, Lily and Harry should still be protected.
> 
> You would think the wording would take care of such scenarios--with
> Harry's life being the most protected of all. But this appears not
> to have been the case.
> 
> Moreover, if the secret simply gave the Potter street address as
> being the hiding place for J, L, and H (jointly and severally) 
there
> would be no reason for the secret to be voided by destruction of 
the
> building.
> 
> The plot of land under the rubble would still be identified by the
> street address, and any remaining Potter would have been protected.
> 
> Of course, in the event that such a surviving Potter was unable to
> leave the hiding place under his own power, said Potter would have
> been *protected* from rescue by DD & Co.  Can't have that.
> 
> If DD instructed the parties involved to use wording that released
> the secret once the house had been damaged...or upon the death of
> any one Potter...or of a particular Potter... my, wouldn't he be a
> far-sighted and cunning old darling, indeed.

If we take the other secret location as a model it was worded like 
this "The headquarters of the OotP may be found at 12 Grimmauld 
Place." Therefore we get something like 'the home/hiding place of 
James, Lily and Harry Potter may be found at 'some place', Godric's 
Hollow. 

This protects from questions like 'where are they, where can I find 
them, where do they live?' and would presumably 'break' if said home 
was destroyed. It leaves the infant Harry vulnerable to the 
simultaneous death of both his parents, the secret keeper and anyone 
else with the information but this would be a small risk in 
comparison to not going into hiding at all.

<snip>
> 
> *The only people who ever knew their [the Potters's] precise 
location
> were those whom Wormtail had told directly...*
> 
> That deflates the Wormtail-handed-out-little-notes theory, as well.

Does it? Why?

DD told Harry about 12 Grimmauld Place using a note, why couldn't 
Wormtail also communicate using handy post its? The note appears 
neither to have been addressed to Harry nor signed by DD (Harry 
recognised the hand writing).

Also at least one person, Moody, thought that note enough of a 
security risk to destroy it. The note didn't spontaneously ignite 
Howler style which is odd.

Altogether the whole thing smells fishy to me.

1st off why did people vote for this question? Well perhaps they 
were interested in what happened to 12 Grimmauld Place and its 
standing as headquarters for the OotP. Perhaps they were also hoping 
to trick JKR into saying something about the demise, or otherwise of 
DD. JKR answers the question, saying she is `surprised' it was 
popular and then doesn't answer with reference to the `dead' secret 
keeper but to the living one, doesn't mention DD at all, not even in 
passing.

Completely by the by in the faq section she also answers one 
regarding the school song and states:

"Dumbledore called for the school song when he was feeling 
particularly buoyant, but times are becoming ever darker in the 
wizarding world. Should Dumbledore ever suggest a rousing encore, 
you may assume that he is on top form once more."

Hum so she won't state on her fan site that DD is dead (even 
obliquely) and she indicates he might be around for future choral 
celebrations. Makes you wonder

even me and I was firmly in 
the `poisoned, shot, dropped from a great height how dead do you 
need him to be' school of thought.

Regards
Jo

Ps isn't anyone going to comment on my Mimbulus post?








From coriolan at coriolan_cmc.yahoo.invalid  Wed Mar  1 15:23:37 2006
From: coriolan at coriolan_cmc.yahoo.invalid (Caius Marcius)
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 15:23:37 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter Filks Update
Message-ID: <du4e9p+s1ju@...>

HPF was updated today, with 20 new filks, including the latest from 
contributors old and new. Drop by for a sing-along!

   - CMC

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







From dontask2much at dontask2much.yahoo.invalid  Thu Mar  2 00:52:16 2006
From: dontask2much at dontask2much.yahoo.invalid (Rebecca Bowen)
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 19:52:16 -0500
Subject: Who's a Warlock vs a Wizard in HP?
References: <du3kou+htka@...>
Message-ID: <006701c63d93$8dfb95c0$6401a8c0@...>

All,

Color me confused - this is a normal condition in my workday life, but for 
my HP hobby not normal at all. :)  Any help would be greatly and most 
sincerly appreciated.

Since DD was Chief *Warlock* of the Wizengamot, I assume that the Old 
English etymology of "deceiver" or "oathbreaker" isn't appropriate here, but 
is the other speculated Anglo Saxon interpretation "the man of the logs" 
(referring to the reading of runes) correct? Or even just "male witch", as I 
have seen some definitions say?  I notice that JKR drops the word "warlock" 
rather strangely to me, outside of use in the Wizengamot and including the 
word in the name of the International Federation or Confederation of 
Warlocks:

Perkins described as an "old warlock" in CoS;
"Wild - looking warlocks" in PoA;
"Rowdy warlocks" again in PoA;
The book "Madcap Magic for Wacky Warlocks" in GoF;
Grubby looking warlock in OoP;
warlocks of Liechtenstein in OoP;
bust of an ugly old warlock in HBP

Is this just slang for a male wizard? Once in GoF, JKR describes one group 
of people "wizards", and in the same sentence another different set are 
called "warlocks." Is it just a JKR inconsistency? It's probably not 
important, but it's not so clear to me and I've always wondered about it...

Rebecca 





From quigonginger at quigonginger.yahoo.invalid  Thu Mar  2 12:58:03 2006
From: quigonginger at quigonginger.yahoo.invalid (quigonginger)
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 12:58:03 -0000
Subject: Who's a Warlock vs a Wizard in HP?
In-Reply-To: <006701c63d93$8dfb95c0$6401a8c0@...>
Message-ID: <du6q4r+vvjf@...>

Rebecca wrote:
(snip)
> Since DD was Chief *Warlock* of the Wizengamot, I assume that the Old 
> English etymology of "deceiver" or "oathbreaker" isn't appropriate 
here, but 
> is the other speculated Anglo Saxon interpretation "the man of the 
logs" 
> (referring to the reading of runes) correct? Or even just "male 
witch", as I 
> have seen some definitions say?  (snip)

Ginger, who has no answer, but wants to pipe up anyway:

This has been asked quite a few times on TOL.  For those of you who 
still hold membership there, you may be interested in the following 
posts:  18800, 30325, 30327, 35330, 37741, 37749, 41799, 41800, 41805, 
41816, 41830, and 41831.

I just got done reviewing this category for the catalogue project, and 
these posts cover the ideas that had been bandied about up to the 
release of OoP.  

As for my personal opinion:  I think it is about the same as the 
difference between lad and boy.  I don't have a clue, but it's there.  
Somehow or other, you just know which one to say at which time.  Or at 
least, JKR does.

Take your pick.  With any luck, some of the authors of those posts (who 
haven't changed their minds) will speak up.

Cheers, Ginger, who is definately a chick. 







From nkafkafi at nkafkafi.yahoo.invalid  Thu Mar  2 15:27:27 2006
From: nkafkafi at nkafkafi.yahoo.invalid (Neri)
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 15:27:27 -0000
Subject: Who knew that Peter was the Secret Keeper? (Was:  After all this time...)
In-Reply-To: <du3qrl+1b75@...>
Message-ID: <du72sv+q9en@...>

> Talisman:
> Since the topic has re-emerged, I'll answer Neri's objection re: If
> the secret dies with the keeper, why wouldn't LV just make people
> his Hx SKs, and then kill them, thus insuring no one could ever find
> the blasted things again:
> 
> Because you never know who's going to come back as a ghost, that's
> why.
> <snip>
> 
> I imagine LV expects most people to fear death, as he does.  That
> being the case, he'd expect almost anyone to leave a ghost behind.
> 

Neri:
In such case, one wonders why did Voldy kill Bertha in GoF? She could
come back as a ghost and foil his plan. But maybe he made sure her
memory was completely destroyed before he killed her? Hmm, a good
point. Must remember to obliviate the Hx SKs before you kill'em.

> 
> Once you've shot your wad, SK-wise, it's out of your hands.  You
> can't decide to make another SK for the same secret, because you can
> no longer ever tell anyone, yourself.
>
	
Neri:
Not exactly. If the secret is the house where the Hx was hidden, and
you have a reason to suspect that the SK (dead or not) had blabbered,
you just take the Hx out of this house and hide it somewhere else,
using another SK.


Neri







From exslytherin at exslytherin.yahoo.invalid  Thu Mar  2 16:08:30 2006
From: exslytherin at exslytherin.yahoo.invalid (Amanda)
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 16:08:30 -0000
Subject: Who's a Warlock vs a Wizard in HP?
In-Reply-To: <006701c63d93$8dfb95c0$6401a8c0@...>
Message-ID: <du759u+42go@...>

Well, I'm a Brit and I have always assumed JKR means to use the word to 
describe an old or elderly wizard. 

It is used both respectfully, as in the centuries old title: 'Chief Warlock of 
the Wizengamot' and less respectfully as in: ??Madcap Magic for Wacky 
Warlocks?? but both cases, and in the other examples you site, refer to a 
wizard who has reached a certain age. 

I really don't think it any more complicated than that.

Cheers, Mandy






From judy at judyserenity.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar  3 19:13:37 2006
From: judy at judyserenity.yahoo.invalid (Judy)
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 19:13:37 -0000
Subject: More on Secret Keepers (was: Re: Who knew that Peter ...)
In-Reply-To: <du3ure+k29l@...>
Message-ID: <dua4h1+jktk@...>

Anne said:
>>>A lot would depend on how the secret was worded, I suppose....
Suppose the secret was "James, Lily, and Harry Potter are hidden in
[such and such a house] in Godric's Hollow."  Once the house was
destroyed, there would be no more secret -- anyone could now find 
them....
"James, Lily, and Harry Potter are living in Godric's Hollow" would
allow anyone to find dead bodies (though only one who knew the secret
would have been able to find The Boy Who Lived...<<<

Good post, Anne!  I agree, the wording would matter a lot.  Whatever 
the wording was, the Secret must no longer be in effect, because 
Harry's location is no longer a secret. 

Snow said:
>>>Seems a few people take the secret keeper switch, as though Sirius 
was Going to be the secret keeper but changed to Pettigrew at the 
last moment. Sirius Was the secret keeper
end sentence. Dumbledore 
was certain of it and "gave evidence" to the Ministry (herein is the 
key words, gave evidence). What evidence would someone have that 
could prove that Sirius was indeed the secret keeper
<<<

I don't believe that Sirius was ever the Secret Keeper.  Dumbledore 
is not supposed to be infalliable; he could have believed Sirius to 
be the Secret Keeper even if that was not the case.  I think 
Dumbledore's evidence was simply that he had discussed the Fidelius 
Charm with the Potters, and the Potters said that Sirius would be the 
Secret Keeper.  Possibly, Sirius also told Dumbledore that he would 
be the Secret Keeper. Given that the only other people known to be 
involved in the secret were either dead (James & Lily) or "known" to 
have murdered thirteen people (Sirius), Dumbledore's testimony of 
James & Lily's plan to make Sirius the Secret Keeper would have been 
pretty strong evidence -- not that the Ministry requires much 
evidence to send people to Azkaban. 

The books say nothing about changing Secret Keepers, and I don't 
believe that it's supposed to be possible. 

Snow also said:
>>>Hagrid is the keeper of the keys of Hogwarts that is protected by 
charms as to its whereabouts. Every first year student goes to 
Hogwarts by way of Hagrid via a boat and I would bet that this is 
Hagrid's way to allocate the secret of where Hogwarts is located. I 
very much doubt that Hagrid was the first keeper of the 'keys' at 
Hogwarts so I would tend to believe that they simply switched who 
held the key previously, which didn't change its protection or who 
previously knew how to find it.<<<

I have wondered why the first years go by boat -- the idea that 
Hagrid has to show them the  castle because he is "Keeper of the 
Keys" is a very good one. (Although the Durmstrang and Beauxbatons 
students presumably found the castle via some other method.)  Still, 
even if one needs to find the location of Hogwarts by following 
someone with the Keys, and those Keys can be switched between people, 
I don't think that tells us that a Fidelius Secret Keeper can be 
switched. 

Talisman noted that JKR posted:
>>>*The only people who ever knew their [the Potters's] precise 
location were those whom Wormtail had told directly...*
That deflates the Wormtail-handed-out-little-notes theory<<<

And Jo said:
>>>Does it? Why?
DD told Harry about 12 Grimmauld Place using a note, why couldn't
Wormtail also communicate using handy post its?<<<

Right -- My interpretation of the statement, "Wormtail had told 
directly" was that it meant, "people whom Wormtail told himself, 
rather than telling an intermediary who then told them."  I didn't 
take it as meaning. "people whom Wormtail told while standing face-to-
face."  After all, JKR was explaining how the Fidelius Charm works, 
and that no one but the Secret Keeper could reveal the Secret.  She 
wasnt't saying that Secrets can't be passed via notes, since we 
already know that they can be. 


Now, moving on from Peter to his Voldieness: 

Talisman explained
>>>why wouldn't LV just make people
his Hx SKs, and then kill them, thus insuring no one could ever find
the blasted things again
...
Because you never know who's going to come back as a ghost, that's
why.<<<

Oh, good point about the ghosts.  Also, I assume that to create the 
Secret, you first have to tell the secret to the prospective Secret 
Keeper, and then spend some time doing the "immensely complex" 
Fidelius Charm with the Secret Keeper's consent and participation.  
Telling someone about a Horcrux would make Voldemort more vulnerable, 
at least for a short time.  If he told a non-follower, that person 
would likely refuse to be the Secret Keeper and/or try to escape.  
And Voldemort probably wouldn't want to use one of his followers as 
the Secret Keeper either.  I mean, Bellatrix & Barty Jr. might be 
willing to die for him, but would Voldemort really want to kill 
them?  Rabidly loyal followers don't grow on trees. 

By the way, I think we should assume that it takes at least two 
people to do a Fidelius Charm.  If Voldemort could simply use himself 
as the Secret Keeper, he would have presumably used the Fidelius 
Charm to turn the existence, identity, and location of his Horcruxes 
into protected Secrets.  But then, Dumbledore would have never 
figured the Horcruxes out and we'd have a major plot hole. So let's 
just assume that the Fidelius Charm doesn't work that way, OK?  (This 
also explains why James & Lily couldn't be their own Secret Keepers.) 

Talisman also explained: 
> Once you've shot your wad, SK-wise, it's out of your hands.  You
> can't decide to make another SK for the same secret, because you can
> no longer ever tell anyone, yourself.
	
To which Neri replied:
> Not exactly. If the secret is the house where the Hx was hidden, and
> you have a reason to suspect that the SK (dead or not) had
> blabbered, you just take the Hx out of this house and hide it 
> somewhere else, using another SK.

Hmmm...  Once the Fidelius Charm has been performed, does the person 
who originally told the Secret to the Secret Keeper still know the 
Secret?  Or would Voldemort need the Secret Keeper to tell him the 
location of his Horcrux in order to find it? 

At any rate, I don't think Voldemort would want to make the 
*location* of the Horcrux the secret, or at least not the ONLY 
secret.  Really, the big secret is that Voldie *has* one (or more) 
Horcrux(es) in the first place, and the identity of said Horcruxes.  
The location only matters if people know that the Horcruxes exist in 
the first place.  


-- Judy, who thinks Dumbledore is really dead (alas!), even if the 
FAQ about his singing doesn't say so








From talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid  Sat Mar  4 12:46:07 2006
From: talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid (Talisman)
Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 12:46:07 -0000
Subject: Who knew that Peter was the Secret Keeper? (Was:  After all this time...)
In-Reply-To: <du3ure+k29l@...>
Message-ID: <duc26g+u37s@...>

Just to be clear, I think that most of the discussion generated by 
the poll answer, including my own observations, is outside the 
useful parameters of textual expectation.  That is, none of it has 
analytical utility, with the possible exception of the previously 
noted information about Wormtail's specific behavior. To wit:

Talisman previously, quoting JKR:
>*The only people who ever knew their [the Potters's] precise 
location  were those whom >Wormtail had told directly...*  (FAQ poll 
answer)

I, for one, will be keeping this statement in mind as I find out who 
was present at GH that fateful Halloween night.  It's certainly not 
the lynchpin of any of my theories, but it could offer additional 
confirmatory evidence.

Talisman previously:
>That deflates the Wormtail-handed-out-little-notes theory, as well. 

Mooseming:
>Does it? Why? DD told Harry about 12 Grimmauld Place using a note, 
why couldn't >Wormtail also communicate using handy post its?

(This answer applies to Judy's agreement with MM's statement, as 
well.)

The nut of the *note or not* issue is whether Wormtail told some 
people about GH in such a manner as to leave them ignorant of his 
status as SK. Or, conversely, whether knowledge of the GH hiding 
place is tantamount to knowledge of Sirius's innocence.

It's not a question of what DD did or Wormtail *could* have done, 
it's a matter of what happened, per Rowling.  *Passing notes* and 
*telling directly* are cognizably two different methodologies.

If I asked a subordinate to please inform someone of something--
specifying that they should *tell the person directly*--and later 
found out they had merely dropped an unsigned note, I'm afraid it 
would have to come up at review time.

Similarly, if someone *tells you directly* that they would love a 
pound of limberger for their birthday, you might act with greater 
confidence than if you were passed an unsigned note written in a 
vaguely familiar hand.    

Like the treacheous cheese situation, the authenticity, or lack 
thereof, of a purported SK communication would only be revealed once 
acted upon.  Reflecting on this might, depending on your level of 
concern for future friendship, or enemy bushwhacks, as the case may 
be, lead to a heightened appreciation for the distinction between 
anonymous notes and direct relation.


It's fairly accepted that someone besides LV and baby Harry 
witnessed GH and survived to tell what happened.  Anyone there must 
have known where to find the Potters.  According to Rowling, 
Wormtail would have told them directly.  I merely suggest that such  
person or persons --and anyone they reported to-- also knew that 
Sirius was innocent.

(Even before a secret is negated, there is no evidence that someone 
who knows the identity of the SK can't pass on that information--
albeit not the secret itself.)

DD dispatched Hagrid early on, and the news of GH was all over the 
British WW by dawn (McG knew it by the time she showed up at Privet 
Drive). 

So who was spreading the news?  I suppose it's just possible that 
some shell-shocked DE was stumbling around, babbling information, 
which was overheard by a DD loyalist, who just happened to be 
nearby, and who then notified DD, etc.  But it really seems more 
likely to have been someone intentionally involved in the event and 
aligned with the Order, doesn't it? 

Back to the whole note-passing business.  DD used this *indirect* 
method of communication because he was systematically avoiding 
contact with Harry--until Sirius's death made Harry Voldproof--and 
until DD had tested the efficacy of this prophylactic by arranging 
for/allowing the possession test.  (Yes, DD is responsible for 
Siruis's death, as well as for keeping him on ice in Azkaban. It's 
rough, I know.) 

But, why would Wormtail have passed a note to a member of the Order 
telling them where the Potters where hiding?  According to the 
accepted WW version, Wormtail told LV within a week of the time 
Sirius underwent the Fidelius.  Everything occurred within a matter 
of days. Why would Wormtail have enabled the Order to be present for 
LV's attack?

No, I rather think Wormtail told person or persons unknown (but 
definitely suspected), who seemed to be DEs, but weren't.

And, he certainly wasn't anonymous with the DEs.  According to 
Sirius, *all* the DEs--inside Azkaban and out--were aware that 
?gVoldemort went to the Potters?f on [Wormtail's] information?h (PoA 
368).  Crazed prisoners were literally screaming  about Wormtail's 
double double-cross (some in an annoyingly babyish way, no doubt.)

Remember? That's why he *had* to go back for LV--between the Order 
and the DEs, he had no other option, once his ratty cover was blown 
(per DD's design).

It's been discussed before how the guards reported what they heard 
in Azkaban (372), this alone, without the many arguments for DD's 
pre-knowledge of the event, should suggest to readers how unlikely 
it would be for the extremely prescient DD to continue to think 
Sirius was the traitor.  Seems like you?fd have witnesses aplenty, 
if you wanted to get Sirius out of jail.

There is also the matter of how Rowling handles clues. 

She is very adept at couching information so that it is colored by 
her audience's assumptions.  In this case, she moves from general 
information about SKs, to specific information about Wormtail and 
the Potters.  

It's worth noting how she shifts from general to specific.  Moose 
finds it annoying that Rowling redirects the question back to 
Wormtail.  I find it telling.

You have to choose to read her comments about Wormtail as being 
merely illustrative of the general proposition (hence subject to 
interpretation in light of all SK evidence) in order to allow DD to 
(inexplicably) know about GH via an anonymous note--thereby 
remaining innocent of the knowledge that Wormtail controlled the 
secret.

Yet, Rowling has already established that Wormtail's involvement was 
widely known to the Dark side, and DD has plenty of inteligence from 
that quarter.

I say she's giving you another chance to recognize DD's involvement 
as you read Book 7.

If you choose not to see any such import in her comments, you are 
simply voting that no useful information whatsoever came of the SK 
question.

It's close enough to that, as it is.  Yet, even if that is the case, 
there is plenty of other evidence of DD's knowledge.

Mooseming:
>If we take the other secret location as a model it was worded like 
>this "The headquarters >of the OotP may be found at 12 Grimmauld 
>Place." Therefore we get something like 'the >home/hiding place of 
>James, Lily and Harry Potter may be found at 'some place', 
>Godric's Hollow. 

Here again, there is little relevance to justify spinning elaborate--
and largely speculative--explanations.  Something obviously voided 
the secret; whether one chooses to interpret it as error or design 
depends on who crafted the language--a question bereft of canon--and 
probably not important to the remaining story.  I forgive us all on 
the grounds that--having waited for the FAQ poll answer, we feel 
compelled to find some fun in it--doomed as the impulse may be.  

In any event, the inclusion of a street address in my examples was 
drawn from the 12GP model, but, as I discussed earlier, that alone 
does not account for the Potter FC being negated by structural 
damage.  

Moreover, the Order is a somewhat more fungible unit than Harry and 
his parents.  Any number of members can join, leave, be killed, or 
simply evaporate without nullifying the secret.  Not necessarily so 
the Potters.

If we are going to amuse ourselves with this idle exercise, I think 
it behooves us to  consider word choice carefully, just as someone 
contemplating a Fidelius Charm should.

If the Potter secret only applied to a coherent group of three 
specific, living, Potters, the death of any family member could 
dispel the charm.

Was that the desired effect? How long did the Potters expect to stay 
in the house?  Was there no possibility that Lily or James would 
venture out--albeit risking death?

If they were laying low for the long haul, but not expecting to be 
totally imprisoned in the house, it seems foolish to cast the charm 
as an all or nothing proposition. 

However, if an attack were expected in the near future, expected to 
be fatal to the Potter adults, and one wanted access to the property 
when the smoke cleared, one might construct a charm that would 
accommodate that scenario.

Indeed, one might construct a charm that would fail upon any indicia 
of attack at the residence--if one were expecting one....  

That's all I'm saying.

Moose:
>This protects from questions like 'where are they, where can I find 
>them, where do they live?' and would presumably 'break' if said 
>home was destroyed.

I'm not sure that *home* is a natural or necessary part of your 
hypothetical secret.  Sirius lived at 12GP, but calling it Order HQ 
seems to have been enough to protect him.  Why not just say *the 
Potters may be found at  XYZ?* 

I'm also not sure that 12GP would lose protection if it suffered 
structural damage, say due to a nasty Bundimun infestation (all that 
scuttling under the floorboards), or someone getting drunk and 
trying to curse certain portraits or tapestries off the walls, etc. 

So, I still say that if the Potter secret were intentionally bound 
to structural integrity, or required all three Potters to remain 
alive, I would be inclined to see that as...advanced planning. 

Moose:
>1st off why did people vote for this question? Well perhaps they 
>were interested in what >happened to 12 Grimmauld Place and its 
>standing as headquarters for the OotP.

Time out. Is that really more interesting than how to destroy Hxes?  
Really?  Did people expect HQ problems to be a big issue in the 
denouement?  Somehow, this is not a comfort to my irritation.

12GP wasn't the HQ in *the old days* or even much prior to Book 5, 
and it was abandoned as HQ immediately after Sirius's death. (At 
which time the standing 12GP Fidelius was negated.) 

Incidentally, DD never actually said that the Order had moved back 
in.

I don't know why he should want them to.  He's so hot to have Harry 
go it alone (or at least go it *Trio*) on the Hx mission, and 12GP 
is Harry's base of operations when/if he's not at Hogwarts (though 
I'm sure we'll get back there).  

Why have a lot of meddling Order members around to ask Harry what 
he's up to, etc.?  Who needs McGonagall up his tookus?

Anyway, even if DD died (which he didn't) the Order could simply 
relocate their HQ again, which I'm sure they have done anyway--if 
they actually ever moved back in--because though DD didn't die, at 
least most of them think he did. (Bottom line, he isn't handy to 
initiate anyone new.)  

There again, upon relocation the secret would be negated and the 
Fidelius would lapse, without regard to the status of the SK.   All 
real estate problems are resolved. 

If someday they wished to re-establish HQ at 12GP, it would be a 
whole new event requiring another charm, fresh SK, etc.

Tempest in a teapot.


  Moose:
> Perhaps they were also hoping to trick JKR into saying something 
>about the demise, or otherwise of DD. 

Trick...?  Huh?  Wha..? Disconcert her by choosing an unexpected 
question so she'll blurt something out? 

Alas, I fear she already knew--and had carefully thought out--her 
answers to all of the questions SHE selected for the poll, before 
she ever offered them to us.

Moreover, if she had wanted to dangle any *dead or alive?* teasers, 
she could have worked them into the Hx answer, just as well.

Please, SK people, don't be tricky any more.

Moose:
>JKR answers the question, saying she is `surprised' it was 
>popular... 

Because it promised--and yielded--very little.

Moose:
>...and then doesn't answer with reference to the `dead' 
>secret .keeper but to the living one,doesn't mention DD at all, 
>not even in passing. 

Turns out she's not that dim, after all.

Again, I see her effort to steer the answer toward GH as pointing to 
the only potentially meaningful information in the entire response: 
knowledge of GH hideout = knowledge of SK Wormtail.  

Moose:
>Completely by the by in the faq section she also answers one 
>regarding the school song >and states: "Dumbledore called for the 
>school song when he was feeling particularly >buoyant, but times 
are >becoming ever darker in the wizarding world. Should >Dumbledore 
ever >suggest a rousing encore, you may assume that he is on top 
form once >more." 

Well, that was written before Book 6 came out--and there are no 
guarantees that a rousing encore is forthcoming.   But, yes, she 
certainly teases with it.

Moose:
>Hum so she won't state on her fan site that DD is dead (even 
>obliquely) and she >indicates he might be around for future choral 
>celebrations. Makes you wonder?Eeven me >and I was firmly in the 
>`poisoned, shot, dropped from a great height how dead do you >need 
>him to be' school of thought.

The entire series foreshadows a major faked death--with clues 
tightening to a crescendo in Book 6.  The most felicitous placement 
is: faked death in 6, revelation in 7.  

I won't rehash the myriad clues and DD's obvious awareness of 
unfolding events, or the whole phoenix angle. But, it's all out 
there. 

(By the way, Rowling has said we'll see Fawkes in 7.  Would it be 
futile to reiterate how Fawkes's appearance, in any matter, 
implicates DD?) 

Talisman saying, dead or alive, DD's got his fingers in the pie. I'd 
be perfectly happy to let the old schemer pike to the dusties--but I 
know he's out there, and by now, I expect, well behind enemy lines.












From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sat Mar  4 21:59:10 2006
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 21:59:10 -0000
Subject: Secret Keeper of GH / "Warlock"
Message-ID: <dud2je+ics7@...>

Talisman wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/3967 :

<< If, as many suspect, Snape was at GH, then he would have had to
have known--from the point of his initiation into the secret--that
Wormtail was the traitorous SK, not Sirius. >>

Another nitpick: a person could have been there without having been
initiated into the Secret -- such a person would *be* there but not
*see* whatever was covered by the FC. I imagine that in the 12
Grimmauld Place example, such a person would perceive that heesh was
standing on the street while hiser companion turned toward the tiny
gap between two houses and vanished. In the GH example, the house may
have been visible but the Potters invisible, so the person might have
stood in the street and watched LV shouting and AK'ing at nobody.  

Rebecca wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/3979 :

<<  Once in GoF, JKR describes one group of people "wizards", and in
the same sentence another different set are called "warlocks." Is it
just a JKR inconsistency? >>

I've been annoyed by the inconsistency for years, and developed a
theory to explain it away. In my theory, 'warlock' is the wizarding
word for an elected representative to a constituent assembly (with the
advantage that the real-world meaning of 'oath-breaker' is a joke on
politicians). Thus, Dumbledore as Chief Warlock of the Wizengemot is
the Chief of an assembly all of whose members are Warlocks. And
Perkins, as 'an old warlock', is some hard-luck bloke who lost a
re-election campaign but was given a civil service job by his old
colleagues who kept their seats and power. And Council or Convention
or Confederation of Warlocks is the same as Council or Convention or
Confederation of Wizards, because no parliament of wizards ever
consisted of the entire population representing themselves.

As for the other references to people in pubs or wherever as 'rowdy'
or 'rough-looking' warlocks, I enhanced my theory with the assertion
that the 'original' meaning of an elected representative aka
politician had given rise to a slang meaning of a blowhard, expanded
to any loudmouth.








From talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid  Sun Mar  5 07:56:20 2006
From: talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid (Talisman)
Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2006 07:56:20 -0000
Subject: Who knew that Peter was the Secret Keeper? (Was:  After all this time...)
In-Reply-To: <du72sv+q9en@...>
Message-ID: <due5j4+b10a@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Neri" <nkafkafi at ...> wrote:
>
> > Talisman wrote:
> Since the topic has re-emerged, I'll answer Neri's objection re: 
>If  the secret dies with the keeper, why wouldn't LV just make 
>people  his Hx SKs, and then kill them, thus insuring no one could 
>ever find the blasted things again: 
> Because you never know who's going to come back as a ghost, 
>that's  why.  <snip> 

> Neri: In such case, one wonders why did Voldy kill Bertha in GoF? 
>She could come back as a ghost and foil his plan. But maybe he 
>made sure her memory was completely destroyed before he killed 
>her? Hmm, a good point. Must remember to obliviate the Hx SKs 
>before you kill'em. 

Well now, if we have to factor in LV?fs prudence--all bets are off. 
<g> 

It turns out that I left the door open to that.

Your actual post dealt with what VL *could* do, and I changed the 
subjunctive to *would,* which is a different kettle of fish.

>From 3717
>Neri: In fact, Voldy could use this effect to device the ultimate 
>Hx hiding place: put all his Horcruxes in a house, make someone 
>the SK, kill SK, Voila! No one would ever find his Hxs again. 

Keeping to the world of *could,* LV could axe his SKs, and Rowling 
could save the day with tattle-tale ghosts.

What LV *would* do is, to his remorse, not always even that bright.  

Of course, as I said regarding the other SK thread, this is all far 
a-field and just for *fun.*

Rowling has never worried about any of this minutia, and our 
discussions are only going to prove her wisdom in that regard.

As to memory wipes, well, ghosts do seem to turn up with the 
attributes their mortal selves exhibited at death, so perhaps a wipe 
charm would be effective against spectral recollection.  Then again, 
perhaps not. 

When Wormtail suggests that they could have modified Bertha's 
memory, instead of killing her, LV points out that *memory charms 
can be broken,* as, indeed,  he has just demonstrated. Can they be 
broken on a ghost, as well? Hmm.

Then, there is the question of whether an Obliviate can cause you to 
forget something that is nestled deep in your soul.  And there is a 
lot we don't know about the requirements for a Fidelius; somewhere 
in all that complicated wand waving we might find additional 
complications to LV's early retirement program. 

Naturally, all of this is beyond the outer edges of canon.

Turning to LV's actual behavior, there is reason to think his 
treatment of Bertha was not wholly guided by wisdom.  LV alternates 
his excuses for killing her between 1) it being necessitated by the 
damage she sustained during the memory extraction process, and 2) 
not wanting her to blab to the Ministry. 

Wormtail obviously thinks they should have done a little memory 
modification and let her skip back out of the woods.  

So which is it? Are her mind and body ruined? Or is she able to go 
back home and blab?

Did he have to be so rough to get the information?  Or was he just 
giddy to find a victim in his clutches again?

In any event, Bertha's disappearance *was* part of the evidence DD 
used to confirm LV's comeback.  Who knows, maybe Bertha's bewildered 
little ghost did stumble back to DD and whisper in his ear. 

It wouldn't have made any difference. DD not only knew about LV's 
plans, he facilitated them.  

 > Once you've shot your wad, SK-wise, it's out of your hands. You  
>can't decide to make another SK for the same secret, because you 
>can  no longer ever tell anyone, yourself. 

> Neri: Not exactly. If the secret is the house where the Hx was 
>hidden, and you have a reason to suspect that the SK (dead or not) 
>had blabbered, you just take the Hx out of this house and hide it 
>somewhere else, using another SK. 

Ah, yes.  I believe I had started thinking in terms of Hx 
identification at this point.  (Still, if you didn't hide all the 
Hxes in one basket, you might well have to include identifying 
specifics that each sequential SK ghost could retain.) 

But as to the whereabouts of the item, why would you relocate?  My 
premise is that you wouldn't be sure of a hostile SK.  Hey, maybe 
you *are* safe--why risk changing ghosts?  Then again, maybe you're 
not ...

The first *reason to suspect* you have might be an Auror with a wand 
pointed at your heart, laughing about how old Fuzziwig's ghost just 
helped her stomp all your little jam pots to bits.  

All that anxiety would wreck havoc with the DL's beauty sleep.

Speaking of which, can you imagine our flat-nosed friend all 
snuggled up with the covers tucked under his chin?  Just where do 
you supposed he does dare to close those glowing red eyes?

Talisman--who can suddenly hear a soft pillow and a warm blanket 
calling her name.....








From josturgess at mooseming.yahoo.invalid  Sun Mar  5 11:19:15 2006
From: josturgess at mooseming.yahoo.invalid (mooseming)
Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2006 11:19:15 -0000
Subject: Who knew that Peter was the Secret Keeper? (Was:  After all this time...)
In-Reply-To: <duc26g+u37s@...>
Message-ID: <duehfj+f413@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Talisman" <talisman22457 at ...> 
wrote:
>
> Just to be clear, I think that most of the discussion generated by 
> the poll answer, including my own observations, is outside the 
> useful parameters of textual expectation.  
<snip> 

Agreed!

> 
> The nut of the *note or not* issue is whether Wormtail told some 
> people about GH in such a manner as to leave them ignorant of his 
> status as SK. Or, conversely, whether knowledge of the GH hiding 
> place is tantamount to knowledge of Sirius's innocence.
> 
> It's not a question of what DD did or Wormtail *could* have done, 
> it's a matter of what happened, per Rowling.  *Passing notes* and 
> *telling directly* are cognizably two different methodologies.
> 
> If I asked a subordinate to please inform someone of something--
> specifying that they should *tell the person directly*--and later 
> found out they had merely dropped an unsigned note, I'm afraid it 
> would have to come up at review time.
> 
> Similarly, if someone *tells you directly* that they would love a 
> pound of limberger for their birthday, you might act with greater 
> confidence than if you were passed an unsigned note written in a 
> vaguely familiar hand.    
> 
> Like the treacheous cheese situation, the authenticity, or lack 
> thereof, of a purported SK communication would only be revealed 
once 
> acted upon.  Reflecting on this might, depending on your level of 
> concern for future friendship, or enemy bushwhacks, as the case 
may 
> be, lead to a heightened appreciation for the distinction between 
> anonymous notes and direct relation.

In a previous incarnation I managed `subordinates' and in my 
experience asking someone if they had `told so-and-so directly' 
almost always had to be followed up by `I mean did you *speak* to 
them not just send them an email?'. I accept that for you JKR is 
making a clear distinction with this statement, I'm more sceptical. 
I concur, however, that if she is being particular then someone must 
have known Sirius was innocent.


<snip>
> 
> But, why would Wormtail have passed a note to a member of the 
Order 
> telling them where the Potters where hiding?  

Perhaps because he was deliberately trying to hide the SK switch. 
Wormtail may have been acting as a spy for sometime prior to the GH 
showdown, both Lupin and Sirius believed someone was (POA p273). If 
he intended to give the Potter's to LV he wouldn't want the OotP to 
know he was the SK as it would blow his cover as soon as they were 
attacked. Hiding the switch would buy him time to get away in the 
event of retribution.

According to the 
> accepted WW version, Wormtail told LV within a week of the time 
> Sirius underwent the Fidelius.  Everything occurred within a 
matter 
> of days. Why would Wormtail have enabled the Order to be present 
for 
> LV's attack?
> 
> No, I rather think Wormtail told person or persons unknown (but 
> definitely suspected), who seemed to be DEs, but weren't.

Agreed it all points to a spy in LV's ranks. Admittedly here I 
struggle with the concept that the spy could remain ignorant of 
Wormtail's identity and warn Lily and James in person (the `Snape 
warned James but James was "too arrogant to believe (he) might be 
mistaken in Black"' theory I'm rather fond of!). At this point I 
have to fall back on the idea that not only did Wormtail tell LV by 
sending him a note but that LV left it hanging around and Snape was 
able to read it even though it wasn`t meant for him

(which is why 
Moody torched Harry's note btw). Not the neatest of plotting and 
rather too much use of the note approach but will suffice at a push!

> 
> And, he certainly wasn't anonymous with the DEs.  According to 
> Sirius, *all* the DEs--inside Azkaban and out--were aware that 
> ?gVoldemort went to the Potters?f on [Wormtail's] information?h 
(PoA 
> 368).  Crazed prisoners were literally screaming  about Wormtail's 
> double double-cross (some in an annoyingly babyish way, no doubt.)

It's possible the other DE's could have learnt it *after the event*. 
Assuming LV didn't disclose the identity of his ratty mole to all 
and sundry its certainly possible that Bella, at least, was party to 
the information which she could have disseminated from her cell in 
Azkaban. Though this still doesn't explain why Sirius' "He's at 
Hogwart's" was attended and the other ramblings not passed on. True 
Fudge went to Azkaban the night Sirius escaped and spoke to the 
guards, this is when they told him what Sirius had been saying (POA 
p54), maybe they don't usually report on prisoners' rantings, thin I 
admit!

As to whether DE's outside of Azkaban know, well we only have 
Sirius' word on this, how he would know is beyond me as he was 
locked away at the time.



<snip>
> 
> There is also the matter of how Rowling handles clues. 
> 
> She is very adept at couching information so that it is colored by 
> her audience's assumptions.  In this case, she moves from general 
> information about SKs, to specific information about Wormtail and 
> the Potters.  
> 
> It's worth noting how she shifts from general to specific.  Moose 
> finds it annoying that Rowling redirects the question back to 
> Wormtail.  I find it telling.

Oh no, not annoying, deeply suspicious on that we agree! Yes she 
could be directing us to re evaluate the who knows what of the GH 
FC, I maintain she could also be refusing to declare that DD is 
truly dead, why on earth discuss the live SK when you have a ready 
made dead one? Then again she could be telling us something about 
Snape, that he alone knew Sirius was innocent for example



As she picks the questions herself she may of course simply choose 
the ones to which she can give `factual' but unrevealing answers of 
which this is one.


<snip>
> 
> Mooseming:
> >If we take the other secret location as a model it was worded 
like 
> >this "The headquarters >of the OotP may be found at 12 Grimmauld 
> >Place." Therefore we get something like 'the >home/hiding place 
of 
> >James, Lily and Harry Potter may be found at 'some place', 
> >Godric's Hollow. 
> 
<snip>
> 
> If we are going to amuse ourselves with this idle exercise, I 
think 
> it behooves us to  consider word choice carefully, just as someone 
> contemplating a Fidelius Charm should.
> 
><snip>

> I'm not sure that *home* is a natural or necessary part of your 
> hypothetical secret.  

Briefly on the whole wording thing
.I chose `home' because it is how 
DD describes the safety of Privet Drive, `as long as you can call it 
home'. Home to me is not about who is alive or dead, present or 
absent, a post code address or a physical building its an idea with 
no fixed points of reference, perfect for the complex FC in my 
opinion.


<snip>
> Talisman saying, dead or alive, DD's got his fingers in the pie. 
I'd 
> be perfectly happy to let the old schemer pike to the dusties--but 
I 
> know he's out there, and by now, I expect, well behind enemy lines.
>

Mooseming saying sadly she no longer believes there will be a tricky 
plot involving dodgy DD or indeed any really trick plot. However, 
she firmly supports those carrying the flag and may yet rejoin the 
ranks....







From willsonkmom at potioncat.yahoo.invalid  Sun Mar  5 19:41:56 2006
From: willsonkmom at potioncat.yahoo.invalid (potioncat)
Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2006 19:41:56 -0000
Subject: Who knew that Peter was the Secret Keeper? (Was:  After all this time...)
In-Reply-To: <duehfj+f413@...>
Message-ID: <dufeu4+lcg1@...>

Mooseming: 
> Agreed it all points to a spy in LV's ranks. Admittedly here I 
> struggle with the concept that the spy could remain ignorant of 
> Wormtail's identity and warn Lily and James in person (the `Snape 
> warned James but James was "too arrogant to believe (he) might be 
> mistaken in Black"' theory I'm rather fond of!). At this point I 
> have to fall back on the idea that not only did Wormtail tell LV by 
> sending him a note but that LV left it hanging around and Snape was 
> able to read it even though it wasn`t meant for him

(which is why 
> Moody torched Harry's note btw). Not the neatest of plotting and 
> rather too much use of the note approach but will suffice at a push!

Kathy W:
(Be kind, I'm in over my head here.)
But, we don't know that Snape warned Lily and James in person. He 
could have told DD who tried to get Lily and James to change SK. When 
they didn't (only they did) Snape felt his news was rejected.

Or Snape told them in person, "before" the charm was put in place 
(therefore, before there was need of a SK to find them) and felt his 
information was rejected. Actually, he would have had to tell them 
before the charm was cast, because that was the whole point.

His being at GH...if he was...could have been because LV took Peter 
and Severus with him. 

Now, how does Sirius know so much when he gets out of Azkaban, but he 
doesn't know Snape was a DE? 







From dontask2much at dontask2much.yahoo.invalid  Mon Mar  6 05:07:41 2006
From: dontask2much at dontask2much.yahoo.invalid (Rebecca Bowen)
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 00:07:41 -0500
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: Who knew that Peter was the Secret Keeper? (Was:  After all this time...)
References: <dufeu4+lcg1@...>
Message-ID: <011101c640db$e5e89bc0$6401a8c0@...>

>potioncat said:

>Now, how does Sirius know so much when he gets out of Azkaban, but he 
>doesn't know Snape was a DE?

Rebecca:

I have ideas.  I'm game to put them out here for others to ponder or flame. 
:)

 It's those nagging lines Bella utters in HBP:

"He shares everything with me!" said Bellatrix, firing up at once. "He calls 
me his most loyal, his most faithful -"
-AND-
 "The Dark Lord has, in the past, entrusted me with his most precious - if 
Lucius hadn't -" .

No doubt for me that Bella knew of Peter's spying and being the Secret 
Keeper for the Potters and she blabbed while in Azkaban - and left Snape out 
of it completely. The question for me is *how* she knew these things and 
from whom.

To Bella's knowledge, Snape was at Hogwarts back then as potion master 
because that's what LV *wanted him to do.*  Bella could know about the 
Potters location because she was perhaps there with Peter in LV's presence 
when the Peter revealed it.  I believe her that she did get her information 
directly from LV "back in the day."  Thus, Snape's name wouldn't have been 
mentioned in Azkaban as a DE, but Peter's would as a traitor to the DE's. 
The imprisoned DE's would be silent about the identity of other free DE's, 
including Malfoy and Snape and simply group them into the less faithful, but 
not traitorous like Peter.

I suspect a slightly different story will emerge about the torture of 
Neville's parents - if, as I postulate, Bella was in the know at LV's 
discretion back then. The Lestranges & Junior only went after Frank and 
Alice Longbottom *after* LV's visit to GH and subsequent disappearance. The 
questions this conjures:

* How would Frank Longbottom *know* where LV was?
* What if it wasn't Peter or Snape at all who was really there that night? 
How about an imperioused, traitorous or coerced Frank Longbottom? (Don't 
kill me for speculating about Frank - JKR hasn't told us enough about him, 
and something about his mother's pride in him juxtaposed with her early 
disappointment in her grandson makes me wonder if we might not have a rude 
awakening about Frank)
* Or, what if Frank Longbottom had possession of one of the LV Horcruxes and 
Bella knew of its existence?

We're told the reason for the Longbottoms torture was to find out where LV 
fled to, yet something is really really weird about that unless maybe you 
speculate wildly that perhaps Bella was in the know about SK!Peter, in the 
know about Snape's LV orders at Hogwarts, in the know about what was to 
happen at GH, and in the know about at least 1 Horcrux  in order to bring 
the Dark Lord back to power.

Too many questions, not enough time....

Rebecca, who thanks Catlady (Rita) and Ginger for their replies about the 
terms wizard and warlock. :) 





From josturgess at mooseming.yahoo.invalid  Tue Mar  7 19:57:04 2006
From: josturgess at mooseming.yahoo.invalid (mooseming)
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 19:57:04 -0000
Subject: Who knew that Peter was the Secret Keeper? (Was:  After all this time...)
In-Reply-To: <dufeu4+lcg1@...>
Message-ID: <dukoig+jugm@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" <willsonkmom at ...> 
wrote:
>
> Mooseming: 
> > Agreed it all points to a spy in LV's ranks. Admittedly here I 
> > struggle with the concept that the spy could remain ignorant of 
> > Wormtail's identity and warn Lily and James in person (the 
`Snape 
> > warned James but James was "too arrogant to believe (he) might 
be 
> > mistaken in Black"' theory I'm rather fond of!). At this point I 
> > have to fall back on the idea that not only did Wormtail tell LV 
by 
> > sending him a note but that LV left it hanging around and Snape 
was 
> > able to read it even though it wasn`t meant for him

(which is 
why 
> > Moody torched Harry's note btw). Not the neatest of plotting and 
> > rather too much use of the note approach but will suffice at a 
push!
> 
> Kathy W:
> (Be kind, I'm in over my head here.)
> But, we don't know that Snape warned Lily and James in person. 

No indeed we don't or anything like! Truth is I simply *like* the 
idea.....

He 
> could have told DD who tried to get Lily and James to change SK. 
When 
> they didn't (only they did) Snape felt his news was rejected.

Yees but wouldn't that mean Snape thought Sirius was the mole before 
GH and why would he have thought that????

<snip>
> 
> His being at GH...if he was...could have been because LV took 
Peter 
> and Severus with him. 

Yup. This has to be a strong contender although if he took Snape and 
Peter then Snape knows Peter is the mole which he doesn't admit to 
in POA (although that's a whole other kettle of kippers....)

> 
> Now, how does Sirius know so much when he gets out of Azkaban, but 
he 
> doesn't know Snape was a DE?

Yeah, as I said in my reply to Talisman the what is said, passed on 
etc from inside Azkaban is a 'weak' link. Snape went to DD on LV's 
oders (allegedly) if every DE knew this it doesn't add up to much of 
a cover for an inside man and if every DE didn't know this then 
surely Snape would be discussed as a traitor. It's possible to argue 
that Snape was such small fry no one really gave a flipitty but they 
have an awful long time to pass in Azkaban even Snape might interest 
them!!!!


Then again Sirius might be aware that Snape is acting the spy for DD 
and therefore does know his past DE history, although you'd think 
Sirius would mention this during one of their little spats wouldn't 
you! The closest he comes is to refer to Snape as 'reformed' when 
they are arguing about Harry's occlumency lessons during Christmas 
at Grimmauld Place, perhaps Harry's presence during this argument 
stops him short of the full disclosure?

Regards
Jo






From erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Tue Mar  7 22:30:44 2006
From: erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (Eileen Rebstock)
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 15:30:44 -0700
Subject: Weighing In Very Late on  the House of Black
Message-ID: <3FF9E274C2DF9748B96A2C35130CAF3F0E8556@...>

I am, as one might suspect, quite taken with the Ancient and Most Noble
House of Black's family tree. Even with the mistakes, which put the lid
on the "JKR's math isn't wrong! It all makes sense if you stand on your
head and squint" school of theorizing. Some people enjoyed that, but it
was beginning to dizzy me. Now that it's wide open that some of her
dates are wrong, I feel gloriously free again to think along sensible
lines. 

If I were writing a fanfic - which I'm not - I'd write Snape as three
years younger than Bellatrix, on the very canon basis that it feels
good.

The other reason I love the family tree is that everyone is related. I
used to dream they were related like that. Now it's fact. I couldn't be
happier. Barty Crouch Sr. being Arthur Weasley's first cousin, I didn't
dream of *that*. So was Percy's appointment nepotism? 

Frank Longbottom's relationship to both Barty Jr. and Bellatrix is also
pretty twisted. Particularly the closer one to Barty Jr. since I gather
the answer to the perennial question, "How did Barty Jr. get past the
Longbottoms' guard?" could be summed up with "Barty Jr. was *family*."
After all, both the Longbottoms and Crouches were on the same side of
the war.

Eileen



From carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid  Wed Mar  8 12:47:31 2006
From: carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid (carolynwhite2)
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 12:47:31 -0000
Subject: Weighing In Very Late on  the House of Black
In-Reply-To: <3FF9E274C2DF9748B96A2C35130CAF3F0E8556@...>
Message-ID: <dumjp3+2tkf@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Eileen Rebstock" 
<erebstock at ...> wrote:
>

> 
> Frank Longbottom's relationship to both Barty Jr. and Bellatrix is 
also pretty twisted. Particularly the closer one to Barty Jr. since 
I gather the answer to the perennial question, "How did Barty Jr. 
get past the
> Longbottoms' guard?" could be summed up with "Barty Jr. was 
*family*." After all, both the Longbottoms and Crouches were on the 
same side of the war.
> 
> Eileen
>

Agree, and when you do a re-read in light of all this knowledge, 
little phrases just jump at you. F'rinstance, Neville's sad little 
comment in GOF that his grandmother was always on at him to uphold 
the family honour. Especially after what Barty Jr had done.


BTW, is this yet another flint: Petunia is described as shrieking 
with horror on finding baby Harry on her doorstep when she opened 
her front door to collect the milk. But wouldn't a muggle milkman 
have noticed a baby lying on there and done something about it? Or 
is the definition of a flint now so elastic that we just roll our 
eyes and groan nowadays?

Carolyn






From erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Wed Mar  8 21:41:02 2006
From: erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (Eileen Rebstock)
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 14:41:02 -0700
Subject: Snape's Social Life
Message-ID: <3FF9E274C2DF9748B96A2C35130CAF3F0E857F@...>


I have never subscribed to the notion that the Worst Memory pensieve
scene sheds light on the young Severus Snape's social life. The argument
usually goes like this: No one stuck up for Snape in the pensieve scene,
therefore, he had no real friends at Hogwarts. Or all his friends had
left by his fifth year. 

Now, I'm skeptical of this argument in the first place because of the
underlying assumption that friends spend 100% of their time in each
others' presence. Is it so hard to imagine that Snape's buddies just
weren't there that afternoon? Maybe Wilkes was brushing up on Astronomy
in the Slytherin dungeon that day James dangled Snape upside down to
impress Lily. 

But a further psychological problem with this argument has occurred to
me lately, when I remembered who exactly one of Snape's schoolmates was.

Avery.

I am trying to imagine the Avery we know and love in GoF and OotP,
Voldemort's favourite punching bag and all-time nervous wreck,
intervening in Snape's favour against Sirius and James.

Trying and miserably failing. 

No one said Snape's friends had to be capable, strong, and brave, right?



From talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid  Thu Mar  9 07:02:41 2006
From: talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid (Talisman)
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 07:02:41 -0000
Subject: The Milkman Hasn't Cometh ( was: Weighing In Very Late
In-Reply-To: <dumjp3+2tkf@...>
Message-ID: <duojuh+32mp@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" wrote:
> BTW, is this yet another flint: Petunia is described as shrieking
> with horror on finding baby Harry on her doorstep when she opened
> her front door to collect the milk. But wouldn't a muggle milkman
> have noticed a baby lying on there and done something about it? Or
> is the definition of a flint now so elastic that we just roll our
> eyes and groan nowadays?

Talisman:
Hey, I'll have to take Rowling's back on this.  There really aren't 
as many flints as all that.

In this case, my text reads that Petunia found Harry when she 
*opened the front door to put out the milk bottles* (PS/SS 17).  

This would indicate that the milkman had not come yet, though 
apparently he was expected sometime later that morning.

I wouldn't have been alarmed even if the text had provided that she
found Harry whilst going to *collect* the milk.  

That would merely explain her motivation in checking the front 
stoop; it would not follow that there was actually any milk to 
collect.

I'm quite sure DD put temporary repelling charms all around the 
area.  I imagine such charms would have been the least
of the protections in place.

Recall how Rowling went to the bother of having old Jim McGuffin 
*promise a wet night* for the night that Harry is delivered to the 
Dursleys? 

Yet there is no sign of even the slightest drizzle.

I hope no one considers that a flint.  It strikes me as quite
intentional.

Indeed, I think that the drought experienced in the beginning of OoP 
is also magic induced.  

Remember all those damp clouds Harry has to fly through
en route to 12 GP?  Lot's of moisture hovering above, but no rain.

Now, why do you s'pose she bothered to write all that?

Talisman, saying: steady on...










From talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid  Thu Mar  9 09:10:15 2006
From: talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid (Talisman)
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 09:10:15 -0000
Subject: Snape's Social Life
In-Reply-To: <3FF9E274C2DF9748B96A2C35130CAF3F0E857F@...>
Message-ID: <duordn+db2q@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Eileen Rebstock" <erebstock at ...> 
wrote:
> No one said Snape's friends had to be capable, strong, and brave, 
right?
>

I don't really see Snape as the posse type.  More the lone gunman.  All 
in black.  Silver spurs.  Likes it that way.

Talisman






From carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid  Thu Mar  9 10:06:59 2006
From: carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid (carolynwhite2)
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 10:06:59 -0000
Subject: The Milkman Hasn't Cometh ( was: Weighing In Very Late
In-Reply-To: <duojuh+32mp@...>
Message-ID: <duouo3+v0f4@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Talisman" <talisman22457 at ...> 
wrote:
>
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" wrote:
> > BTW, is this yet another flint: Petunia is described as shrieking
> > with horror on finding baby Harry on her doorstep when she opened
> > her front door to collect the milk. But wouldn't a muggle milkman
> > have noticed a baby lying on there and done something about it? 
> 
Talisman:
> In this case, my text reads that Petunia found Harry when she 
> *opened the front door to put out the milk bottles* (PS/SS 17).  
> 
> This would indicate that the milkman had not come yet, though 
> apparently he was expected sometime later that morning.
> 
> I wouldn't have been alarmed even if the text had provided that she
> found Harry whilst going to *collect* the milk.  
> 
> That would merely explain her motivation in checking the front 
> stoop; it would not follow that there was actually any milk to 
> collect.
> 
> I'm quite sure DD put temporary repelling charms all around the 
> area.  I imagine such charms would have been the least
> of the protections in place.
> 

Carolyn:
Ok, fair cop - should have checked the actual wording. I could start 
a ghastly British Thread by explaining you put empty milk bottles 
out the night *before* for collection, because milkmen collect and 
deliver at unseemly hours in the early morning, waking you up if you 
have only just dozed off after worrying into the small hours..but I 
WON'T WON'T WON'T, right?

But I see JKR/DD thought of everything. Silly me.

> 
> Talisman, saying: steady on...
>

Splutter..pots, kettles, black etc...

Carolyn






From talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid  Thu Mar  9 10:57:51 2006
From: talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid (Talisman)
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 10:57:51 -0000
Subject: The Milkman Hasn't Cometh ( was: Weighing In Very Late
In-Reply-To: <duouo3+v0f4@...>
Message-ID: <dup1nf+q0nc@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" 
<carolynwhite2 at ...> wrote:
 Ok, fair cop - should have checked the actual wording. I could 
start 
> a ghastly British Thread by explaining you put empty milk bottles 
> out the night *before* for collection, because milkmen collect and 
> deliver at unseemly hours in the early morning, waking you up if 
>you have only just dozed off after worrying into the small hours..> 

Do they really still deliver, at all? The last time I had a milkman, 
I was a kid in my parent's home.  Okay, I didn't actually HAVE the 
milkman, just his delivery services...oh, never mind.

And bottles...do they still use those?  And collect empties?  Sounds 
like life 40 years ago.

> > Talisman, saying: steady on...
> 
>Carolyn:  Splutter..pots, kettles, black etc...
>
 Why whatever could you mean? ::bats eyelashes sweetly::

Talisman saying, that's it then! Petunia woke up at 2:00 AM, 
suddenly recalling that she hadn't set out the empties.  She 
scurried to the door with her arms full of bottles--and got a nasty 
surprise. 

Now we see that poor widdle Harry only had to camp out on the 
doorstep for a few hours. 

Thanks for clearing that up C :) 







From quigonginger at quigonginger.yahoo.invalid  Thu Mar  9 12:37:54 2006
From: quigonginger at quigonginger.yahoo.invalid (quigonginger)
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 12:37:54 -0000
Subject: The Milkman Hasn't Cometh ( was: Weighing In Very Late
In-Reply-To: <duojuh+32mp@...>
Message-ID: <dup7j2+delb@...>

Talisman:
> Recall how Rowling went to the bother of having old Jim McGuffin 
> *promise a wet night* for the night that Harry is delivered to the 
> Dursleys? 
> 
> Yet there is no sign of even the slightest drizzle.

Ginger:

Actually, Jim McGuffin is a Seer and was predicting that Harry would 
show up that night.  The wet part referred to his (Harry's) nappies.

Ginger, does a duck and run






From sherriola at ...  Thu Mar  9 13:55:29 2006
From: sherriola at ... (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 05:55:29 -0800
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: The Milkman Hasn't Cometh ( was: Weighing In Very Late
In-Reply-To: <dup1nf+q0nc@...>
Message-ID: <E1FHLc9-0002VG-34@...>

Do they really still deliver, at all? The last time I had a milkman, I was a
kid in my parent's home.  Okay, I didn't actually HAVE the milkman, just his
delivery services...oh, never mind.

And bottles...do they still use those?  And collect empties?  Sounds like
life 40 years ago.

> > Talisman, saying: steady on...
> 


sherry now:

my best friends in Colorado still have milk delivered.  In glass bottles no
less.  it's fantastic.  and they don't just put the bottles out the night
before delivery.  They have four kids, plus grandma and the couple in the
home, so they drink tons of milk, and they put the bottles outside once they
are empty and rinsed out.  so, yep, people do still get milk delivered.

sherry




From severelysigune at severelysigune.yahoo.invalid  Thu Mar  9 14:24:32 2006
From: severelysigune at severelysigune.yahoo.invalid (severelysigune)
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 14:24:32 -0000
Subject: The Milkman Hasn't Cometh ( was: Weighing In Very Late
In-Reply-To: <dup1nf+q0nc@...>
Message-ID: <dupdr0+kthh@...>

carolynwhite wrote:
<<  Ok, fair cop - should have checked the actual wording. I could 
start a ghastly British Thread by explaining you put empty milk 
bottles out the night *before* for collection, because milkmen 
collect and deliver at unseemly hours in the early morning, waking 
you up if you have only just dozed off after worrying into the small 
hours..>> 

Talisman replied:
> Do they really still deliver, at all? The last time I had a 
milkman, I was a kid in my parent's home.  Okay, I didn't actually 
HAVE the milkman, just his delivery services...oh, never mind.

And bottles...do they still use those?  And collect empties?  Sounds 
like life 40 years ago. >


Sigune's two Knuts:

Well, I'm twenty-six, the age Hermione would be today, and I remember 
most definitely that milk was delivered in glass bottles at home. The 
baker also delivered his bread. I don't think either still happens 
today in the town where I used to live, but sixteen years ago? 
Definitely.









From erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Thu Mar  9 15:21:23 2006
From: erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (Eileen Rebstock)
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 08:21:23 -0700
Subject: Sirius Rehabilitated WAS [the_old_crowd] Re: Snape's Social Life
Message-ID: <3FF9E274C2DF9748B96A2C35130CAF3F0E8586@...>

Talisman wrote:
> I don't really see Snape as the posse type.  More the lone gunman.
All
> in black.  Silver spurs.  Likes it that way.

Not in Sirius's recollections. I know it's the fashion right now to
regard Sirius as a raving maniac who can't be trusted to tell us which
way is up and which is down, but I think such a reading does violence to
the text... well makes it infinitely less interesting, to speak
honestly. GoF just makes no thematic sense if we can't trust a word
Sirius says. 

Particularly since the main reason for disregarding Sirius's commentary
on Snape, the Death Eaters, the Ministry, Crouch etc. seems to be a
demonstrably doomed attempt to wrestle JKR's dates into order. At this
point, I say, forget the dates, go for the meat. Sirius's moral
commentary is more important to me than who was born in what year.

Ok, the [Fill In the Blank] is Ever So Evil lobbyists probably also have
a stake in all this, and will be along to explain how all the
contradictions can be resolved by the simple acknowledgment of [Fill In
The Blank]'s many and most manifest crimes.

Eileen



From joym999 at joywitch_m_curmudgeon.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 00:22:20 2006
From: joym999 at joywitch_m_curmudgeon.yahoo.invalid (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 00:22:20 -0000
Subject: Whorekrukses Revisted
Message-ID: <duqgrs+klod@...>

Ok, so I don't make it here very often.  I am woefully behind the 
times and you will probably laugh at my antiquated 
theories.  "Joywitch," you will say with an exasperated tone in your 
voice, "that has been discussed to death.  Please see messages 384, 
1483, 1484, 1502 and 1894 -- for starters! -- for an already-
exhaustive and detailed discussion of this."  Then, you will 
probably mutter under you breath something about "I don't understand 
why they don't just throw her out of here.  Probably only because 
she's been around FOREVER that they don't - she must have dirt on 
all of us."  (Bwahahaha)
  
But I have been thinking about something.  I made a brief trip to 
HP4GU (my old neighborhood which, sadly, I visit even more 
infrequently than I visit here, and when I do, I hardly recognize 
it, what with all the development -- Starbucks and condiminiums and 
sidewalks so crowded you can hardly walk down them and all.  But I 
digress.)  I noticed an interesting theory, twinkling at me from the 
corner like a gleam in Dumbledore's eye.  Some young whippersnapper 
posited that the seven horcruxes are being introduced one per book.  
I liked this theory.  I read a little bit of the thread, and it 
stuck back in the corner of my dusty old brain.  I thought about 
each book, and the 7 horsthingies.  We know that Voldie himself is 
one of them, and that the diary, the ring, the locket (not the one 
that Dumbledore gave his life to recover but the one that RAB took, 
presumably), probably Nagini (according to Dumbledore) and two other 
things, one of which might be Hufflepuff's cup and both of which 
probably once belonged to one of the founders.  Maybe.

OK, so:
1. Voldy himself is introduced in PS.
2. The diary reveals itself in COS.
3. Hmmm.  POA.  Hmmm.
4. Nagini makes his (her? its?) first appearance in GOF
5. It seems likely that RAB is the younger Black brother.  In OOP, 
while our gang is cleaning out the house on Grimmauld place they 
come across a locket which, presumably, they throw out.  Kreacher 
has been absconding with the garbage.  Could it be?
6. The ring appears on Dumbledore's withered hand in HBP.
7. ???

Well, that sat around in my brain for a while, then suddenly a few 
nights ago I woke up at two a.m., and I HAD to know what horehound 
was introduced in POA.  WHAT COULD IT BE?  I turned the light on, 
went to the other side of the room to the bookcase containing an 
entire shelf of HP, got out one of our six copies of POA, and 
starting reading.  I got to the part where Percy makes his 
appearance, and it struck me -- the Head Boy badge!  It makes 
perfect sense.  Well, to me, at least. It was once Tom Riddle's, it 
was probably made by one or more of the founders, and it's hidden in 
plain sight.  Well, what do the masses say?

OK, so what's the latest consensus on this one-per-book theory?  
And, is it my imagination, or is creating one-per-book scenarios the 
latest pasttime in the HPfanworld?  (I did breeze thru Randy's 7 
Deadly Book Sins post.)

--Joywitch M. Curmudgeon, who will go back to the porch and quietly 
sit on her rocking chair very soon.  She promises.






From heidi8 at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 01:19:24 2006
From: heidi8 at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 17:19:24 -0800
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Whorekrukses Revisted
In-Reply-To: <duqgrs+klod@...>
References: <duqgrs+klod@...>
Message-ID: <1141953566.2960A297@...>


On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 8:06 pm, joywitch_m_curmudgeon suggested horcruxes 
introduced in various of the books, but left 3 sort of blank:

> 3. Hmmm.  POA.  Hmmm.

I posit the following:

A time turner?



From erisedstraeh2002 at erisedstraeh2002.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 01:46:19 2006
From: erisedstraeh2002 at erisedstraeh2002.yahoo.invalid (Phyllis)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 01:46:19 -0000
Subject: Whorekrukses Revisted
In-Reply-To: <duqgrs+klod@...>
Message-ID: <duqlpb+4pli@...>

Joywitch:

<<Well, that sat around in my brain for a while, then suddenly a few 
nights ago I woke up at two a.m., and I HAD to know what horehound 
was introduced in POA.  WHAT COULD IT BE?>>

What about the Marauder's Map?  Harry's first thought when he sees it 
is to recall Arthur Weasley's warning about the diary horcrux: "Never 
trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where it 
keeps its brain."  And if you buy that James is a descendant of 
Gryffindor, it could be argued that the Map was a Gryffindor relic.  
And Pettigrew knew about the Map, and could have provided it to his 
master Voldy upon request.

Joywitch:

<<OK, so what's the latest consensus on this one-per-book theory?>>

Personally, I think the one-horcrux-per-book theory is a bit flawed, 
as we learn about both the ring and Hufflepuff's cup for the first 
time in Book 6.  However, it's possible that there were some clues 
about one or the other that have been missed in previous books.

What if the horcrux-related "thing" that's introduced in PoA isn't a 
horcrux-holder, but a horcrux hiding place?  Azkaban would be a 
wonderful place to hide a horcrux, don't you think?

~Phyllis
hoping this helps Joywitch sleep better tonight :)







From olivier.fouquet at olivierfouquet2000.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 01:49:04 2006
From: olivier.fouquet at olivierfouquet2000.yahoo.invalid (Olivier Fouquet)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 10:49:04 +0900
Subject: Horcruxes/Snape's social life
Message-ID: <2DA27DB1-F615-4329-8A95-90C7B08D8BA8@...>

Eileen
 >Sirius's moral commentary is more important to me than who was born  
in what year.

Olivier
Particularly since, as I have mentioned a few times already, there is  
absolutely no contradiction between what we know about dates and what  
Sirius says. Snape could very well have been part of "a gang of  
Slytherins who nearly all turned out to be Death Eaters" if he met  
them in his first years and then kept seeing them several times a  
year in Slughorn's party (and maybe in social events hosted by the  
Black family where Sirius refused to go but that he knew of  
nonetheless). Note that Sirius says "turn out to be DE" not "became  
DE" so this implies that they were already DE when Snape was part of  
that gang. To compare, imagine Draco reminiscing with his children 20  
years after the series and saying "Potter was part of a gang of  
Gryffindors who nearly all turned out to be members of the Order: the  
Weasleys, Hagrid, Lupin?". Well, that wouldn't be incorrect and yet  
the time discrepancy would be the same (or even much worse in the  
case of Hagrid).

Joywitch
 >I thought about each book, and the 7 horsthingies.

Olivier
There is something I like in your theory. It looks very probable that  
the Head boy badge will go to Draco, Ron or Harry in book seven. So  
indeed, the badge will come back. However, I can't see how Voldemort  
could have make an Horcrux of it. To what murder would it be  
attached? I may have my chronology wrong but it seems to me he  
learned about Horcruxes in his sixth year and killed Myrtle in his  
fifth, so it can't be her (besides, the badge wasn't him yet). And  
presumably he would have hidden and protected the badge. So no, I  
stick to the "official" explanation presented by DD: the cup is  
Horcrux four and Nagini is Horcrux five. Personally, I am more than a  
little convinced by Horcrux!Harry so I would say Harry is Horcrux six  
and we are done. Dumbledore, maybe echoing JKR's thought, does tell  
us that "[LV] never fulfilled his ambition of collecting four  
founder's objects. " DD thinks he may have something from Rowena but  
definitely nothing from Gryffindor but I would bet the reverse.

That would make a very nice story: Harry destroys the cup with much  
difficulties only to discover that "neither can live while the other  
survives", not at all plot-couponish (hat-tip to Neri).
Best regards,
Olivier

PS: Joywitch, you may have a lot of dirty secret about us, but I have  
one about you. Ah ah, you were to confident confessing that unnatural  
love of yours about something-that-must-not-be-named on HPFGU-OT  
during that endless night between GoF and OoP. It was a long time  
ago. But I remember... 



From katmac at lagattalucianese.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 02:05:47 2006
From: katmac at lagattalucianese.yahoo.invalid (Kat Macfarlane)
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 18:05:47 -0800
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Snape's Social Life
References: <3FF9E274C2DF9748B96A2C35130CAF3F0E857F@...>
Message-ID: <003201c643e7$2d39b1e0$482fdcd1@...>



  I have never subscribed to the notion that the Worst Memory pensieve
  scene sheds light on the young Severus Snape's social life. The argument
  usually goes like this: No one stuck up for Snape in the pensieve scene,
  therefore, he had no real friends at Hogwarts. Or all his friends had
  left by his fifth year. 

  Now, I'm skeptical of this argument in the first place because of the
  underlying assumption that friends spend 100% of their time in each
  others' presence. Is it so hard to imagine that Snape's buddies just
  weren't there that afternoon? Maybe Wilkes was brushing up on Astronomy
  in the Slytherin dungeon that day James dangled Snape upside down to
  impress Lily. 

  But a further psychological problem with this argument has occurred to
  me lately, when I remembered who exactly one of Snape's schoolmates was.

  Avery.

  I am trying to imagine the Avery we know and love in GoF and OotP,
  Voldemort's favourite punching bag and all-time nervous wreck,
  intervening in Snape's favour against Sirius and James.

  Trying and miserably failing. 

  No one said Snape's friends had to be capable, strong, and brave, right?

Granted, I don't see Avery galloping to the rescue. But what's to stop him rallying the Slytherins to save one of their own from being humiliated by the hated Gryffindors? It wouldn't even have to be a matter of friendship--just of house pride.

By the way, where do you get that Snape was particularly friends with Wilkes and Avery? Does Sirius mention it somewhere?

La Gatta Lucianese



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




From susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 15:08:50 2006
From: susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid (cubfanbudwoman)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 15:08:50 -0000
Subject: Updates at Jo's site -- interesting throwaway line on Hermione
Message-ID: <dus4q2+o3o7@...>

I haven't seen any discussion here yet of the juicy new goodies at 
Jo's site.  Not being particularly good at discovering or deciphering 
clues there, I always cheat and let someone else tell me how to 
attain all the new scrapbook items (5 this time).  

[I'll put a note at the bottom from the comments section at TLC which 
does a pretty good job of it, in case anyone wants to go snag them.  
Don't read that far if you want to do it yourself!]

Anyway... Not sure if anyone other than me will find this 
interesting, but one of the scrapbook items you get when you solve a 
clue (or follow someone else's instructions, as I did ;-)) is the 
original synopsis of PS/SS.  I noticed a little tidbit near the end:

"...and Hermione Granger (cleverest girl in the year and the only
person in the class to know all the uses of dragon's blood)."

Huh.  Does this surprise anyone else that Hermie KNOWS the 12 uses?
I thought only DD knew them all -- or at least that none of our main
kid characters did.  So far we readers only know a couple of them,
right?  Oven cleaner, for instance.  I wonder why Hermione hasn't
mentioned more of those uses along the way?

Not sure what this does to my DRIBBLE SHADOWS theory -- that Snape
concocted a protective potion for baby Harry which included dragon's
blood.  Would Hermione have guessed at such a thing if she knew
dragon's blood could be used in such a way?

Maybe.  Maybe not.

Jo may only have meant that bit to be an example of Hermione's
advanced knowledge re: her classmates, but I do wonder if it isn't
also a specific example which is also going to come into play somehow
before we're through....

Siriusly Snapey Susan

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

INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE NEW SCRAPBOOK ITEMS, from TLC comments:
First, go into the "Extra Stuff" Section. Turn the radio off then on 
and wait a few seconds. Listen to the announcement, telling you to 
put 6 drops of red potion followed by three of the green potion on a 
plant. Now, leave and click on the Eraser Portkey on the desktop. It 
brings you to the mysterious door. Now, follow the instructions with 
the potion on the plant. Now you have another scrapbook piece, 
revealing around the time of Prisoner of Azkaban, genders of teachers 
and some attempts for hippogriff names.

Now, go to the rubbish bin and move the mug four times in a clockwise 
circle. When you do that, stop, it forms a circle inside. Now leave 
and go to the extra stuff section, click on the card that 
says "Circle" with a circle on it. Now you have an original synopsis 
of "Philosopher's Stone."

Next, go to the main page. On the phone, dial "31071965" (which 
happens to be Jo's birthday, 7/31/65). Now you have an early (around 
1994) draft of Philosopher's Stone and information that Draco's 
surname used to be "Spungen."

Next, go the "Extra Stuff" Section. Grab the pen and draw a lightning 
bolt on the extra piece of paper. You will get an unrevised portion 
of Order of the Phoenix.

Go to the Fan Sites page. To the right, click on the small red box 
five times. It will open. Click the question mark bubble to get the 
same clue as the phone dialing one. An early (around 1994) draft of 
Philosopher's Stone and information that Draco's surname used to 
be "Spungen."









From erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 15:17:19 2006
From: erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (Eileen Rebstock)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 08:17:19 -0700
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Snape's Social Life
Message-ID: <3FF9E274C2DF9748B96A2C35130CAF3F0E85C3@...>

Kat:
> By the way, where do you get that Snape was particularly friends with
> Wilkes and Avery? Does Sirius mention it somewhere?

No, it's actually an old HPFGU joke. We used to have Avery on list as a
regular contributor to discussions. He was a bit of a favourite of mine,
particularly, as the most maltreated character in the entire
Potterverse, only existing to be tortured by Voldemort and weep. And so
HPFGU Avery, a timid downtrodden character who only lived to be bossed
around and provide a prop for our arguments, came into existence. 

And Wilkes, well, Wilkes is the forgotten Death Eater. Doesn't have a
first name, has only one mention in GoF, gets left out of half the lists
of Death Eaters people make. So I felt *sorry* for him.

All in all, I'd like to give those two *some* role in the Potterverse.

But in terms of strict canon, while Avery and Wilkes were close enough
to Snape to be identified as part of "the gang of Slytherins" there's
nothing in particular to make them his favourite friends of his school
days, as opposed to anyone else. 

But there is some evidence for Wilkes being close to Snape, at least
professionally, if you can call the Death Eaters a profession. Wilkes
was killed by Aurors soon after Snape turned sides. Same with Evan
Rosier. So it's often posited that Snape turned those two in. 

Eileen



From sherriola at ...  Fri Mar 10 15:20:23 2006
From: sherriola at ... (Sherry Gomes)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 07:20:23 -0800
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Updates at Jo's site -- interesting throwaway line on Hermione
In-Reply-To: <dus4q2+o3o7@...>
Message-ID: <E1FHjPt-00060u-3c@...>

SS Susan
I haven't seen any discussion here yet of the juicy new goodies at Jo's
site.  Not being particularly good at discovering or deciphering clues
there, I always cheat and let someone else tell me how to attain all the new
scrapbook items (5 this time).  

Sherry now:

is there anything else interesting?  I've been told there were no updates on
the text only site, but could you pass along any interesting tidbits from
the scrapbook stuff?  my screen reader program doesn't work with all those
cute things on the regular site.

Sherry




From erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 15:20:51 2006
From: erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (Eileen Rebstock)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 08:20:51 -0700
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Horcruxes/Snape's social life
Message-ID: <3FF9E274C2DF9748B96A2C35130CAF3F0E85C5@...>

Olivier: 
> It looks very probable that
> the Head boy badge will go to Draco, Ron or Harry in book seven. 

I can't consider Draco very likely, considering he's on the lam from the
authorities.

Eileen



From susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 15:33:13 2006
From: susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid (Susan Albrecht)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 07:33:13 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Updates at Jo's site -- interesting throwaway line on Hermione
In-Reply-To: <E1FHjPt-00060u-3c@...>
Message-ID: <20060310153313.45771.qmail@...>

SS Susan:
>>> I haven't seen any discussion here yet of the
juicy new goodies at Jo's site.  Not being
particularly good at discovering or deciphering clues
there, I always cheat and let someone else tell me how
to attain all the new scrapbook items (5 this
time).<<<

Sherry asked:
>>> is there anything else interesting?  I've been
told there were no updates on the text only site, but
could you pass along any interesting tidbits from
the scrapbook stuff?  my screen reader program doesn't
work with all those cute things on the regular
site.<<<


SSSusan back again:

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
 
S
P
A
C
E

...for any who care to avoid.

You get two different early draft pages from SS/PS,
plus the synopsis of SS/PS I mentioned a moment ago. 
There is a pretty cool, hand-written chart on OotP,
with several chapters listed along the left and then
various topics in columns along the top, for which JKR
noted things she wanted to cover.  I only took a brief
look at it -- and the damn thing is oriented SIDEWAYS
so I was getting a crick in my neck trying to read it
[must investigate whether I can turn it] -- but I did
find it interesting that she had a column headed
"Cho/Ginny," as if she were already thinking of those
two in terms of "facing off" over Harry?  There's also
a page of note-jotting from around the time of PoA,
where Jo wrote names she considered for Hippogriffs,
has a list of the professors (with their subject area
& their genders), etc.  

The most hilarious bit, I suppose, is that we discover
that Draco's surname was originally... SPUNGEN. Surely
"Malfoy," with the manner in which we can "translate"
it from the French, fits much more nicely with the
family.

Let me know, Sherry, if you want any more specifics,
and I can chat with you offlist if this might prove
tedious to the entire list?

Siriusly Snapey Susan




From susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 16:27:54 2006
From: susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid (Susan Albrecht)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 08:27:54 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Horcruxes/Snape's social life
In-Reply-To: <3FF9E274C2DF9748B96A2C35130CAF3F0E85C5@...>
Message-ID: <20060310162754.14986.qmail@...>

Olivier: 
> It looks very probable that the Head boy badge will 
> go to Draco, Ron or Harry in book seven. 

Eileen:
> I can't consider Draco very likely, considering he's

> on the lam from the authorities.


SSSusan:
And nor Harry, as he does not intend to return to
Hogwarts.  And Ron & Hermione seemed to be saying that
they were going to go along with Harry wherever he
went.  If that *really* means not returning to
Hogwarts, then, well, I guess the HB badge won't be
going to any of these three.  

Siriusly Snapey Susan




From erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 16:30:39 2006
From: erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (Eileen Rebstock)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 09:30:39 -0700
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Horcruxes/Snape's social life
Message-ID: <3FF9E274C2DF9748B96A2C35130CAF3F0E85D1@...>

> SSSusan:
> And nor Harry, as he does not intend to return to
> Hogwarts.  And Ron & Hermione seemed to be saying that
> they were going to go along with Harry wherever he
> went.  If that *really* means not returning to
> Hogwarts, then, well, I guess the HB badge won't be
> going to any of these three.

I think it'd look nice pinned on Ernie MacMillan's chest, myself.



From erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 16:34:52 2006
From: erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (Eileen Rebstock)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 09:34:52 -0700
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Snape's Social Life
Message-ID: <3FF9E274C2DF9748B96A2C35130CAF3F0E85D2@...>


I wrote:
> But there is some evidence for Wilkes being close to Snape, at least
> professionally, if you can call the Death Eaters a profession. Wilkes
> was killed by Aurors soon after Snape turned sides. Same with Evan
> Rosier. So it's often posited that Snape turned those two in.

Alec writes me off-list, and I'm c&ping it.
---------

Alec:
Whatever Snape's real motives, Voldemort seems to have ordered him to at
least pretend to defect to Dumbledore, to become a spy - and no doubt
trained him in Occlumency: Snape's real changing of sides (if there was
one) would appear to have been later, when the prophecy turned out to
refer to the Potters. And Voldemort must have known that the turncoat
would be
expected to betray some names, or at least where Death Eaters might be
found. Probably it was Voldemort that told Snape that Rosier and Wilkes
were the most expendable. Or (possibly) simply too soft to be of much
practical use, except as martyrs to the cause.

----

I respond now: 

That makes sense, though Rosier, of course, put on a good performance
going down. Took out a piece of Moody's nose, so he couldn't have been
*that* soft. Anyway, the selection of martyrs to the cause would be
limited to Snape's associates in the first place. Karkaroff indicates in
the pensieve scene that they did not know all the other Death Eaters'
names, and I can't imagine Snape was the exception to this rule. Rosier
and Wilkes as closely associated with Snape - friends or otherwise -
makes a lot of sense, even if Voldemort picked them out as sacrifices.

Eileen



From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 16:56:39 2006
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 16:56:39 -0000
Subject: Updates at Jo's site -- interesting throwaway line on Hermione
In-Reply-To: <dus4q2+o3o7@...>
Message-ID: <dusb47+icri@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" <susiequsie23 at ...> wrote:
>
> 
> and information that Draco's 
> surname used to be "Spungen."
> 

Spungen? 
As in Nancy and her mate Sid?

So.... is this a hint that we are supposed to look on Draino's degradation
and eventual nasty death as some sort of wasteful tragedy?

Could be.
Jo's about the right age for The Sex Pistols fandom.

Kneasy






From susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 16:59:05 2006
From: susiequsie23 at cubfanbudwoman.yahoo.invalid (Susan Albrecht)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 08:59:05 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Horcruxes/Snape's social life
In-Reply-To: <3FF9E274C2DF9748B96A2C35130CAF3F0E85D1@...>
Message-ID: <20060310165905.97893.qmail@...>

SSSusan:
> > ...If that *really* means not returning to
> > Hogwarts, then, well, I guess the HB badge won't
be
> > going to any of these three.

Eileen:
> I think it'd look nice pinned on Ernie MacMillan's 
> chest, myself.
      
SSSusan:
'Tis already so nicely puffed out and all, to accept
it. ;-)

What about Dean Thomas?  Is he ever going to have a
greater role to play in things, I wonder?

SSSusan





From quigonginger at quigonginger.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 17:29:29 2006
From: quigonginger at quigonginger.yahoo.invalid (quigonginger)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 17:29:29 -0000
Subject: Updates at Jo's site -- interesting throwaway line on Hermione
In-Reply-To: <dus4q2+o3o7@...>
Message-ID: <dusd1p+l5f4@...>

SSSusan (quoting JKR's site):
> "...and Hermione Granger (cleverest girl in the year and the only
> person in the class to know all the uses of dragon's blood)."

SSSusan, not quoting JKR's site:
> Huh.  Does this surprise anyone else that Hermie KNOWS the 12 uses?
> I thought only DD knew them all -- or at least that none of our main
> kid characters did.  So far we readers only know a couple of them,
> right?  Oven cleaner, for instance.  I wonder why Hermione hasn't
> mentioned more of those uses along the way?

Ginger, quoting JKR's books where noted:

That got me going.  I was sure I remembered the line "reciting the 12 
uses of dragon's blood" somewhere in the books.  I searched, gave up, 
went to the Lexicon, and found the quote from PS chapter 14. (US 
paperback):  "It was hard to relax with Hermione next to you reciting 
the twelve uses of dragon's blood or practicing wand movements."

In context, this was during Easter break of their first year, and 
Herm had begun studying for exams.  If Herm knows them, and was 
reciting them for exams, and Harry and Ron were finding it hard to 
concentrate with her recitation, how is it that Herm is the only one 
who knows them?  It seems that they were given as a possible exam 
question, and certainly Ron and Harry heard them enough that they 
knew what they were.  Unless JKR means that Herm is the only one who 
remembers them, or got them right on the exam...

If this is from the first draft, then either she changed her mind and 
it is not a clue, or she decided to hide the clue better by making it 
more vague.

A thought?  Anyone?

Ginger, wishing Dreamy Remy a Happy Birthday






From heidi8 at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 18:18:13 2006
From: heidi8 at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 10:18:13 -0800
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: Updates at Jo's site -- interesting throwaway line on Hermione
In-Reply-To: <dusb47+icri@...>
References: <dusb47+icri@...>
Message-ID: <1142014696.2D7E2FA1@...>


On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 1:12 pm, Barry Arrowsmith wrote:
>
> Could be.
> Jo's about the right age for The Sex Pistols fandom.

Sort of, but more likely 3 years too young for it, or so says my 
born-in-66 husband. She's on record as being a Smiths fan, though, which 
once led to  a discussion on Main as to whether Girlfriend in a Coma was 
a theme song for CoS, and if so, was Hermione or Ginny the titular 
girlfriend.

Heidi

Http://www.fictionalley.org



From erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 18:23:23 2006
From: erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (Eileen Rebstock)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 11:23:23 -0700
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: Updates at Jo's site -- interesting throwaway line on Hermione
Message-ID: <3FF9E274C2DF9748B96A2C35130CAF3F0E85DC@...>

Heidi:
> Sort of, but more likely 3 years too young for it, or so says my
> born-in-66 husband. She's on record as being a Smiths fan, though,
which
> once led to  a discussion on Main as to whether Girlfriend in a Coma
was
> a theme song for CoS, and if so, was Hermione or Ginny the titular
> girlfriend.

I vote for Penelope Clearwater.

Eileen



From katmac at lagattalucianese.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 18:41:12 2006
From: katmac at lagattalucianese.yahoo.invalid (Kat Macfarlane)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 10:41:12 -0800
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Horcruxes/Snape's social life
References: <3FF9E274C2DF9748B96A2C35130CAF3F0E85C5@...>
Message-ID: <003401c64472$40d06ec0$482fdcd1@...>

And it looks like Harry isn't going to be there either.

Maybe with Dumbledore out of the picture, it'll go to some obscure and hard-working Ravenclaw. ;D

Or maybe McGonagall will show her true colors and make Hermione Head Young Person. ;)))

--Gatta


  Olivier: 
  > It looks very probable that
  > the Head boy badge will go to Draco, Ron or Harry in book seven. 

  I can't consider Draco very likely, considering he's on the lam from the
  authorities.

  Eileen



  SPONSORED LINKS Albus dumbledore  Jk rowling  Goblet of fire  


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS 

    a..  Visit your group "the_old_crowd" on the web.
      
    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 dk59us at dk59us.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 10 21:25:46 2006
From: dk59us at dk59us.yahoo.invalid (Eustace_Scrubb)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 21:25:46 -0000
Subject: Horcruxes/Snape's social life
In-Reply-To: <20060310162754.14986.qmail@...>
Message-ID: <dusqsq+k30j@...>

Olivier theorized: 
> > It looks very probable that the Head boy badge will 
> > go to Draco, Ron or Harry in book seven. 
> 

Eileen demurred:
> > I can't consider Draco very likely, considering he's
> > on the lam from the authorities.
 
SSSusan added:
> And nor Harry, as he does not intend to return to
> Hogwarts.  And Ron & Hermione seemed to be saying that
> they were going to go along with Harry wherever he
> went.  If that *really* means not returning to
> Hogwarts, then, well, I guess the HB badge won't be
> going to any of these three.  
> 
> Siriusly Snapey Susan

Now Eustace_Scrubb:
Guess my money's on Ernie MacMillan or Neville Longbottom at this point.

Cheers,

Eustace_Scrubb






From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sat Mar 11 20:46:35 2006
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 20:46:35 -0000
Subject: Pureblood Nepotism, OoP Drought, Milk Bottles, Draco, Head Girl
Message-ID: <duvcvb+hulk@...>

Eileen wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/3991 :

<< Barty Crouch Sr. being Arthur Weasley's first cousin, I didn't
dream of *that*. So was Percy's appointment nepotism? >>

I think the idea is that *all* the purebloods, both Light and Dark,
are *that* closely related. So any pro-pureblood prejudice in hiring
would be nepotism.

Talisman wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/3995 :

<< Indeed, I think that the drought experienced in the beginning of
OoP is also magic induced. >>

By whom, for what purpose?

Talisman wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/3998 :

<< And bottles...do they still use those?  And collect empties? 
Sounds like life 40 years ago. >>

Well, that scene did happen 25 years ago, in 1981.

Eileen wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/4011 :

<< I can't consider Draco very likely, considering he's on the lam
from the authorities. >>

No, he's on the lam from the Death Eaters.

La Gatta Lucianese wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/4021 :

<< Or maybe McGonagall will show her true colors and make Hermione
Head Young Person. ;))) >>

There's already a job of Head Girl, and no hard evidence that it's
less powerful or less respected than Head Boy.






From constancevigilance at constancevigilance.yahoo.invalid  Sun Mar 12 19:28:17 2006
From: constancevigilance at constancevigilance.yahoo.invalid (Constance Vigilance)
Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 11:28:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Whorekrukses Revisted
In-Reply-To: <duqgrs+klod@...>
Message-ID: <20060312192817.32563.qmail@...>

Welcome back, Joywitch!
   
  Following your map, I'm thinking that Voldy is the item in Book 7, leaving Book 1 to be my personal choice for a horsespits: Godric's Hollow itself. First of all, I think this is the name of a structure as well as the place where the structure resided. This is definitely an artifact of a founder (whose personal artifact hasn't been positively identified yet). It is (was) hidden in plain sight. In Voldy's mind, it is indestructable. Oops.
   
  I think that Voldy intended to make the house at Godric's Hollow into an Orcnuts using Harry, with James' death as a backup. He laid whatever magical groundwork is necessary to do this so that the horcrux was half-created. But he never expected the ancient magic charm laid by Lily. We've seen that distruction of a horcrux is catestrophic - the diary bleeds. The ring is broken. We have never been told why a failed AK would destroy a house. Perhaps it was the catastrophic backflow from a broken horcrux? Destruction of the ring disfigures Dumbledore. Perhaps destruction of the house is what disfigured Harry with his scar?

  CV
  
joywitch_m_curmudgeon <joym999 at ...> wrote:
  Ok, so I don't make it here very often.  I am woefully behind the 
times and you will probably laugh at my antiquated 
theories.  "Joywitch," you will say with an exasperated tone in your 
voice, "that has been discussed to death.  Please see messages 384, 
1483, 1484, 1502 and 1894 -- for starters! -- for an already-
exhaustive and detailed discussion of this."  Then, you will 
probably mutter under you breath something about "I don't understand 
why they don't just throw her out of here.  Probably only because 
she's been around FOREVER that they don't - she must have dirt on 
all of us."  (Bwahahaha)
  
But I have been thinking about something.  I made a brief trip to 
HP4GU (my old neighborhood which, sadly, I visit even more 
infrequently than I visit here, and when I do, I hardly recognize 
it, what with all the development -- Starbucks and condiminiums and 
sidewalks so crowded you can hardly walk down them and all.  But I 
digress.)  I noticed an interesting theory, twinkling at me from the 
corner like a gleam in Dumbledore's eye.  Some young whippersnapper 
posited that the seven horcruxes are being introduced one per book.  
I liked this theory.  I read a little bit of the thread, and it 
stuck back in the corner of my dusty old brain.  I thought about 
each book, and the 7 horsthingies.  We know that Voldie himself is 
one of them, and that the diary, the ring, the locket (not the one 
that Dumbledore gave his life to recover but the one that RAB took, 
presumably), probably Nagini (according to Dumbledore) and two other 
things, one of which might be Hufflepuff's cup and both of which 
probably once belonged to one of the founders.  Maybe.

OK, so:
1. Voldy himself is introduced in PS.
2. The diary reveals itself in COS.
3. Hmmm.  POA.  Hmmm.
4. Nagini makes his (her? its?) first appearance in GOF
5. It seems likely that RAB is the younger Black brother.  In OOP, 
while our gang is cleaning out the house on Grimmauld place they 
come across a locket which, presumably, they throw out.  Kreacher 
has been absconding with the garbage.  Could it be?
6. The ring appears on Dumbledore's withered hand in HBP.
7. ???

Well, that sat around in my brain for a while, then suddenly a few 
nights ago I woke up at two a.m., and I HAD to know what horehound 
was introduced in POA.  WHAT COULD IT BE?  I turned the light on, 
went to the other side of the room to the bookcase containing an 
entire shelf of HP, got out one of our six copies of POA, and 
starting reading.  I got to the part where Percy makes his 
appearance, and it struck me -- the Head Boy badge!  It makes 
perfect sense.  Well, to me, at least. It was once Tom Riddle's, it 
was probably made by one or more of the founders, and it's hidden in 
plain sight.  Well, what do the masses say?

OK, so what's the latest consensus on this one-per-book theory?  
And, is it my imagination, or is creating one-per-book scenarios the 
latest pasttime in the HPfanworld?  (I did breeze thru Randy's 7 
Deadly Book Sins post.)

--Joywitch M. Curmudgeon, who will go back to the porch and quietly 
sit on her rocking chair very soon.  She promises.





  SPONSORED LINKS 
        Albus dumbledore   Jk rowling   Goblet of fire 
    
---------------------------------
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS 

    
    Visit your group "the_old_crowd" on the web.
    
    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. 

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



		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail  makes sharing a breeze. 

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




From joym999 at joywitch_m_curmudgeon.yahoo.invalid  Tue Mar 14 00:54:51 2006
From: joym999 at joywitch_m_curmudgeon.yahoo.invalid (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 00:54:51 -0000
Subject: Whorekrukses Revisted
In-Reply-To: <20060312192817.32563.qmail@...>
Message-ID: <dv548r+s0lg@...>

Hmmm.  That would, indeed, answer a lot of questions and solve some 
of the mystery about Godric's Hollow.  The thing is, Voldy himself 
really was introduced in Book 1, which seems to me would mean that 2 
parts of Voldy's soul were introduced in that book.  But maybe the 
actual hormchuck is something IN Godric's Hollow that is still 
there.  We do know, after all, that Harry is headed there in Book 7. 
Hmmm.  Anyway, I like it, Constance.

Maybe we should start a betting pool.

JMC

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, Constance Vigilance 
<constancevigilance at ...> wrote:
>
> Welcome back, Joywitch!
>    
>   Following your map, I'm thinking that Voldy is the item in Book 
7, leaving Book 1 to be my personal choice for a horsespits: 
Godric's Hollow itself. First of all, I think this is the name of a 
structure as well as the place where the structure resided. This is 
definitely an artifact of a founder (whose personal artifact hasn't 
been positively identified yet). It is (was) hidden in plain sight. 
In Voldy's mind, it is indestructable. Oops.
>    
>   I think that Voldy intended to make the house at Godric's Hollow 
into an Orcnuts using Harry, with James' death as a backup. He laid 
whatever magical groundwork is necessary to do this so that the 
horcrux was half-created. But he never expected the ancient magic 
charm laid by Lily. We've seen that distruction of a horcrux is 
catestrophic - the diary bleeds. The ring is broken. We have never 
been told why a failed AK would destroy a house. Perhaps it was the 
catastrophic backflow from a broken horcrux? Destruction of the ring 
disfigures Dumbledore. Perhaps destruction of the house is what 
disfigured Harry with his scar?
> 
>   CV
>   
> joywitch_m_curmudgeon <joym999 at ...> wrote:
>   Ok, so I don't make it here very often.  I am woefully behind 
the 
> times and you will probably laugh at my antiquated 
> theories.  "Joywitch," you will say with an exasperated tone in 
your 
> voice, "that has been discussed to death.  Please see messages 
384, 
> 1483, 1484, 1502 and 1894 -- for starters! -- for an already-
> exhaustive and detailed discussion of this."  Then, you will 
> probably mutter under you breath something about "I don't 
understand 
> why they don't just throw her out of here.  Probably only because 
> she's been around FOREVER that they don't - she must have dirt on 
> all of us."  (Bwahahaha)
>   
> But I have been thinking about something.  I made a brief trip to 
> HP4GU (my old neighborhood which, sadly, I visit even more 
> infrequently than I visit here, and when I do, I hardly recognize 
> it, what with all the development -- Starbucks and condiminiums 
and 
> sidewalks so crowded you can hardly walk down them and all.  But I 
> digress.)  I noticed an interesting theory, twinkling at me from 
the 
> corner like a gleam in Dumbledore's eye.  Some young 
whippersnapper 
> posited that the seven horcruxes are being introduced one per 
book.  
> I liked this theory.  I read a little bit of the thread, and it 
> stuck back in the corner of my dusty old brain.  I thought about 
> each book, and the 7 horsthingies.  We know that Voldie himself is 
> one of them, and that the diary, the ring, the locket (not the one 
> that Dumbledore gave his life to recover but the one that RAB 
took, 
> presumably), probably Nagini (according to Dumbledore) and two 
other 
> things, one of which might be Hufflepuff's cup and both of which 
> probably once belonged to one of the founders.  Maybe.
> 
> OK, so:
> 1. Voldy himself is introduced in PS.
> 2. The diary reveals itself in COS.
> 3. Hmmm.  POA.  Hmmm.
> 4. Nagini makes his (her? its?) first appearance in GOF
> 5. It seems likely that RAB is the younger Black brother.  In OOP, 
> while our gang is cleaning out the house on Grimmauld place they 
> come across a locket which, presumably, they throw out.  Kreacher 
> has been absconding with the garbage.  Could it be?
> 6. The ring appears on Dumbledore's withered hand in HBP.
> 7. ???
> 
> Well, that sat around in my brain for a while, then suddenly a few 
> nights ago I woke up at two a.m., and I HAD to know what horehound 
> was introduced in POA.  WHAT COULD IT BE?  I turned the light on, 
> went to the other side of the room to the bookcase containing an 
> entire shelf of HP, got out one of our six copies of POA, and 
> starting reading.  I got to the part where Percy makes his 
> appearance, and it struck me -- the Head Boy badge!  It makes 
> perfect sense.  Well, to me, at least. It was once Tom Riddle's, 
it 
> was probably made by one or more of the founders, and it's hidden 
in 
> plain sight.  Well, what do the masses say?
> 
> OK, so what's the latest consensus on this one-per-book theory?  
> And, is it my imagination, or is creating one-per-book scenarios 
the 
> latest pasttime in the HPfanworld?  (I did breeze thru Randy's 7 
> Deadly Book Sins post.)
> 
> --Joywitch M. Curmudgeon, who will go back to the porch and 
quietly 
> sit on her rocking chair very soon.  She promises.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   SPONSORED LINKS 
>         Albus dumbledore   Jk rowling   Goblet of fire 
>     
> ---------------------------------
>   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS 
> 
>     
>     Visit your group "the_old_crowd" on the web.
>     
>     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. 
> 
>     
> ---------------------------------
>   
> 
> 
> 
> 		
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Mail
> Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail  makes sharing a breeze. 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>







From gbannister10 at geoff_bannister.yahoo.invalid  Wed Mar 15 14:20:51 2006
From: gbannister10 at geoff_bannister.yahoo.invalid (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 14:20:51 -0000
Subject: The Milkman Hasn't Cometh ( was: Weighing In Very Late
In-Reply-To: <dup1nf+q0nc@...>
Message-ID: <dv97s3+1fae@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Talisman" <talisman22457 at ...> wrote:
>
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" 
> <carolynwhite2@> wrote:
>  Ok, fair cop - should have checked the actual wording. I could 
> start 
> > a ghastly British Thread by explaining you put empty milk bottles 
> > out the night *before* for collection, because milkmen collect and 
> > deliver at unseemly hours in the early morning, waking you up if 
> >you have only just dozed off after worrying into the small hours..> 
> 
> Do they really still deliver, at all? The last time I had a milkman, 
> I was a kid in my parent's home.  Okay, I didn't actually HAVE the 
> milkman, just his delivery services...oh, never mind.
> 
> And bottles...do they still use those?  And collect empties?  Sounds 
> like life 40 years ago.

Geoff:
No, it is a picture of life in the UK in 2006.

Although many people buy milk from the supermarket or the corner shop, there are still 
doorstep deliveries in towns and cities and larger villages.

In the village where I live, there is a doorstep delivery every other day - at aboout 05:00! 
We had our milk delivered until about a year ago, when we decided that it was far cheaper 
to buy it at the shops; we had kept up our delivery because many older folk rely on the 
milkman and obviously, if demand drops, the service comes under threat.






From talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid  Wed Mar 15 22:33:11 2006
From: talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid (Talisman)
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 22:33:11 -0000
Subject: The Milkman Hasn't Cometh ( was: Weighing In Very Late
In-Reply-To: <dv97s3+1fae@...>
Message-ID: <dva4n7+kf11@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at ...> wrote:
>
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Talisman" <talisman22457@> 
wrote:
> >
> > --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" 
> > <carolynwhite2@> wrote:
> >  Ok, fair cop - should have checked the actual wording. I could 
> > start 
> > > a ghastly British Thread by explaining you put empty milk 
bottles 
> > > out the night *before* for collection, because milkmen collect 
and 
> > > deliver at unseemly hours in the early morning, waking you up 
if 
> > >you have only just dozed off after worrying into the small 
hours..> 
> > 
> > Do they really still deliver, at all?  <snip> 
> > And bottles...do they still use those?  And collect empties?  

> Geoff:
> No, it is a picture of life in the UK in 2006.

 
Thank you Geoff.  That is the information I was looking for.

> In the village where I live, there is a doorstep delivery every 
other day - at aboout 05:00! 


We'll have to assume Petunia went out at 4:30. :)







From SongBird3411 at songbird3411.yahoo.invalid  Thu Mar 16 05:46:20 2006
From: SongBird3411 at songbird3411.yahoo.invalid (songbird3411)
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 05:46:20 -0000
Subject: Secret Keeper, Godric's Hollow, revisted
Message-ID: <dvau3c+m3on@...>

I haven't posted here in a long time, but I have lurked rather 
consistently.  I must preface this post by saying that I currently do 
not read any other HP lists/boards.  So, I have no idea if this idea 
has been discussed at HPfGU main, or elsewhere.  Terribly sorry if I 
am repeating something.

I read with interest all the speculation about Jo's recent comments 
about Pettigrew, Secret Keeper, Godric's Hollow, etc.  Heaven knows, 
I am fascinated with the topic of what really happened at Godric's 
Hollow.  I definitely think there are twists to be revealed there.

The most recent speculation here centered on who knew the Potter 
Secret and when.  I think what people are trying to get at is how 
Dumbledore knew about the attack and was able to respond so quickly, 
right?  

Okay, I now venture unto unfamiliar territory.  This post will be 
Faith centered.  Faith and I are not very close friends, as I do not 
find her to be a terribly fun or exciting muse.  However, something 
about all this speculation on who knew what about SK/Godric's Hollow 
pulled me in Faith's direction.  Shockingly.

It seems to me that if Dumbledore knew about the attack so quickly, 
someone at the scene must have tipped him off.  The problem we all 
seem to be running into is whether this informant was privy to the 
Secret or not.  

Now, most of us are working under the assumption that there was 
someone else present at Godric's Hollow the night of the attack.  
Someone other than Voldy and the Potters.  I do not think Faith 
discounts this, so I will work under this assumption as well.  

I am now going to trash any theories related to Puppetmaster!DD in 
regards to these events.  I do admire this theory a great deal.  
However, I can't support it enough to the point of believing that 
Dumbledore left an innocent Sirius to rot in Azkaban.  (Ramblings of 
imprisoned DE's are tricky, but I am just going to have to let them 
go.)

So, what I need is an informant at the scene who can alert Dumbledore 
without Dumbledore ever being aware of the SK-switch.  What I am 
looking for is an informant who was at the scene, in on the Secret 
and therefore fully witnessed the ensuing events (and can, most 
importantly, testify to what really happened later).  So, I am also 
tossing any theory which has the informant as someone who was not in 
on the Secret and couldn't have seen exactly what happened before the 
house was destroyed/Secret was voided.

Option A is one that seems to be popular around here: Severus Snape.  
This theory seems to go that Pettigrew's information got back to 
Snape, directly or indirectly.  Snape went to Godric's Hollow that 
night, by himself or with Voldy.  This requires Snape to know that 
Pettigrew was the spy all along.  This also requires Snape to let an 
innocent Sirius rot in Azkaban.  I guess I don't find that bit too 
unlikely.  However, the Shrieking Shack scene in POA looks a bit 
problematic to me if I work under this assumption.  Remember, I am 
working with Faith here.

There is another option that I am somewhat surprised has not been 
discussed here.  I mean, I am as big a Snape lover as anyone.  
However, we may be making this chain of events much more complicated 
than necessary by including Snape here.  Perhaps the solution to this 
problem is quite simple indeed.  Who would have been at the scene, 
fully cognizant of the Secret, fully witnessing the events, and still 
could have alerted Dumbledore without tipping DD off about the SK 
switch?

Could the informant have been, perhaps, Peter Pettigrew himself?  I 
am not sure how likely it is, but it does seem to hold a certain 
logic.

Using WYSIWYG, if there was an attack, Dumbledore would have assumed 
immediately that Sirius was the spy and had betrayed the Potters.  
Would anyone have been suspicious if Sirius and the Potters had let 
their good friend Peter Pettigrew in on the secret?  What if Peter 
claimed, a la Sirius, that he got concerned and went to check on the 
Potters.  A shocked and distraught Peter could have alerted 
Dumbledore fairly quickly to the attack.  Why Pettigrew could even 
have decided to throw any remaining suspicion off himself by 
confronting the betraying Sirius in front of loads of witnesses the 
next day.  Why, poor Pettigrew!  He first had to witness the death of 
his beloved friends, and then was murdered by their betrayor.

Okay, there you go.  My first, and maybe last, attempt to spculate 
with Faith.  Admittedly, not as fun a solution as speculating about 
dear old Sevvy.  However, it feels much less problematic to me, 
especially in regards to POA plot/characterization.

Mindy, who will go back to the more wild speculations about 
horseclucks now.   











From annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid  Thu Mar 16 14:11:24 2006
From: annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid (annemehr)
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 14:11:24 -0000
Subject: Secret Keeper, Godric's Hollow, revisted
In-Reply-To: <dvau3c+m3on@...>
Message-ID: <dvbrmc+cr51@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "songbird3411"
<SongBird3411 at ...> wrote:
Mindy: 
> Could the informant have been, perhaps, Peter Pettigrew himself?  I 
> am not sure how likely it is, but it does seem to hold a certain 
> logic.

Could be.

You don't even really need Faith. Regardless of what Dumbledore knew
about Pettigrew and when he knew it, Peter would at least believe his
spy and SK status was a secret and act accordingly.  He needn't even
face Dumbledore if he used that Patronus message service, and as he
may well have known that Sirius' name had been mentioned in connection
with Secret Keeping, Peter may already have had some thoughts of blame
shifting should things go pear-shaped. 

I really wish we knew if a Patronus-message is something you send up
like a flare, or if it includes data encryption.  Do you suppose if we
could organise a massive letter-writing campaign from fandom to JKR,
we could get the question up as an FAQ on her site?

Anne










From joym999 at joywitch_m_curmudgeon.yahoo.invalid  Thu Mar 16 20:46:44 2006
From: joym999 at joywitch_m_curmudgeon.yahoo.invalid (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 20:46:44 -0000
Subject: Secret Keeper, Godric's Hollow, revisted
In-Reply-To: <dvau3c+m3on@...>
Message-ID: <dvcirk+ktmd@...>

I dunno, I think the explanation may be simpler than that.  I think 
there was a portrait in the Potter's house at Godric's Hollow that 
was one of Dumbledore's vast network of spies.  Given the small 
number of pureblood wizarding families, James Potter probably had an 
ancestor who was a Hogwarts Professorhead, so his/her portrait would 
naturally be hanging there.  Dumbledore is sitting in his office 
late at night when a blank canvas suddenly fills with Flaplinagrous 
Potter's head, screaming, "Dumbledore, my other portrait just 
exploded in a flash of green light!"

I've always thought that the Old Headmaster's Network has played a 
greater role than we've really examined.  For example, I've always 
thought that it must have been a portrait that told Dumbledore that 
Harry was looking in the Mirror of Erised, again.

--JMC


--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "songbird3411" 
<SongBird3411 at ...> wrote:
>
> I haven't posted here in a long time, but I have lurked rather 
> consistently.  I must preface this post by saying that I currently 
do 
> not read any other HP lists/boards.  So, I have no idea if this 
idea 
> has been discussed at HPfGU main, or elsewhere.  Terribly sorry if 
I 
> am repeating something.
> 
> I read with interest all the speculation about Jo's recent 
comments 
> about Pettigrew, Secret Keeper, Godric's Hollow, etc.  Heaven 
knows, 
> I am fascinated with the topic of what really happened at Godric's 
> Hollow.  I definitely think there are twists to be revealed there.
> 
> The most recent speculation here centered on who knew the Potter 
> Secret and when.  I think what people are trying to get at is how 
> Dumbledore knew about the attack and was able to respond so 
quickly, 
> right?  
> 
> Okay, I now venture unto unfamiliar territory.  This post will be 
> Faith centered.  Faith and I are not very close friends, as I do 
not 
> find her to be a terribly fun or exciting muse.  However, 
something 
> about all this speculation on who knew what about SK/Godric's 
Hollow 
> pulled me in Faith's direction.  Shockingly.
> 
> It seems to me that if Dumbledore knew about the attack so 
quickly, 
> someone at the scene must have tipped him off.  The problem we all 
> seem to be running into is whether this informant was privy to the 
> Secret or not.  
> 
> Now, most of us are working under the assumption that there was 
> someone else present at Godric's Hollow the night of the attack.  
> Someone other than Voldy and the Potters.  I do not think Faith 
> discounts this, so I will work under this assumption as well.  
> 
> I am now going to trash any theories related to Puppetmaster!DD in 
> regards to these events.  I do admire this theory a great deal.  
> However, I can't support it enough to the point of believing that 
> Dumbledore left an innocent Sirius to rot in Azkaban.  (Ramblings 
of 
> imprisoned DE's are tricky, but I am just going to have to let 
them 
> go.)
> 
> So, what I need is an informant at the scene who can alert 
Dumbledore 
> without Dumbledore ever being aware of the SK-switch.  What I am 
> looking for is an informant who was at the scene, in on the Secret 
> and therefore fully witnessed the ensuing events (and can, most 
> importantly, testify to what really happened later).  So, I am 
also 
> tossing any theory which has the informant as someone who was not 
in 
> on the Secret and couldn't have seen exactly what happened before 
the 
> house was destroyed/Secret was voided.
> 
> Option A is one that seems to be popular around here: Severus 
Snape.  
> This theory seems to go that Pettigrew's information got back to 
> Snape, directly or indirectly.  Snape went to Godric's Hollow that 
> night, by himself or with Voldy.  This requires Snape to know that 
> Pettigrew was the spy all along.  This also requires Snape to let 
an 
> innocent Sirius rot in Azkaban.  I guess I don't find that bit too 
> unlikely.  However, the Shrieking Shack scene in POA looks a bit 
> problematic to me if I work under this assumption.  Remember, I am 
> working with Faith here.
> 
> There is another option that I am somewhat surprised has not been 
> discussed here.  I mean, I am as big a Snape lover as anyone.  
> However, we may be making this chain of events much more 
complicated 
> than necessary by including Snape here.  Perhaps the solution to 
this 
> problem is quite simple indeed.  Who would have been at the scene, 
> fully cognizant of the Secret, fully witnessing the events, and 
still 
> could have alerted Dumbledore without tipping DD off about the SK 
> switch?
> 
> Could the informant have been, perhaps, Peter Pettigrew himself?  
I 
> am not sure how likely it is, but it does seem to hold a certain 
> logic.
> 
> Using WYSIWYG, if there was an attack, Dumbledore would have 
assumed 
> immediately that Sirius was the spy and had betrayed the Potters.  
> Would anyone have been suspicious if Sirius and the Potters had 
let 
> their good friend Peter Pettigrew in on the secret?  What if Peter 
> claimed, a la Sirius, that he got concerned and went to check on 
the 
> Potters.  A shocked and distraught Peter could have alerted 
> Dumbledore fairly quickly to the attack.  Why Pettigrew could even 
> have decided to throw any remaining suspicion off himself by 
> confronting the betraying Sirius in front of loads of witnesses 
the 
> next day.  Why, poor Pettigrew!  He first had to witness the death 
of 
> his beloved friends, and then was murdered by their betrayor.
> 
> Okay, there you go.  My first, and maybe last, attempt to spculate 
> with Faith.  Admittedly, not as fun a solution as speculating 
about 
> dear old Sevvy.  However, it feels much less problematic to me, 
> especially in regards to POA plot/characterization.
> 
> Mindy, who will go back to the more wild speculations about 
> horseclucks now.
>







From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sun Mar 19 10:57:06 2006
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 10:57:06 -0000
Subject: Portraits (was: Secret Keeper, Godric's Hollow, revisted)
In-Reply-To: <dvcirk+ktmd@...>
Message-ID: <dvjde2+bqif@...>

It's been 12 hours since I replied to this post and my reply hasn't
appeared yet, so I get to try again.

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "joywitch_m_curmudgeon"
<joym999 at ...> wrote:
 
> I've always thought that the Old Headmaster's Network has played a 
> greater role than we've really examined.  For example, I've always 
> thought that it must have been a portrait that told Dumbledore that 
> Harry was looking in the Mirror of Erised, again.

Paintings, House Elves, ghosts. There are a lot of invisible and/or
unobstrusive spies available to the Headmaster.

That makes it all the more remarkable that the Marauders learned
Animagery without DD knowing. I'd think that would have required a
paranoid level of security not shown in OoP's Pensieve scene. Not to
say 'you run with a werewolf every month' where a painting, ghost, or
House Elf could overhear. Not to leave any books about Animagery lying
around the dorm room for the House Elves to tidy up, much less any
potions or talismans involved. 

I imagine they bought the books (and supplies) by owl order from
Diagon Alley, maybe even delivered to an accomodation address in
Hogsmeade (maybe at the Hog's Head, whose innkeeper surely thought the
boys were merely buying pornography) and kept them in their trunks,
wrapped in garments under garments, when not in use. 

And went to the Shrieking Shack (not at Full Moon) for all their
practises. (When they went not at Full Moon, Dumbledore probably
thought that was where they kept the porn, but once they learned to
transform, and regularly visited the Shrieking Shack at Full Moon,
what did he think? That they only went into the tunnel, but not out
the other end?)






From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sat Mar 18 19:31:28 2006
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 19:31:28 -0000
Subject: Secret Keeper, Godric's Hollow, revisted
In-Reply-To: <dvcirk+ktmd@...>
Message-ID: <dvhn6g+g3dr@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "joywitch_m_curmudgeon"
<joym999 at ...> wrote:
>
> I've always thought that the Old Headmaster's Network has played a 
> greater role than we've really examined.  For example, I've always 
> thought that it must have been a portrait that told Dumbledore that 
> Harry was looking in the Mirror of Erised, again.

Paintings, ghosts, House Elves. All can be invisible or unnoticed
spies for the Headmaster.






From foxmoth at pippin_999.yahoo.invalid  Mon Mar 20 00:34:20 2006
From: foxmoth at pippin_999.yahoo.invalid (pippin_999)
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 00:34:20 -0000
Subject: Portraits (was: Secret Keeper, Godric's Hollow, revisted)
In-Reply-To: <dvjde2+bqif@...>
Message-ID: <dvktac+no9m@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" <catlady at ...> 
wrote:
> 
> Paintings, House Elves, ghosts. There are a lot of invisible and/or
> unobstrusive spies available to the Headmaster.
> 
> That makes it all the more remarkable that the Marauders learned
> Animagery without DD knowing. I'd think that would have required a
> paranoid level of security not shown in OoP's Pensieve scene. Not to
> say 'you run with a werewolf every month' where a painting, ghost, or
> House Elf could overhear. Not to leave any books about Animagery lying
> around the dorm room for the House Elves to tidy up, much less any
> potions or talismans involved. 
> 

Pippin:
James had the invisibility cloak. They used the space behind the mirror
on the fourth floor as one of their hideouts. They were probably
practiced at moving around the school and eluding the eyes in the walls
long before their research in animagery got to the practical stages.


Dumbledore  thought they were stealing food from the kitchens 
(no doubt they were.)

Sirius's family had a library of its own. We don't know if the Potters 
were bookish, but  James could probably get
his doting parents to buy all the transfiguration texts he wanted,
not to mention a subscription to Transfiguration Today.

They wouldn't need to smuggle  anything, and unlike Harry, they could 
also practice over the summer. 

Pippin






From olivier.fouquet at olivierfouquet2000.yahoo.invalid  Tue Mar 21 05:46:36 2006
From: olivier.fouquet at olivierfouquet2000.yahoo.invalid (Olivier Fouquet)
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 14:46:36 +0900
Subject: Take a hint when a hint is intended
Message-ID: <465AA48B-81BF-4E1A-B613-3513963650A4@...>

Much discussion here and elsewhere focus on trying to guess future  
plot development. I have come to look at these attempt with a wary  
eye, because past experiences tended to show that JKR does not  
provide enough information in previous books to guess about future  
plots. However, I have always thought that the series had a strong  
thematic component and that on this subject, information were not so  
scarce. I particularly enjoy the growing-up part in HP so this is  
what I would lie to discuss now. One word of caution. In all that  
follows, when I write that something is "about" something, I don't  
want to imply that it is only nor even predominantly about it, I just  
want to convey the idea that some of the point of the first thing was  
to allude to the second. Blame the ambiguity on me mangling English  
as if I was Fenrir.

In my opinion, the HP series is about the journey from childhood to  
adulthood. Each book yet has been a step.
PS was about abandoning childhood and discovering the wonders and  
dangers of adolescence.
CoS was about the danger of a premature sexuality (a bold assertion,  
but one I detailed in previous posts, interested reader can read it  
many posts, particularly TOL 83372).
PoA was about a teenage boy constructing a positive masculine identity.
GoF could be about the danger of thinking that being adult  
automatically implied being responsible. The idea that adult  
obsessions are dangerous is there, clearly, but GoF's theme has never  
been as clear to me as the others.
OoP was about failure and the difficulty of being a responsible person.
HBP was about accepting love as something positive and normal (here  
my word of caution is particularly important: I don't believe this is  
the main theme of HBP but it definitely there, I'll spell it in more  
details if anyone wishes so).

So what about book 7? Well, a recent rereading of JKR's interviews  
plus my own speculations gave me some ideas. What do we know for sure  
will be in book 7(either from earlier books or from interviews)?

It will probably start by Bill and Fleur's wedding.
We know that Harry wishes to visit Godric's Hollow and his parent's  
grave.
It will be his last stay at the Dursley's, and Ron and Hermione  
should be there too (or so they say).
We will probably learn about what Dudley saw when attacked by the  
Dementors, about letters between Petunia and DD (both pointed as  
significant by JKR in interviews and on her website) and about  
Petunia in general
We will learn about the Founders (from an interview).
Dumbledore's family would be a profitable line of inquiry.
We will meet properly a member of the Order that we haven't properly  
met yet.

Of course, we know for sure about many other things. What about  
reasonable speculation?

It seems reasonable to speculate that we will learn things about  
Regulus.
It is likewise reasonable to speculate that Snape's love-life will be  
important (Snape has been loved by someone).
Grindelwald has connections to someone (or so it seems).

 From all that, I hereby declare that I fully expect book seven to  
deal extensively with families, and with the fact that being  
responsible for one's family is an important final step to become an  
adult. Because idle speculation is worthless but conjectures and  
refutations are nice, I go as far as to make a precise conjecture.

I conjecture that Aberforth Dumbledore will play an important role,  
that the lady pushing the trolley in the Hogwarts express is related  
to Dumbledore too (his sister or step-sister); that part of Snape's  
life has entailed failing for his familial obligations (maybe by  
failing to protect his family, maybe by turning against it); that  
part of his motivations since has been to try to make up for this  
(maybe in saving the Dursleys); that the Malfoys were related to  
Grindelwald, maybe in league with him, that thus Draco knows or has  
the possibility to discover something important (presumably the  
location of Cup!Horcrux) and finally that Draco will give Harry this  
information for the sake of his family.

I also conjecture that everything above will be disproved in book seven.
Best regards,
Olivier

PS: A liquorice wand to anyone who see the relevance of the title to  
the rest of the post, or maybe this is obvious for Americans.





From kumayama at kumayama.yahoo.invalid  Wed Mar 22 21:45:09 2006
From: kumayama at kumayama.yahoo.invalid (Lyn J. Mangiameli)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 21:45:09 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?What_might_Lilly_have_known_that_DD_didn=92t=3F?=
Message-ID: <dvsgh5+9c7v@...>


Often there is the assumption that DD knew everything, if not controlled everything. As 
the books have proceeded, this assumption is become more open to question. In 
particular, I'd like to consider some possibilities. Is it possible that Lilly may have known 
some things DD didn't. 

Lets establish the possibility with a rather mundane speculation. If DD is honest in saying 
he didn't know three of the Mauraders were Animagi (something many of us seriously 
question), and there is the distinct possibility that Lilly did know her husband, and two of 
his friends possessed this capability, then we may have at least one instance of Lilly 
knowing something DD didn't. Somehow, I think that in a fully intimate relationship, James 
would have shared knowledge of his capabilities with Lilly. [And to be tangential here; this 
generates the amusing image of the three transforming at will to have a boy's night out, 
with or without Lilly's knowledge or consent. It makes one wonder if this might not have 
been a means of exclusion with respect to Lupin, for Lupin lacked the ability to transform 
at will,  a capability that even the weakest of the other three had obtained,]. 

Which brings me to wondering if there wasn't something much bigger that Lilly knew that 
DD didn't, namely that Riddle had been making Hxs and more specifically, that he may 
have been interested in Harry being his last Hx. Why do I say this, it goes back to the one 
line that haunts and intrigues me more than any other line in the books, "Not Harry, please 
no, take me, kill me instead." I continue to find the first phrase, "take me,"  as more than a 
synonym for "kill me, " in part because there would have a needless redundancy in the 
words that an editor would likely have eliminated. No, I believe the two phrases were 
deliberately written and retained, but then this begs the question, "Take me for what?"  In 
this case, I would now speculate that Lilly knew that LV was there for a purpose in addition 
to killing Harry and Lily was offering herself as more than just a substitute death. One 
speculation might be that she is offering herself as a substitute vessel for the formation of 
a Hx. 

What I have posited previously with respect to possession can be easily adapted to Hxs. In 
this form it goes like this:

The "Take me" line just isn't wording consistent with someone who is first thinking of and 
inviting their death (at least in USA common usage), and it creates the image that a choice 
of who to "take" was even conceivable. If LV's motivations and actions were solely in 
reaction to the prophecy, a choice of who he must kill would be out of the question, thus 
most current understanding holds that LV was there to kill HP,  and Lilly was sufficiently 
aware of this probability that she had engaged in prophylactic charms (so to speak) to 
prevent HP's death. Again, if she had the understanding that the mission of LV was to kill 
the adversary described in the prophesy, how could she even conceive that he might be 
interested in killing her instead of Harry, or might in any way show mercy. Nor is it 
consistent with the presumed protection charms placed upon Harry, both Lily's and the 
one's that it is suggested DD may have made, otherwise, why not protection charms for all 
their lives. So no, anyone aware of even the first two lines of the prophecy, aware of LV's 
past behavior sufficiently to have "thrice defied him," even under duress, could not 
conceive that LV would have any interest in substituting anyone's death for Harry's?
unless there was some reason to believe that LV might be there for another reason.

So what if Lily had her own reasons to believe the LV might be present that night for a 
purpose other than murder of her son. Note that Lily's initial words to LV that night are 
"Not Harry, not Harry, please not Harry!", rather than  "please don't kill" Harry. In the short 
three lines we have from Lily, she only uses the work kill once, and in every other phrase 
the action is left unstated or vague. This raises my suspicion, though I recognize the 
suspicion likely may not prove to be warranted. 

Nonetheless, I can't help but consider that Lilly's charm on HP may not have been primarily 
or only to ward off an AK, but to ward off possession and/or an attempt to use Harry as 
the repository of a Hx (though given DD expressed understanding at the time, he would 
not have thought to have personally created, or suggested the creation of charms that 
protected against Hx formation, unless of course, possession is required to do so with a 
human host, and an anti-possession charm would have accomplished this secondarily.) 
What if Lilly's real worry was to prevent HP from becoming a Hx, for to become a human 
Hx for another is actually worse than death because it would involve an "overwriting" of 
the host's own soul (and therefore a "fate worse than death"),  and thus she offered herself 
as the host instead of her son. For me, this would be more in line with Lily's actual words.

Now if LV was intending to transfer a portion of his soul, with its attendant powers, from 
the Riddle body to the HP body, and in the process overwriting or dominating the existing 
soul,  I can't imagine doing so without first possessing the potential host. If the 
possession and Hx process was disrupted, then it might have been this "blown Hx" or 
"blown possession" that stripped LV from his TR body  and thus the LV ended up with no 
body not because of a reflected AK, but because his attempt to possess/Hx Harry was 
disrupted when LV's "soul/being" was not fully attached to his body.
 

So how might Lily have know that LV might have had some other or additional mission 
beyond murder. Well, I think most would consider Snape to be the most likely source of 
that information, though I think Lupin remains a distinct possibility. If DD is being truthful 
(always a question) that he didn't suspect Riddle's Hx plans until the Diary was revealed 
and the events that surrounded it in COS, then he couldn't have warned Lilly of such a 
possibility, and wouldn't have provided a protective charm against it.. However, I think it is 
unlikely that Snape could have been the direct source of the warning, as surely Snape's 
mind already had been well probed by DD, and such info was not to be uncovered. So by 
whatever means, I think there is a distinct possibility that Lily knew of the Hx possibility 
before DD, and even more intriguingly, chose not to share that information with him.


Now please allow me to speculate in one other area -- that James and Lilly didn't want DD 
to know precisely where they were hiding or what they knew, because they no longer 
trusted DD nor felt he was acting in their family's best interests. Why might that be? One 
possibility is that too many members of the Order were being picked off, perhaps with the 
common factor being that they were on secret missions only DD was supposed to know 
about. Perhaps they distrusted DD for bringing Snape back into the fold. But a more likely 
factor is that they saw DD as just too wiling to use their son as a weapon against LV 
(directly or indirectly, possibly as bait for a trap). Keep in mind, DD makes it quite clear 
that he had no a priori love for Harry, that it only developed over time while watching him 
at Hogwarts. A deep distrust of DD may also offer an explanation for why Lilly didn't run 
away from GH--for where was she to run away to? Running to the safety of DD should be 
the logical conclusion, but not if she did not see DD as a source of safety for her child. 
Lupin was already under a cloud of suspicion, Peter had just betrayed them, and perhaps 
even Sirius was to be questioned. No, if DD could not be counted on, then there was no 
where to run to and hide.  She made her stand at GH, in her last best efforts to save her 
son, because it was the only means left to her to save her son. 

So what might Lily have known that DD didn't? Well quite likely that LV was making Hxs, 
and that she and the Marauder's were questioning if they must fear DD almost as much as 
LV.

Just some thoughts to ponder, more for fun than enlightenment. 









From carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid  Thu Mar 23 08:42:45 2006
From: carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid (carolynwhite2)
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 08:42:45 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_What_might_Lilly_have_known_that_DD_didn=92t=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <dvsgh5+9c7v@...>
Message-ID: <dvtn25+6tog@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Lyn J. Mangiameli" 
<kumayama at ...> wrote:
>
> 
> So how might Lily have know that LV might have had some other or 
additional mission beyond murder. Well, I think most would consider 
Snape to be the most likely source of that information, though I 
think Lupin remains a distinct possibility. 

>However, I think it is unlikely that Snape could have been the 
direct source of the warning, as surely Snape's  mind already had 
been well probed by DD, and such info was not to be uncovered. So by 
whatever means, I think there is a distinct possibility that Lily 
knew of the Hx possibility before DD, and even more intriguingly, 
chose not to share that information with him.
> 
> 

Lyn, good post! I have just done a re-read and possession theory+Hx 
seems more and more likely, for all the reasons you suggest. It also 
explains V's impatient comments: 'stand aside, silly girl', and 'she 
needn't have died'. If he wasn't going to kill Harry, they make sense.

But just to respond to one of the points above - what if Lily got her 
knowledge from Slughorn? She was a favourite student, and he is the 
only person who we have canon evidence of passing on the Hx secret to 
students. He even says to Tom "It's natural to feel some curiosity 
about these things.. wizards of a certain calibre have always been 
drawn to that aspect of magic." 

If Lily, James & Sirius had heard about Hxs, and suddenly suspected 
that was what was in store for their son, it would have been 
simplicity for Lily to have got it out of Sluggie. 

Wonder if it was on that second wonderful day when he took felix 
felicis when he was 57? Tut, tut, nothing like an old man's folly is 
there..

Carolyn







From kumayama at kumayama.yahoo.invalid  Thu Mar 23 19:05:12 2006
From: kumayama at kumayama.yahoo.invalid (Lyn J. Mangiameli)
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 19:05:12 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_What_might_Lilly_have_known_that_DD_didn=92t=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <dvtn25+6tog@...>
Message-ID: <dvurh8+3dcs@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" 
<carolynwhite2 at ...> wrote:
>
> But just to respond to one of the points above - what if Lily got 
her 
> knowledge from Slughorn? She was a favourite student, and he is 
the 
> only person who we have canon evidence of passing on the Hx secret 
to 
> students. He even says to Tom "It's natural to feel some curiosity 
> about these things.. wizards of a certain calibre have always been 
> drawn to that aspect of magic." 
> 
> If Lily, James & Sirius had heard about Hxs, and suddenly 
suspected 
> that was what was in store for their son, it would have been 
> simplicity for Lily to have got it out of Sluggie. 
>
Lyn now:
I find that to fit in quite nicely. If there is any merit to my 
initial speculation, then Slughorn would be the perfect conduit for 
the information.

To go on a bit with what I wrote earlier: JKR has repeatedly been 
coy, yet insistent that the sacrifice Lily made (or at least 
offered) was somehow greater and deeper than the sacrifice made by 
James (which she considers more defensive combat, I believe she even 
uses the word "animalistic"). It has never quite made sense to me 
that Jame's desire to protect his family was less than Lily's desire 
to protect Harry alone (you know, she could have chosen to fight 
side by side with James in the protection of both her husband and 
her son). Afterall, wasn't it conceivable that both had a choice to 
step aside and leave Harry to LV. If there had been no resistance, 
might LV have spared both their lives.

However, Rowling's unelaborated distinction begins to make more 
sense in the context of Hx's. If the Potter's knew of LV's Hx plans, 
then they may well have recognized James (a Griffy heir) would be 
the desired death to create the tear. Thus Jame's battle with LV was 
not merely to protect his wife and son, but was indeed essential for 
his own life. As James was to be given no opportunity to live, there 
was no sacrifice, there was only defense (of both him and his 
family). 

But let's take this one step beyond. Jame's death was only a death, 
as clean as a combat death can be. He's dead, but his "soul" is left 
to do what soul's normally do after death in Rowling's world. 
However, they same might not apply to Lily's offered sacrifice and 
to Harry's intended fate. If using a human host for a Hx requires 
overwriting of the host's soul, as I suspect it does, then the 
host's death is not clean. There is no intact "soul" of the original 
to pass on to the WW's afterlife. This would be a fate worse than 
death alone.

If this be the case, then Lily's offer to take Harry's place 
involves a much deeper, more self/soul destroying sacrifice, than 
was ever available for James to make. When Lily is pleading for 
mercy, she is requesting something much more than a sparing of 
Harry's life, she is pleading for a sparing of his "soul." 

LV had no interest in killing Lily as it held no utility for him, 
except to remove a nuisance (which finally, he did). So the AK was 
addressed to Lily only (and appears that way in the graveyard 
scene). For Harry, LV's plan was to take over (possess) the 
soul/self/body of Harry, and then overwrite Harry's soul with his 
own, much more powerful, soul fragment. How elegant and ironic, this 
would have been! Keep in mind the Prophecy says that neither can 
live will the other survives. The default interpretation is that to 
not survive means to be killed, to no longer have one's body. But a 
deeper interpretation of "survive" is that the "soul"/self no longer 
continues (the premise forshadowed, or perhaps echoed, by 
BCjrs "soul" being sucked by the dementor--can anyone say that 
BCjr "survived" or "lived" after that). 

Had LV overwritten the "soul" of his prophesied adversary, would 
that not have been a more complete and thorough "killing" of his 
adversary than any simple AK that would yet leave behind a possible 
ghost or after-life spirit. I also suspect that the challenge of 
thoroughly overwriting an existing soul in order to substitute your 
own soul fragment is likely the most difficult and dangerous of all 
magic, perhaps magic that had never been done before (or at least 
not since SS). What a crowning glory this would have been for LV. To 
complete his final Hx, a number more than had ever been acheived 
before, doing so in a means that had never been done before, and 
best of all, doing it by the elimination of the prophesied means for 
his overthrow(but not by physical death-indeed rather, by retaining 
a trophy). For LV, it would be irresistable--a crushing achievement 
and declaration of his unassailable power.

What we presently have in Harry is a failed overwrite. As the twin 
columns of smoke revealed in DD office, likely LV did manage to 
first possess, and then transfer his soul fragment to Harry, but the 
attempt to overwrite Harry's soul was catastrophically rejected. The 
result being Harry's scar, the destruction of LV's body, the 
devastation of GH, and within Harry's body, two souls in essence 
divided.

So Lily's sacrifice was significant in that she was offering her 
soul as well as her mortal life. The above would also mean that her 
charm was made in an unsure attempt to prevent the loss or overwrite 
of Harry's soul. This is what LV really didn't anticipate. He was 
likely prepared for all sorts of defenses against mortal death, but 
didn't anticipate defenses in protection of the soul. Some might 
suggest that the greatest strengthening of the soul is associated 
with love?I'll leave it to others to pursue this aspect if they 
wish. So not only might Lilly have gained her knowledge of Hx's from 
Slughorn, but one wonders if she went to another for her knowledge 
of how to create a charm for the protection of the soul. If the 
latter be true, I'm betting that it wasn't DD, but someone else 
(maybe even Ollivander). 

As always, more likely the above is all rubbish than 
JKR's "reality," but I would suggest it holds some explanatory power 
and potential for amusement.

Have fun








From dontask2much at dontask2much.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 24 05:57:54 2006
From: dontask2much at dontask2much.yahoo.invalid (rebecca)
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 00:57:54 -0500
Subject: Potion In The Cave Maybe Revealed - Try This For Yourself
Message-ID: <011901c64f07$e5433470$6401a8c0@...>

I posted this to TOL, and thought you folks who don't see everything there 
might appreciate it too.

One poster posed that there is a clue in that DD's portrait in the 
headmaster's office after his demise appeared to be sleeping.  I kept 
thinking green light, green light...it's mentioned all over that chapter in 
HBP. There's all kinds of speculation about the potion that  makes one think 
Draught of  Living Death or Sleeping Potion, doesn't it? What's intriguing 
about this is we're told that the DoLD is pink, and pale pink, at its last 
stages and the Sleeping Potion is purple, so that would lead you to think 
neither of those is correct.  But consider these statements from HBP:

(Slughorn's first exercise in Potions, DoLD at the last stage) "Harry 
stirred counterclockwise, held his breath, and stirred once clockwise. The 
effect was immediate. The potion turned pale pink."

And let's not forget this in the same chapter: "Harry glanced around. As far 
as he could see, no one else's potion had turned as pale as his."

Then there's Harry and Dumbledore in the cave later in the book: "Sure 
enough, the greenish light seemed to be growing larger at last, and within 
minutes, the boat had come to a halt, bumping gently into something that 
Harry could not see at first."

"The basin was full of an emerald liquid emitting that phosphorescent glow"

"Was this why he had been invited along - so that he could force-feed 
Dumbledore a potion that might cause him unendurable pain?"

Now, let's recall that the "DoLD seems to be pale pink when completed" 
thingy I mentioned prior. I'm a certified scuba instructor with some 500 or 
so dives under my dive belt - I know what fish and coral look like 
underwater on cloudy day 30 ft underwater and red is a color you don't see 
naturally unless you have bright sunlight and very clear water or add 
filters or additional bright light -without much light, red fades and looks 
like a bright variant of the subdued light around it, for lack of a better 
description.   Pink is a color made by mixing red and white, and in pale 
pink, more white than red.  Remember, red is the one of the lowest 
frequencies of light discernable by the human eye and white by its nature 
reflects light. If there is a greenish light above the potion, one could 
submit it is actually absorbing what it can and then reflecting back what it 
cannot absorb based on the natural color of the potion in ambient or white 
light.  The phosphorescent glow could be the reflection of the white color 
portion of the potion - the pink creates an eyeball impression of a brighter 
green.

You can actually duplicate this and see the emerald color describing the 
potion in the cave by using 2 appropriately colored boxes in any paint 
program (even Powerpoint using colored text boxes, which I used first to 
try.) I used 1 box as pale pink as the base, full color, and the other box 
slightly bigger at about a 20% transparency to duplicate low light, since we 
know the cave was very dark as Harry couldn't even tell what the rowboat 
bumped into when it came to rest on the island where the potion and light 
were.  I will mention that whatever transparency you use, you'll see that 
the color remains a heightened green where the pale pink box resides with 
the green overlay.

Just so you know, the purple experiment of this (for the Sleeping Potion as 
its described) revealed a *darker* shade of green, since deep blue and red 
make up that color. The purple hasn't any white in the mix, so the 
phosphorescent glow or reflection of light wouldn't occur.

Tricky, tricky that JKR, hm?  IMO, DD drank some souped up Draught of Living 
Death.

Rebecca





From joym999 at joywitch_m_curmudgeon.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 24 18:21:55 2006
From: joym999 at joywitch_m_curmudgeon.yahoo.invalid (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 18:21:55 -0000
Subject: Potion In The Cave Maybe Revealed - Try This For Yourself
In-Reply-To: <011901c64f07$e5433470$6401a8c0@...>
Message-ID: <e01dc3+359q@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "rebecca" <dontask2much at ...> 
wrote:
>
> [snipsnipsnip]

> Tricky, tricky that JKR, hm?  IMO, DD drank some souped up Draught 
of Living 
> Death.

So, uh, that would mean that Dumbledore is really alive?  Nothing 
would make me happier, but it also seems like a cheap trick, and one 
that JKR is unlikely to play on us.  OTOH, who the hell can predict 
what that woman will do?

Joywitch M. Curmudgeon, who loves Dumbledore and hates, hates, hates, 
hates Snape






From dontask2much at dontask2much.yahoo.invalid  Sat Mar 25 03:41:37 2006
From: dontask2much at dontask2much.yahoo.invalid (rebecca)
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 22:41:37 -0500
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: Potion In The Cave Maybe Revealed - Try This For Yourself
References: <e01dc3+359q@...>
Message-ID: <010101c64fbe$0553b3f0$6401a8c0@...>

From: "joywitch_m_curmudgeon"

>So, uh, that would mean that Dumbledore is really alive?  Nothing
>would make me happier, but it also seems like a cheap trick, and one
>that JKR is unlikely to play on us.  OTOH, who the hell can predict
>what that woman will do?

>Joywitch M. Curmudgeon, who loves Dumbledore and hates, hates, hates,
hates Snape

Rebecca:

Naw, I think he's dead because Snape did him in on the Tower. But in another 
twist of fate, I'm not so sure Regulus Black is.  That's another topic 
entirely, though :)

Rebecca








From judy at judyserenity.yahoo.invalid  Sat Mar 25 08:33:26 2006
From: judy at judyserenity.yahoo.invalid (Judy)
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 08:33:26 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_What_might_Lilly_have_known_that_DD_didn=92t=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <dvsgh5+9c7v@...>
Message-ID: <e02v8m+g25d@...>

Lyn said:
>>> it goes back to the one line that haunts and intrigues me more 
than any other line in the books: "Not Harry, please no, take me, 
kill me instead." I continue to find the first phrase, "take me," as 
more than a synonym for "kill me, " in part because there would have 
a needless redundancy in the words that an editor would likely have 
eliminated. No, I believe the two phrases were deliberately written 
and retained, but then this begs the question, "Take me for what?"  
In this case, I would now speculate that Lilly knew that LV was there 
for a purpose in addition to killing Harry and Lily was offering 
herself as more than just a substitute death. One speculation might 
be that she is offering herself as a substitute vessel for the 
formation of a Hx. <<<

Lily clearly thought that Voldemort intended to kill Harry; she 
said "kill me instead." So, this implies that Lily was suggesting 
Voldemort kill her and then use her body as a horcrux, rather than 
doing the same to Harry.  I suppose a dead body could be used as a 
horcrux -- yuck! It does seem that inferi don't decompose, since the 
ones in the cave were still intact, but -- yuck!

Anyway, given that Lily thought Voldemort planned to kill Harry, I 
don't think she believed that Voldemort would possess Harry in the 
process of making him into a Horcrux, therefore "overwriting" Harry's 
soul.  If Harry were killed, and his body was then made into a 
horcrux afterwards, his soul would already be gone, and in no danger 
of being overwritten.  But if Voldemort possessed Harry before 
killing him, he'd presumably be at risk of doing damage to himself, 
since he'd be in the body he was killing. 

Also, Lily really had no reason to think that Voldemort would be 
making a horcrux so long after he gained power. It's possible that 
people ususpected that Voldemort was protecting himself with a 
horcrux, but it seems that making multiple horcruxes was unheard of. 
Dumbledore himself seemed to only figure it out because of 
Voldemort's casual treatment of the Diary Horcrux.  Dumbledore didn't 
think that the Death Eaters knew about the multiple horcruxes, so the 
Death Eaters wouldn't be a source of information, either.  Really, 
Slughorn was the only one who had reason to believe that Voldemort 
was making multiple horcruxes -- but he was terrified of telling 
anyone.  Much as Slughorn was fond of Lily, it took a *lot* for 
Slughorn to tell the truth to Lily's son, so I don't think Slughorn 
would have been eager to tell Lily about this.  And, why would Lily 
even think to ask Slughorn about horcruxes? 

I see Lily's "take me, kill me instead" as pretty realistic dialogue 
for someone whose husband was just murdered and who expected her baby 
to be murdered, too.  I don't really see any hidden clues in what she 
says to Voldemort. 

-- Judy







From talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid  Sat Mar 25 09:35:36 2006
From: talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid (Talisman)
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 09:35:36 -0000
Subject: Cheap Tricks and Epiphanies (was: Potion In The Cave
In-Reply-To: <e01dc3+359q@...>
Message-ID: <e032t8+i9op@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "joywitch_m_curmudgeon" 
<joym999 at ...> wrote:
 
> So, uh, that would mean that Dumbledore is really alive?  Nothing 
> would make me happier, but it also seems like a cheap trick, and one 
> that JKR is unlikely to play on us. > 

Hmmm. With a series that explores faked death in nearly every book, a 
book (HBP) that openly shows and discusses faked death, and a character 
represented by the phoenix, I can't agree that a return from the 
seeming-grave would be either a cheap trick or unlikely. I think it's 
on the menu, in neon lights.


> Joywitch M. Curmudgeon, who loves Dumbledore and hates, hates, hates, 
> hates Snape
>

Now, now. Remember, Rowling herself considers it a flaw in Sirius's 
character that he can't appreciate Snape's good qualities. ;)

Don't worry.  Your beloved old meddler is out scampering amongst the 
villains, setting things up for the big domino-extravaganda ending.

Harry doesn't have to be the prime-mover behind the happy ending.  He 
just has to have a profound epiphany--and do the right thing.

He has to face that thing for which, Rowling said, it would take seven 
books to prepare him.  He has to have his transformative moment--and 
that is all. That is the raison d'etre of his quest, not single-
handedly saving the WW.

If it were, let's face it, he'd already have failed.

Talisman, who enjoys Dumbledore's antics, and loves, loves, loves, 
loves Snape.











From kumayama at kumayama.yahoo.invalid  Sat Mar 25 19:36:22 2006
From: kumayama at kumayama.yahoo.invalid (Lyn J. Mangiameli)
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 19:36:22 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_What_might_Lilly_have_known_that_DD_didn=92t=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <e02v8m+g25d@...>
Message-ID: <e0463m+6kmd@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Judy" <judy at ...> wrote:
> 
> Lily clearly thought that Voldemort intended to kill Harry; she 
> said "kill me instead." So, this implies that Lily was suggesting 
> Voldemort kill her and then use her body as a horcrux, rather than 
> doing the same to Harry.  I suppose a dead body could be used as a 
> horcrux -- yuck! It does seem that inferi don't decompose, since the 
> ones in the cave were still intact, but -- yuck!
> 
> Anyway, given that Lily thought Voldemort planned to kill Harry, I 
> don't think she believed that Voldemort would possess Harry in the 
> process of making him into a Horcrux, therefore "overwriting" Harry's 
> soul.  If Harry were killed, and his body was then made into a 
> horcrux afterwards, his soul would already be gone, and in no danger 
> of being overwritten.  But if Voldemort possessed Harry before 
> killing him, he'd presumably be at risk of doing damage to himself, 
> since he'd be in the body he was killing. 

Lyn here:
Our different views hinge quite a bit on they way in which we define the word "kill." I am 
positing that Rowling's usage of kill may be more expansive than simply to end biological 
functioning. I'm suggesting the possibility that to deprive one of one's soul (say, by 
substituting one soul for another within the same body) might be considered a form of 
killing, yet leave a physical body biologically intact and functioning. Don't we presently 
face similar issues when a person is found to be "brain dead," yet an otherwise functioning 
body. 

So, I'm suggesting there is no need for a decomposing body to bring about the end of an 
adversary, achieve a death if you will. As I mentioned earlier, to extinguish the soul of a 
person is far more powerful "killing" than simply destroying their body. I find this 
consistent with Rowling's choice of using the word "vanquish" in the prophecy and with 
respect to DD and Grindenwald. 

I must also return to a point that most satisfied with an AK attempt on Harry consitently 
choose to overlook, that is, that during the prior incantatem scene in the graveyard, all of 
LV's uses of his wand are revealed back to Jame's death, and that there is NO regurgitation 
of any wand based spell cast against Harry. Rowling had two chances at writing this scene, 
and in both she leaves out any wand based action against Harry. No scar, no scream, 
nothing. While others such as Olivander and DD may speculate and assume what 
happened that night, the PI is about as close to a literal record of what occurred as has 
thus far been accessible from JKR. This, for some of us, leads us to seek another 
explanation and means for LV's assault on Harry.

If one goes with the possibility, which most believe DD suggests, that LV choose Hx 
receptacles from those of special significance to him, what could be of greater significance 
than his prophesied nemisis. Should Nagini be a Hx, then this may in part be his practice 
attempt (perhaps occuring after hearing of the prophecy) at preparing for making a human 
Hx. 

Back to Judy: 
> Also, Lily really had no reason to think that Voldemort would be 
> making a horcrux so long after he gained power...... SNIP......  And, why would Lily 
> even think to ask Slughorn about horcruxes? 

A crucial question, and one I don't have a present answer to......just maybe, because JKR 
had deliberately witheld so much information about Lily. But I am confident of one thing, 
there is much more to Lily than has thus far been revealed. Many have previously assumed 
Lily may have worked in the DoMM. I am particularly tantalized by Rowling's decision to let 
us know that the handwriting in the Potions textbook might well have been from a woman. 

Judy again:
> I see Lily's "take me, kill me instead" as pretty realistic dialogue 
> for someone whose husband was just murdered and who expected her baby 
> to be murdered, too.  I don't really see any hidden clues in what she 
> says to Voldemort. 
> 
I fully accept your view as a fair, realistic, and conservative reading of the text available to 
us. It just seems insufficient to me to take in all the facts (such as the PI at the graveyard), 
and possibilities. I approach the series as more of a morality play set within a mystery, and 
so I still tend to explore possible solutions to the mystery that would be consistent with 
the moral themes she appears to return to. It's rather ironic really, that this atheist is 
going on so about loss of soul rather than physical death, but then that's my take on a 
possible way JKR is conceiving of this.







From dontask2much at dontask2much.yahoo.invalid  Sat Mar 25 23:51:53 2006
From: dontask2much at dontask2much.yahoo.invalid (rebecca)
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 18:51:53 -0500
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: What might Lilly have known that DD didn't?
References: <e0463m+6kmd@...>
Message-ID: <02fd01c65067$18469410$6401a8c0@...>

Lyn here:

<snip>

I must also return to a point that most satisfied with an AK attempt on 
Harry consitently
choose to overlook, that is, that during the prior incantatem scene in the 
graveyard, all of
LV's uses of his wand are revealed back to Jame's death, and that there is 
NO regurgitation
of any wand based spell cast against Harry. Rowling had two chances at 
writing this scene,
and in both she leaves out any wand based action against Harry. No scar, no 
scream,
nothing. While others such as Olivander and DD may speculate and assume what
happened that night, the PI is about as close to a literal record of what 
occurred as has
thus far been accessible from JKR. This, for some of us, leads us to seek 
another
explanation and means for LV's assault on Harry.

Rebecca responds:

This part of your post reminds me of  the "what *really* happened in GH" 
speculation.  Everyone in the WW apparently knows at the beginning of PS/SS 
that LV has "fled the scene" and disappeared after being at the Potters the 
night before. The *rumor* (and I emphasize the word for a reason) as 
McGonagall tells DD on Pivet Drive is that LV couldn't kill Harry. 
Rumors....they do get around, don't they?  And the public at large (with the 
exception of a suspicion DD may have had, and I'd have to check the timeline 
for Regulus' spelunking in the cave) appears at that point to have not had 
an notion about the Dark Twisted Lord's Hor-thing-a-mah-bobs.

Hello, what if LV *didn't* try a AK on Harry? I agree with you that the 
definition of the word "kill" is probably not what everyone thinks generally 
it is. I would equate what I'm speculating more with what the Dementoids do 
when administering a kiss on their victims, or perhaps a form of soul 
possession as LV did with Quirrell. DD did say in PS/SS that Quirrell was 
"sharing" his soul w/ that of LV. And Nagini apparently does have a mind of 
her own, if we take what DD says to heart.

Now, through too much sci fi viewing over during my meager existence, what 
if LV's mission to GH was to collect Harry's soul and keep it himself? 
That's a hell of trophy of the murder of a perceived enemy, given the 
prophecy that LV believes, isn't it?

Rebecca






From kumayama at kumayama.yahoo.invalid  Sun Mar 26 06:34:49 2006
From: kumayama at kumayama.yahoo.invalid (Lyn J. Mangiameli)
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 06:34:49 -0000
Subject: What might Lilly have known that DD didn't?
In-Reply-To: <02fd01c65067$18469410$6401a8c0@...>
Message-ID: <e05cm9+rjrj@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "rebecca" <dontask2much at ...> wrote:
> This part of your post reminds me of  the "what *really* happened in GH" 
> speculation.  Everyone in the WW apparently knows at the beginning of PS/SS 
> that LV has "fled the scene" and disappeared after being at the Potters the 
> night before. The *rumor* (and I emphasize the word for a reason) as 
> McGonagall tells DD on Pivet Drive is that LV couldn't kill Harry. 
> Rumors....they do get around, don't they?  And the public at large (with the 
> exception of a suspicion DD may have had, and I'd have to check the timeline 
> for Regulus' spelunking in the cave) appears at that point to have not had 
> an notion about the Dark Twisted Lord's Hor-thing-a-mah-bobs.
> 
> Hello, what if LV *didn't* try a AK on Harry? I agree with you that the 
> definition of the word "kill" is probably not what everyone thinks generally 
> it is. I would equate what I'm speculating more with what the Dementoids do 
> when administering a kiss on their victims, or perhaps a form of soul 
> possession as LV did with Quirrell. DD did say in PS/SS that Quirrell was 
> "sharing" his soul w/ that of LV. And Nagini apparently does have a mind of 
> her own, if we take what DD says to heart.
> 
> Now, through too much sci fi viewing over during my meager existence, what 
> if LV's mission to GH was to collect Harry's soul and keep it himself? 
> That's a hell of trophy of the murder of a perceived enemy, given the 
> prophecy that LV believes, isn't it?
> 
> Rebecca


Lyn now:
Yes, it would be quite a personally significant trophy. I'm unsure of the exact thing that LV 
wanted to/ did do to Harry, but I'm growing more and more sure that he wanted to do 
something beyond destroying his body. 

It has been made very clear that DD takes this Hx and soul stuff very seriously, and has 
taken an uncommonly strong stance, for him, in trying to withhold this knowledge from 
others. I suspect it is because DD has some understanding of the potential for the 
formation of a Hx to affect the soul of others, above and beyond a simple murder.

It is a very curious thing, this whole issue of all the wizarding world learning of LV's 
"demise" by his attempt to AK an infant. As you point out, the WW in general didn't have 
any information about the prophecy, didn't know about Hxs, and probably weren't even 
particularly aware of Harry (who had been christened in private and been hidden most of 
his life). Makes you wonder what they told themselves, or were told, about why LV 
bothered to try to AK an infant. Makes you also wonder why this small community of 
wizards where everyone is related and everyone knows each other's business, all took 
what happened that night as so significant, yet so easily accepted that HP should then 
drop out of site for the next ten years. Not a hint of curiosity? Where the hell was Rita 
during this time--she should have been all too eager for the expose "Child who destroyed 
HWMNBN is found hidden with Muggles."

Just weird, a whole mythology is created and celebrated with abandon for a couple of days, 
then dropped in a heartbeat. I really hope JKR will offer something to explain this, though I 
don't have much hope. Really, where is this WWs curiosity, "why Harry, how Harry, where 
Harry".  It really does seem that the WW took the story it was fed quite uncritically, much 
as many still do. 
 







From jferer at jferer.yahoo.invalid  Sun Mar 26 11:46:58 2006
From: jferer at jferer.yahoo.invalid (Jim Ferer)
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 11:46:58 -0000
Subject: Horcruxes/Snape's social life
In-Reply-To: <dusqsq+k30j@...>
Message-ID: <e05uvi+kesd@...>

Eustace: "Guess my money's on Ernie MacMillan or Neville Longbottom at
this point."

Ron and Hermione might stay at school after all, and Professor
McGonagall might not know that Ron and Hermione might not be back. It
would be Hermione in a walk, nomrally. 






From jferer at jferer.yahoo.invalid  Sun Mar 26 15:42:50 2006
From: jferer at jferer.yahoo.invalid (Jim Ferer)
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 15:42:50 -0000
Subject: Pureblood Nepotism, OoP Drought, Milk Bottles, Draco, Head Girl
In-Reply-To: <duvcvb+hulk@...>
Message-ID: <e06cpq+1cqd@...>

Eileen wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/4011
"I can't consider Draco very likely, considering he's on the lam
from the authorities."

Catlady (Rita) answered "No, he's on the lam from the Death Eaters."

I'd say he's on the lam from everybody. Draco wants out, all the way
out, for himself and his mother, and there's only one way out: Harry.
Harry will want a price, though; where's Voldemort?







From dontask2much at dontask2much.yahoo.invalid  Sun Mar 26 17:06:12 2006
From: dontask2much at dontask2much.yahoo.invalid (rebecca)
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 12:06:12 -0500
Subject: Soul Hunting, Truth, Denial and Reality (was Re: What might Lilly have known that DD didn't?)
References: <e05cm9+rjrj@...>
Message-ID: <049701c650f7$96241890$6401a8c0@...>

"rebecca" <dontask2much at ...> wrote:

>snip<.
>
> Hello, what if LV *didn't* try a AK on Harry? I agree with you that the
> definition of the word "kill" is probably not what everyone thinks 
> generally
> it is. I would equate what I'm speculating more with what the Dementoids 
> do
> when administering a kiss on their victims, or perhaps a form of soul
> possession as LV did with Quirrell. DD did say in PS/SS that Quirrell was
> "sharing" his soul w/ that of LV. And Nagini apparently does have a mind 
> of
> her own, if we take what DD says to heart.
>
> Now, through too much sci fi viewing over during my meager existence, what
> if LV's mission to GH was to collect Harry's soul and keep it himself?
> That's a hell of trophy of the murder of a perceived enemy, given the
> prophecy that LV believes, isn't it?
>

>Lyn now:

>Yes, it would be quite a personally significant trophy. I'm unsure of the 
>exact thing that LV
>wanted to/ did do to Harry, but I'm growing more and more sure that he 
>wanted to do
>something beyond destroying his body.

Rebecca:

What turned me on to this concept was during the bout with the flu a couple 
weeks ago when I decided to watch my collection of Babylon 5 DVD's.  Strange 
the ideas you get when watching a space opera and have an addled slightly 
baking brain, hm? Probably should be outlawed...

Episode 2 of the first real season is entitled "Soul Hunter", written as all 
D5 episodes are by  J. Michael Straczynski.  JMS, as he signs his notes to 
his fans, felt that this was one of the episodes he hoped would "generate 
discussions, arguments, even a bar fight or two." One of the races he 
created which are represented on the station, the Minbari, fear soul 
hunters, even warning and educating their people from birth actively about 
them. The Minbari believe that the soul hunter's method of preservation is 
true death, for it cuts a soul off from the rest and diminishes the next 
generation of Minbari.

Soul hunters believe when a person dies, the soul expires into oblivion. 
However, soul hunters have a prescient attraction to death - if they so 
choose they can capture and preserve a soul "for the greater good" at the 
moment it leaves the body. They carry with them a bag full of the souls they 
have "saved", each in its own glass vessel.

The various other characters on the show take their own stands about this, 
which of course vary depending on their theological. cultural, and 
philosphical beliefs about what a soul is. And true to real life, JMS also 
mentions in his backstory about the episode with fans that he had problems 
with some members of the production staff having a theological problem with 
the episode's content.  As he also said, the basic concept goes back to the 
beginnings of civilization (that your soul can be captured somehow) and 
includes the issues *behind* the soul...where does it come from, where does 
it go, does it survive the death of the body, or does it go on. While he 
admitted the episode was creepy, he was very proud of  it nonetheless.

LV at the moment isn't a harvester of anyone's soul but his own, but in the 
present, he views himself as immortal, doesn't he? Most characters in 
mythology and literature who believe they achieve or have achieved 
immortality often begin thinking they are *gods.*

>Lyn:
>It is a very curious thing, this whole issue of all the wizarding world 
>learning of LV's
>"demise" by his attempt to AK an infant. As you point out, the WW in 
>general didn't have
>any information about the prophecy, didn't know about Hxs, and probably 
>weren't even
>particularly aware of Harry (who had been christened in private and been 
>hidden most of
>his life). Makes you wonder what they told themselves, or were told, about 
>why LV
>bothered to try to AK an infant. Makes you also wonder why this small 
>community of
>wizards where everyone is related and everyone knows each other's business, 
>all took
>what happened that night as so significant, yet so easily accepted that HP 
>should then
>drop out of site for the next ten years. Not a hint of curiosity? Where the 
>hell was Rita
>during this time--she should have been all too eager for the expose "Child 
>who destroyed
>HWMNBN is found hidden with Muggles."

Rebecca:

I think you've hit the nail on the head and gratefully, I salute you. Why? 
Because I like seeking what the truth is, from a *philosophical* 
perspective. This marries with with something that DD said in PS/SS when 
telling Harry that the truth "is a beautiful and terrible thing,and should 
therefore be treated with great caution." Truth, knowledge and wisdom are 
all intertwined in philosophy. Many think that applies to just Harry's 
related truth's about why LV tried to *kill* him, and I would submit it 
applies to everything in the WW society, including the propensity for 
propaganda displayed by the Ministry through the Daily Prophet. Wouldn't it 
be fabulous to have seen those Prophet issues way back when? You know, it 
was a rumor about all of it - did the Ministry influenced Prophet actually 
publish anything of substance about GH?

Pandering to what people want to think rather than what really *is* promotes 
deceiving one's self about reality - this is a major issue in the HP series. 
Fudge in GoF is a true representation of this with his obvious self denial 
of LV's return: the Dursleys and their denial of magic and Harry are a case 
study of it.   DD also mentions that the WW is in denial about how they 
treat their fellow magical cousins and creatures, and Harry even has to 
battle this denial in OoP in physical way overtly when Umbridge has him 
write the line " I will not tell lies" in his own blood.  Ok JKR, I get the 
message -the WW society has a definite problem with reality. :)

The problem with self deception or the denial of reality is that eventually 
as that condition progresses, 2 things happen:  1) the condition bleeds to 
other areas and 2) reality and the truth rears its head until denial is no 
longer possible. The latter is the progression I think I we're seeing in the 
books, particularly with HBP. The reality of LV, if he weren't a wizard and 
were present in our world today, is that he is a thief and a sadistic serial 
murderer, probably afflicted with antisocial personality disorder - he is a 
criminal. There are members of the DE who are going to figure this out as 
the DE's start to be affected *themselves* with those close to them at LV's 
direction - the Malfoys are one example and my bet is others will be too. 
It's a fact that people only change their thoughts or actions when there's a 
direct endangerment or incentive. Regulus figured it out, and look how far 
he went?

What if the Ministry had come out with a dossier to the public on LV, 
including the fact he's a half blood and not a pureblood - and that his 
given name is Tom Riddle? It's not common knowledge those 2 things, are 
they? Forget listing who the DE's are, and focus on dumbing this guy down to 
what he is: a criminal who must be stopped. Part of the reason that the WW 
at large doesn't use his given name is that yes, they fear him, but no real 
information about Tom Riddle has been provided to them to decrease this 
fear, has it?  It doesn't even appear that anyone (other than DD)  has tried 
to find out about him at all!  Instead, they hide behind calling him HWMNBN 
or YKW and make him less than human, thereby increasing the fear about him. 
Futhermore, now the Ministry and the Prophet have seemed to have granted 
Harry, in the effort to make an "equal" with LV, the same kind of notoriety: 
The Boy Who Lived now matured to The Chosen One in HBP. Compare that to what 
Harry did when telling his story to the Quibbler - he provided accurate 
information that started to "shift" perception of Quibbler readers that LV 
was back and what he is capable of doing.

Rebecca, are you on crack, you might ask? The answer is no, I'm not.  I have 
a very hard time with the media in the US when serial criminals are 
sensationalized by some catchy names like DC Sniper, BTK, the Hillside 
Strangler, and the Zodiac. It sensationalizes an dehumanizes a criminal in a 
subconscious way to the point where the rest of the law abiding public is in 
a panic - if you'd been in DC during the Sniper episode and got caught in 5 
hours of rush hour traffic going home when your normal commute was an hour 
(and this happened several times over a period of 6 weeks for me), you'd 
understand just how panicked people and officials were. And how rampant 
rumor was - good lord, the things we heard.

>Lyn:
>Just weird, a whole mythology is created and celebrated with abandon for a 
>couple of days,
>then dropped in a heartbeat. I really hope JKR will offer something to 
>explain this, though I
>don't have much hope. Really, where is this WWs curiosity, "why Harry, how 
>Harry, where
>Harry".  It really does seem that the WW took the story it was fed quite 
>uncritically, much
>as many still do.

Rebecca:

It has been said that lies become rumor -- given enough time, rumor becomes 
myth -- myth becomes legend and there is always a fragment of truth in 
legend.  I'm of the mind that we'll see that legend/myth broken in the next 
book because I think the full truth known to the public,  not just Harry and 
Company, and LV's defeat are linked.

Notice that the myth is not fed with "Lily died for her son", just that the 
Potters were killed. All of it seems to be focused around who lived, not how 
he lived or the others who died. The WW is very, very shallow in this 
regard, isn't it?  A society which lives in denial cannot long survive 
without acceptance of the reality, and ultimately, the realization of the 
truth.

rebecca, who thinks this is all great fun to discuss this way and hopes 
others are interested in this as much as speculation about the individual 
characters









From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sun Mar 26 23:21:34 2006
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 23:21:34 -0000
Subject: Cheap Tricks and Epiphanies (was: Potion In The Cave
In-Reply-To: <e032t8+i9op@...>
Message-ID: <e077lu+v05f@...>

Talisman wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/4042  :

<< Hmmm. With a series that explores faked death in nearly every book,
a book (HBP) that openly shows and discusses faked death, and a
character represented by the phoenix, I can't agree that a return from
the seeming-grave would be either a cheap trick or unlikely. I think
it's on the menu, in neon lights. >>

Stupid (at least memory-challenged!) Catlady can't remember faked
death being openly shown in HBP.







From kumayama at kumayama.yahoo.invalid  Sun Mar 26 23:31:29 2006
From: kumayama at kumayama.yahoo.invalid (Lyn J. Mangiameli)
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 23:31:29 -0000
Subject: Cheap Tricks and Epiphanies (was: Potion In The Cave
In-Reply-To: <e077lu+v05f@...>
Message-ID: <e0788h+f9b3@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" <catlady at ...> wrote:
>> 
> Stupid (at least memory-challenged!) Catlady can't remember faked
> death being openly shown in HBP.
>
DD & Harry's visit to Slughorn







From erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Mon Mar 27 15:49:09 2006
From: erebstock at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (Eileen Rebstock)
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 08:49:09 -0700
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: Cheap Tricks and Epiphanies (was: Potion In The Cave
Message-ID: <3FF9E274C2DF9748B96A2C35130CAF3F0E86F6@...>

If I had to predict a faked death, it'd be Regulus Black, though. Much
more fun than Dumbledore.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com
[mailto:the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com]
> On Behalf Of Lyn J. Mangiameli
> Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2006 4:31 PM
> To: the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: Cheap Tricks and Epiphanies (was: Potion
In
> The Cave
> 
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)"
> <catlady at ...> wrote:
> >>
> > Stupid (at least memory-challenged!) Catlady can't remember faked
> > death being openly shown in HBP.
> >
> DD & Harry's visit to Slughorn
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 




From annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid  Fri Mar 31 19:00:04 2006
From: annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid (annemehr)
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 19:00:04 -0000
Subject: DO Disturb!
Message-ID: <e0ju7k+9fmq@...>

*runs around in circles*

The sign's off the door!  The sign's off the door!

*floos out*

~A