From carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid  Thu May 10 21:27:23 2007
From: carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid (carolynwhite2)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 21:27:23 -0000
Subject: OT: Spato-meter
Message-ID: <f202nr+ikp3@...>

Just picked this up off another website, thought it might amuse and 
jog a few fond memories of Things Worth Arguing About..
Carolyn
..wondering whether Tony's told Gordon about the Minister for Magic



1 Calm ? someone posts an innocuous message on the message board.

2 Scuffle ? another person says "ooh, that wasn't funny/fair/kind".

3 Tussle ? a few more people get involved either to back up the 
original poster or to agree with the dissenter. Someone says "I find 
that very offensive". 

4 Scrap ? serious insults start to appear. First catpee occurs. 
Thread reaches 50 replies.

5 Fracas ? spat really gets going as people threaten to leave. 
Plaintive cries of "why can't we all be nice?" can be heard.

6 Affray ? first mention of newbies v. oldies. People are accused of 
hi-jacking the thread for their own agenda. 

7 Fight ? first flounce occurs. The thread now has over 100 replies. 

8 Punch-up ? hosts get involved. Thread no longer makes sense as most 
of it has been catpeed. 

9 Brawl ? first mention of 'cliques'. More flouncing. High number 
of 'please don't go' posts can be observed. Wendy swears.

10 All?out war ? multiple flouncing. Thread now covers six pages. 
Spat enters Mustardland folklore.





From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Fri May 11 09:22:25 2007
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 09:22:25 -0000
Subject: OT: Spato-meter
In-Reply-To: <f202nr+ikp3@...>
Message-ID: <f21ckh+142a@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" <carolynwhite2 at ...> wrote:
>
> Just picked this up off another website, thought it might amuse and 
> jog a few fond memories of Things Worth Arguing About..
> Carolyn
> ..wondering whether Tony's told Gordon about the Minister for Magic
> 
> 
> 
> 1 Calm ? someone posts an innocuous message on the message board.
> 
> 2 Scuffle ? another person says "ooh, that wasn't funny/fair/kind".
> 
> 3 Tussle ? a few more people get involved either to back up the 
> original poster or to agree with the dissenter. Someone says "I find 
> that very offensive". 
> 
> 4 Scrap ? serious insults start to appear. First catpee occurs. 
> Thread reaches 50 replies.
> 
> 5 Fracas ? spat really gets going as people threaten to leave. 
> Plaintive cries of "why can't we all be nice?" can be heard.
> 
> 6 Affray ? first mention of newbies v. oldies. People are accused of 
> hi-jacking the thread for their own agenda. 
> 
> 7 Fight ? first flounce occurs. The thread now has over 100 replies. 
> 
> 8 Punch-up ? hosts get involved. Thread no longer makes sense as most 
> of it has been catpeed. 
> 
> 9 Brawl ? first mention of 'cliques'. More flouncing. High number 
> of 'please don't go' posts can be observed. Wendy swears.
> 
> 10 All?out war ? multiple flouncing. Thread now covers six pages. 
> Spat enters Mustardland folklore.
>

They seem to have missed out a key escalation point in any protracted
blogging spat - the one predicted by Godwin's Law.
"As an on-line discussion grows longer, the probability of a
comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."

Mind you, those on the receiving end (usually the contrarians, known 
trouble-makers and the incurably mischievous) don't mind too much,
bearing in mind O'Rourke's observation:
"I have often been called a Nazi, and, although it is unfair, I don't let
it bother me for one simple reason. No one has ever had a fantasy
about being tied to a bed and ravished by a liberal."

A good, old-fashioned up-and-downer can be great entertainment,  
especially if one of the main participants manages to keep their cool
while the main opponents foam at the mouth in outrage. Still, you 
can't imagine that such a thing could happen amongst the gentle 
souls pondering the life and times of a boy wizard, can you?

Hur, hur, hur...

Kneasy







From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Fri May 11 14:44:10 2007
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 14:44:10 -0000
Subject: OT: Spato-meter
In-Reply-To: <f202nr+ikp3@...>
Message-ID: <f21vfq+v5k2@...>

> Carolyn
> ..wondering whether Tony's told Gordon about the Minister for Magic

Ooh, that wasn't funny, fair, or kind to Tony or Gordon.  Or Wendy, 
whoever she may be.

David




From carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid  Sat May 12 13:27:25 2007
From: carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid (carolynwhite2)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 13:27:25 -0000
Subject: OT: Spato-meter
In-Reply-To: <f21vfq+v5k2@...>
Message-ID: <f24fbt+3ars@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" <dfrankiswork at ...> 
wrote:
>
> > Carolyn
> > ..wondering whether Tony's told Gordon about the Minister for 
Magic
> 
> Ooh, that wasn't funny, fair, or kind to Tony or Gordon.  Or Wendy, 
> whoever she may be.
> 
> David
>

Carolyn:
Excellent. Who's going to move to stage 3:

> 1 Calm ? someone posts an innocuous message on the message board.
>
> 2 Scuffle ? another person says "ooh, that wasn't funny/fair/kind".
>
> 3 Tussle ? a few more people get involved either to back up the
> original poster or to agree with the dissenter. Someone says "I find
> that very offensive".

Kneasy:
A good, old-fashioned up-and-downer can be great entertainment,
especially if one of the main participants manages to keep their cool
while the main opponents foam at the mouth in outrage. Still, you
can't imagine that such a thing could happen amongst the gentle
souls pondering the life and times of a boy wizard, can you?

Hur, hur, hur...

Carolyn:
Fond memories of that infamous late-night bar-room brawl in The Other 
Place with..? Do y'know, the guy's name has been completely 
obliterated from my mind. Perhaps he was a nonentity. Fancy that. But 
chairs were certainly hurled, moderators invoked.. sigh, that list 
used to be worth reading.

Howsomever, returning to the chase. On the theme of Macmillan's (?) 
apocryphal remark, 'events dear boy, events', in what circumstances 
do we think the MoM should engage with the muggle government(s) to 
defeat Voldemort? And should the muggles' care?

Carolyn
..wondering whether to start a re-read of the series, and trying 
quite hard to get excited about Book 7.




From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Sat May 12 14:48:54 2007
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 14:48:54 -0000
Subject: OT: Spato-meter
In-Reply-To: <f24fbt+3ars@...>
Message-ID: <f24k4m+t7eh@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" <carolynwhite2 at ...> wrote:
> 
> 
> Carolyn:
> Fond memories of that infamous late-night bar-room brawl in The Other 
> Place with..? Do y'know, the guy's name has been completely 
> obliterated from my mind. Perhaps he was a nonentity. Fancy that. But 
> chairs were certainly hurled, moderators invoked.. sigh, that list 
> used to be worth reading.
> 

Slipped my mind too.... strange that, it's not all that often that I get called
a genocidal fascist. On site, that is; off-site, that's different.

> Howsomever, returning to the chase. On the theme of Macmillan's (?) 
> apocryphal remark, 'events dear boy, events', in what circumstances 
> do we think the MoM should engage with the muggle government(s) to 
> defeat Voldemort? And should the muggles' care?
> 

Mm.
Have to think about that.
Could hatch a Radio TBAY-type thingy. Might work.
But for the moment there's another "Once more - with questions" post
nearing completion, possibly tomorrow or Monday.

> Carolyn
> ..wondering whether to start a re-read of the series, and trying 
> quite hard to get excited about Book 7.
>

Yes, I know what you mean.
However, a good each-way bet for a surprise role in book 7 - Neville.
Hope to expand on that sometime soon, too.

Kneasy




From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Sun May 13 07:47:29 2007
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 07:47:29 -0000
Subject: Not quite the end
Message-ID: <f26fqh+8ntf@...>

What we hoped for, nice to have it confirmed.

http://tinyurl.com/2yp7wp




From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Sun May 13 11:53:12 2007
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 11:53:12 -0000
Subject: Once more -  with questions. part 3.
Message-ID: <f26u78+l5nh@...>

Third part, third book.
Another look back, and oh, boy - what a tangled skein
of plot threads and questions this one throws up, leaving
one to suspect that Jo was manufacturing dust by the 
barrow-load to throw in our eyes.

In those dear, distant days when PoA was the latest tome
on the shelf (and long before I was aware of the existence
of HP boards for adult, well, adultish readers) a proto-Kneasy
was already wallowing in conspiratorial contrarianism, though
by necessity of a solitary nature. Made up for that since by 
inflicting all manner of heretical notions on the gentle 
members, though there are a few ideas that haven't yet 
appeared in public. It would have been fun arguing them 
with other fans at the time, but there's a weight of canon 
piled up against them since. Pity. Maybe one day.... as a 
demonstration of deviationist thinking.   

It's not my favourite book of the series, but so far as plot
presentation and management is concerned it's got all the
bells and whistles anyone could wish for. There's so much 
going on in there that it's not easy to tease out and dissect
the constituent parts in isolation; everything seems to 
connect with, depend on, and impinge on, everything else. 
So if one happens to form an opinion about, say Lupin, then
that will probably have a sufficient knock-on effect to affect
conclusions drawn about Sirius, or Peter, or DD. And these 
opinions tend to persist, even when later canon contradicts
them quite strongly. 

First impressions of characters matter a lot when one is 
struggling through the plot undergrowth of books like HP,
even though they shouldn't. We're well aware that the author
isn't to be trusted, that she's doing her damnedest to 
deliberately confuse and confound. Yet still we fall for it. 
It's a desperate searching for something, anything, that will
provide a firm-ish base on which to construct some sort of
comprehensible framework into which one can slot pieces as 
they turn up. 

It's such a comfort to have first principles that start with: 
"Right. Well, since we're dealing with Puppetmaster!DD / 
Creep!Sirius / ESE!Lupin / Justified-in-being-a-miserable-old
-bastard!Snape / Misunderstood!Peter / Fake!Sybill (delete as 
applicable) then what's probably happening is this...." 

Most of these fairly common biases crystallised or were 
confirmed in fan minds through PoA, and once formed have
been remarkably tenacious, colouring perceptions of story arc
and sub-plots through the following books, sometimes in the
teeth of later sympathetic authorial treatment of those same 
characters. 
And it follows that how many of the questions that one may ask
of HP are then framed is probably largely dependent on, and 
closely allied to the character assessments that one has 
constructed while devouring a text like PoA. To others, those
with different assessments, they're non-questions, and 
suspiciously akin to the output of fevered imaginations and 
skewed thinking.

PoA has a lot to answer for, IMO.

So, what have we got?
Well, the Kneasy Knotes on PoA run something like this:

1. You can't trust Sirius.
He's been really bad news for anyone named Potter, even 
during his Hogwarts days. Such friends one can well do without.
Usually, after a bit of a battering from the real world, the scales 
drop from the eyes of most blokes and school-friends like Sirius
get down-graded to a-pint-once-in-a-blue-moon level; not for 
James, though. Nope, Sirius and his bloody brilliant schemes 
were still tolerated if not positively welcomed, resulting in the 
almighty cock-up of the SK / GH incident. He's been such a 
disaster that it's difficult to believe it wasn't intentional. 
Be interesting to hear Lily's assessment of Sirius. 
Bet it wasn't very complimentary.

His 'escape' from Azkaban was a fix.
Having been responsible for wiping out the previous 
generation of Potters, he's going for the full set by being 
(perhaps unwittingly) an accomplice in a little ploy to slot 
Harry onto the working end of a spiritual vacuum-cleaner. 
The 'unwitting' bit hardly matters, though. He's so bloody 
predictable that anyone with an ounce of cunning could wind
him up like a clock-work mouse, just let him go and could 
pretty-well depend on him to run in straight lines to just where
they want him to be and to behave just how they want him to 
behave. 
Pillock. 
No, I'll rephrase that - an egotistical, grand-standing, 
self-justifying pillock with unjustified delusions of adequacy. 

2. There's something significant we haven't been told about Lupin.

For starters - there's his name. It's too apposite. I'm convinced
he's using a nom-de-chien, which is supported to a certain extent
by the fact that the only other werewolf we've met has the same 
sort of oh-so-descriptive cognomen. Follow that with the glossing
over of what form his Patronus takes, his immunity to Dementor-
induced misery and the very casual, off-hand way he greets Sirius 
in the SS. Twelve years estrangement/separation? `you'd never 
know it, it's as if they'd parted only yesterday. 

(BTW - does anyone really believe that a trio of teenagers could
have made something as sophisticated as the Marauders Map?
Given their activities, wouldn't they have been inclined to include 
the Shrieking Shack in there too? Altering an existing model to 
provide the front-end insults to Snapey - possibly. But make from 
scratch? Nope. And has no-one else ever wondered if there's not 
another version of same - maybe sitting in DD's office?)

3. Peter could well be one of DD's little helpers - and may have 
been one for years. Interesting that during Sybill's funny turn she 
states "... the servant has been chained these twelve years [...] will 
break free.." it implies a lack of choice, that Peter had been compelled
by a third party to play the role of Scabbers during all that time. 
That's assuming that the prophecy is about Peter....

4. From what we're told, Sevvy probably got a very raw deal over 
Shrieking Shack I, and in his position I'd probably be even more 
pissed off than he is.

5. And DD was busy in the background pulling the strings.
DD is the thread that connects the aspects of the plot - as usual. 
Any interpretation of the book at more than face value depends on
what one thinks he did or didn't do, what he knew or didn't know.

For instance, does anyone think it's a coincidence that Lupin was 
recruited as DADA prof. for that year?
'Course it wasn't.
Sirius is on the loose, Harry and Peter will be at Hogwarts and who
is probably the only person around that has connections with all 
three? Lupin. Oh, there's DD himself, of course, but he never gets
directly involved unless he absolutely has to. He likes to keep 
things at arms length.

Most of the outstanding questions turn, to a great extent, on 
the character assessments that have been formed in fan minds. 
Well, they are for me, anyway. I'm looking for confirmation rather
than enlightenment and frankly, it won't take much to bolster my 
HP suspicions to damn-near certainty. 
(Never claimed to be fair or objective after all.)

So, give me the low-down on a few quite short passages and I'll 
know whether I'm barking up the wrong tree or not. Does anyone
need anything more? And, for example any insight into Peter's true
role would go a long way in helping to resolve other murky bits too.
Sirius, for instance. 

Why was Peter hiding in the milk-jug in Hagrid's hut?
How long had he been shacking up with Hagrid?
Why with Hagrid? How much does Hagrid know?
Really surprising that when Hermy finds Scabbers there are no 
words *at all* on this odd situation from Hagrid. Dunno though. 
He is DD's man after all. What with the trio arriving unexpectedly,
diving into the milk-jug could have been a panic move. Wonder 
what form he was in immediately prior to their knock on the door?

At the climax Peter becomes Scabbers and scampers off - but in 
which direction?  Does he sneak back into Hogwarts before heading 
off to Voldy? I've always been a bit leery about DD's magnanimous 
"Yes, it's better to let him escape" vignette. Can't help but think he's 
got an on-going undeclared vested interest in keeping Peter free and 
away from the business end of vengeful wands.

Snape - we'd all love to know what actually happened at SS I, but in 
the meantime - what did Sirius tell Sevvy -  and why would Sevvy 
believe him? 
Be interesting to learn how DD kept Sevvy's mouth shut, as well.

Sybill?
No questions.
She's under DD's 'fluence.

Kneasy





From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sun May 13 15:12:56 2007
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 15:12:56 -0000
Subject: Once more -  with questions. part 3.
In-Reply-To: <f26u78+l5nh@...>
Message-ID: <f279to+piuh@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Barry Arrowsmith"
<arrowsmithbt at ...> wrote:
>
> Why was Peter hiding in the milk-jug in Hagrid's hut?
> How long had he been shacking up with Hagrid?

The Marauder's Map doesn't show the inside of Hagrid's house. That
would be useful for hiding, whether hiding in rat form unbeknownst to
Hagrid or hiding in human form (and forced to eat rock cakes and stoat
sandwiches).

If your speculation that the Map pre-dated the Marauders is correct,
then maybe the reason it doesn't show the inside of Hagrid's house or
the inside of the Shrieking Shack is that they weren't built yet when
it was made. 

If the Marauders made the Map (I'm a sucker for Faith), one needs to
invent another reason why those insides aren't shown. I suspect
they're protected by some kind of privacy spell cast by DD(*).
Otherwise, it's hard to think that the Marauders would be so
considerate of their friend Hagrid's privacy as to leave his house off
their map

Leaving the Shack off their map is another story. They wouldn't have
felt any need to look inside it, as they were certain that they were
the only people who could enter it. Maybe they actually had some
thought of protecting their own privacies from each other by using the
Shack for activities they didn't want to be watched doing (sex springs
immediately to mind). 

(*) DD would have cast a privacy spell on the Shack to discourage
everyone from investigating it and finding the werewolf. He would have
cast one on Hagrid's house to protect him from peeping students? Or
from reporters eager to find out that he was half-Giant? Or that he
had other bad habits? Or because DD was preparing a hiding place for
use in his schemes?





From saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid  Sun May 13 18:14:43 2007
From: saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid (Saitaina)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 11:14:43 -0700
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Not quite the end
References: <f26fqh+8ntf@...>
Message-ID: <00f001c7958a$95869880$88fea8c0@Draco>

What I wouldn't have given for that book as a fanfiction writer.   It will be a wonderful read that's for sure.

-----
Saitaina

Since when did Harry Potter hug people who lost their tempers and Crucio'd kitchen appliances?

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

"You can go to college, live on your own, go fight in a war, work fulltime, fuck anybody else of-age, vote, but you can't have a beer?  We trust you to make an informed decision about the government, but not what's in your own damn glass?"

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




From dk59us at dk59us.yahoo.invalid  Tue May 15 16:56:24 2007
From: dk59us at dk59us.yahoo.invalid (Eustace_Scrubb)
Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 16:56:24 -0000
Subject: OT: Spato-meter
In-Reply-To: <f21vfq+v5k2@...>
Message-ID: <f2cono+arkb@...>

Carolyn wrote:
> > ..wondering whether Tony's told Gordon about the Minister for Magic
> 
David opined:
> Ooh, that wasn't funny, fair, or kind to Tony or Gordon.  Or Wendy, 
> whoever she may be.
> 

Now Eustace_Scrubb:

Well, it certainly seems fair enough to either Tony or Gordon, if not
to Peter and Gordon.  It's rather funny and who said we needed to be kind?

I find it offensive that you've dragged Wendy into this, whoever she
may be.

Cheers,

Eustace_Scrubb







From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Fri May 18 12:09:46 2007
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 12:09:46 -0000
Subject: Jo on top
Message-ID: <f2k52a+9aqn@...>

Oops!
Post again, this time without the missing bits.


http://tinyurl.com/3cpu3j

Interesting that it's PS/SS.
Mind you, that's my favourite of the series too - though not of
all the books I've read that were written in the past 25 years.


And the top 25 are....

http://tinyurl.com/2f399m






From josturgess at mooseming.yahoo.invalid  Fri May 18 16:14:06 2007
From: josturgess at mooseming.yahoo.invalid (mooseming)
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 16:14:06 -0000
Subject: Jo on top
In-Reply-To: <f2k52a+9aqn@...>
Message-ID: <f2kjce+q9mh@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Barry Arrowsmith" 
<arrowsmithbt at ...> wrote:
>
> Oops!
> Post again, this time without the missing bits.
> 
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/3cpu3j
> 
> Interesting that it's PS/SS.
> Mind you, that's my favourite of the series too - though not of
> all the books I've read that were written in the past 25 years.
> 
> 
> And the top 25 are....
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/2f399m

ah these top 25/100/all time lists, always good for a laugh/ageist 
shock....

last 25 years, not really but then my memory is short/failing too.

I feel they should have done it by genre, would have produced a more 
interesting result - and some potential authors I may have missed. 
I'm going away to look at my bookshelves and see what they've left 
out (or is lower down the list)...off the top of my head there's 
Jasper Fforde, Lindsey Davis, Janet Evanovich, George RR Martin, 
Kazuo Ishiguro, Alistair Reynolds, CJ Sansom and very recent but 
impressive Marina Lewycka

Regards
Jo

oh and should you be interested here's my take on that top 25:

1 Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, JK Rowling  - who?
2 The Time Traveler's Wife, Audrey Niffenegger - yup very good book
3 Northern Lights, Philip Pullman - as a place holder for the series 
I agree
4 Birdsong, Sebastian Faulks - another fine book
5 The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown - don't get me started!
6 The Shadow of the Wind, Carlos Ruiz Zaf?n - ok but not great
7 Memoirs of a Geisha, Arthur Golden - loved it
8 The Secret History, Donna Tartt - excellent
9 Captain Corelli's Mandolin, Louis de Berni?res - not so much
10 The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time, Mark Haddon - 
really good
11 The Handmaid's Tale, Margaret Atwood - preffered others (Oryx and 
Crake, Penelopiad)
12 The Kite Runner, Khaled Hosseini  - ah haven't read it
13 The Lovely Bones, Alice Sebold - nor this
14 A Prayer for Owen Meany, John Irving - oh is this a pattern
15 The Colour of Magic, Terry Pratchett - what!!!  I love pratchett 
but this is the worst
16 The Five People You Meet in Heaven, Mitch Albom - another to be 
read
17 Magician Raymond, E Feist - please, they are kidding
18 Life of Pi, Yann Martel - ah never made it past the first chapter
19 Wild Swans, Jung Chang - yeah if only for the foot binding 
stuff...gross
20 The Secret Dreamworld of a Shopaholic, Sophie Kinsella  - never 
even heard of it
21 The Name of the Rose, Umberto Eco - really loved this but did 
skip some of the 'harder' bits
22 Angela's Ashes, Frank McCourt - no haven't read this either
23 A Suitable Boy, Vikram Seth - oh but is was soooo long
24 Notes from a Small Island, Bill Bryson - not usually my thing but 
enjoyed it
25 Labyrinth, Kate Mosse - this is even worse than Dan Brown






From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Fri May 18 19:07:22 2007
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 19:07:22 -0000
Subject: Jo on top
In-Reply-To: <f2kjce+q9mh@...>
Message-ID: <f2kthb+2p7p@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "mooseming" <josturgess at ...> wrote:
> 
> ah these top 25/100/all time lists, always good for a laugh/ageist 
> shock....
> 
> last 25 years, not really but then my memory is short/failing too.
> 
> I feel they should have done it by genre, would have produced a more 
> interesting result - and some potential authors I may have missed. 
> I'm going away to look at my bookshelves and see what they've left 
> out (or is lower down the list)...off the top of my head there's 
> Jasper Fforde, Lindsey Davis, Janet Evanovich, George RR Martin, 
> Kazuo Ishiguro, Alistair Reynolds, CJ Sansom and very recent but 
> impressive Marina Lewycka
> 

That's cheating.
You're only allowed one.
And a specific book from that one author, too. 

Makes it bloody difficult, if not downright impossible.
I've been considering the problem on and off throughout the 
afternoon and just when I thought I'd decided, I remember 
another one - and another, and another.

Even if it were divided into genres, how can one choose between 
William Gibson's 'Neuromancer',  Neal Asher's 'The Skinner',
Vernor Vinge's 'A Deepness in the Sky', Theodore Roszak's
'Flicker' and Mary Russell's 'The Sparrow'? 
Or John Lawton's 'A Little White Death', George V. Higgins' 
'Kennedy for the Defence', Deighton's "Hook, Line and Sinker'
trilogy and ... well, fill in any quality whodunnit/spy author you like.
Grrr!

Kneasy
P.S.
Agree about Pratchett, he didn't hit top form until about his fifth
book - and Alistair Reynolds, got to be 'Diamond Dogs' but does it
count as a stand-alone book?
Decisions, decisions.
 




From josturgess at mooseming.yahoo.invalid  Sat May 19 10:03:17 2007
From: josturgess at mooseming.yahoo.invalid (mooseming)
Date: Sat, 19 May 2007 10:03:17 -0000
Subject: Jo on top
In-Reply-To: <f2kthb+2p7p@...>
Message-ID: <f2mi15+c8m3@...>

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

> > 
> Kneasy
> P.S.
> Agree about Pratchett, he didn't hit top form until about his fifth
> book - and Alistair Reynolds, got to be 'Diamond Dogs' but does it
> count as a stand-alone book?
> Decisions, decisions.

Ah Alastair Reynolds is a recent find for me

Neuromancer, how can I have forgotten that! Also, ye gods, Douglas 
Adams...

Another author would be Michael Dibdin (and no I won't pick one 
book ;-)

On Pratchett, yes book three would be about where he picks up for 
me, but a quick review of the list shows they have selected the 
first book in all series so that might explian it. Now my favourite 
of his would be Guards! Guards! if only for the 'million to one 
chance' scene. Oh and I liked his comment re JK:

His full response to Rowling's admission that she did not think 
Harry Potter was fantasy as she was writing it, was: 
"I would have thought that the wizards, witches, trolls, unicorns, 
hidden worlds, jumping chocolate frogs, owl mail, magic food, 
ghosts, broomsticks and spells would have given her a clue?" 

Regards
Jo
>





From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Sun May 20 14:52:00 2007
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 14:52:00 -0000
Subject: Jo on top
In-Reply-To: <f2mi15+c8m3@...>
Message-ID: <f2pnag+a84v@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "mooseming" <josturgess at ...> wrote:
> 
> Ah Alastair Reynolds is a recent find for me
> 

Decent bloke, met him while he was doing signings for 'Chasm City'.
Very interested in learning what other SF writers the fans were buying.
Good writer from the serious end of the genre, but must admit, I'm
very taken with Neal Asher - he comes up with splendid (but nasty)
fauna in 'The Skinner' and 'Line of Polity', and in the latter links it  
nicely to his distaste for a religious dictatorship through a children's
story book.

> 
> Another author would be Michael Dibdin (and no I won't pick one 
> book ;-)

Yeah. Austere style, but very readable.
A bit shocked to see his obit published a few weeks back - he was 
younger than me, gives one intimations of mortality.

> 
> On Pratchett, yes book three would be about where he picks up for 
> me, but a quick review of the list shows they have selected the 
> first book in all series so that might explian it. Now my favourite 
> of his would be Guards! Guards! if only for the 'million to one 
> chance' scene. Oh and I liked his comment re JK:
> 
> His full response to Rowling's admission that she did not think 
> Harry Potter was fantasy as she was writing it, was: 
> "I would have thought that the wizards, witches, trolls, unicorns, 
> hidden worlds, jumping chocolate frogs, owl mail, magic food, 
> ghosts, broomsticks and spells would have given her a clue?" 
> 

There's a book of his essays and short stories published by NESFA
that I'd rate (overall) as good as any of his books and better than
some. Has trenchant comments on adults who disapprove of kids
reading fantasy. Well, he would, wouldn't he? Though he's probably
right in what he says.  And Jo did leave herself wide open for that
comment.

Kneasy




From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Tue May 29 19:10:51 2007
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 19:10:51 -0000
Subject: Waiting for Neville
Message-ID: <f3htrr+8pkr@...>

What's the collective noun for suppositions? 
A fancy? A hunch? A whim? Or how about an inkling?
An inkling of suppositions ... that has a certain ring to 
it, don't you think? 
There certainly ought to be one, particularly when, as 
is the case here, a bunch of them get linked together, 
each dependent on the one before, in an attempt to 
cobble together a half-assed surmise regarding 
potentially important happenings in book 7.

The future is a realm I don't venture into very often, 
it's the past of the Potterverse that has mostly held 
my attention - old Sally, Tom in the Chamber, Godric's 
Hollow, the 24 hours, SS I and all that fine stuff. Much 
more interesting - and anyway, it'll be the past that 
determines the how and what of events to come, IMO. 
And the inkling of suppositions here supports that 
opinion to a certain extent.

It's a fair bet that Harry can't beat Voldy in a High-
Noon-in-Hogsmead-High-St.-type showdown, not as 
things stand now, anyway. If Sevvy can brush him off 
as if he were an irritating insect, what chance against 
Voldy? Pretty damn poor, I'd guess. So, is it a case of a 
dead-cert away-team win, Harry doing a Black Knight 
from Monty Python and the Holy Grail? Insisting on 
carrying on no matter how many bits get lopped off, until
there's nothing left but a pair of  furious green eyes 
trying to stare Voldy into submission? Voldy'd laugh his 
socks off. Probably have 'em mounted as novelty cuff-links
 - "They match my favourite curse, you know." So once 
more Harry is gonna need help. If it runs to form 
something/somebody will pop up at the last minute to 
save Harry's bacon. 

Protection, Fawkes, wands, DD, there's usually a helping 
hand available for Harry. Makes one wonder just how 
magical that boy is. Remove the power(s) embedded in his 
noggin at GH and just how much would he be left with? But
that's a question for another day. 
Thing is, who or what will save him this time?
Neville, that's who.
Good on yer, Nev.

Right. Time to start linking to construct the inkling.
What's Neville for? - in plot terms, that is.
We all now what he was to start with - a good egg, a duffer 
who just can't get it right, evincing smiles of sympathy all 
round. Needs a bit of protection from nasty Slyths, bumbles
from one minor cock-up to another, but he does try. And 
gradually - so gradually you hardly notice, his effort and 
stubborness start to pay off. Round about the time of GoF it 
was. Who really expected Nev to get a partner for the Ball 
with so little fuss? Very odd. The lad's an archetypical wallflower. 
Then he does well in the Ministry dust-up. Duffer no more. 
Yup, time to take notice of Neville. If he carries on like this 
he'll end up half-way competent. So what's his role from now on?

There's that revelation at the back end of OoP, the prophecy,
two possibilities, Harry and Neville, but Nev is immediately 
discounted by DD. OK. Fine. But only because Voldy, by trying 
to nail Harry made Harry his putative nemesis. And if he'd gone
for Neville instead, would the result have been the same, only 
with a change in the juvenile lead? 
Quite possibly.

Because the protections that Harry had were laid on him too.
 Just what these protections entail and how they work is still 
none too clear (I wonder why? *cough* *cough*). One, the Lily 
sacrifice activated number, isn't up and running in Nev's case, 
or so we may reasonably assume, but you can bet your boots 
the other one(?) is. And since he's not yet had the pleasure of 
a meeting with Voldy, we'll be interested to see what happens 
when they do meet at the cross-roads one dark and dirty night.

Then there's his wand.
For most of the books he's made do with an old one, not a 
custom-fitted job. That's no longer so, so he should get even 
better at the magical stuff.  
Splendid.
But the half is not yet told.
If the tarot connection to the Founders relics is valid, then 
Ravenclaw left a wand lying around somewhere. And if Neri is 
right and it was sitting in plain sight in Ollivander's window... 
and Ollivander has gone walkabout now that Voldy's back in town 
(why? Does he have something/know something that Voldy wants?)
... and about the last thing he does before vanishing into the 
woodwork is fitting up Neville with a replacement wand.... well, 
the thoughts begin to bubble.

A competent Neville, with magical protection and with a 
Founder's relic in his hot little fist. Now that would be very useful 
when Harry finds himself in a sticky situation, don't you think?

Yes, I am aware that Jo has on occasion down-played Neville 
for the starring role as the boy who would be king. 
Doesn't mean he can't be a contender for Oscar for best-supporting,
though.

Kneasy




From editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid  Wed May 30 02:27:53 2007
From: editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid (Amanda Geist)
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 21:27:53 -0500
Subject: FW: The Geist predicts again, mostly about Snape
Message-ID: <C8153D63DABC4259B5A699637F9942DB@AmandaPC>

Hey, y'all.  I compiled the following for the HPforGrownups list, but apart
from one response (which, I admit, was sterling), nobody's commented. I need
*thoughts*--I have to talk to the Mensans on June 20!  Forwarding it here,
because I know I can depend on you guys. Even if you have all heard all this
before.

 

~Amandageist

 

P.S.  - I *was* nice enough to leave out all the predictions I'd made that
turned out to be right..

: D

 

  _____  

From: Amanda Geist [mailto:editor at ...] 
Sent: Monday, May 28, 2007 4:03 PM
To: (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Subject: The Geist predicts again, mostly about Snape

 

Greeting to the list, from one long inactive.  I'm throwing out a
"predictions post," for a couple of reasons.  For one, book 7 is looming and
I love to go on record.  For another, I have to give a presentation on HP to
our local Mensa chapter on June 20, and the list's thoughts on my
predictions may give me some fodder.  And lastly, I was digging through the
archives to find an old post, and felt anew the seduction of the list
discussions.

 

Please forgive the length.  Some of these are "general" in nature, and some
provide details on how I think the general ones will play out.  I numbered
them for ease of response, if anyone so chooses.  I tried to get them in
some logical order, but they're a bit interrelated; sorry.  For any
masochists with historian instincts, links to the old posts follow my
compendium.

 

Have at 'em.

 

(1)  The rest of the Order, along with Harry, go on believing Snape is a
turncoat.


(2)  Hermione discovers the tarot and thus they realize they are looking
for, among other things, Rowena Ravenclaw's wand.

 

(2.a.)  Ollivander has it. His ancestor made it (they've been in business
for two thousand years, after all). He's hiding; they have to find him
before the other side does.   [but if Voldemort hasn't Horcruxed it yet?
Maybe Ollivander's hiding because he is in danger for the simple reason that
he can tell Harry that he's looking for a wand.]


(3) We may see a third in the sequence of brilliant plot mechanisms that
increase Harry and Snape's knowledge/understanding of each other without
their desire to know and without them growing any closer.  Snape and Harry
have already been forced into a deeper understanding through the Occlumency
lessons and the old potions textbook.  I can think of one plot device that
will continue this-more knowledge of Lily and any interaction she had with
Snape.  Since both Snape and Harry see each other through eyes so prejudiced
they don't even realize it, this could lead to many interesting over- or
mis-reactions.

 

(4) Related to #3: We will learn that he did love Lily; but by that I mean
*he* loved *her,* likely from afar, unless he managed to say something and
was let down easy. I don't think they ever had a relationship. [I still
think part of the strength of the venom he associates with James is due to
some neat sublimation, where he associates all the negative of being let
down to James, and all the positive feelings that remain to Lily. Also the
very deep fear that Lily may have told James; can you imagine his (even
imagined) humiliation, to even consider that James *knew* and could have
laughed?]

(5)  We will hear reports of Snape doing things that can be interpreted in
two ways but will be presented as only Evil!Snape.

 

(5.a.)  Harry will fatally misunderstand some action of Snape's, and act
based on his own interpretation of it, to the great harm of both Harry,
Snape, and the cause. JKR depends on Harry's misinterpretation of things as
a plot driver; and this is prime territory. For example, I will be genuinely
surprised should Snape honestly turn out to be wholeheartedly supporting
Voldemort--but since he must give that impression, and Harry is so ready to
believe it, we will likely see more ambiguity (if not wilfull disbelief on
Harry's part) leading to mishap. Possibly as I outline in #6.

(6)  Harry will confront Voldemort with Snape present.

 

(6.a.) Harry will be unable to withstand Voldemort's mental abilities.

 

(6.b.) Snape will have to mentally "shield" Harry at some point-- for only
with help from someone as skilled as Snape would Harry be able to lie or
even hold his own in a conversation with Voldemort (unless Harry's signed up
for Kwikspell's Occlumency program over the summer).  

 

(6.c.)  This will endanger not only Snape himself, but also the long-laid
plans that require Voldemort to trust Snape. Either because (a) Voldemort
detects Snape's action himself; or (b) Harry cannot bring himself to trust
Snape and betrays him to Voldemort.  I can see him doing it, either
deliberately out of fury at Snape, or inadvertently, out of an inability to
break his habit of resistance to Snape.

 

(7)  Regardless of whether it takes the shape I lay out in #6, Snape will be
injured or otherwise damaged through some attempt to protect Harry, which
Harry does not understand and therefore fights, causing it to go awry.  A
potential scenario is in If myIt may be the spell that Dumbledore's willing
death could have been a part of (see #11 below).


(8)  Snape will die. All of his character looks backward. He gives me the
impression of someone whose goals are not ahead, except to rectify mistakes
made, and who does not care much if he dies in that attempt. He can't let
the past go, because that's where he lives; I think he accepted long ago
that the future holds only one task for him and nothing else, and so has
made no effort to move past the past that defined that future.  I personally
think he will go heroically in some blaze of redemption, but he's toast. 

 

(9)  Snape may or may not have been truly evil at various points in the
books or their prehistory--but his final choice will be for the good.
Harry will not believe this until in hindsight.  Harry's not understanding
will be part of what led to Snape's death.


(10) Harry will learn why Dumbledore trusts Snape, from a memory Dumbledore
left safely bottled in his office somewhere.  

 

(10.a.)  Dumbledore did not tell Harry why, because he himself didn't know
(because the memory wasn't in his head, it was in the bottle).

 

(10.b.)  Harry will immediately understand why Dumbledore didn't tell him in
the first place; and immediately wish he still didn't know. (since he is
such a liability where Legilimency is concerned).

--OR-Harry will convince himself that Dumbledore had been fooled.

 

(11)  We will learn that Dumbledore's death was part of two things:

--A plan-maybe not Plan A, but definitely one of the potentials, and Snape
was adhering to Dumbledore's will as much as Harry had been when Harry fed
him the potion.

--A powerful spell, where a willing death was a component, which required
Snape's action to complete.  

As I said in an earlier post: "I believe that, however Dumbledore dies, both
Harry and Voldemort will *believe* that Snape is responsible. Snape will
foster this belief in Voldemort; it will be an unfortunate conclusion drawn
by Harry (who for whatever reason--Dumbledore's general lack of any desire
to explain anything, a misunderstood conversation, a missed message,
etc.--will not know or will refuse to believe that Snape did not do it).  At
this point, Snape and Dumbledore will have accomplished two key things:
--Snape will have proven himself to Voldemort and will be reinstated with
full DE honors or whatever, in the inner circle. Even if he wasn't in the
Inner inner circle before, I think he will be now, because (a) Voldemort's
followers have diminshed somewhat and (b) Snape now has a very useful
position.
--The spell, whatever it is, to which Dumbledore's death is integral, will
have been completed (or nearly so).
"These are key because Snape will now be in a *superb* position to implement
or otherwise set in motion or effect, the spell. Having a tremendous spell
ready is of no use at all, if the spell cannot be cast or implemented due to
lack of access. Access is of no use without a weapon. Snape will have both
the access and the means."

 

(12)  Harry will be brought to a literary parallel with Snape-he will be
presented the opportunity Snape was, in the Shrieking Shack: to recognize
that an object of hatred had been misunderstood and was, in actuality,
following orders and as much a victim as himself.  Much as Snape rejected
the possibility of another view of Lupin, as another to whom Dumbledore's
second chance meant the world--- Harry may reject the possibility of any
other view of Snape than the one he so cherishes and defends.  I don't know
if Harry will completely fail, as Snape did-but I do think his hesitation
will cause major problems, possibly Snape's demise.


(12)  Snape will have problems maintaining his own control, because of
Dumbledore's death. I think Snape loved Dumbledore. Snape himself is
young--old enough intellectually to accept what Dumbledore asked him to do,
but facing problems of his own on the *emotional* level. He's already pretty
unsteady there as it is.  So Snape's own reactions to what happened will
cause difficulties.  I think that Dumbledore's death devastated Snape, for I
believe that to Snape, as to Lupin, Dumbledore's trust has meant everything.
And he cannot show it at all-leaving a lot of emotion behind a dam, ready to
cause damage if it is breached. Say, by the weakening caused by having to
protect a clueless boy during his confrontation with the Dark Lord.
Especially if that clueless boy must be shielded because his knowledge of
Dumbledore's plan must be hidden from Voldemort, lest the sacrifice Snape
made in killing Dumbledore be wasted. Especially if he blames that clueless
boy for Dumbledore's death (because I can see him blaming Harry, just as
Harry blames Snape for Sirius' death).  

 

(13)  Snape will remain Snape and operate on his own terms to the end.
Whatever he does to save Harry or the cause, whenever he does it, he will do
it in his particularly nasty and cruel manner, without one shred of
softening at all.  We will be denied any dewy-eyed scene of forgiveness.
Snape cannot forgive himself for his past and for what he did to Dumbledore,
and true Slytherin that he is, nobody else's forgiveness matters.  

 

(14)  Harry will realize Snape's death as a loss, not a triumph.  Snape is a
father figure to Harry--one of the most reliable, in fact.  He is all the
negative aspects--the one who doesn't understand, who sets curfews, who
isn't interested in explanations, who sets rules, who doesn't seem to care.
The aspect that you hate. The one you do not appreciate until many years
later--or when he is gone. And we don't have the luxury of "many years
later" in this series (or indications are strong that we don't).

 

~Amandageist, old Snapologist

 

References (newest to oldest):

 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/28778, August 2005,
Re: Tink-Tink-Tink! 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/134457, July 2005,  What
would convince Harry/canned memories

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/133732, July 2005,
Reposted in hopes of new discussion: TBAY: Amanda Binns Explains It 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/129605, May 2005, The
Geist Predicts, was Re: Admonishing Snape

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80881, September 2003,
Amanda Predicts Snape's future, was Snape history/future

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/47077, November 24,
2002, TBAY: Amanda Binns Explains It All (was loads of Snape stuff)

 

 

 

 

 



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




From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Wed May 30 15:46:02 2007
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 15:46:02 -0000
Subject: FW: The Geist predicts again, mostly about Snape
In-Reply-To: <C8153D63DABC4259B5A699637F9942DB@AmandaPC>
Message-ID: <f3k67q+gviq@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Geist" <editor at ...> wrote:
>
> Hey, y'all.  

Wotcher.

> I compiled the following for the HPforGrownups list, but apart
> from one response (which, I admit, was sterling), nobody's commented. 

Well.. No. Shut up, Kneasy. Say nothin'.
You'll only upset somebody.
> 
> 
> (1)  The rest of the Order, along with Harry, go on believing Snape is a
> turncoat.
>

Yes for most of 'em.
But there'll be at least one that doesn't, otherwise there'll be no opportunity
for young Potter to throw tantrums and spread suspicions that an innocent 
party is going soft on the Voldy faction. There's always a voice of reason
around to counter Harry's snap judgements - and he never listens to them. 
It'll probably be Lupin.

> 
> (2)  Hermione discovers the tarot and thus they realize they are looking
> for, among other things, Rowena Ravenclaw's wand.
>

More likely to be Ron, I'd think - he's more gullible than Hermy when it 
comes to the Divination stuff.
Bet it surfaces in a homely game of Snap, or WW equivalent, with a pack
produced by Fleur (continental cards are closer to tarot than those in the
English-speaking world). Innocent questions ensue on why the suits
look different, and - Bingo! 

> (2.a.)  Ollivander has it. His ancestor made it (they've been in business
> for two thousand years, after all). He's hiding; they have to find him
> before the other side does.   [but if Voldemort hasn't Horcruxed it yet?
> Maybe Ollivander's hiding because he is in danger for the simple reason that
> he can tell Harry that he's looking for a wand.]
> 
> 

'Cept I'm hoping Neville has it (see post of yesterday).

> (3) We may see a third in the sequence of brilliant plot mechanisms that
> increase Harry and Snape's knowledge/understanding of each other without
> their desire to know and without them growing any closer.  Snape and Harry
> have already been forced into a deeper understanding through the Occlumency
> lessons and the old potions textbook.  I can think of one plot device that
> will continue this-more knowledge of Lily and any interaction she had with
> Snape.  Since both Snape and Harry see each other through eyes so prejudiced
> they don't even realize it, this could lead to many interesting over- or
> mis-reactions.
> 

Um.
Not sure about this.
Any understanding will come too late, IMO.
Harry is not about to give Sevvy the benefit of any doubts and Snape doesn't
give a toss what Harry thinks - he just wants him to fulfill the Prophecy in the
way that DD planned it.
Not exactly fertile grounds for mutual respect or understanding - and any
hint that Sevvy saw Lily as a possible help-meet through life's trials and
tribulations is liable to engender nothing but disgust in Harry.

Besides, you sound as if there will be multiple interactions between them;
I'd bet on there only being two - and the second one is where Sevvy ends up
as a crumpled heap on the floor.

> 
> (4) Related to #3: We will learn that he did love Lily; but by that I mean
> *he* loved *her,* likely from afar, unless he managed to say something and
> was let down easy. I don't think they ever had a relationship. [I still
> think part of the strength of the venom he associates with James is due to
> some neat sublimation, where he associates all the negative of being let
> down to James, and all the positive feelings that remain to Lily. Also the
> very deep fear that Lily may have told James; can you imagine his (even
> imagined) humiliation, to even consider that James *knew* and could have
> laughed?]
> 

Hate LOLLIPOPS, just hate it.
Not only is it mushy, it's also trite.
So it'll probably be true.
Arrgh!

> (5)  We will hear reports of Snape doing things that can be interpreted in
> two ways but will be presented as only Evil!Snape.
> 

Naturally.
>  
> 
> (5.a.)  Harry will fatally misunderstand some action of Snape's, and act
> based on his own interpretation of it, to the great harm of both Harry,
> Snape, and the cause. JKR depends on Harry's misinterpretation of things as
> a plot driver; and this is prime territory. For example, I will be genuinely
> surprised should Snape honestly turn out to be wholeheartedly supporting
> Voldemort--but since he must give that impression, and Harry is so ready to
> believe it, we will likely see more ambiguity (if not wilfull disbelief on
> Harry's part) leading to mishap. Possibly as I outline in #6.
> 

Yes, Harry  will misunderstand, misinterpret and by doing so will put Snape's
anti-Voldy-but-pretending-otherwise gambit (devised by DD) in jeopardy. 

> (6)  Harry will confront Voldemort with Snape present.
>

There's a traditional bit of business that could fit in here, which may
incorporate your 6a, b, & c. One that some of us having been waiting 
for since book 4 - the Temptation.

This could take one of any number of forms and it's highly unlikely
that Potter would ever ally himself with ole Snake-eyes. But he's been
leaning towards violence, revenge and Unforgiveable Curses since the
Ministry battle - no doubt egged on by that stray bit of software in his
head. This is an important part of the plot, IMO, that starts in book 1 -
"Not Slytherin, eh? You could be great, you know, it's all here in your
head, and Slytherin will help you on your way to greatness..."

Fans scoff, but Kneasy reckons that the Hat saw a fragment of Sally
in his head, and it was that that would help him to greatness, not
a bunch of plonkers in Slytherin House. All he has to do is let it
loose - and when Voldy countered the Yah!-can't-touch-me shield
spell in the graveyard, it's possible that the fragment was freed to 
become active.

No-one seems to consider that the lightning-flash scar on Harry's
bonce is much like the lapel flashes of the Waffen SS. And that's
what they were - stylised Ses. Harry marked with an S-for-Slytherin.
If that isn't a clue, I don't know what is.

Certainly it's since then that his mental links with the external Voldy
have strengthened -  why not with the internal Voldy too?

Again, the prophecy ".. the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal...."
Not his opposite, you'll note - his equal.
Harry has the potential to be another Dark Lord, DD knew it - hence
the "in essence divided" test, and he could start down that path all too 
easily unless he can sort out which of his thoughts and impulses are
truly his own, and which are cuckoo hatchlings.

Snape's greatest feat may be saving Harry from himself (see (7)).

> 
> (7)  Regardless of whether it takes the shape I lay out in #6, Snape will be
> injured or otherwise damaged through some attempt to protect Harry, which
> Harry does not understand and therefore fights, causing it to go awry.  A
> potential scenario is in If myIt may be the spell that Dumbledore's willing
> death could have been a part of (see #11 below).
> 
> 
> (8)  Snape will die. All of his character looks backward. He gives me the
> impression of someone whose goals are not ahead, except to rectify mistakes
> made, and who does not care much if he dies in that attempt. He can't let
> the past go, because that's where he lives; I think he accepted long ago
> that the future holds only one task for him and nothing else, and so has
> made no effort to move past the past that defined that future.  I personally
> think he will go heroically in some blaze of redemption, but he's toast. 
> 

Yep, he'll die. 
 
> 
> (10) Harry will learn why Dumbledore trusts Snape, from a memory Dumbledore
> left safely bottled in his office somewhere.  
> 
> 

Don't forget the possiblities of DD's portrait waking up and spouting off.


You've sort of skated round the most interesting question one can ask
about ole Snapey - why did he leave a winning team and join DD in the
first place?

The answer of course, lies in Blackwidower!Snape and Snape!Son.

Kneasy




From foxmoth at pippin_999.yahoo.invalid  Thu May 31 00:25:59 2007
From: foxmoth at pippin_999.yahoo.invalid (pippin_999)
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 00:25:59 -0000
Subject: FW: The Geist predicts again, mostly about Snape
In-Reply-To: <C8153D63DABC4259B5A699637F9942DB@AmandaPC>
Message-ID: <f3l4mn+tj78@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Geist" <editor at ...> wrote:
>
> Hey, y'all.  I compiled the following for the HPforGrownups list, but apart
> from one response (which, I admit, was sterling), nobody's commented. I need
> *thoughts*--I have to talk to the Mensans on June 20!  Forwarding it here,
> because I know I can depend on you guys. Even if you have all heard all this
> before.

Pippin:
I have been thinking about this. 

Amanda:
> (1)  The rest of the Order, along with Harry, go on believing Snape is a
> turncoat.

Pippin:
It will be revealed that Hagrid continues to believe Snape is innocent

 <snip stuff I agree with>

Amanda:
> (6.a.) Harry will be unable to withstand Voldemort's mental abilities.

Pippin:
 Harry's already shown he can banish Voldemort from his mind.
I don't think that's going to be undone. But Voldemort might demand
that *Snape* use legilimency on Harry, and that might be the mechanism
whereby Harry realizes that Snape is not on Voldemort's side. 

<more snippage> 
> (8)  Snape will die. All of his character looks backward. He gives me the
> impression of someone whose goals are not ahead, except to rectify mistakes
> made, and who does not care much if he dies in that attempt. He can't let
> the past go, because that's where he lives; I think he accepted long ago
> that the future holds only one task for him and nothing else, and so has
> made no effort to move past the past that defined that future.  I personally
> think he will go heroically in some blaze of redemption, but he's toast. 
> 

Pippin:
Nah, he lives. There's that old "he's tough" rumor. But he really doesn't
fit the trajectory of a character who dies. He hasn't got a future, as you say.
But it's the characters *with* a future who get knocked off. Or at least, the
ones whom Harry expects to have a future. Cedric. Sirius. Even Dumbledore,
who was obviously going to get his ticket punched, was handed a stack
of unfinished business to leave behind him. 

It doesn't quite fit the pattern of a redemptive death either. Characters
like that have some moment in their past when they should have chosen
to face their doom and dodged it by joining the Dark Side. "YOU SHOULD
HAVE DIED" bellows Sirius to Peter, and we know that Peter is going to
have to die in the end. Boromir couldn't face the loss of his city, Anakin
couldn't face losing Padme, and they have to redeem themselves by
dying to save the people they betrayed, or their descendants.
 
 Now, if Snape should have turned down the UV, or should have died 
on the Tower rather than fulfill it, then he has such a moment. But 
otherwise he doesn't, because according to Dumbledore, when Snape's
big test came, the moment when he should have died rather than 
co-operate with the murder of James, Snape passed. He's *already*
redeemed himself. 

I agree that Harry has to understand this at some point. But if
Snape is dead that would make it all rather futile. 

Pippin




From carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid  Thu May 31 10:46:41 2007
From: carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid (carolynwhite2)
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 10:46:41 -0000
Subject: Fancy a stroll down Diagon Alley?
Message-ID: <f3m92h+vcc6@...>

I guess this is old news in the US, but just saw it today on the Beeb:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_6700000/newsid_6706800/6706847.s
tm?bw=bb&mp=rm





From heidi8 at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid  Thu May 31 11:50:49 2007
From: heidi8 at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 07:50:49 -0400
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Fancy a stroll down Diagon Alley?
In-Reply-To: <f3m92h+vcc6@...>
References: <f3m92h+vcc6@...>
Message-ID: <1180612251.29F9BF6D@...>

No, it's brand new news. I was lucky enough to be on a webconference 
anouncing it at midnight (about 8 hours ago) and the team involved are 
so gung-ho about it, it sounds phenomenal.

Of course, I'm lucky to live only a few hours away, but I certainly plan 
to be there, kids in tow, on Day 1 (if not before).


On Thu, 31 May 2007 7:14 am, carolynwhite2 wrote:
> I guess this is old news in the US, but just saw it today on the Beeb:
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_6700000/newsid_6706800/6706847.s
> tm?bw=bb&mp=rm
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>



From arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid  Thu May 31 13:47:25 2007
From: arrowsmithbt at kneasy.yahoo.invalid (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 13:47:25 -0000
Subject: FW: The Geist predicts again, mostly about Snape
In-Reply-To: <C8153D63DABC4259B5A699637F9942DB@AmandaPC>
Message-ID: <f3mjld+a1sg@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Geist" <editor at ...> wrote:
>  
> 
> (13)  Snape will remain Snape and operate on his own terms to the end.
> Whatever he does to save Harry or the cause, whenever he does it, he will do
> it in his particularly nasty and cruel manner, without one shred of
> softening at all.  We will be denied any dewy-eyed scene of forgiveness.
> Snape cannot forgive himself for his past and for what he did to Dumbledore,
> and true Slytherin that he is, nobody else's forgiveness matters.  
> 
>  

Yes, agreed - but....
What if, just for the sake of argument, ole Snapey really is a baddun. 
Not that it would bother me much, in fact in some ways it'd be 
welcome, what with Voldy being a most unsatisfactory wannabe Ruler
of the Universe. It'd be nice to have  a genuine boo-hiss! villain around
the place instead of an incompetent numpty.

Jo seemed a touch concerted that such a large proportion of the 
fan-base are rooting for the Potions Supremo. As to why he's so many
fans, that's a bit of a poser.  Could it be that uncounted Potterheads 
really like the misanthropic, pitiless despot as portrayed in the books, 
or has film contamination blinded them to the reality?

Now project yourself forward a few months: the book is out, fans've 
read, re-read and digested through their watery bowels the finale to 
this epic tale - and it turns out Sevvy is a no-good, murdering scrote 
who was at GH and loved every minute of it until Voldy had his 
unfortunate oops! moment. That he really, really, REALLY hates Harry, 
has done everything he could to screw him up, deliberately provoked
him so as to ruin the Occlumency lessons, thoroughly relished blasting
DD and as a reward Voldy will supply him with a constant stream of 
ravishable virgins and sole rights to all the TV cookery shows.

How many would still be in Sevvy's cheering section?
Or rather, given the cries of dis-approbation that would swamp the 
sites, how many would admit it?

Well, there's one over here, for a start.

Fictional stinkers are so much more fun than the goody lot.

Kneasy




From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Thu May 31 15:04:26 2007
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 15:04:26 -0000
Subject: Fancy a stroll down Diagon Alley?
In-Reply-To: <f3m92h+vcc6@...>
Message-ID: <f3mo5q+k52q@...>

Carolyn wrote:
>
> I guess this is old news in the US, but just saw it today on the Beeb:
> 
> 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_6700000/newsid_6706800/6706847.s
> tm?bw=bb&mp=rm

For the video-challenged (i.e. those of us who who need to fool our 
colleagues that we are doing something useful) there's a text article, 
too:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6706939.stm

The answer to your question, though, is 'no', unless being 'faithful to 
JK Rowling's vision' involves the use of actual magic.

Oh, and Kneasy asked: 

> What's the collective noun for suppositions?

Tissue?  Farrago?

David




From talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid  Thu May 31 17:16:20 2007
From: talisman22457 at talisman22457.yahoo.invalid (Talisman)
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 17:16:20 -0000
Subject: Standing Leeward (was: Fancy a stroll down Diagon Alley?
In-Reply-To: <f3mo5q+k52q@...>
Message-ID: <f3mvt4+qnom@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" <dfrankiswork at ...> 
wrote:
> Oh, and Kneasy asked: 
> 
> > What's the collective noun for suppositions?
> 
> Tissue?  Farrago?
> 
> David


"Ventus Maximus" comes to mind........