eleanorrigby, actually I wouldn’t be happy if it turns out that the people we saw in the final battle were not themselves after all. To me it would be a cheat, akin to a bad Star Trek or comic book where people can come back since it turns out only a clone/robot/projection/shapeshifting creature of them was killed. JKR doesn’t seem to go for that sort of thing; she has integrity that she can afford since her story is limited.
Dumbledore had a particular horror of having his soul split so I agree that the person’s soul is not in a portrait. But a general pattern of the person’s memories and temperament seems to be there, they can see what’s going on outside the portrait, and they can’t stop their portrait being destroyed–they have no wands and can’t cast spells or otherwise affect the onlooker. I would also guess they take some time to be ‘activiated’ since Dumbledore’s was exhausted and sleeping after his great battle.
As for Fawkes, it was like the shuttlecraft in Star Trek again. “The transporter is out! We’re dooooomed!” “Well, why don’t we send down a shuttle–” “Look, something shiny!” Or perhaps Dumbledore has to deliberately summon his Phoenix (or send it out to help somebody else) and he wasn’t doing it then since he knew he was doomed and Snape had to take care of him.
I don’t think that Fawkes can cure everything–if so, why wouldn’t the DE want to get Fawkes to remove their marks (when Voldy was thought to be gone for good).
Alot of them got off because they claimed to be under a charn or spell-so I would think that they would try to remove the evidence, if they could. I doubt the dark mark comes off. So, like that, something that is withering an arm, may be out of Fawke’s ken.
There have been a number of places where it seems clear she invented a particular magical device well into the series. After all, no mention of side-along apparation until Book 6 - but they send ten aurors (something like that) to fly Harry to the Order of the Phoenix on brooms, with contingency plans in case them and ten others die in the process. Taking what they consider a very real risk of twenty lives, just to move some kid? Instead of Tonks just showing up, grabbing Harry, and apparating? Granted, she’s not particularly a fantasy author, and I don’t find the slips in her world development to be a terrible crime. But this one is pretty noticeable.
Yeah, I heard she suggested in an interview that wizards have something very much like the internet, though I can’t remember exactly when she said so. If so, it hasn’t been brought out yet. They don’t have TV either, which admittedly might make for a better world in certain ways (and TV doesn’t seem very wizardly) but it still strikes me as odd. No ATMs, so they have to suffer through (apparently) very inconvenient trips to the bank. (No “Probity Probes” for me, thanks.)
Some of this is understandable - things like the fireplace sorta suck, but it’s more a minor inconvenience than anything else. But the internet is pretty fucking awesome. If any of the wizards had any clue what it was, they’d want it too.
There are about as many posts in this thread as there are pages in the book - it took forever to read them all, especially after the merging.
I decided to take it slow and just read a few chapters before going to sleep at night, especially as I have some stuff for my comp lit class to deliver before Friday. Anyway, there are some posts I’d like to answer first, before going into my own (probably redundant) thoughts.
This has been a common accusation of many very succesful and prolific writers: Stephen King, Robert Ludlum. I think that with the way things work after Milli Vanilli (I’m serious), the publishing house would never do this. Note that Alistair McNeil writes the Alistair MacLean books, some named hack writes as Robert Ludlum and Clancy’s throw away ideas have named authors to them.
I know this comment is emotional, but I really can’t see that she has any responsibility at all. It’s not as if she signed acontract promising to deliver certain goods. From all I know about JKR, she writes for the same reason many other writers write: she has to. From Heinlein to Stephen King, they all stated that they need to sit down and crank out stories and would continue to do so, even if they stopped selling. I believe this is said in earnest by all of them.
Just because HP became a worldwide phenomenon doesn’t mean that we should hold JKR to higher standards than when the first book came out in a couple of thousand copies. She’s not a very good writer, it ain’t literature, but she sure as heel can spin a good yarn. With millions of readers obsessing and re-reading every word, it’s no wonder they come up with stuff she never thought about herself (and I’m about to write about some of them, for the fun of it), but it’s not like she ows us anything beyond the promise of seven books.
As they say - promotion is fast in war time.
I think quidditch is about as archaic as pentathlon, which is basically just joining some fun and games “an officer and gentleman” needs to prove himself “an officer and gentleman”, IOW, brooms are no longer used as a mean of tranportation in the magical world, but Q serves as a reminder of a heritage and gives the kids some excuse for outdoor activities, fun&games. It doesn’t have to be logical, anymore than bullfighting or figure skating (which needs athletic skills but is more akin of a pageant than athletics).
I like HBP a lot more than OoTP, mainly because I can start to like the main character again. In book five, Harry was such a whiny brat I wanted to smack him most of the time. I don’t think he has learned, but that JKR realized that even though she protrayed teen angst in a realistic way, it was not the style to use for our hero. A couple of weeks doesn’t seem long enough for him to grow wiser, but it’s nice that he starts trusting his friends. Someone upthread mentioned Buffy, and apart from “the chosen one” I got a strong Buffy vibe when Dumbly talks about love and that he should confide in his friends. Friendship makes us stronger and Voldy doesn’t have any friends. This was a very strong message througfhout Buffy, especially for the big fight at the end of S.4.
Dumbledore
I have some serious problems with Dumbledore’s actions and JKRs writing. Almost all books written for kids or young adults that I ever read have the kids being smarter and more insightful than the grown ups, but also doing the daring stuff without their approval. The grown ups are too involved in their own grown up stuff to see what the kids see and hear. However, having a grown up using a kid, the way Dumbledore does in the HBP, is something I’ve never come across before, and I don’t like it. I breaks all conventions and is wrong for the narrative and out of character for Dumbly. Having the kids aid the grown ups is one thing, taking them to the frontline of the battle is another.
The second part has to do with the scene where Dumbledore dies. There is something wrong with it and maybe it’s because I’m awriter (journalist) by trade, but I can wrap my head around it.
JKR, knowing the plot, knows that Snape will show up. Dumbledore can’t know that. He’s sent Harry to get him, but as the door burst open, he paralyzed Harry. Obi-Wan Dumbledore doesn’t want Draco to kill him, possibly channeling the force and knowing that it’s the road to the dark side, which will turn Draco into Darth Malfoy. Dumbledore reasons with Draco, saying that there’s still time to turn back and is almost there when the storm troopers enter the scene.
Now, from Dumbledore’s POV, he can’t know that Snape is on the way, he’s almost managed to wheadle Draco not to kill him, and clearly the death eaters (which is a stupid name BTW) have instructions not to do it - Draco is to prove himself to Voldy.
So who is Dumbly counting on to kill him? And if that isn’t the case…? If he’s not ready to go yet?
Snape
Who enters the scene and kills Dumbledore in an off hand way. Did he know Dumbledore would be there? How could he? Snape was in his office and [someone] went to get him and got stupefied. Snape, working for Voldy orDumbly, didn’t know what Draco was planning and thus didn’t have and knowledge beforehand about the attack. He might have guessed it was going to come, but not when.
So what does Snape expect to find when he reaches the top? Have the death eaters told him on the way up? Why would he have to kill Dumbledore at this precise point, apart from making a good final fight scene for the book. There’s something about the whole layout that’s off - not from the reader’s point of view, but from that of the characters.
And another thing about Snape - why did JKR add that chapter in the beginning with Snape and the sisters? Fairy of misdirection or setting us up to believe that Snape was working for Voldy all along. The consensus of this thread seems to be that Snape is still working for Dumbledore - I’m thinking JKR painted herself in a corner and that chapter is a late addition to lessen the impact of Snape’s betrayal.
It was good of JKR to have characters that were on the good side, but weren’t likable. There should’ve been some characters on the dark side that were likeable, but what little chance she had with Draco, she blew it, IMO, when she had him kicking Harry in the face and breaking his nose.
Gay characters
All I know who are gay and all I’ve read about or heard from basically say the same thing - the age around 15 is hell. There’s the pressure of “normality” to be attracted to the opposite sex, the general will to fit in with peers, that all teens experience, while hormons and emotions are sending out totally different signals. I know quite a few gays that tried dating the opposite sex before coming to terms with themselves, something I think might be very much harder in a small community, as the wizarding world is, and even more so on a bording school. Think of the torment Draco would inflict on someone who was openly gay and realize that anyone who in fact is gay, would most likely hide it.
I’m not opposed to gay characters in books for younger readers, but the issue is too complex and would take up way too much space to make a good narrative, so I’m not upset that JKR has decided to skip this.
Puppy love
Finally. And about two years too late. I’m wandering if JKR have been holding off with an eye on the American market. I think any book written in a European country and aimed at teen readers wouldn’t have any problem showing 14 year olds snogging.
BTW - snog is a wonderful word. It’s almost onomatopoetic, like the sound of a plunger being released from its sucking action. Snog isn’t a word in Webster’s, but I’ll bet top € that it’ll be soon, consdering the amount of books JKR sells in the US and that the scripts aren’t vetted for Britishisms anymore.
Also, I was thinking of sending an owl to Hermione with a copy of Marvin Gaye’s ‘Let’s get it on’ so she could play it to Stupid-as-a-Brick Weasley.
JKRs depiction of puppy love was spot on, though.
I think a much more interesting question would be to ask if the wizards consider sexuality a big enough issue that they didn’t have a spell to cause, cure, correct, coax, or otherwise change someone’s orientation? There are potions, after all, which cause a werewolf not to become a mindless killing beast during his transformation; and potions of love (okay, obsession). Would wizards avail themselves of such a possibility?
This is a pretty creepy idea, Fish. Also, it seems like potions which cause permanent change would fall under the category of dark magic. So I would say first that based on what we’ve seen of love potions, the art is not precise enough to make it change orientation without overwriting the user’s personality completely, and two, even if it could be done, I don’t think wizards would use it. We never see Neville practicing Suave Charms or the girls using glamours on themselves, for example, and those would be very minor changes compared to changing ones sexuality. So, even little self-improvement spells are either very dangerous, or on the whole not an acceptable part of wizard culture.
My daughter snagged our copy so I can’t reread it. Thus, some questions -
[ul][li]What are the initials of the witch who showed her valuables to Tom Riddle when he was working for Borgins? []There was a reference to Draco Malfoy using the hand of glory before the attack on Dumbledore, but it was never explained as far as I remember. Did I miss it? []Is it possible that Dumbledore’s arm got burned in removing a Dark Mark, either from him or from someone else? [/ul][/li]
Regards,
Shodan
Gaspode --yup. I was just reacting to that info re: JKR. I still think that she must have some continuity assistance-don’t most serial writers?
Also, if AS has told HP to go get Snape, what matters it if Snape just shows up? Either way, AS has the person he is looking for-Snape. I doubt that JKR would be so obvious as to put in the entire scene of Snape, Narcissa and Bellatrix and then have Snape be so wicked. I don’t see that scene as a softener, but as a deepener, if you follow me. JK likes here twists and turns–I think that Snape is playing a deep game.
As for the sexuality: I don’t see it as any different from Muggle’s. Wizards and witches seem to pair off. suffer heartache, and marry. I don’t doubt for a minute that there are gay wizards and witches–but they don’t enter the story, at least not yet. Why should they? It’d be a nice touch, but JKR seems to have other fish to fry. I don’t see absence as outcasting or condemnation.
In movie #3-HP gets his hand stuck in a skeletal hand mounted on a wooden block–I think that it is labelled “hand of glory”. But I also remember a reference to the HOG only lighting up for the owner.
AD’s withered hand (shades of Richard III)–I am not sure, but I think it’s from the ring itself. Perhaps it sickens anyone but the true heir of Slytherin. I don’t recall offhand, what happened to the ring at the end?
I’m in agreement with the people that Dumbledore’s death was part of some type of pact with Snape, and the Lily/Snape oath idea makes sense. I also think that James was horrible to Snape out of jealousy for Lily’s kindness to him. Think how much was made of jealousy among the three friends in this book.
Snape had to be in on the arrangements for Harry to get his old potions book. It’s hardly likely that he’d leave something like that lying around for anyone to find. Harry has to think it was an accident, though, because he, like everybody else now has to believe that Snape has betrayed them once and for all. If there was any inkling that he hadn’t he’d be no more use. I also think that Draco couldn’t kill or attempt to kill Dumbledore, because he is going to be redeemed.
I think we’re done with the people closest to Harry being killed off. I think Snape is going to die, but not before he is vindicated. I think it’s possible that Neville might die, too, but heroically. That may be why JKR has said that he and Luna won’t be a couple. One of the Weasley children might die as well, but it won’t be Ron.
And Dumbledore is dead. JKR has kept explicit religion out of the books, but there could hardly be a clearer metaphor for a departing soul than the flight of his patronus. He is being reborn, but not in this world. That said, there are plenty of ways for him to make brief reappearances as other people have suggested.
I think the hand grabbing Harry is only in the movie, as the don’t mention it giving light in the movie (not that I recall, anyway). In the book, I think the hand is simply a lighting device - IIRC, Draco touches the hand and nothing happens.
I think Dumbledore still has the ring in his office, even after it’s been cleansed or whatever he does to remove V’s soul - I don’t have the book at work, otherwise I’d check.
But the whole sequence of events only makes sense for the omniscient reader (and writer), not from the POV of the characters - unless Snape decded that this is the time when he must kill Dumbledore, to save Draco, i.e. it was something decided there and then, not beforehand.
Also, we’re only speculating that Dumbledore was dying. He was weak and injured and the text hints that his time was up, but it doesn’t say so outright.
I’m still convinced that Snape was a tripple agent and that Dumbledore was fooled.
A probable direct descendant of Helga Hufflepuff, her name is Hepzibah Smith. The memory was that of Hokey, her house-elf, extracted while she was diong time in Azkaban for accidentally poisoning her mistress.
I’m pretty sure that the ring was one of Voldemort’s Horcruxes. The stone was cracked the first time Harry saw it (Dumbledore was wearing it when he picked Harry upon Privet Drive in July). By midway through the book, Dumbledore was no longer carrying the ring around with him. It was in the destruction of the Horcrux that the ring was cracked, releasing a booby-trap jinx onto Dumbledore which injured his hand so severely, and nearly took his life.
N.B. per Bob Ogden’s memory of his interview with Marvolo Gaunt, the ring bore the crest of someone other than Salazar Slytherin (Penderex, or something like that; sorry, I don’t have my copy at hand). I regard this ring as a Voldemort heirloom, but not necessarily a Slytherin one.
Dumbledore did make some serious misjudgements in this book–not figuring out how Draco could get the Deatheaters into Hogwarts being the worst. He also seems to have seriously underestimated how strong the potion would be, though. I wonder if it was some sort of distillation of the pain and suffering of Voldemort’s victims that Dumbledore wouldn’t have encountered before. At this point in the story, though, a weak and injured
Dumbledore would be a liability to the good guys. He can’t let Draco kill him and he can’t risk being captured. But I don’t think that Dumbledore was wrong about Snape. That would tarnish his memory too much. Snape may very well have some more soul-searching to do, though, especially if he has been released from an oath by Dumbledore’s death.
Yes, most benevolent potions do wear off, but permanent magic isn’t only the purview of the Dark Arts. The invisibility cloak and the portraits appear to be relatively permanent and it’s doubtful they’re created with the Dark Arts. Animagi and Metamorphagi retain their powers for life, and the Minister gave the transfigured hamster-teacup away (with no mention of it turning back to normal).
In general, though, I agree that from a story standpoint, it doesn’t make sense to give your heroes magic so powerful they can circumvent the antagonist and the obstacles in the story without fear of drawbacks. An all-powerful hero makes for a poor story, but a quite powerful hero facing down an even bigger enemy makes for hero(ine)ism.
The magic could well exist in their world, just as gay characters could well do, but neither appear because neither suits the direction of the story or would serve as more (at this point) than a ruthless way to market to a demographic.
Not so. Mme Pomfrey used magic to restore Hermione’s front teeth after Draco hexed her; and didn’t Hermione use a straightening spell of some kind on her hair for the Yule Ball in book 4? Of course, she said it’s far too much work to do every day, but that’s par for the course: hurtful magic is easy and frightening, benevolent magic is difficult.
Re: The thought about Dumbledore’s countless frog cards being eyes and ears all over Great Britain (at least).
I don’t recall any of the wizard pictures and photos actually speaking, except the art hanging on the walls of Hogwarts. Moving around, yes, even smiling and waving like Harry’s parents did (at least in the movie), but even they have not given any advice or warnings.
Maybe the portrait has to be created by hand (like a painting) or perhaps the Hogwarts art has been specially charmed to be able to speak.
