A Harry Potter thread to pass the time
 

While I'm waiting for book seven, I've been rereading books four, five and six with an objective of figuring out if Snape is really on Voldemort's side. This thread doesn't need to be all about that, it is for all things HP.

Here's what I currently think about the Snape thing. I think that he is still loyal to Dumbledore, here's why:

In book four Snape is an enemy in the fake Moody's enemy mirror thing. If he was on Voldemort's side, he would be on the same side as Barty Crouch Jr.

Dumbledore says that he trusts him, and I think there must be some big reason. I don't think Dumbledore would take hiring a death eater lightly.

After he kills Dumbledore and he's running away from Harry, he doesn't hurt Harry, if fact he stops another death eater from hurting him. He uses the excuse that Voldemort wants him for himself, but I highly doubt that Voldemort would mind Harry being Crucio-ed a few times before Voldie kills him. Also, in his "I, the half blood prince" speech, he doesn't go on about Voldemort being the true ruler or whatever. In fact it seems like he is trying to teach Harry.

If Snape were truly on Voldie's side, I don't think he'd be able to resist a "ha-ha" type of speech to Dumbledore before he killed him. Instead, he just kills him and leaves. I think that Dumbledore made him do it in the same way that he made Harry promise to pour all the liquid down his throat in the cave.

My instinct says that Snape will play a large role in Voldie's downfall. I think he will help Harry in a crucial way.

I do wonder though about Snape's attachment to Draco Malfoy. The Malfoy's have always clearly been Voldemort supporters.

I'm sure I'll think of more, as I'm only halfway through book five this go round.

I must say that reading four, five and six in a row is pretty rough. So much happens in four, in five bad things happen to Harry with hardly a break, and Dumbledore dies in six.

I'm glad that it had been a while since I read Goblet of Fire when I saw the movie. They really are only the same on the very basicest of plot points. I did enjoy the movie, but the book is leagues better, IMO.

Anything to add? How long till book seven?

I disagree. And someday I'll read the books and then explain why.

:p

I think Snape is a good guy. He made an unbreakable promise to Dumbledore that he wouldn't give himself away as a spy. That's my theory.

Goblet of Fire is my favorite book, but upon seeing it three times, I must agree with iSm and say that 'Azkaban' was the best movie...

:)

Wait till you see the dark ride...

What dark ride...?

Sorry, long running joke...

There WAS a Harry Potter special attraction at Warner Bros. Movie World in Australia, and thanks to the powers of the internets, a BUNCH of people were insisting that DISNEY was going to make a Harry Potter dark ride (never mind the fact that the property is Time Warner). A couple different manufacturers HAVE put forth Harry Potter dark ride concepts - in the U.S., if it does materialize anywhere, it would be Six Flags. I can't say anything else on this. ;)

The rumor is obviously a silly one...but this particular point is hardly a roadblock. Not when there's a Fox propery and a Paramount property already in the park.

...but did he really kill Dumbledore? In Snapes opening lecture in book one he brags about being able to "stopper death
"

:eek:

But Time Warner had already put out a statement that they had the theme park rights for the franchise, and they had no plans at the time to go ahead with the idea.

The books have lost a lot of traction among younger kids. They are still read regularly but at the same rate as other classics. I think this is because the later ones aren't really for their age group. The popularity remained crazy until book 5 came out.

I thought the books were purposefully (if not successfully) designed to appeal in style to whatever age kids the kids in the books were. Very jeuvenile in Books 1 and 2, young adult lit in 3 and 4, moody adolescent litratoor for 5 and 6.

I don't think it's worked out too well. I really haven't like the more recent books. I particularly loathed the last one, which was unbelievably boring for 400 pages, then breathtakingly exciting for 50. The end. Bah.

Dumbledore doesn't seem the type to me to ask anyone to make an unbreakable vow. Either he trusts them, or he doesn't.

As for him being really dead, yes I think he is dead.

Something that occured to me is that Snape calls Voldie the Dark Lord. Does anyone recall if anyone good calls him Dark Lord? I can only recall Death Eaters saying it, while everyone else calls him he who must not be named.

You're correct, everyone who is a death eater calls Voldemort, the Dark Lord, only Harry and Dumbledore call him by name, Voldemort, everyone else has been He Who Must Not be Named.

As for Snape being chummy with Draco and whether or not Snape is still a death eater or loyal to Dumbledore. I believe he is loyal, and remains loyal to Dumbledore. To remain on the good side of the Malfoys, and Draco, would make sense. Since Snape is the head of Slytherin, keep your enemies close.

GoF is my favorite book of the series so far, not the movie (although the dragons were really well done). Like T and iSm, Prisoner of Azkeban is, thus far, the best film.

Hmmmm, maybe I will put them on my iPod for the drive across country.......:coffee:

I never thought of the unbreakable vow thing to be a dark thing. I thought anyone could do it. Maybe I need to reread 7. Although, I must again agree with iSm that 7 was slow in places. And the payoff for 7 bummed me out. All that and the item was not a horcrux. Bleh.

I think Harry Potter may be a horcrux. Can people be horcruxes? I think Harry might die in the last book OR Voldemort will not die but be sent to a place where he can never come back nor hurt anyone. That's my theory.

I've said this one before but don't know if it may be that I'm crazy, but does anyone else thing that Hermione might be a werewolf? I'm just saying that in 'Azkaban' they said that werewolves only responded to werewolves and Hermione distracted Lupin with a wolf cry. She's also very into the rights of creatures that are different. And that hair of hers, sheesh! Rowling also had her answer all of the werewolf questions in the classroom, but then again Hermione always answers all the questions...

I also have a theory that Mrs. Dursley is a witch that is helping to protect Harry. I mean her sister was a witch... all the Weasley kids are magical... it's possible. It would account for her severe distate for her own sister even though she's dead.

I'm worried that the body count will go up in the next book. But if Ron or Hermione die, I will be devastated.

Good casting call for Umbridge. Staunton is amazing.

Ginny did, in the poem to Harry, during the time that she was under Riddle's control.

I actually DO think that Dumbledore is capable of making an ubreakable vow with Snape... but not for the reason you thought. I thought that his unbreakable vow was for Snape to kill him at the planned moment (if circumstances called for it) so as to distract them from Harry, to save Draco from murder-peer-pressure, and to secure Snape's spot in Voldemort's hierarchy so as to help bring him down from the inside.

An another topic, I think Harry's toast. I think that he (or his scar) is the last horcrux, and he/it will have to be destroyed in order to destroy Voldemort. After all, "neither can live if the other the other survives," does not exclude the possibility that both have to kick it.

They could both end up surviving at the end.
:confused:

Also, I believe Dumbledore is dead. He appeared sleeping in a portrait in his office at the end of the last book. But there are phoenix references all over the place, so who knows what will happen next...

Only JK Rowling knows and she is not one to spill anything significant. :(

I'm with you, if Ron or Hermione bite it in the last book, I will be crushed, same thing with Mr. or Mrs. Weasley.

I think he's capable of it, I just don't think it's something he would do. I think if he really trusts Snape then he would make him give his word and that would be good enough. I think you are right about the rest though. I think that eventually Draco will understand the sacrifice that they both made for him and join the good side.

I really hope you are wrong. I think making a horcrux must be a complicated bit of magic, and Harry's mom's sacrifice protected him. I also don't think Rowling's going to make Harry suffer so much his whole life and then not reward him with a normal life in the end. I think we may have a hobbit like scenario in which we think Harry will die but then Fawkes will fly in and save him.

If Harry, Ron. Hermione, any of the Weasley's (except Percy), or Hagrid dies, I will be crushed. That being said, I think that either a Weasley or Snape will die. If she kills Hagrid I'll hunt her down. :p

Take it to the bank:

1. Dumbledore stays dead.

2. Snape is on the side of good.

3. The big three (Harry, Ron, Hermione) live happily ever after

3. Sirrius makes a comeback (but not unitl the real action is over)

4. Ron and Hermione get together

Bookmark this post and save it for when the final book comes out.

She and that kid she told who had cancer and passed away.

I don't agree that Dumbledore's dead- I think the sleeping portrait and Fawkes' absence are two big clues to the contrary. I don't think it's wishful thinking on my part: either she's gone to a great deal of trouble to throw in so many red-herrings, or Dumbledore is going to pull a Gandalf. Remember, he worked with Nicholas Flamel for many years and if anyone knew how to get past death it was Flamel. Also, like Harry's mom, he sacrificed himself out of love and that is supposed to be the greater power.

I hear ya. But there's also that aveda kerdava thing. Only one person has ever survived it and that's Harry.

I guess I am coming at this from a different angle. Dumbledore had to die for the same reason James, Lilly and Sirius all had to be disposed of. In the end, Harry must stand alone to face Voldemort. As soon as JK started using lines like "Don't you see, nothing bad can happen to Harry while Dumbledore is here" it was clear Dumbledore had to go, and not just off on some errand. As long as Dumbledore was around Harry would feel safe but that's not his future. He has to become a man and face the future on his own terms.

'Alone' also means w/o Ron and Hermione. :eek:

Oh did she? Well, that's really wonderful of her to do that. Sad, but very make a wish kind of cool thing to do.

I'll try and dig up a link for you...

Here it is.

I remember Rowling, in an interview with Stephen Fry (who sympathized with Snape) not to like him too much. Apparently she planned for him to do something pretty awful. So she kept her promise in Book 6. I also remember her saying something about Snape doing something terrible before he could redeem himself, but I think I'm making that up...or putting a self-serving spin on it, since I *want* Snape to be working for Dumbledore this whole time. She's brilliantly written his character to go either way without betraying anything she's already done.

I do think Harry's scar is the last horcrux, and that this will be Voldemort's undoing. I do not, however, think Harry will die. At least, I don't believe he'll stay dead...phoenix rising from the ashes, and all that jazz.

I really, really loved the 6th book. It's probably my favorite next to Azkaban. The 4th was a lot of fun, but it was mostly the side stories that interested me. As plots go, the 4th had the most ridiculous, I think. Why didn't Barty Crouch Jr., in disguise, just hand Harry a portkey earlier on? Why go through all the trouble of rigging a contest. I get that it's FUN. And I get that it would be fun, especially, for kids to read. But the plot holes in Book 4 were glaring. Still, I LOVE the read. It's got so much going on that's great. I find that the movie, because it really does pare it down to the main plot, is not one I can rewatch numerous times without feeling restless and bored.

I agree on these. Although now that I'm rereading the post, I realize that I do somewhat think Dumbledore comes back ;)

My gut tells me Dumbledor is not dead. But, I'm not HP scholler. I can barely remember what happens in the last book.

lol! :D That cracked me up, Lisa.

Not at all. By alone I mean without a guardian figure to help protect him. No mom to give him protection, no wizard with a sword toting bird etc...

Having friends you can count on is a different thing entirely in fact for Harry, learning to trust and rely on others is a large part of his journey to adulthood. I fully expect the dynamic due to be hip deep in the action right beside Harry but at the very end, it'll be Harry one-on-one with Voldie.

Oh, I see what you're saying. I thought you meant alone alone.
:)

me type gud

Not to worry my dear, unlike some people around here you can at least count past the number freee .....

I don't do math, so I never noticed

I think the scar as a horcrux would be cool in a way, but it just seems like a horcrux takes quite a bit of work to make. I'll do quite a bit of eyerolling if a horcrux just happens accidentally.

I do think that Fawkes reviving Harry is a likely scenario, though. I don't think Dumbledore will be back, as JK has said before that once someone is dead, they're dead. She doesn't want kids thinking their relatives will come back from the dead or anything like that. Also, if Fawkes were going to revive him, he wouldn't have been mourning for so long. They buried a casket, I'm assuming there was a body in it, though that could have been easily switched.

Another thing that makes me think Snape isn't really bad (well, he's not exactly good even if he is loyal to Dumbledore though, is he?) is that Harry's true enemies are really nice to him until they turn on him. Snape has always been mean. In fact, I think it's possible that he doesn't even dislike Harry. I think that maybe he knows all along what he may have to do and if he were close to Harry (as he is Lilly's son, whom I think Snape loved) then Harry wouldn't really believe that he's a Death Eater. Like Mrs. Figg treated Harry poorly so that the Dursleys would let him come over.

I just read the part where Harry asks Snape about the Death Eater thing, so I guess my idea wasn't that original, lol. I had just forgotten that I read it.

Dumbledore removing himself from the scene would leave Harry alone, at least as far as Voldemort's concerned. I think perhaps, just as Voldemort has the horcrux's (something that was only intro'd in the last book) as a means to defeat death, Dumbledore likely has something as well. Could be something untested, which would explain Snape's reluctance to do it and his fierce denial of cowardice to Harry at the end of book 6. Of course, I've also thought that perhaps Snape has been playing Dumbledore and Voldemort all along- being as skilled as he is at occlumency he could be hiding his true intentions from both of them, and Dumbledore might be aware of this and using it to his advantage. Snape and Riddle seem to both be overly-proud and from humble origins- perhaps Snape thinks he should be the ultimate wizard? Look at some of the wicked spells he created at such a youg age- hardly the sign of someone who would settle for a subordinate position in life. And the whole 'half-blood Prince' moniker, which is not unlike 'Lord Voldemort' in it's pretentions.

Sigh. We'll spend all this time and energy looking for answers, and then JK will likely throw another 'horcrux' scenario at us; something that we know absolutely nothing of and therefore could not possibly guess. I hope not, as I think that would be irritatingly lazy writing. I really hate it when authors pull that sort of crap.

You may be right, WB. There certainly did seem to be a lot of Phoenix allusions in HBP. I think though, that if he does come back it will be in some otherworldly yoda-esque fashion to help Harry in a time of need. Perhaps he will come back as a phoenix? Or in a similar way to what happened when Harry fought Voldemort in GoF.

Might I take this opportunity to say that it annoys me to no end that in the beginning of PoA the movie, Harry uses Lumos out of school. And Sirius the dog growls at him.

Also, rereading the last three books really drove home what a travesty the Dumbledore from GoF movie was. I hope they do better with OotP.

Rowling has said that when a character dies they are dead. She doesn't want to confuse children who could think that a loved one who died may come back.

I'm slow. Traci beat me to it.

Right. So they could both survive... right?

Sirius is dead. (Sadly.) She said he wasn't coming back. But I don't really understand what happened to him...

I don't think he is. They had the funeral. It would go against her not causing confusion statements.

No no no. :D I meant that Harry and Voldemort may survive...

I'm gonna say, not a chance in hell does Voldie survive.

But wouldn't that be the ultimate show of mercy for Potter to let him live? Or he could be banished forever or locked away somewhere permanently... :shrug:

I don't think that Harry will actually kill him, but I think that the last fight with Harry will kill him.

July 13, 2007?! I was all set for a movie release in two months. I totally missed the 2007 part. Lame.

I think we should plan a London LoT party for the book seven release.:D

Michael is fairly certain that Harry is heir to Godric Gryffindor, for the following reasons:

When Harry first gets his wand, it shoots out red and gold sparks.

Harry's parents live in Godric Hollow.

His birthday makes him in a Leo, the lion.

We're always being reminded how much courage he has.

His arch nemesis is the heir of Slytherin.

He pulled Gryffindor's sword from the hat in book 2.

James inherited his fortune, but we don't know from where.

I think he may be on to something. JKR has been saying that it is very significant that he has his mother's eyes. I wonder what that means?

I think the eyes matter largely because of their effect on Snape- that's one of the reasons I believe Snape was in love with Lily. That love, which Dumbledore goes to great lengths on many occasions to indicate the power of, is what redeems him and makes him stronger than Voldemort. (It's the "old magic" Voldemort referred to in the graveyward in the movie). JK has a great deal of say in the movies, and I think all the odd looks Snape throws Harry is included for a reason, particularily when you think how many things they tossed out because of time constraints. I don't just look for clues in the books- I use the movies as well, primarily because she does have so much input into what makes it onscreen.

That is an excellent point, and perhaps the entire reason that he trusted Snape.

I just finished re-reading book 3 last night and I pondered the question, is Crookshanks an unregistered animagis? If so, who can Crookshanks be in the wizarding world?

JKR has said that she isn't. She isn't all cat either though. I forget the magical animal that she's mixed with.

Okay, thanks. I just wondered since Crooshanks was so friendly and helpful to Sirius Black. Also the reactions to Scabbers/Pettigrew. I'll have to consult my guide to magical creatures!

Crookshanks is part kneazle, see the last entry on this page.

http://www.hp-lexicon.org/bestiary/bestiary_k.html

I wonder if the fab three will ever figure out that Crookshanks is part kneazle. (and thanks Brigitte!)

:eek: Does He ?? ....No !!!!!!!!!

Aw Bugger. Now I know.








...actually I've already read it.. couldn't resist teasing.. Sorry. :p

Look what I found . . .

Link 1

And even better . . .

Link 2

Enjoy!

So, did JK Rowling tell us too much by saying two people are going to die in book 7?

I mean, it's got to be Harry and Voldie, right? Or maybe not...

I think that her comments implied that evil kills two goodies. So while Voldie will be part of the body count, he does not count as one of the two.

Harry will not die. Ron will not die. Hermione will not die. That's just opinion, but I'm right.

All the rest: Hagrid, McGonagall, Weasley clan (minus ron), etc are fair game.

I'd bet on Hagrid to be part of the body count for sure.

Ah, I thought 2 was the total body count. Interesting.

I'm more interested that someone apparently got a reprieve and now isn't dead? That's what I'm assuming. So, who was going to die and now won't?

My 2 knuts, 4 sickles and 1 galleon:

Reprieve: Hermione or Ron

Biting it: McGonagall or Snape
Mr. or Mrs. Weasley or Hagrid

I'm not quite sure if Tonks or Lupin would count toward the major characters or not.

Does Harry return to Hogwarts next year if it remains open?

Is Snape still one of Dumbledore's good guys? (I think so) Will there be some other surprise revelation about Snape in the last book?

This does not lessen in any way my complete lack of patience having to wait for the final installment to hit the bricks sometime mid-late 2007.

I think so too. Michael is fairly convinced that Snape is a vampire. I must say, she does often say that he swoops in like a bat, and after he gave Lupin's class the essay about werewolves, Lupin gave them one about vampires.

Hmmm- interesting on the vampire thing- hadn't considered that before. I think Snape is an anti-hero; he's helping Dumbledore, but he's still an asshole. (I think because he had a thing for Lily and felt guilty for helping to bring about her death, blah blah blah...) I also think that Ron is going to bite it in the end- he's got that fatal flaw that I'm almost positive she's going to exploit in the final book. I also think Molly is toast.

I had not considered and missed completely the vampire connection. Yes, Snape is still an asshole. Wonder how Draco will fare in all of this, I think he is toast too, from Voldemort. Snape has no other duty to protect him, as far as I know, with regard to the unbreakable vow. He did what he was supposed to do (and I believe Dumbledore knew it as well) so now that he got Draco out of Hogwarts, obligations in that respect are done.

I'll be very sad if Molly bites it. I'm also wondering if Petunia and the rest of the Dursleys, but Petunia in particular, have anything significant to contribute when Harry returns to Privet Drive for book 7.

So many questions........and most of mine, so trivial

The Story In Oz
 

Here's that I got to read:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/books/two...174172150.html

The parts that interest me are:

That leads me to think that:

• Voldemort will definately die (evil is NOT allowed to triumph in childrens literature... for the most part)
• Harry may very well die to protect the name, as she mentions. (I can just imagine "Harry Potter and the Ingrown Toenail" or such)
• one or both of the rest of the terrible trio (ie Won won and hermeineonie) will also perish (maybe)
• Oh, and Umbridge really DOES need to die. Snape too, if he IS really evil.

My 2 knuts, and I'll raise you a Fizzing Whizzbee. :D

Have some Chocolate Frogs on me!:p

I'm with WB - I think Ron's going to bite it. Hermione just wouldn't be heart-wrenching enough. She's not as goofy likeable as Ron, and Ron's got the whole extended family that would be affected.

But it's the part where she says that two die that she didn't intend to die that now has me most intrigued. I think Ron's one, but I also think she always meant to kill off Harry, so that leaves hearse number two still empty and waiting.

I'm starting to wonder if one or both of the Weasley parents gets knocked off. Ron and Percy are so unnappreciative of their family and it would serve to knock some sense into Ron with regards to how he views Harry- he'd see how important family really is and what Harry was missing all those years. If he did go bad it might bring him back.....

I will be so mad if Ron dies.

I wonder what this movie would be rated. It seems the book is being set up to be pretty violent (violence via magic instead of guns, but violent none-the-less). I'm not sure that book 7 should even be considered a childrens book.

And Voldermort has to be killed off or she leaves room for spin-offs.

Maybe Fred and George are the two.

Urp! Hadn't considered that!

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!

Won't happen. They are just now really getting cute.

pity they're both really gay :evil:

Then they're cute gay boys- what's new?

Hehehehe. Ok, that stir didn't work ;)

...back to the old drawing board.

I'm going to start calling you Lashbrat.;):p

Well, I'm sure I'm related to Fred & George somewhere....Red(dish) hair, incredible good looks......... :D

Can we learn from the past?

If I remember this correctly (always a dodgy prospect with me...)

When Goblet of Fire was being published JK talked about killing a character. How it was related to the plot, etc...

When Halfbood prince came out she expressed "extreme" concern about how her younger readers would be effected and was warning parents about what was coming.

This time around, I'd say her comments are more along the lines of what she said with Goblet and as such I'd expect secondary characters (like Hagrid) to be more of a target than the big three.

^^^
That's kind of what I was thinking as well. She doesn't say it will be a major character just that two who she initially had live will now die.