Welcome to the Commenting Pixie Party!
Done! Anyone else awake around here?
I just finished. I wish I could say I was surprised that Dumbledore died. I *am* surprised that Snape did it. Even though he was always a slimy bastard, I wanted to believe he was a good guy underneath.
Okay, just one quick comment before church. I think I was more upset that Snape was really evil than I was that Dumbledore died.
Could this have anything to do with my surpassing fondness for Alan Rickman? Very, very possibly. But it also has to do with hoping, like Dumbledore, that those who have been bad can in fact repent, come over to the right.
More later...
I was disappointed with the book. Way too much explaining and backstory, and few of the wonderful descriptions and creative, clever explanations of the magical world that made the early books so great to read.
I did think Dumbledore's funeral was touching ....
I wasn't surprised by his death because we had gotten lots of hints in the last book. Are we ever going to find out why he trusted Snape so much? That part still seems a bit strange.
Perhaps one of my biggest disappointments in this book is that Hermione didn't have a very important role. In other books, she was the super smart witch who figured things out. In this book she was mainly just Ron's love interest. (Rolling my eyes.)
And Harry deciding to break up with Ginny to protect her at the end was an unnecessary piece of melodrama. Clearly, Ginny and whole family are in danger already anyhow. Give me a break. That scene is such a cliche. (Has anyone seen the end of the Spiderman movie?)
My thoughts exactly, jo(e). By far the most disappointing of her books. Chapters and chapters of backstory with very little narrative to propel them forward. And none of the pageantry and clever invention that makes the other books -- even the draggy 4th and 5th books -- so entertaining. Hermione was superfluous -- and her interest in Ron makes less sense as Ron's character continues to have little to do except act foolish and react to those around him. Even the Quidditch matches were surpassingly dull, and the climactic sword in the stone/holy grail moment at the middle of the lake was distinguished only by the faint smell of sadism as Harry shoved the liquids down Dumbledore's throat.
It WAS shocking to find that Snape was the murderer, but the blow was dulled by the spellbook ruse, a device that seemed tired after being done suspensefully in Chamber of Secrets.
I feel a little guilty reading these spoilers... but only a little guilty.
I think her mistake was trying to write the story in seven books. A trilogy would have worked better.
This whole book could have been condensed into a couple of chapters. Why wouldn't Dumbledore have take an afternoon to sit down with Harry and tell him everything all at once instead of dragging it out? The series of private lessons with Dumbledore just seem like an author's trick for drawing out the suspense.
Not just for drawing out the suspense, but for papering over the sad fact that nothing really, you know, happens until the last few chapters of the book.
Ickiest moment? When Draco stomps on Harry's face. I am so not looking forward to that in the movie version.
Yeah, I agree, I was rather disappointed. It felt like this volume was way too much about satisfying all the "who is going to hook up with whom?"-mongers, and dragging things out to get to Dumbledore's death. (What is with the sudden obsession with pairing up everyone? Bill and Fleur, Tonks and Lupin? And why bother throwing that stuff in unless you're going to develop it properly?) It felt like this time the structural formula that she's set up - starting school, Halloween, Christmas, etc. etc., with climactic stuff all happening at the end of the school year - was really constraining. I wasn't really surprised about Dumbledore's death, but I thought it was a little formulaic, too. (That is, I hadn't predicted it because I thought it would be too cliched to do that: oh, it's the end of the book - time for someone to die.) I suppose it's kind of a way to dramatize the growing-up process - one has to come to rely on oneself instead of on others - but - eh.
I agree with jo(e), I thought there was an awful lot of explaining stuff that could have been shown much more effectively.
The one thing I thought was interesting was the portrayal of Draco as torn about what he's doing, and suffering, and Harry's recognition of that suffering.
But overall, I really felt like she was clearing up all the stuff she had to clear up in order to get to book seven.
Hmmm, didn't realize I had so much to say about it! 
Oh, all along there's been this whole thing about how Harry is protected by his mother's love -- which has been actually fairly touching -- but now suddenly we are getting thrown all these stupid romantic love pairings. Ugh. I think the romantic pairings are supposed to fit on the side of good in the battle of good vs. evil (rolling my eyes). Whatever.
I like that Draco emerges with a bit of complexity but otherwise the black and white good vs. evil stuff does get awfully simplistic. It was sad to discover that there was nothing complex about Snape after all. He was just plain evil. Very disappointing, that. I rather liked him.
Yeah, I'm still hoping that there is more to the story about Snape. It was so promising, beginning with the scene sympathetic to Narcissa...
I don't mind the pairings so much when they're done with some levity -- Fleur's line about being good-looking enough for the both of them may be the best line in the whole book -- but I have to agree with jo(e) that having Harry renounce Ginny is pointless cliche.
Ultimately, I'm just irritated that the book is so unsatisyingly over, and now begins the long wait for Book 7.
And if that effective luck potion is common enough that the Potions teacher is handing it out as a prize in class, why doesn't Dumbledore whip some up for everyone who is fighting the Deatheaters? Or how come no one ever uses the going-back-in-time trick from a couple books ago? I think the magic should have been thought out more carefully ....
Ooo, that bit she did address, jo(e). Apparently all the Time-Turners were smashed up in the battle at the Ministry last summer (p.231).
As for the luck potion, that's explained on p.187.
(Sorry, I'm trapped on the couch with the laptop, the book, and the sleep-nursing baby. Thus the pedantry.)
Well, I am in the minority, because I was quite happy with the book; I didn't find it disappointing at all. Yes, I thought from the beginning that it was going to be Dumbledore that died, but I don't hold that against the book; I figured out the "secret" of the The Sixth Sense during the opening scene. So, I don't let things like that bother me.
What I what to know is, is Snape *REALLY* evil? That is the question I am left with at the end of the book. Yes, I know he killed Dumbledore, but it may not have been murder. I see two scenarios here that would not make it murder: one, it could have been a mercy killing. Dumbledore was seriously ill from drinking the "substance" (whatever it was) when he and Harry tried to get the necklace. He begged Harry then to kill him. He was still so weak by the time they returned to Hogwarts that he could barely stand and couldn't do magic.
We also know that Snape is skilled in reading minds, and that Dumbledore is skilled in nonverbal communication. Could have he told Snape to kill him? This would also have protected Draco, who would probably would have been killed by the other Death Eaters (and if not them, then certainly Voldemort) for not killing Dumbledore. This would have explained Dumbledore's "pleading," as Rowling calls it. I can't see Dumbledore pleading for his life from anyone, even someone he trusts like Snape. Could he have been "pleading" with Snape to kill him?
I'll write my other hypothesis in a separate comment, since I fear this is getting so long that I'll be cut off.
I liked the device of unfolding the story gradually via memories, actually. I probably would have liked it even more if I had read it slowly, as The Princess is doing. It feels like I raced through to find out who was going to die, which is partially true. But I also feared being spoiled before I got there myself, so that's largely why I read it so quickly/obsessively. I'll have to read it again more slowly at some point.
Phantom, I used your character spreadsheet to research "R.A.B." Anyone think it might have been Regulus Black? That might put the locket horcrux among the property left to Harry by Sirius.
Wow, that was geeky.
I'm still mourning over Snape. I would love to find out in the final book that there is some other explanation, but the emphasis on his facial expressions of rage and hatred don't leave a lot of room for that possibility.
OK, second scenario, closely related to the first. What if Snape killed Dumbledore (and again, I think Dumbledore would have been in on the plan) to protect Harry and possibly himself?
Here's my second possible scenario: after making the Unbreakable Vow with Narcissa, Snape tells Dumbledore of what he has promised. Dumbledore knows that by making this vow, Snape will die if he doesn't kill Dumbledore when Draco fails (we all knew he would, after all). Perhaps Snape was very much willing to sacrifice his life for Dumbledore.
But what if Dumbledore tells him, no, that Snape must kill him so that Snape can continue to be a double agent so that Harry can be protected? What if Dumbledore tells him that, when it comes down to it, he must kill Dumbledore? Dumbledore knew he was fading, that his powers were diminished (his hand was already injured when Snape made the vow--Snape tells the sisters so at that time). What if Dumbledore felt Snape was the best option for protecting Harry, and so he told Snape that he, not Snape, should be the one to die? Again, such a decision would have spared Draco's life as well.
Other things that add to this possibility, in my mind: during the fight, Snape only defended himself from Harry's spells--he did not attack Harry with spells. I realize he told the others that only Voldemore should get to kill Harry, but 1) I don't find that very convincing and 2) even if that was the case, don't you think given the animosity between them that he'd want to at least HURT Harry? I just find it very suspicious that the only spells he cast at Harry were shields. Exception: the final spell, which cast away Harry's wand, but again that was a defensive spell.
Under this scenario, the reason why Snape appeared so angry when he killed Dumbledore might have been because he didn't really want to kill him. He didn't want to do it, even though Dumbledore told him he must (again, I think they could have been reading each other's minds). This is when Dumbledore pleaded, assuring Snape that yes, his mind was made up and that he was ready to die.
I propose these two scenarios not because I'm a fan of Snape--I'm NOT. I still think it's fishy how in book 5, Snape's lessons with Harry made his mind more, and not less, open to Voldemort. It wouldn't be surprising to me if Snape really IS evil. But Dumbledore's pleading seemed completely out of character to me.
And jo(e), I think there's a lot more to D's trust in Snape than we know. I think we'll find out what it is in the next book. That whole issue also leads me to suspect that Snape didn't *really* murder D.--I think there's so much that Rowling hasn't told us yet.
I hope to God book seven doesn't take another two or three years. I know she had a baby between books 5 & 6, so maybe she's done having kids and will whip out the finale in a year or so. Probably not, but I can dream.
I am in denial that Dumbledore is dead and that Snape is evil. I keep wondering if it is a ruse, akin to what Dumbledore was promising Draco, that someone could appear to have been killed so that they could disappear and be safe. Thus, Snape would have been in on it to make it look like he had been killed (and thus give the appearance that Snape was evil, which would protect him against Voldemort), and that he will come back in book 7. This is my hope at least.
Hated the characterization of Hermione (and of women in general, in this book actually -- a lot of yucky remarks about women and their place in society), hated that she was not at all instrumental in anything, and agree about how inane it is that she could be in love with Ron (and act in such a jealous and competitive way). Further, I too hated all the romantic subplots. The theme of love could be done in so many more interesting ways (and without having to stoop to using the sterotype of catty women fighting over a man).
Didn't like the book, and found several typos which really irked me.
Oh, excellent work, Songbird. I hadn't checked the database for RAB yet -- you are quick on the draw!
Welcome to the commenting pixie party, ABDmom! Yes, I think your scenarios are very plausible, and would go a long way to explaining things. Though, as I understand it, if what Draco was supposed to do was kill Dumbledore, then Snape was bound to do it when he made the vow to Narcissa. The question then remains whether or not Dumbledore knew about it ahead of time or not.
My complaint about the book is not that the death of Dumbledore was obvious -- sure, it was, but I assume that was purposeful. My complaint is that Rowling can be a bit lazy as a writer. If there is a stereotype that will quickly express what she wants you to know about a character (like Snape's hooked nose), she doesn't hesitate to use it. If there is a dusty plot device that will get her where she needs to go -- like the obligatory Dumbledore-explains-it-all-to-you scene -- she'll trot it out once or 15 times.
Usually the flaws brought on by lazy writing are totally overshadowed by her humor and marvellous inventiveness. But this book didn't offer much of either -- by design, I know, but still, the final product is a book whose flaws are more clearly in evidence than its predecessors.
Welcome to the commenting pixie party, shrinkykitten, and do give page numbers for the typos! We love a good typo, here!
Right, Phantom--Snape had to kill Dumbledore when he made the vow. However, in a later chapter, Ron explains to Harry how Ron and George tried to get him to commit to an Unbreakable Vow when he was 5 years old. Ron tells Harry that if a person makes the vow and does not fulfill it at the moment of opportunity, the person will die (wish I had the page #, but BH is reading our copy). That is why I said that about Snape. If Ron knew the repercussions, Snape clearly did. Perhaps he took the vow knowing its implications, being ready and willing to sacrifice himself for Dumbledore when the time came for him to fulfill the vow.
Okay, ABDmom, I'm with you. Is his rage, then, based in his anger about having to kill Dumbledore to protect Harry? Snape is doing what Dumbledore wants out of his respect for Dumbledore, but it irks him that it's in the service of protecting Harry?
Just finished--got special dispensation from G to read ahead for "really scary parts".
I also think that Snape killed Dumbledore on Dumbledore's orders--the rage was having to do something he didn't want to do, kill the person who saw the good in him. And there was something there, something Dumbledore said about he and Snape having some sort of connection.
Snape as the Half Blood Prince--did not see that coming.
Draco should be VERY interesting in book 7.
I think Snape is still super secret undercover agent.
The romantic pairing up seemed kind of an afterthought, as if something is coming up in 7 that needs this kind of thing.
On the whole, though, I really liked it. Even though I could see Dumbledore's death coming, it was upsetting. And even though Hermione wasn't a big part, I think this was more about Harry than anything else--more about him getting ready for the big fight.
Can't wait for 7 and to read about Ron, Hermione and Harry's adventures with the Durselys.
Oh, now I get what you're saying, ABDmom. Yes, I agree totally. With you and Songbird. That would explain the argument that Hagrid overheard between Snape and Dumbledore (pp. 405-6).
Pages 405 and 406, eh? Thank goodness The Princess put the book down for a snack break, so I can check it out! And even though she left in her brothers' air-conditioned attic room, she is willing to go and get it! Yay Me!!
By the way, I just pinged you, pretty amazing since it's the very first trackback I have ever done and required a Haloscan tutorial. I'm sending people who want to talk Potter in this direction.
Thanks, Songbird. I'll make sure that this post stays visible in the sidebar for quite awhile, even after I go back to our regularly scheduled blogging.
I'm still trying to find the Ron reference that ABDmom gave. I know it's there... maybe I should just start working on the Book 6 edition of the database that I promised to Niece #1.
It's pretty easy to see that she's suffering from Steven King/Anne Rice Syndrome. Boy Howdy does this woman ever need an editor.
I suppose publishers are a bit hands off with their superstars. She deserves her success, but a firm editor would go a long way to improve the series. Even Michiko Kakutani seemed a bit reverential in her review.
I agree, an editor is a lovely thing--and there were passages that I thought "eh?" about. I guess when you go a few years between books, you have to start selling by the pound.
Still, as I said, I enjoyed it. The typos were annoying, though.
I'm also in the apparent minority who liked this book a great deal (certainly far more than 4, which I despised). I had predicted -- just from the structure of the series -- that Dumbledore would die, and from the unbreakable vow knew Snape would do it (also that he was the HBP, but that was a little repetitive, copying the diary). I like the suggestions for why Snape might still not be evil -- I was hoping for one, but kept getting my imagination stalled on the focus on his look of hatred. I would like to know why Dumbledore had such faith in him, because clearly it's not been explained. "He said he was really sorry" makes no sense.
I missed the descriptions -- her plots are not hugely original (though there were a number of good lines in this one) -- and her descriptions are generally the best part of the books. So her description of te funeral was wonderful -- but it was still the funeral.
And the relationships were cliched -- but in a lot of ways, adolescence is living through a bunch of cliches. I think the ending was unnecessary, because really, it's not like the Weasleys aren't in danger, and Ginny, being the youngest, in the most danger . . . but I also suspect it will unend in the next one anyhow.
Ginny was a less developed character than in the last book, though, which was too bad. I also am not sure why people didn't trust Harry who, after all, tends to prove to be right. (But I had this same complaint about BtVS.) And it's not like it's ever been heavy on females-who-do-stuff (Lily had no friends in school, just James?); I don't think this was much worse than others.
Still, for the complaints, I still thoght the book was good. I thought the plot was better planned than the last two, and that she's finally pulling in the threads she laid in the first 5 books. It was more readable than the last few, and marginally less heavy on despair than the last one. Until the end, anyhow. And the end wasn't underwhelming like book 5 (the prophecy is . . . that Harry has to kill Voldemort or vice versa? This is a huge shock?)
I was pleased that she finally mentioned Harry giving gifts for Christmas (is *everyone* Christian there?) and other people's birthdays, too; that was a complaint I've long had.
I was disappointed that we didn't see more of Neville. I originally had thought that he might turn out to be the half-blood prince, but she went a different direction with that, which I guess was ok. I know Dumbledore took some pains to explain to Harry how Voldemort essentially selected Harry over Neville to fulfill the prophecy, but I can't help but feel that Neville will (or should, at least), have a larger role in the final confrontation in book 7.
Hi oliviacw and wolfangel. Welcome to the commenting pixie party. I too was hoping for a larger role for Neville. I liked his character development through the 5th book, and was hoping to see him moved into more of a pivotal role. I was expecting to see Ginny moved into a central role, but, like Wolfangel, a bit dismayed to find her character flattened. For all the pairing up, there was very little focus on character development for any of the kid characters -- one more reason for my frustration, I guess. Like we waited all this time only to be handed a placeholder for all the real developments to come in the 7th book.
Laughing at your question, by the way, Wolfangel. Yes, despite the Patil sisters and the previously sighted Anthony Goldstein, it does appear that everyone there is Christian!
Don't forget Rowling is British and many Brits celebrate Christmas without being Christians.
Welcome to the commenting pixie party, Round Hipped Woman! Do you mean that non-believers celebrate Christmas, or do you mean that followers of other religions -- Muslims, Jews, Hindus -- celebrate Christmas in Britain in a non-sectarian sort of way?
Songbird, that's exactly what I was getting at: Snape's rage was rooted in the facts that not only did he have to kill Dumbledore, but he had to do it for Harry, of all people. My take is that Snape understands WHY Harry must be protected, and knows it must be done, but he doesn't like it, because of his many issues with Harry and James.
Phantom, I have the book in my possession right now and am looking for that page reference. It may take me a bit because I didn't make any markings or notes. But I will find it.
OK, that was easy enough, thanks to the chapter entitled, "The Unbreakable Vow." 
The discussion between Harry and Ron happens in the next chapter, though--pages 325-326.
ABDmom, I really like this argument, because it makes Snape's (a character I dislike, though he is generally one of the more interesting ones) actions comprehensible. I am also not sure whether or not he knew, when he made the spell, what he had agreed to do: then, having agreed, he was doomed: die or kill Dumbledore, and D told him to kill him, because it was more important to still seem like a dbl agent or whatever. I'm not sure if this will be true or I just hope it will be true, though.
I didn't find this was hugely placeholdery. I agree that the characters mostly stagnated -- well, the kids: I think that there were changes in most of the adults, as well as Draco. But I think plotwise, it was more an actual plot than the last 2, though it also missed what the first 3 had, which was a book arc on top of the series arc. (Well, they all had those, but only the first 3 were any good.)
Also, a question I've had for a while: what was that "gleam of triumph" Dumbledore showed at the end of book 4 all about?
OK, one more comment. I can't help it; BH won't finish the book for probably a month or so, and I am dying to talk about everything.
I, too, was disappointed that Neville wasn't in the book more. I didn't expect him to be the half-blood prince, because he's not a half-blood: he's a blood traitor, as Draco would say. But I was hoping he, as well as Ginny and Luna, would have more active roles. I definitely agree with the comments about lack of character development, though I did enjoy how we finally saw Draco struggling with his conscience.
The romance stuff didn't bother me because, well...I felt it was fairly typical of teenage behavior. I wasn't surprised at all that Hermione and Ron paired up; that's been building since at least book three. I was a Hermione-type girl myself, and I went out with plenty of Ron-types.
Heck, it could be argued that BH was a Ron-type, given his lack of effort in college. As a true Hermione kind of girl, I edited all of his papers once we started dating. His GPA went up a full point, and he even made the Dean's List senior year.
Ron and Hermione have been good friends for a long time, so I can understand the attraction.
wolfangel, can you explain what you're referring to a little more? I have the books right next to me, but need a little more context to think of what you're referencing.
When D finds out that V has some of H's blood in him now (end GoF, when they're talking after the ceremony where V gets brought back to life), he first has what H thinks is a gleam of triumph in his eyes, then looks old and tired. It's clear that D thinks this will somehow be V's downfall -- but it's still somehow odd: why not discuss details about this?
Unrelatedly: I hope Fawkes returns soon.
FWIW, Russell Arben Fox< has a pro-HBP review up .
Thanks much, ABDmom! I'm finding that I do not have enough hands to flip through the pages to find references, monitor this thread, and hold the squirmy cranky baby at the same time... going to make it difficult to update the character database that I've promised for my niece. Maybe I can grow an extra hand.
I think it's right on the money to say that Snape would be filled with rage at having to kill Dumbledore to protect Harry. But I wonder if he would also rage at having to be forced into the public role as a villain by the very man who had steadfastly believed in him. If Dumbledore had allowed SNape to die instead, Snape would have been a public hero, lauded for his bravery. Perhaps that explains the description of him as looking "inhuman" when Harry calls him a coward.
Wolfangel, you've articulated exactly what I was missing -- the book arc that carries us over Rowling's rough patches. I'm such a sucker for narrative, it's pathetic.
One of the things I missed about the DA in Book 5 was Harry finding his talents as a teacher. I was hoping there'd be more development of that. I suppose that's something she's saving for him to discover in Book 7 -- that he's the Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher that the school has been awaiting ever since Voldemort was denied the job.
I was hoping for more DA, too. And wolfangel, I found what you were referencing. I'm in the middle of something right now and will have to think about that. But you're right--I'd like to know what the deal with that is. Maybe in book seven it will be revealed. ABDmom
ABDMom, I came over here after reading your blog entry. I agree with your theories ... and I honestly think this was the best book of the series. Five was bloated beyond all belief and desperately needed the services of a good editor, and i felt this one received that. Plus, it's what we've been waiting for, so many questions answered.
So here's a thought ... what if Harry is the missing Horcrux? What if part of Voldemort's soul was put into Harry unwilling with the Killing Curse. Harry has some of his powers ... is that how he got them?
Apologies for the manic posting: I've no one else to discuss this with here (yet).
The Snape thing has several levels of problem. If he is, actually, bad, we lose the possibility of redemption in this book -- Draco didn't go far enough (neither did Percy), and I don't think Peter Pettigrew will end up there. So we're in a story where, once you are bad, you are always bad: this is not a good world to create. (I've mostly given up on the other side, good people becoming bad, not just good people making mistakes.)
On the other hand, if this is some elaborate triple-cross -- well, that's really a little much, and, as RAF notes, it keeps Harry in the dark *again* about things, and keeps him from being an adult.
I think that both of these pose severe problems to the series. I obviously do not know what has been planned for the next book, so of course there may be simple solutions to either of these problems. But perhaps not, because often JKR finds a simplistic answer (kill Cedric, the characters of people in the houses, etc) which is unsatisfying. I *think* I prefer the elaborate setup example, because I think that a world where there is no possibility of making amends is more horrifying than the other.
I do think that the leaving Hogwarts thing was a good move for the book, a crucial one -- and yet entirely unexpected. Of course there couldn't be year after year of classes with Voldemort around, but somehow, the idea of ripping the series out of the structure she created didn't occur to me. It's always possible that 7 will bring it back there for the year (oh look! all the soulbits are hidden in Hogwarts!), but I doubt it.
I love the manic posting, Wolfangel! Believe me, if my husband would get around to finishing GoF and the next two books, I'd be talking to him instead of glued to my laptop!
I was FLOORED to hear that they're leaving Hogwarts entirely for the next book. Much harder to accept than Dumbledore's death or Snape's evil.
I do think that the possible triple-cross you mentioned, keeping Harry in the dark, is a way of keeping him from being an adult until Rowling is ready to develop his character more in the seventh book. I kept feeling that so much emotional development was being delayed for use in the seventh book.
Stephanie, what a chilling scenario!
i've never read any of the books, but i think it's totally amazing how people read them in one sitting because they are so fascinated with the story! i think that's pretty cool. i take it you enjoyed it?
Stephanie, I had the same thought about Harry being a possible horcrux; it fits into the prophecy, too.
I'm firmly in the camp that believes Dumbledore made Snape kill him. I think the rage and hatred in his face was about what he knew he had to do, not about his feelings for Dumbledore. Why else would Dumbledore have been so insistent that Harry get Snape and only Snape to help him? Whether he did it because he was already dying from the poison or to protect Draco from becoming completely evil or for some other reason, I think Snape was following Dumbledore's orders.
I had the thought about R.A.B. being Regulus Black, but in book 4, Sirius mentions he was killed by Death Eaters after trying to leave their ranks. (Oooo, unless maybe Snape saved him somehow, which would explain why Dumbledore would have trusted Snape for all those years. Just a thought.)
I thought the book was pretty good. I definitely missed the humor and inventiveness of the first four books, and I had predicted Dumbledore would die at the end of Book 6, so that was no surprise. The identity of the Half-Blood Prince was a surprise, but I think that storyline might be there at least in part to give Harry more of an inside view of Snape, building on the feelings of sympathy and shame he started to have in the last book after seeing how his father treated him. I predict in Book 7, Snape will die heroically for Harry.
I'm going to allow a couple of years to pass before letting my just-turned-8 daughter read this one. She's read and re-read all the others, but between the extreme darkness, violence and constant make-out sessions, I think this one can wait.
Hey Allison, glad to see you in this thread. I think what SOngbird was saying was that if RAB turned out to be Regulus Black, then the horcrux will turn out to be in Harry's possession, because Sirius left the Black family home and all its possessions to Harry.
Honeybunny, I did enjoy it. Whining about it afterward is part of the enjoyment. Especially since I am clueless when it comes to most pop-culture trends -- it's a pleasure to be able to discuss something fun with a wide range of people, from visiting historian pixies to my nine-year-old niece!
All of this is fascinating; I appreciate very much the link Wolfangel provided above to my blog, since it has drawn over some readers that have gotten me to think about various things. In particular, I admit that Snape's ferocious retort to Harry, "DON'T CALL ME A COWARD!", is clearly important to whatever Rowling imagines is going on in Snape's head. But is that sufficient evidence to ignore the book's all-but-baldly stated conclusion that Snape really was a bad guy after all? I'm not sure.
All this talk of a "triple-cross," of Rowling's universe being without "redemption" if Snape turns out bad through and through, strikes me, to a great extent, as partaking of dark romantic cliches. He's the tragic hero, you say, the misunderstood Judas, Dumbledore's greatest ally and simultaneously his greatest threat, etc., etc., etc. I don't like it. Morally, it reduces Harry, indeed it reduces the whole tale, to something out of Asimov--yes, sure, a tremendously gifted prose artist, a wonder with words, but not in any moral or spiritual sense a "deep" writer: his stories were all one-trick ponies, with "the truth" (in quotation marks, of course) hiding behind one more facade, one more trick, one more clever little set-up. In the name of offering an out to everyone, even Snape, we are instead given the impression of a world that is apparently littered outs and excuses, moral tricks and getaways, leaving Harry just a poor little thing struggling through it all. Unlike Asimov, I think Rowling actually likes her characters, and consequently wouldn't put them through ethical wringers for the sake of a "gotcha!" moment.
The fact is, Snape's story is complicated, and no doubt will be shown to be even more so in the final volume. I think it is very possible, even likely, on the basis of HBP as well as some of the fine arguments made here, that we will in the end discover Snape to be a deeply confused and deluded man, a man whose hatred--of the world and himself, of the choices he's made and feelings he's felt--is so deep as to have made the man himself an object of pity. But that hardly justifies making excuses for, what seems to me, the plain case that Rowling has made, and which, on my reading, she has excellently played in this book. I think Snape ultimately couldn't or wouldn't break away from a path that made him Harry's and Dumbledore's enemy, and whether he meant it to be that way or not, in the end that puts him in our hero's way. I think Rowling wants us to understand not that Dumbledore was secretly putting one final plot into action by stringing along Harry as usual, as if he were still 13, but that events have finally superceded even Dumbledore himself: we all kept believing Dumbledore, just as all the characters kept believing Dumbledore....but it cannot be Dumbledore who points Harry at Voldemort like he was some tool (even if the pointing is from beyond the grave). The shock of Snape's actions is the shock of a skilled writer throwing in our faces something that was apparent all along, and yet we did not see: that this is Harry's battle, and Harry's alone.
But hell, I've been wrong before!
Russell, I think your conclusion above is right on the mark. We've been used to Harry's misunderstanding things or having only partial information, but this time he was not only sure; he was right. And, really, in order to fight his battle alone, at some point he needed to be.
More tomorrow, I'm sure!
Thanks for cross-posting that thoughtful comment here as well, Russell Arben Fox.
Honestly, though, I did not feel shocked to see Snape kill Dumbledore. Finding out that the horcrux in the cave had been replaced with a decoy locket was the shocker that made me realize that Dumbledore was *not* in possession of all the answers when he died, and that Harry really is on his own. Until that moment, I think I was just waiting for Fawkes to come in and save everyone as Dumbledore's proxy...
Oh I meant that a lot of people with no religion at all celebrate Christmas. I'm not a Christian and neither are my parents yet we still get presents and eat turkey etc.. I get quite cross if people assume I'm a Christian when in fact most of my family is completely secular. I think when Rowling has everyone celebrating Christmas she's looking at it as a secular festival. Think about the Bridget Jones films, you don't get anyone going on about Jesus there. Religion is far less of an issue in Britain than it is in North America. Our Christians aren't as strident. The Church of England is very wishy washy.
I'm sure there are Brits of other religions who would completely disagree with me and say that the dominance of the British Christmas is offensive to religious minorities. But what I mean to say is that I think Rowling is writing from the secular Christmas point of view.
RAF: I agree with your analysis of the problems with the Snape was really good after all scenario (though at least some of it could be mitigated if Dumbledore left a message for Harry that we get in the beginning of the next book). But I think that the concern that no one ever changes sides -- good is good, bad is bad, and once you've correctly identified them, it's enough -- is one that can't be ignored.
I rather like your reading, because I think any other reading make the books more about Snape than I would like them to be. I don't particularly care if he's actually good, except inasmuch as there's no one else who can change sides. And given the kind of world being built, I think that you do not want the idea "you cannot go back and try to make things right" is not the story she wants to be telling. But then, she's spent interview upon interview saying how it's not a story where women take a secondary role in general, though clearly it is, so this could be some author blindness.
There may, as I said, be an out: this story has been planned for a long time, and no doubt she has thought these issues through.
Also, a question: at the end of GoF (I think) Voldemort talks about the Death Eaters who are not there, including some at Hogwarts, and mentions that one person has changed sides. (I do not, sadly, have the book handy to give a reference.) If he was not talking about Snape -- who is back working for Voldemort, or pretending to, whichever -- then who is he referring to?
. . . I wish I had the books handy.
A lot of the comments here have made me go "hmmm." There are quite a lot of good ideas about Snape having an unknown alliance with Dumbledore in a sort of cross/double cross situation. I think that if Snape was playing at double agent, that if Snape was batting for the good team all along, that there *could* have been some plan in place in which Dumbledore would have extracted a promise from Snape to kill him if the situation warranted it. I find it hard to fathom at the moment, but I could see where that might be plausible. I just am not sure that JKR would have done the evil-good-evil-good flip-flop so many times. Dumbledore tried to impress upon Harry all along to trust his instincts, and Harry *never* trusted Snape. He had a gut reaction to Snape from the start, and has never had an experience with Snape that would change his mind or his opinion.
It's interesting that Snape says to Narcissa and Bellatrix that he has already been made to answer all those nagging questions to Voldemort -- makes you wonder what THAT interview went like. And, since Snape managed to hang onto his hide, he must have pacified Voldemort pretty well. Wonder if Snape was coached on what to say by Voldemort's old teacher? After all, it could be said that Dumbledore knew Tom Riddle best, so wouldn't it stand to reason that Dumbledore could fabricate excuses that would seemingly explain Snape's odd behavior?
I do have one brow-furrowing query though....If Snape is found to have killed Dumbledore on Dumbldore's orders (and this is assuming that the Wizarding world goes back to some semblance of order, and that good routs evil) will Snape be prosecuted by the Ministry for having used an Unforgivable Curse? Lesser people have been sent to Azkaban for lesser crimes. And, it's interesting to note, in the final battle, both Harry and Malfoy both attempt to hurl Unforgivables at each other a number of times each, but are stopped *each* time. If my hazy, sleep-deprived memory serves, Snape is the one intercepting the curses of BOTH Harry and Draco. So, this would indicate that while Harry isn't his favorite person, Snape prevents him from uttering an Unforgivable. And, to that point, Malfoy as well. He's evil, yet he still protects his students from crossing that last line? Interesting to ponder.
"Dumbledore tried to impress upon Harry all along to trust his instincts, and Harry *never* trusted Snape. He had a gut reaction to Snape from the start, and has never had an experience with Snape that would change his mind or his opinion."
KLee, Dumbledore's been asking Harry to trust Dumbledore all along (not his own instincts, in most cases), and hinted several times in every book so far, and especially in this one, that Harry does not have all the information on Snape. In each book, he's had plenty of reasons to be angry with Snape, but Snape has also saved Harry many times. I do think it's very telling that Snape repeatedly kept both boys from using unforgivable curses. It's what Dumbledore would have wanted him to do.
I liked this book much more than #5. The pairing up and romantic squabbles/mismatches/blindness didn't bother me because they seemed about right for sixteen-year-olds. I thought Ginny's arguments with Ron seemed realistic, and I did find her character more developed here than in the last book -- I ended it thinking that she's grown a lot over the series. And while she may not accompany Harry, with Ron and Hermione (though I wouldn't be surprised if she did), I bet she's instrumental in some way in defeating Voldemort. After all, as she reminded Harry in the last book, she's the only one who's been possessed by Voldemort and can tell about it.
I liked how Hermione reacted after Ron was realizing what a mistake hooking up with Lavendar was -- after getting some digs out of her system, once she saw how Ron was unhappy with Lavendar, Hermione's good sense reasserted itself and she didn't get catty or argumentative. She just was patient and a good friend to Ron while he got himself out of the mess he created.
Now, on to the important plot points -- ABD, your explanations make a lot of sense and give plenty to think about while we wait for the last book. I was shocked that Snape was truly a Death Eater -- I assumed that the "Unbreakable Vow" chapter was somehow a misdirection, and that he was still working for Dumbledore. Your theory would explain a lot, especially with the emphasis in this book on unspoken communication.
I very much liked Dumbledore's understanding and compassion for Draco. I had very little compassion for Draco, even when he was crying to Moaning Myrtle, until Dumbledore spoke to him. For a bit, it reminded me of the Sound of Music when the Captain tells Rolf that he's not a killer, but it went further to show how torn Draco was.
>I suppose that's something she's saving for him to discover in Book 7 -- that he's the Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher that the school has been awaiting ever since Voldemort was denied the job.
This is brilliant, PS. It never occurred to me, for some reason. I assumed that Harry would become an Auror, and then in this book wondered how that would work, given how he's coming to despise the Ministry (not just Fudge and Umbridge). And I hated to think he'd just become a professional Quidditch player. Hmm, if he becomes a teacher, I wonder if Ginny would too? Maybe with McGonagall as the headmistress, Ginny would be the new head of Gryffindor House? (though the Head should be more senior) Or the new Transfiguration teacher?
Oh, and I very much liked that Ron and Hermione will be going with Harry on his quest for the Horcruxes. Even though it did remind me a bit much of Frodo and the other hobbits.
And I liked that the Dursley section in this book was quite different.
Looking forward to Bill and Fleur's wedding. I was with Mrs. Weasley in thinking she'd dump Bill when he was no longer handsome, and had to reevaluate her a bit when she stepped up so thoroughly.
Thanks for the clarification, Round Hipped Woman. I will cease to view Hogwart's Christmas celebrations as any sort of religious festivity. Though I will continue to chuckle at how Anthony Goldstein suddenly appeared in Harry Potter's year at Hogwarts in Book V, after Rowling had taken some heat for diversity issues and Snape's hooked nose...
wolfangel, I've been thinking about the "gleam of triumph" in GoF that you posted about yesterday. I'm still pretty confused, but I'm wondering if there is a connection between that exchange of blood and the blood that Dumbledore and Harry had to shed to enter and exit the cave/lake area when they went after the necklace. It doesn't seem like just a coincidence that blood was required there.
Voldemort was happy to get Harry's blood, because he thought it would give him Harry's powers and the protection of Lily. And he seemed to be right, since he could touch Harry after that. Perhaps that's the connection with the blood at the lake: shedding blood somehow weakens Voldemort's opponenets and/or strengthens Voldemort.
But still, why the "gleam of triumph" in Dumbledore's eye? I just think that somehow, somehow the taking of Harry's blood in GoF will somehow lead to Voldemort's undoing. Rowling probably isn't explaining it now because it will be a crucial part of the final battle in Book 7.
That's what I'm hoping for, anyway.
wolfangel, about the person who changed sides at the end of GoF, I think you're referring to Professor Karkaroff, the head of Durmstrang.
On p. 710, when Snape shows his Death Eater mark to a disbelieving Fudge, Snape says, "This Mark has been growing clearer all year. Karkaroff's too. Why do you think Karkaroff fled tonight? We both felt the Mark burn. We both knew he had returned. Karkaroff fears the Dark Lord's vengeance. He betrayed too many of his fellow Death Eaters to be sure of his welcome back into the fold."
Karkaroff's was found and killed by Voldemort, and his death is briefly mentioned a couple times in HBP.
The other thing about Christmas: remember that Christmas originally was a "pagan" holiday in response to the winter solistice, which was considered to be a time when evil forces were particularly powerful. The boundary between the two worlds was most easily crossed at the Winter Solistic. The idea was that a loud, joyful celebration, complete with evergreens and holly, could offer protection.
It was only later that the holiday was adapted by Christians into a celebration of Christ's birth. So, the celebration of Christmas makes perfect sense in Harry's world, though Rowling never talks about the dangers of the Solistice, oddly enough.
One last comment (I've been on a tear this morning, but I can't help it: I am DYING to talk about this book, and BH hasn't read it!) for this morning. I really like the possibility of Harry returning to Hogwarts as the DADA teacher. This would be a great ending to the series, with Harry returning to the school and continuing Dumbledore's legacy. I wonder if it will happen, though, since Harry will still only be 18.
RE: Snape, I think we'll find he's neither good nor evil. Even if RAF's scenario is right--and I fully admit that this is a very good possibility--that doesn't mean Snape will be with Voldemort until the end. I think that even he truly did "murder" Dumbledore, it's possible that we could see Snape fail in his role to bring about Voldemort's ultimate triumph. Murdering Dumbledore is still a far cry from permitting the trimph of the ultimate evil.
While I agree that Rowling would be stretching things with a super-duper-secret triple cross, it also doesn't make much sense to me that Snape would always be the bad guy. I just think the character, and the world Rowling created, is too complex for that.
But, I could very well be wrong! Just have to wait for book seven to find out. UGH! This wait is going to be awful.
From GoF (ch 33, 'The Death Eaters', page # moot b/c I have the British/Cdn version):
'And here we have six missing Death Eaters ... three dead in my service. One, too cowardly to return ... he will pay. One, who I believe has left me forever ... he will be killed, of course ... and one, who remains my most faithful servant, and who has already re-entered my service.'
Now, Karakoff is the first of the three, and Barry Crouch the third, which makes Snape number 2. It is of course possible that he didn't rejoin by then -- but the implication is that he explained these things to V when he returned to his side (from his discussion w/Bellatrix).
On the Christmas thing -- I spent a winter in London, and I was one lonesome Jew at Christmas time! They didn't have the same atmosphere of recognizing that not everyone celebrates Christmas that we have here -- no "Happy Holidays", no references to any other winter holidays. Absolutely everything was closed for Christmas and Boxing Day -- no bus service, no nothing. And I (just by happenstance) lived in Golders Green, in north London, where there is as much of a Jewish part of town as there is (some shops close on Saturdays instead of Sunday). Maybe there were some Golders Green shops open, but I couldn't get to them without the bus service . . . I've never had the "Jew at Christmas" feeling as strongly as I did in London.
Great discussion! I threw together a post over at my place that I won't belabor here, except that I am favoring the theories that have Snape still working (albeit reluctantly) to protect Harry. Snape is one of the most intriguing characters in the series, and
Whoever suggested that Harry-via-Regulus has some horcruxes--yes--that adds a dimension to Mundungus's appearance in the book, which was so brief as to be a non-sequitur. Mundungus was pilfering stuff that could be important later.
I sped through the last 100 pages and it was 1 a.m., so I have a question about the decoy horcrux--is that what Dumbeldore picked up originally, or was there a switch between the time he died and when Harry found him at the base of the tower? I guess I assumed the latter for some reason--perhaps it seems more plausible that someone would have gotten wind of Dumbeldore's plan and made a switch, than that they were a good enough wizard to make it across the lake, get the original, plant a decoy and so on. Admittedly I didn't read carefully, so I'm open to correction.
I assumed that the switch of the horcrux occured before Dumbledore and Harry got there, though I suppose it's possible that it happened during the time that Dumbledore's body lay on the ground.
If it's the former, though, and Songbird's brilliant RAB supposition turns out to be correct, then -- who went with RAB to help him? Dumbledore said a single wizard couldn't accomplish it.
Well, that's what I get for being late to the party. Almost everyone said what I wanted to talk about!
Re Snape: He has a brief opportunity to crow or gloat or make one of those "bad guy victory speeches" to Harry and he doesn't.
Agree that this is the least subtle of all of the books. Lots of blah, blah exposition, some of which we already knew or surmised. A bit disappointing, even a bit boring. No suspense or mystery, really, until the whammo end.
Looking forward now to the last installment.
Allison replied to me: "KLee, Dumbledore's been asking Harry to trust Dumbledore all along (not his own instincts, in most cases), and hinted several times in every book so far, and especially in this one, that Harry does not have all the information on Snape. In each book, he's had plenty of reasons to be angry with Snape, but Snape has also saved Harry many times."
Oh, don't get me wrong, Allison, I agree with everything you said. My point was that Dumbledore has also been trying to get Harry to listen to that Inner Voice that has been trying to push Harry into doing the right thing. For example, he gives Harry MANY chances to tell him about the dreams he's having in Book 5 -- "Is there anything you want to tell me, Harry?" Knowing that as powerful as Dumbledore is, he could practicy Legilmency quite easily on Harry, and just probe his mind. But, that's not what Dumbledore wants. He wants Harry to trust that Inner Voice that's screaming at him, and tell him of his own volition. I agree that there's more to Snape than what we're being told, but I just wanted to say that I find it telling that Harry has *always* distrusted Snape, and, now, in his mind -- he was right to do so. Time may prove that Harry (and us, the reader) don't have all the information, but as of now, Harry's suspicion seems to have a good basis in truth.
I started to post my speculative thoughts about Snape's character and motivations, but it got way too long. So I'm posting it on my website, at
The short version? I think Dumbledore trusted Snape because he knew Snape loved Lily Evans. And I think Rowling, in comparing Snape and Voldemort and their damaged and evil natures to Harry's "purity of heart," is saying some rather interesting things about the nature of maternal love.
I think Lily Evans Potter is the person to watch for, when that final battle rolls around.
Jody's essay is here, and her blog is here. Great stuff!
I am SO late to this party...but here's my two cents...and someone else may have said this, but trying to sort through over 70 comments is tough. LOL
Here goes: Harry's greatest test in defeating L.V. will be to believe that Snape can love. It is easy for Harry to believe that L.V. is evil and in HP6 he got to see part of the story of how and why he came to be the evil one he is--part nature, part nurture. But even as Harry can see shades of grey in L.V. and still go against him, he is utterly incapable of seeing shades of grey in Snape.
I agree with the prior post that Snape's love of Lily will play a role in HP7...Rowling has relied heavily on the power of love...even the sacrificial power of love.
Does that mean Snape didn't really want to kill Prof. D.? I haven't a clue, I agree that I can see no way that the further flip-flop could be accomplished and have Harry be "in charge" of the situation.... Still, Snape prevented the Death Eaters from killing Harry and I don't buy the "Lord V. wants him for himself" BS.
What if Snape was indeed in league with L.V. all along, but Prof. D. knew that the only way to save Snape was for Prof. D. to sacrifice himself at Snape's wand...to let Snape see how horrible complete surrender is...
I want redemption for Snape...but I also want Harry to grow up...Rage and vindictiveness are his greatest weaknesses...I cannot see JKR rewarding them....particularly not with how she treats Bush in Paragraph 1.
I'm clueless, but intrigued all over the place.
Harry's greatest test in defeating L.V. will be to believe that Snape can love.
Brilliant, NotShyChiRev/ChicagoRev!
Speaking of that "wretched man," one of the things that surprised me about this book was how tightly it focused on Hogwarts. There were few wide-angle shots of the larger wizarding world (like Quidditch World Cup, the trip to St. Mungo's, and the other pageantry that studded -- and interrupted -- the 4th and 5th books). We see the Burrow, and get one brief look each at how Voldemort's return has affected Diagon Alley and Hogsmeade. But otherwise our only information about the outside world comes from an occasional brief scan of headlines listing the daily death and destruction.
The death and horror is going on daily as mostly unremarked background noise, even as more Hogwarts students are personally affected. It reminded me very much of the way that deaths in Iraq have become background noise.
Incidentally, some other blog post mentioned that in OotP, they found "a heavy locket no one could open" in Sirius's house, suggesting that RAB is indeed Sirius's brother, and Mundungus sold the locket.
Also, was not Dumbledore about to die *anyhow* (from drinking the liquid)? (This doesn't really impact the Snape: good or bad? question, since either story is consistent.)
Ok, laughing at myself now, because I just picked up Book 6 to check the scenes involving Mundungus, and reflexively flipped to the back to look him up in the index.
What do you mean, there's no index???
When *did* you find the time to make the spreadsheet? One-handed while nursing LG?
Oh, can I get a copy of the spreadsheet?
I agree with ChicagoRev that it's going to be a love thing--although I hope it's not too derivative of the denouement in A Wrinkle in Time.
Wolfangel, I just re-read the Dumbledore death scene, and it's hard to say whether he was really on the verge of death, but it's obviously quite grave. He also mentions to one of the Death Eaters that he would be lucky to live to the old age that Dumbledore has--sort of a reflective retrospect moment for him.
To me the biggest evidence that D put Snape up to it was the pleading. "Severus... please..." I just can't believe that D. would plead for his life. I *can* picture D. pleading that Snape would take his life.
(Yes he seems to ask Harry to kill him when he's drinking the bad water, but he seems to not be in his right mind at that point.)
But if you look at the quest to get the locket, he mentions (a) that he's dispensible and (b) that the liquid will probably kill him, but only after some time (I agree that his begging Harry to kill him is not really wanting to die).
I do think that the pleading and the fact that Snape doesn't do anything to hurt Harry are the two big arguments against the Snape=evil side.
(Much as it sounds like it, I really have no dog in this fight: I can't decide which story I want to be true. I just like to argue.)
Done, Wolfangel. Let me know if you don't get it.
Reverendmother, I believe that Rowling does not acknowledge knowing, much less being influenced by, most American kids' literature. Any resemblance to any classic kids' books, like A Wrinkle in Time, is therefore purely coincidental. No, seriously. Not derivative at all. Totally sui generis.
You believe her, don't you?
Oh, no. Certainly she's never read Diana Wynne Jones, either.
I suspect though that she believes herself, because she seems to have a talent for self-delusion. ('What do you mean Hermione won't die since she's the only girl? She's not the only girl!' right before book 4, eg.)
I did get it, thank you.
Of course, and there were WMDs in Iraq.
, Reverendmother, but that may be part of her point. I get the sense that she strenuously objects to being linked with American culture in any way. She doesn't deny the influence of British children's literature, I don't think.
I actually like that she's remained true to her own culture (and think it would have been cool if the US release of the first book had retained its original title, the Philosopher's Stone).
Well, and I will be the first to admit that the "love triumphs over all" thing ain't exactly an original creation of Madeleine L'Engle, if you know what I mean.
The big problem with making the power of love the theme of book 7 is that it was the theme of book 1...and of course of the Gospels, and Wrinkle in Time, and the Narnia Books, and so on, and so on...even up to and including the only modern British author to still outsell Rowling (The Bard doesn't count)...Barbara Carland (and children it's not even close...1 billion books sold).
What does Rowling do? I think she plays up the sacrificial love angle but adds to it the redemption angle...redemption for????Tom Riddle? Snape? or Harry?
Here's another interesting thought...who has sacrificed themselves for Harry so far? Mom...Sirius (twice, sort of)...Dumbledore (in a way)....doesn't it stand to reason that the one who must do the sacrificing of self this time is Harry? Not sure what the outcome would be....
Harry saved himself with the power of his love for those sould pulled from L.V.'s wand...he saved himself and Sirius once before when he acted on a loving instinct...he was saved (and saved Gini) when he used his pure heart (to get the Sword) and his loyalty (Fawkes protective actions and healing tears)...he got the stone when he had a selfless thought--to get the stone for the protection of others, but not to use it for himself...
I find it hard to believe that he will not be called upon to rely upon the better angels of his nature in a very powerful act of loving self-sacrifice...that may very well be his redemption and the redemption of the Wizarding World...but I admit that's ubertheological wishful thinking....
OK, you saw it hear first.
No way Dumbledore would plead for his life. What he was pleading for was for Snape to do what he (Snape) had previously told Dumbledore that he would do - namely kill Dumbledore. I can't find it just now, but there is a short passage somewhere in the middle of the book where Snape is clearly trying to back out an agreement to do something for Dumbledore, and Dumbledore holds his toes to the fire.
Also consider the multiple times that Dumbledore has, over the books, talked about the insignificance of Death.
Why would Dumbledore do this? Consider what we have learned about LV. What he values more than anything else is life - life at any cost. So the one thing that he could never understand, and never suspect, is that Dumbledore would give up his life willingly in order to bring about LVs downfall. How will Dumbledore's actions do this? By once and for all quelling any doubts which LV might have about which side Snape is on. And the good guys definitely need an inside person if they are to find all of the Horcruxes and defeat LV. If you doubt this, reread the scene in which Dumbledore is killed. Dumbledore is not suprised by what is happening - all he does is plead with Snape to do what needs to be done. And why else whould he have petrified Harry? Not to protect him, but to keep him from spoiling the plan.
Finally, consider the difficulty that Dumbledore and Harry reaching even on (fake) Horcrux. Harry is not a very good wizard - he will clearly need a lot of help to finish the job, and Snape is clearly qualified to provide that help. As was mentioned above, the test for Harry in book 7 will be to be able to see all of this - HP's main weakness is his impetuousness, and he will have to overcome that in order to join with Snape to defeat LV.
Piggy-backing on Chicago Rev and Greg's comments, then going to bed:
Another key point in the climax is when Draco says something about Dumbledore being at Draco's mercy, and Dumbledore replies something like no, indeed, it is Draco who is going to learn something from Dumbledore about true mercy. (I think Dumbledore is also trying to protect Draco [not just Harry] by having Snape do the deed.)
Interesting discussion. And not as intense as fanfic which I am *decidedly* not ready for!
Draco is the other character, besides Snape, who has the potential for redemption in book 7. And is it possible he's going to have to defy or sacrifice his father to get it?
The most interesting thing about this book, to me, was that Rowling might have set up this dramatic arc with Draco about what happens when one seeks corrupt power. Less about power corrupting and more about becoming enslaved to/by that power, while only being allowed some derivative of that power for yourself.
There's still time and hope for Draco, he didn't kill anybody.
Snape, I think, is finished, whether he's evil or good. If he's really secretly good, the question is, will he sacrifice himself for Harry, or has he *already* sacrificed himself for Draco?
One possibility in the "Snape is good" scenario is that Dumbledore, knowing of the unbreakable vow, was pleading with Snape to save Draco. Dumbledore dies for Draco, not Harry.... hmmmmm.....
One possibility in the "Snape is evil" scenario is -- which poor fool will he take with him on the way out?
Fanfic? No, you have defintely come to the wrong place if you are interested in fanfic.
Greg, the argument between Dumbledore and Snape is referenced in one of the comments above.
I guess it's been a while since I read 5 because I didn't expect Dumbledore to die and am disappointed that he was killed off. I am hoping, like someone else wrote here, that he is not really dead. Whether Snape is truly evil or not...well I don't know. I was thinking that maybe he was pretending to be back with the D.E. to get info, but who knows? He certainly seems like he should be evil. I agree that nothing really happened in this book except Dumbledore's death. I think I'm going to have to go back and read the entire lot in order. As for book 7, any ideas when it will show up?
Grrr! Haloscan ate my comment!
It was long and well-reasoned and perfect. It was insightful and witty, and now I can't remember any of it.
Poop.
Ok, what I remember:
1. Dumbledore is dead, but he's not gone. Maybe Harry can ask him about Snape, he's just sleeping in his portrait in the headmistress' office.
2. I agree about the women being completely flattened. There was no female character with any character.
hey.. just a suggestion:
the part where neither can live and vice versa?
what if harry himself IS a horcux? dumbledore did say that it was possible for a living being to be a horcux just inadvisible. After all, voldemort did realise that harry would kill him.. why not make harry his horcrux which would render him further immortal.. Moreover, that could be the hidden reason why harry was spared and has the ability to know what voldemort was thinkingm instead of the explanation given so far.
J K Rowling loves to play around with our expectations. So yeah, who knows this could be a possiblity. Especially since they have no idea who or what is the last horcrux.
I was wondering about the portrait too -- Dumbledore will be able to comment on things that happen in the headmaster's office, and speak to those present there. I wonder how the portraits differ from ghosts? And if someone is present in a portrait, how does that affect their moving forward into death, unlike the ghosts? Remember that Nearly Headless Nick says he can't tell Harry about what happens after death because he chose to linger as a ghost. Anyway, I wouldn't be surprised if Dumbledore's portrait mostly makes comic remarks (along the lines of "Alas, earwax."), but perhaps he will give McGonagall or Harry some veiled hints.
Dumbledore's coffin going up in flames made me think of Fawlkes and phoenixes in general, though I don't really think Dumbledore will "rise from the ashes".
This is a blog post that talks about the locket in Sirius' cabinet: http://www.livejournal.com/users...raves/
3409.html
The author has some very clever and (to me) convincing theories.
A couple of questions: (1) if Snape was protecting Harry and Voldemort hadn't really issued a "don't touch Potter" order, won't Snape be suspected when that's reported back to Voldemort? (2) will Narcissa turn on Voldemort now, from anger that he risked her son's life?
I think this was the poorest written and dullest of all teh HP books to date. Even saying that it was a good book, JK has created such intersting characters and world that she could write just about anything and it would be good.
I have not seen it anywhere so let me throw this one out there....
DD knew that Draco was trying to kill him. My guess is that Snape revelaed this and the unbreakable vow to DD. What is the potion DD drank in the cave was the Draught of Living Death? And what if Snapes killing curse was not what it seemed? Did DD just finish telling Draco that LV could kill him if he was already dead? And that they could hide him more completely than you can possibly imagine!
If DD is dead certainly HP does not posses the magical ability to go after the other Horcurxes by himself? he would not have even stepped into the cave yet alone gotten to the center island to get the locket. Not to mention that it will take a powerful wizard to destroy the Horcruxes. Simply getting them isn't enough, they must be destroyed.
HP is not a Horcrux! LV was going to kill him to tear his sole and then impart that into an object. In other words HP would have been dead already!
Just my thoughts...
I must agree with one of the points made by the eponymously named Ima Puckhead. The more I consider the Harry-as-horcrux suggestion, the more inclined I am to dismiss it. Not just because there are some stumbling blocks to it in the books themselves, but also because if Harry was a horcrux that would require him to sacrifice his own life to defeat Voldemort. That scenario may be an appealing one to some adult readers, but Rowling is writing a CHILDREN'S series. Dark as these last few books may be, they are still appropriate for older children. If the adored main character committed suicide for a cause, however noble, that would cross the line of appropriateness for a lot of parents.
Rowling is quite conscious of her responsibility as a writer for children -- the last thing she'd want is to let loose upon a world of children the suggestion that suicide or other forms of deliberate, violent death are glorious or commendable.
It's one thing to suggest that the aged Dumbledore might have sacrificed his life -- another thing altogether to suggest that a young person just barely out of childhood should do the same. I don't think Rowling would go there.
That makes a lot of sense, PS. You're right, I don't think she'd put that in a book meant for teenagers and kids.
Oh goodie! People who have finished it!
I have come to some of the same conclusions as the above posters... but another one crosses my mind. Perhaps it is stupid, but I have been thinking about it.
People keep saying Harry is a horcrux... but no one here has touched on the thought that Dumbledore himself might be one.
Now, since we don't know *how* someone actually makes a horcrux (besides the killing part, I mean how they instill their sould into a particular item or person) we don't know if a)the person making the horcrux has to have possession of the person/item he is making the horcrux out of, or b)if a PERSON being used as a horcrux actually knows this, or c)if you can CHANGE your horcrux, remove it from one object/person and put it in another object/person.
Perhaps the reason that "Dumbledore is the only wizard you know who ever feared" is because he did not want to do battle with DD, putting himself in a kill or be killed situation. If that were to happen, he would either have to destroy one of his horcruxes himself, or allow himself to be (temporarily) killed.
It's worth a thought. And perhaps, somehow, DD found out about it and forced Snape to kill him. Maybe there were no orders to kill DD from Voldemort. We don't really know *what* the order was, we're just guessing it was to kill DD.
Another thought... do you ever think maybe she wrote the first two or three, maybe four, books on her own... and then started cruising discussions on the web looking for the plots for her next book? I mean, look at all the great stuff we've already given her, and the book in only 4 days old!
Hi Estelle! Welcome to the commenting pixie party! I think Rowling has said that she planned out the story arc for the series before most of the books were written. If she were making it up as she went along, I think we'd find a lot more mistakes!
She does read some of the major fan sites, though.
I wonder what she thinks of all the super offbase speculations (or the slash fanfic).
There is Harry Potter slash fanfic?
::shudders::
What is it? Remus/Sirius?
(I'm so ashamed of myself for having an instant thought about it.)
I believe that there is pretty much every possible pairing. I somehow think Draco/Snape is one of the favourites, but -- I avoid fanfic.
Eww. That's not a pretty image.
A couple of interesting thoughts I saw on another site:
-- Harry's scar is a Horcrux (not Harry himself) -- I wonder if the scar could be removed?
-- R.A.B. could be Amelia Bones (if she had a first name she didn't like to use, like Tonks, or like some of my in-laws). I like this, but the Regulus Black theory also makes so much sense, what with the locket at Grimmaud Place
-- Harry's parents lived in Godric's Hollow, and Godric was Gryffindor's first name, so there's a connection there (perhaps the horcrux was created there?)
-- the Sorting Hat belonged to Gryffindor, according to the song
Anyone else here wondering about Peter Pettigrew? In PoA, D says that saving PP will give H some kind of advantage in the future. And now we see PP back as SS' servant in his muggle-neighborhood home. So when does PP really reappear? What is the significance of his presence in SS' home? And does that give a hint as to the future actions of SS?
A couple of things to add to my previous comments -- I don't think Harry could be a Horcrux. If you'll remember Harry's backstory, supposedly Voldemort has not yet seen Harry until he breaks into the Potter home. Lily and James had been on the run, and that's why they were using a Secret Keeper. The house was enchanted so that people the Potters hasn't given the location to would walk right past in, and not even see it. Since Voldemort had to have made his Horcruxes before that fateful night, Harry couldn't logically be a Horcrux. Besides, didn't Dumbledore say that Horcruxes were generally objects? Remember, Harry at first confuses them with Portkeys, and Dumbledore makes the distinction that Portkeys are usually trash-y type objects that Muggles probably wouldn't dream of picking up. Horcruxes, at least to Voldemort, were objects that held some meaning, therefore reverence. This would hold true if Moldyvort continued to seek out items that had belonged to the four founders of Hogwarts, or others he considered great witches or wizards. When would Voldemort have had the time to do the magic necessary to turn Harry into a Horcrux? I just don't think that argument holds any weight.
Also, Songbird -- there are MILES of HP slash fanfic out there. Some of it I've read, just for grins and giggles. Some of the fanfic (not necessarily slash) at www.sugarquill.net is pretty good. I read one where a the members of Hufflepuff are counselling a new member at not falling into the trap of "Hufflepuff Disease" -- a malaise that befalls those who are sorely disappointed when they don't make it into Gryffindor, and go all depressed because they think Hufflepuff is for second-rate losers. Some of the fic is quite clever, and well written. I believe that I was first pointed there by Luna. (Sorry if linking to a fic site is bad blog behavior, but not all of it (the fic) is very bodice-rippingly bad.
Some of the slash I've seen have been Harry/Ron, Ron/Hermione, Hermione/Pansy Parkinson (yech!), and Harry/Ginny. There are ALL sorts.
I think that there are a lot of unanswered questions in this book, as well as in the series itself. And, our minds, wanting logical conclusions, are making leaps and jumps, trying to make connections. I know it will be interesting to see what book seven brings, but I am *so* not wanting the year plus wait that it means.
As I reread all of this tonight, I'm amazed at how indebted we are to JKR for creating this amazing world and these characters in whom we are so emotionally and otherwise invested...
And a cruise around the net, fanfic notwithstanding, reveals young folks are talking too...and discussing things like sacrificial love...and how good can really conquer evil without becoming evil itself.
Here's what I figured out as soon as I read it:
1. RAB refers to a Black, likely Regulus.
2. It is possible that Dumbledore was a Horcrux and that is why he ordered Snape to kill him; it is equally likely that he ordered Snape to finish him off to protect Draco and Harry - said eloquently by others above, so I don't need to beat a dead horse.
3. Dumbledore was supposed to tell Draco how he could protect him if he was already dead--didn't finish the sentence--but it leaves open the possibility that a) he ordered Snape to kill him, or b) he isn't really entirely dead.
4. Snape is a sniveling teenager. But he may not be all bad--he just needs some serious therapy--or love. Lily Potter and Draco's mom may have been those lost chances at love, but he needs something.
5. Being beaten over the head with non-verbal curses proves that Dumbledore ordered Snape to kill him. It also leaves open why he may still be alive in another form--we don't know what they could have said non-verbally to each other.
6. Making sure Harry saw Snape kill him means that the occlumency-challenged Potter won't reveal any other truths than what he saw--hence Dumbledore was still protecting him.
7. Beating us over the head with teens in love and everyone pairing up has just as much to do with being a teenager as driving home the message that "the power of love" is very important.
8. Ginny Weasly would make a great wife for Harry--one day. She is so darned strong!
9. Hermione is a real teenager now. Glad to see her human side.
10. Nice to see Ron step up and show some confidence (and a shoulder to lean on).
And I am sad--more than Sopranos-when-is-the-next-season sad.
I have to say, I had a small moment of triumph at being right about Snape being the HBP - when I saw it was tied to the potions book, who else could it be?
I like the ambiguity of Snape's character - he's one of the more interesting ones to me. I'm in the "Dumbledore forced Snape to kill him" camp - it ties in with D telling Harry to make him drink the potion, the overheard conversations, etc. Obviously Snape is deeply conflicted, and that's what gives his character such weight. I wouldn't be surprised if he dies in Book 7.
Dumbledore's death lacked weight for me. Maybe because (like with Sirius) you're thinking "is there a way out of him being dead?" and "why exactly did Snape kill him - evil or on orders?" That doesn't let you (me) really feel any sadness for it.
I'm terribly interested to see what she does with the kids not going back to Hogwarts - that never occurred to me.
And I can't believe I read every single comment.
I can't believe you did, either, jess. What a stalwart pixie you are. A hearty welcome to the commenting pixie party!
AM I the only one who thinks Snape wasn't ordered to ill Dumbledore? I think he knew that he had betrayed the Order, and Dumbledore knew alot about him (except that he was still loyal to Lord V) and if he didn't seize the oppertunity to get rid of Dumbledore (becuase of course Draco wasn't going to) then he'd hunt him down and have his way with him.
What I still haven't figured out is, what is Lord V going to do to Draco for not completing his mission but having Snape do it for him?
Could Draco betray Lord V and his family to join with Harry seeing it his only chance to live?
P.S. Sorry for the typos
Oh, and I propose 2 things in the next book *beyond my earlier post*--what if Voldy uses James/Lily's dead bodies under a curse to come after and confuse Harry? And what if Snape and/or Draco die by helping Harry?
Running2Ks posted: "...what if Voldy uses James/Lily's dead bodies under a curse to come after and cunfuse Harry?"
Ew! I think that's a little too gory for what would be aimed at young adults. I mean, I know JKR introduced the "Inferi" this book, but it's one thing to have some anonymous dead body chasing after you, but your dead parents? I think that's a shade too far. But, it's an interesting idea though! It sounds like something old Moldyvort would think up. Diabolical, but the ew factor is way too high.
Could someone please clue me in as to what a Harry Potter slash fanfic is?
Thanks!
It just now came to me, what happened to The Dursleys in this one, I thought Aunt P would have more to do with the plot, and after going more in depth into Dudley's character in the 5th, I was dissapointed that he was barely mentioned in this one.
Hopefully when Harry goes home briefly in the 7th they will play a role in everything.
I've always wondered if his Aunt won't turn out to have some powers of her own. She is, after all, Lily's sister.
You know, I'm starting to wonder if Godric Gryffindor had any surviving descendants.
I think there's a lot left to be said about the Evans family, at any rate.
Im sure this has been answered somewhere in one of the books, but does anyone know what happened to Harry's Grandparents?
I don't think it has been answered, Chris. It's an excellent question.
As far as I know, the only references to Harry's grandparents that we know are:
1. Petunia says that their parents made a huge fuss over Lily's magic powers.
2. Sirius says that James's parents let him stay with them over vacations.
I suppose that the grandparents were among the people that Harry saw in the mirror in Book 1.
Anyone else know of other references to his grandparents?
Laura asked: "Could someone please clue me in as to what a Harry Potter slash fanfic is?"
Laura, "fanfic" is fiction (stories, etcetera) written by fans. Therefore, HP fanfic are stories HP fans write about Harry Potter. They usually use JK Rowling's characters, but the stories are only for personal enjoyment, not for any gain. "Slash" fanfic refers to writing of a romantic nature. You usually see slash as stories that go into (sometimes *great*)detail about a certain characters love (or sex) life.
In Star Trek fanfic, there was often Captain Kirk/Spock (can we just say "EW!" here?!?) pairings. These dealt with a romantic relationship between Captain Kirk and Mr, Spock. It never happened on the TV show, but some writers like to explore uncharted territory with their fanfic.
Does that help? (Gosh, I hope PS doesn't kick me off her blog for all this.....
There has been a lot of speculation as to the "gleam of triumph" (GOF p. 604) in Dumbledore's eyes.. This could simply have been because he finds out that his theory was correct? And that perhaps he hopes that by this, Voldemort may have learned something from him...
We cannot put even Dumbledore above wanting to be right?
A little irrelevant, but I was extremley dissapointed in the Quidditch matches even though they seemed to talk non-stop about them. And Luna becoming the new commentator was extremley dissapointing.
And while we're on the subject of Luna, I was also dissapointed that Harry chose her to go to Slug's Party with.
Just a couple of things I was dissapointed with.
Why disappointed, Chris? You just don't like Luna, or some more elaborate reason?
I think Rowling has gotten good and sick of Quidditch matches at this point. Can't say as I blame her.
I'm not saying Quidditch is what the books revolves around but in books 1-5 Quidditch seemed to play more of a role in the plot (in the 1st that's where Snape couterjinxed Quirrel trying to harm Harry, in the 2nd there was the whole incdient with the rogue bludger, the 3rd had the dementor attack, the 4th had no matches due to the Triwaizard tournament but depending on who you the World Cup could count as playing a major role in the plot, and then in the 5th there was the "Weasle King" and the twins and Harry getting suspended for fighting Malfoy at the match) but in the 6th it seemed to just be McLaggen screwing everything up and the after-party relationships. I'm sure few people feel the same on the role of Quidditch in the books but I found this lack of importance disapointing.
The Luna being commentator wasnt that big of a deal just another small thing I disliked, her barely talking about Quidditch unlike Lee Jordan of the past just didn't seem the same.
However I'll have to agree with Phantom Scribbler on Rowling getting sick of the elaborateness as there are things of more importance to spend time on.
Geese that's longer than I thought it'd be.
Yes I finally read this whole page!
I've been scrambling my brain trying to figure out how Dumbledore can't be dead. But he is (despite the fact that you only see Hagrid carrying something in Dumbledore's clothing, there's no 'viewing' or anything. Is it possible that Dumbledore had a horcrux?
Also, I like that someone pointed out that Snape only performed defensive/shield maneuvers when matched up against Harry. But no one's mentioned that he even gave Harry TIPS (Like, not out loud, Harry). Telling him to think the spells. He's trying to teach Harry even though the kid thinks he's totally evil.
*slinking off the soapbox and heading back out to lurk*
A friend of mine sent me this link and I am so thrilled to read your discussion. I finished the book (too quickly) as well and have been left with no one to talk to about it yet!
First, before I got to the end of the book, I thought--why can't we learn more about Dumbledore? What made him the great wizard he is (was)? Was he ever married? Did he have kids? Was he orphaned like Voldemort and Harry? I just kept thinking that his path must have been interesting too.
Secondly, I couldn't help thinking that maybe Snape had an enormous crush on Lily back in the day, and maybe Harry is also representative of the offspring he never had? It seems that Snape's hatred has to have other roots than just loyalty to Voldemort. What would REALLY motivate him to kill Dumbledore--and like it has been said many times--the explaination of why Dd trusted Snape is flimsy at best.
Finally, I was just absolutely devastated by Dd's death. Yes, I cried a lot and my husband and kids must have thought I was a big loser--but I just hated the idea that Harry was again naked to the world.
Thanks for giving me a place to say it
Welcome to the commenting pixie Potter party, Red and Scallops&Shrimp! Good point about Snape giving Harry tips, Red. And I agree with you, S&S -- I wanted to know more about Dumbledore's background. All we know -- besides that he was a WWII-era hero -- is that he has a brother, Aberforth, who was once prosecuted for performing inappropriate charms on a goat (!!).
First, my apologies if someone answered this and I missed it, but is anyone else wondering about the importance of Peter Pettigrew, who shows up again here as the despised servant of Snape? Didn't Dumbledore tell Harry that sparing Pettigrew in PoA would put Pettigrew in Harry's debt? And in GoF Pettigrew did not yet help to save Harry. So could this next novel be the moment when Pettigrew lives out Dumbledore's prediction? Might his silver hand hae something to do with it, for example by blocking a curse that would not have been blocked by a flesh-and-blood hand? After all, Pettigrew just floats to the side that's winning, and if Harry looks like he's winning at some point, mightn't Pettigrew switch?
A couple of other random thoughts and requests for reactions:
First, there were sounds behind the veil in the Ministry of Magic in OoftP, but only Luna and Harry hear them (just like they're the only ones to see the horses pulling the carriages at Hogwarts). It makes me wonder about the permeability of that veil and the ability to at least speak to the dead through it, at least for those who've lost someone they love.
Second, I can't help but have a sneaking suspicion that Harry's last and greatest test will be the ability to do something he desperately wants to do, that is, for him to somehow get some of Voldemort's power and now be able to bring back some of the dead, perhaps his parents, more likely Sirius or Dumbledore. And yet he will have to resist in order to defeat Voldemort. No reason to see this coming except that it kind of feels right to me. To any of you?
Finally, thanks to Phantom -- it's a relief to have folks with whom to chew over the book.
wow, there have been a lot of great theories here.
how my eyes have been opened!
although I, too, had a fleeting suspicion that Harry was, himself,one of Voldemort's horcruxes, it was just that; fleeting.
It *would* perfectly explain harry's mysterious connections with the dark lord, but why would he (Voldemort) instill a portion of his soul into someone that he knew he would, in the end, kill or die at the hand of?
Nor, do i think, would he use Dumbledore as a horcrux. Although he would have proved a safe (nearly indestructable) vessel for his soul-bit, i don't think Riddle could have stood having part of him within something as "pure" as DD.
Now onto the fate of our beloved headmaster. I realize, with great regret, the symbolism and the neccessity of DD's death; Harry needs to learn to fight on his own without anyone there, not even the unmovable and resilient figure who seemed to control everything, effortlessly, behind the scenes.
I do hope that Harry can move on without him, but I just can't force myself to believe that we have seen the last of Dumbledore (and in forms other than just his portrait).
I agree with Red. As little as we may want to believe it, Dumbledore must have fought often in his long, shaddowy life, especially since the appearance of the Death Eaters. It's very possible that at least once, DD may have ended a life, and perhaps took the opportunity to create a horcrux for himself.
It would have proved a valuable weapon against L.V. What evidence do we have that DD ever committed the crime?
pg 547-548 "...Draco. Killing is not nearly as easy as the innocent believe..."
As troubling as it may be, it seems that DD has personal knowledge on the subject.
So, say the headmaster created a horcrux, where would it be? It is my tendency to think that Fawkes has a greater role to play before this story is through. What better container for a horcrux than a creature that can not only defend itself, but regenerate endlessly? Containing some of Dumbledore's soul would also provide an explanation for Fawkes' arrival in the C.O.S., seeing as "only one who was loyal to DD could have called him".
Finally, my last clue to this is in seeing that Fawkes has now left the school "...the phoenix had gone, had left Hogwarts for good..."
At first this may seem simply a metaphor to push DD's absence, but remember that after Voldemort's 'death', one of his souls-bits was forced to build strength before returning. I can only hope that DD's return need not be as gruesome as leeching to the back of someone's head or spilling blood to gain a body.
One way or the other, I don't think we've seen the last of Albus Dumbledore!
one other thing...
i may very well have read too quickly, but did the story behind Dumbledore's injured hand ever come up in full?
Ok, this is a little out on the edge but, with Harry and Luna being the only ones hearing what is behind the veil in the ministry, I suspect Luna could be a parselmouth explaining why only her and Harry could hear it. Although then the others would probably hear the hissing.
The idea of only someone who lost a loved one can hear it, is more reasonable but I thought I'd throw it out there.
This is great! I’ve read all the Harry Potter books but never have investigated comments online until today, and thoroughly enjoyed reading this list. I REALLY want Snape to not be fully evil after all, so I take hope in some of the theories put forth here!
Way up near the top of the list someone mentioned bothersome typos, and someone else asked what they were. I saw a couple:
P.10, 8 lines down:
The site, therefore, of Fudge stepping out of the fireplace once more, looking disheveled and fretful… (site should be sight).
P.261, 10 lines down:
He swilled the contents of the Pensieve as Harry had seen him swill them before, much as a gold prospector sifts for gold. (swill means drink; should be swirl, unless swill means something different in the UK).
Finally, this isn’t a typo, just something I thought unlikely: when Draco paralyzes Harry in the train, he uses the invisibility cloak to hide Harry so he’ll get sent back to London. The cloak is such a valuable, rare object that surely Draco would steal it!
Ok, more theories about Snape--
Do you think that DD also had a horcrux? Do you think that Snape knew DD had a horcrux and knew that by "killing" him, he hadn't really killed him? Maybe THAT was the unexplained bond Snape and DD had...
Just don't want to believe Snape is totallly on the dark side either...
Ok, not sure if this has been discussed already, apologies if it has, but one thing that I just can't see a way to explain is why Snape countered Quirrel's attempt to kill Harry in book one if he is truly evil? In the Half Blood Prince he prevents anyone from killing Harry at the end of the book, saying that Voldemort wishes to do it himself, but in book one Quirrel was doing Voldemort's bidding, so by countering the jinx, Snape was saving Harry's life AGAINST the will of Voldemort.
Also it just seems too much of a glaringly stupid thing to do for Dumbledore to trust Snape if he didn't have an extremely good reason to do so. Think of the immense wisdom Dumbledore has demonstrated in the past, wisdom which he often alluded to the Half Blood Prince, it just doesn't make sense that he'd make such a glaringly obvious mistake.
Is it possible therefore that Dumbledore made some kind of agreement with Snape that he would sacrifice himself so that Snape could remain undercover? Think to when Snape bursts through the door on the astronomy tower just before he kills Dumbledore, why does Dumbledore immediately jump to the conclusion that Snape is going to attack him? If he trusted him so implicitly, why would he not assume Snape was coming to his aid? Snape says nothing before Dumbledore begs for his life and remember Dd actually asked Harry to fetch Snape to help him... Is it possible that Dumbledore knew that Snape would have to sacrifice him and broke down because he knew what was about to happen?
Ooo, design nerd, many thanks for the page citations for the typos! How I love a good typo! And, yes, I thought the same. Who in their right mind would leave an invisbility cloak there for the taking??
I love your thoughts about Harry's last and greatest test, radical_leftist! Wouldn't that be the ultimate temptation for Harry, restoring to life those he has lost. (Wouldn't that be a temptation for a lot of us, really?) I agree that Peter Pettigrew is a loose end still waiting to be tied up somehow, and that there is meaning behind Harry's and Luna's ability to hear whisperings just beyond the veil. Luna and her oft-described uncomfortable truths are just biding their time for more meaningful work in the last book, I think.
I wanted to mention a couple of things -- about the Horcruxes. I don't think Dumbledore would ever create one. If you will remember, he states that splitting your soul is a very destructive and evil thing to do. One would have to be very desperate in order to make use of such Dark Magic. I don't think Dumbledore would ever use such obviously "bad" magic. he may know if it, but he would never use it. Doesn't he say that it also lessens one's power?
As for Luna and Harry being able to hear the voices in the Ministry -- maybe the theory that they can hear them because, like they can see the thestrals (the odd winged horses), because they have been very close to, or had experience with death, is a valid argument. It might also be that in the confusion, no one else ever really stopped to take the time to listen, because time was of the essence. I don't think that Luna is a Parselmouth, however. If she were, then that would have meant that she would have also heard and understood the basilisk from "Chamber of Secrets." Since we had not met Luna until recently, and she has also never mentioned anything about the basilisk, that would lead me to think that she wasn't a Parselmouth.
I think that Luna is a great character. I like her shewed view of the world, and am glad that Harry has enough sense to know that good people come in all types.
What a fun thread. First of all, thanks Phantom, for hosting the discussion. I think there's too much here to respond in comments. I will probably just have to write my own post.
OK, I have a post up over on my blog now addressing some of these comments, though by no means all of them. One thing I'll say is no way did Dumbeldore create a horcrux--he wouldn't split his soul like that. The phoenix motif might provide a means for his return, but not dark magic like that.
Oh, and unless I missed it in this thread somewhere, even though I did read all of the comments, I think I did make one original prediction (or at least an extension of the one Phantom made) in my post:
I'm sure that in the whole of the internets, I am nowhere near the first to predict it. But in this thread, which is the only thing I've read on HP, my claim to original predictions is that Snape will end up taking over Dumbledore's position as the Head of Hogwarts. And I agree with Phantom that Harry will be the DADA teacher. He was too good at that in book 5 to not end up there, and he can't be at the Ministry.
Oh, Scriv, you think? I like that better than having Snape end up dead, which I am feeling is inevitable.
I stated it a little more forcefully up there than I actually believe it--after all, if you're gonna predict the future, you might as well do it boldly, right--but it makes sense to me. The hard part will be dealing with him killing Dumbeldore, even if he did so under orders. It might be that Dumbledore will end up not dead after all, he had a plan in place to totally fake his death with Snape, but will retire. I don't know, that seems like too happy an ending. Though it is a kids' book after all, right?
Scrivener wrote:
>
> And I agree with Phantom that
> Harry will be the DADA teacher.
> He was too good at that in book
> 5 to not end up there, and he
> can't be at the Ministry.
>
Based on what Rowling said in an interview recently, I think this scenario is unlikely. Rowling indicated that Harry would probably find such a position kind of tame after all the experiences he's been through.
BTW, have y'all seen her interview here at The Leaky Cauldron from July 22?:
http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/
I've been having a very good time reading all the different comments (any thanks to Songbird for the recommendation). It's always a treat to find other Potter maniacs!
i was thinking about the possibility of harry being a horcrux, and trying to find a way around him having to kill himself in order to destroy Voldy's soul-bit.
what about this? harry reaches the climax and he has to allow a dementor to kiss him and take 'his' soul!
he must face his greatest fear to destroy the horcrux!
but of course, harry's own soul must remain intact somehow...hmm...
What about Dumbledore's portrait in his old office? Surely Harry or indeed anyone else can go and talk to Dumbledore through it?
Another thought: we haven't had much discussion of Neville on this list. Yet he is in the interesting position of being the boy-who-almost-was... That is, he might have been the one to be Voldemort's nemesis. AIt kind of reminds me of Frank Herbert's Dune series, in which the almost-messiah's either became evil (Harkonnen's nephew) or defective eunichs (Count whats-his-name). Plus, we have seen his powers grow in the DADA classes run by Harry, his anger at his parents' condition, and the fact that the sorting hat thought he had enough courage to be sorted into Gryffindor House. So I wonder about a greater role for Neville in the final showdown.
I agree radical_leftist that Neville should play a larger role in the final book. But all of the factors you list in that comment draw from the book before this one--no one's talking much about Neville here because, well, he only has one or two cameos in Half-Blood Prince.
La Binsk, interesting interview you linked to there. I've never read any peripheral information on the books. I'm a little astounded at how much there must be out there, just from the references in this interview. As I said to Phantom at some point, the sum total of my conversations about the books before today has consisted of saying to my wife or a couple of other people, "yeah that one was pretty good" or "thought the adolescents were awfully annoying."
By the way, if you want a more intellectual discussion of Harry Potter than you'll ever get from me, Michael Berube has a Potter post in which he adds his voice to the chorus complaining about Byatt's dismissal of HP. It also includes this fine passage:
"But her narratives are compelling in scope and in execution, and easily complex enough to withstand close scrutiny a second and third time around. I wonder whether her under-15 readers are discovering the same thing—and if they are, then that seems to me a phenomenon as worthy of commentary as the stupefying sales figures. Millions of kids not just reading but rereading? Goodness, what will happen to their attention spans? Do you suppose that J. K. Rowling, all by herself, can undo the effects of every other mass cultural medium known to humankind?"
I really, really don't like the idea of Harry-as-horcrux. Harry's-scar-as-horcrux doesn't make sense to me at the moment, though perhaps it would once we're told more about how one makes a horcrux. But Rowling says in the interview linked above that the last word of book 7 is "scar."
What to make of that??
Wow, that's interesting. My first thought is that when Harry kills Voldemort (inevitable, is it not?)--his scar disappears because he will no longer be "marked"--I wonder if this would diminish his powers (that he received by chance) from old V baby. The real question is--how long will it take her to write this book if she already knows the last word??
I think Harry could become a professor at Hogwarts -- I kind of hope he does eventually. But I think JK will allow him some "real-world" experience before he jumps from being a schoolboy directly into being a schoolteacher. Of course, I'm not sure what kind of real-life experience could top the impending Voldemort encounter, but still....
I'm with Songbird -- I think Aunt Petunia's role is not yet over. JK seems to drop small but crucial hints that her part is not yet played out.
So much other speculation to do, but most of it has already been eloquently expressed on this very thread, so I shan't be repetitious. I have *SO* enjoyed reading this thread! Thank you, PS, for playing hostess! Some delightful, educated hypothesizing, to be sure!
Bad news, Scallops&Shrimp. According to the same interview, she's not going to even START writing the rest of the book (save the first chapter) until she's had a year to devote to her new baby. Yikes!
I do really recommend the interview at the Leaky Cauldron that Scrivener linked to above. They all sound like they're having so much fun!
Oh, and welcome to the commenting pixie party, concretegodmother, La Binsk, Dumbledore'sMan, design nerd, radical_leftist, and anyone I've left out! It's a pleasure to have you here.
Well, I finally followed the Leaky Cauldron link -- THANKS! Great fun. But it leads to a quote from JKR that reads: "[Snape] was a Death Eater, so clearly he is no Muggle born, because Muggle borns are not allowed to be Death Eaters, except in rare circumstances." Elsewhere JKR says "To people like Lucius Malfoy, a Muggle-born is as bad as a Muggle, so Harry is considered Half-Blood because of his mother's parents. In effect, a Muggle Grandparent "pollutes" the blood."
So now that we know Snape is half-blood and therefore polluted, does this mean that Voldemort is less prejudiced than Malfoy? Or that Snape was allowed to become a Death Eater as one of the "special circumstances," and if so, what were they???
Well, radical_leftist, Voldemort himself is half-blood, right? Because his father was a Muggle. So it makes sense that he would be willing to admit a fellow half-blood to the Death Eaters.
The Malfoys' prejudice seem to be as much a class issue as a Muggle issue. Draco is almost as cutting about the Weasleys' poverty as he is about Hermione's Muggle family.
Phantom, on that Voldemort is half-blood and all that--somewhere in the interview Rowling talks about the links between the wizarding world and the real world and the first war with the DEs and WW2. So is Voldemort supposed to be some kind of explicit parallel to Hitler, himself part Jewish?
I think people linked above to the discussion at Russel Fox's and at Tim Burke's, but there's some really smart stuff going on over there too. I don't much agree with Russell Fox's interpretation of the book, as I think I've made clear, but he makes some smart points, and he's teased out some really smart observations through his oppositional viewpoint at least, including this recent comment by Scott about what's going on during that scene on the lake as Harry forces potion down Dumbledore's throat--he thinks the potion was showing Dd his own death, so he was seeing the events in the following chapter. Very interesting.
Another thing I'll say--as firmly as I believe it'll turn out Snape is not on the Dark Side, it's difficult to find anything that would prove it. Clearly, JKR has very carefully constrcuted this novel to support each reading of its ending. Which I bring up ony to say that this novel is a clear step forward for her as a writer.
I mean, I enjoyed the earlier books--except 5, which I had to kind of force myself to get through most of--but I couldn't imagine having too much of a real discussion about any of them. As I've read the discussion here and at Fox's and Burke's, my appreciation for the novel has really grown quite a lot. This might be my favorite book in the whole series now, at least, it's between Prisoner and this one.
I think, re: Rowling and WWII, she's referring to the dark wizard Grindelwald that Dumbledore defeated in 1945.
I'm not at all persuaded that Voldemort hates Muggles more than he hates anything else mortal. I know that's been bandied about in the books as one of his motivators, but the pure-blood fetish seems to have other owners. I think that the Muggle-haters provided fertile recruiting grounds for Voldemort, but ultimately have little to do with his real goals: immortality, and power.
I'm going to have to reread (a commercialized pastime now, as Daybreak points out) and see if I don't appreciate the book more now that I'm over my initial disappointment in the thinness of its narrative...
Phantom --
Thanks for the response about Voldemort's half-blood status himself. There is a JKR interview somewhere in which she explicitly compares the distate for half-bloods (and even those with a single Muggle grandparent) to the Nazi distaste not only for Jews but for anyone with a taint of Jewish heritage. And Hitler seems to be the most virulent self-hating mongrel in centuries. It does lead one to wonder about the self-hating character of Voldemort, especially now that we have read the back story.
That said, your comment about Malfoy prejudices being as much class based as race based was dead-on. Thanks.
"If it's the former, though, and Songbird's brilliant RAB supposition turns out to be correct, then -- who went with RAB to help him? Dumbledore said a single wizard couldn't accomplish it."
How about Kreacher? Light enough to share the boat, and "nonwizardly" enough to make it through the magical protections. Plus he had a (forced) loyalty to Regulus, so he would keep feeding him the potion like Harry did to Dumbledore. And Harry has access to him now, so he should be able to get the backstory out of him once he realizes who RAB is.
Welcome to the commenting pixie party, ElizabethN. Yes, my guess is also that Kreacher went with Regulus Black, though I've been wondering logistically how that would work -- if Regulus said, as Dumbledore did, "Don't make me," would Kreacher have to obey him? Perhaps I'm a little too concerned with the workings of house-elf magic, there...
Boy, I really recommend the comment by Scott at Russell Arben Fox's site that Scrivener cites up above. Brilliant supposition, there. And what a close, clever reading to pick up on the line "Don't hurt them, don't hurt them, please, please, it's my fault, hurt me instead..." I had been reading the scene as a sort of sadistic symbolic parent-child role-reversal, signalling that it was time for Harry to take the reins from Dumbledore. But that line shows that Dumbledore is experiencing more than just pain.
La Binsk -- GREAT to see you here, btw, and great minds and all that rot! I read that interview at the Leaky Cauldron last night, and was intending on posting the link here myself! I found that JKR's insistence that we just read the book, we should have a good handle on whether Snape is truly evil or not to be quite telling. She seems to hem and haw when she can't outright reveal anything that would give away main components of book seven.
I'm so torn on whether or not Snape has permanently defected to the Dark Side...I want to believe that Dumbledore knows something that we don't, that he's giving Snape the benefit of the doubt for some reason we are not yet aware of...but JKR makes it clear in the Leaky Cauldron interview that Dumbledore is (was) a very trusting person, and that that might have worked to his disadvantage. I don't want to think of Dumbledore as having misplaced his trust, but he is, after all, only human, and humans have foibles and failures.
I don't think that Harry is a horcrux. Harry or his scar. I think that horcruxes are going be confined to items -- the cup, a locket, a book. Nothing we've seen so far indicates that people are good receptacles for random parts of souls. Don't you think that the host of the soul would realize? I think that "R.A.B." is Regulus. There were just too many mentions of him in this book to be anyone BUT him.
I think Hogwarts will be open next year. I'm sure it won't be the same, but otherwise, how would we have book 7 -- Year 7 at Hogwarts? Harry really wants to be an Auror, and I think that he'll become one, in one way or another. If the Auror's job is to search out Voldemort and Dark Magic and try to repair what damage has been done, it seems like that's what Harry's already been doing, and been preparing for since he came to Hogwarts. I don't think he'll teach. At least, not at first. I think he's an excellent teacher, but I think Harry has enough on his plate with Voldemort. Once Voldemort has been vanquished (and I hold out hope that he will be), then Harry may feel that he can pass on his knowledge to others. After all, if Voldemort is destroyed, and the Death Eaters rounded up, there won't be any need for so many Aurors. Granted, there will always be evil in the world, and there will always be a need for Aurors to root out that evil, but Harry will have had enough after the final battle with Voldemort.
I think if Petunia had any magical powers, they would have long manifested themselves. She was so jealous of Lily that she would have wanted to display any sort of power she had in order to be seen as Lily's equal. There is some connection there for Harry, though. Maybe if Petunia would let go of her jealousy of Lily, she could retain some sort of residual magic. As long as her heart remains closed, I fear that she dooms herself to a life that's bitter and disappointing. Harry may feel more kindly disposed towards her if she showed any slight amount of affection for him, or for Lily.
KLee says "JKR makes it clear in the Leaky Cauldron interview that Dumbledore is (was) a very trusting person, and that that might have worked to his disadvantage. I don't want to think of Dumbledore as having misplaced his trust, but he is, after all, only human, and humans have foibles and failures." But JKR doesn't explicitly say his mistakes are being too trusting or in trusting Snape too much. She could be saying he makes the mistake of not trusting Harry enough, of not explaining to Harry what's going on with Snape. He's already admitted to that mistake in Book 5 and he's taken steps to include Harry now, but still not gone far enough? I think that passage about Dumbledore making mistakes is a little more ambiguous than you seem to take it to be.
And I'm not agreeing that Petunia necessarily has magical powers, just that she'll be instrumental in some way in the next book. JKR has begun dropping hints that Petunia has more depth to her in some way. I really have no idea how that'll play out, but I suspect she'll be more than just that annoying Muggle lady in the final book.
Late to the game as always, and unable to read every single comment here, I'll add briefly that I agree with ABDMom and Scrivener. There are enough hints that Snape is really the good guy and that Dumbledore wanted Snape to kill him (do we really know that the guy with the phoenix is really dead, anyway?). I figure that we have a Star Wars rip-off here: Dumbledore is like Obi-wan Kenobi, and his death gives Harry (i.e., Luke Skywalker) the extra bit of magic/love (i.e. The Force) necessary to fulfill his destiny of fending off the Dark Lord Voldemort (Lord Vader of the Dark Side). If Voldemort turns out to be Harry's real father, then . . .
As for the lovey-dovey stuff, the worst thing for me is the taken-for-granted heteronormativity of it all. And, yes, teenage hormones and sappy love stories is unlikely to be the highlight for our crowd here. But, maybe a bunch of kids will be able to understand their raging desires a little better.
Finally, I think that the feel and structure of this volume is different because Rowling sees the end in sight. Rather than being a real stand-alone school year like the first five books, this seems more like the cliff hanging two-episode series finale kind of fare.
Oh, a general question: Do you think Rowling will write more books about this world, say, like about Dumbledore as a youth?
---It might be that Dumbledore will end up not dead after all, he had a plan in place to totally fake his death with Snape, but will retire. I don't know, that seems like too happy an ending. ---
Sorry, but besides his painting/s I think Dumbledore is gone for good. After the book said that Fawkes would never return to Hogwarts again I think it cleared it up that Dumbledore wasn't coming back.
I'm not sure but my opinion on JKR writing more books of this world would be that she won't. I heard somewhere (probably a post on this thread) that there would be no use for any prequels after the 7th book, that we would know everything there is to know. Although I like the idea of more books, I doubt it will happen.
Just a simple question for everyone becuase I have no idea, Do you think there will be another mass breakout from Azkaban in the 7th book?
Hey dr. m, nice to see you at this thread -- it's never too later to join the Potter party. According to that interview with JK Rowling, it sounds like she'd be interested in writing some reference-type books about the magical world -- along the lines of the Quidditch and Magical Creatures books that she wrote for charity a few years ago. It didn't sound like she was planning any sustained biographies of characters.
With the dementors gone from Azkaban, it's certainly possible that we'll see the banished Death Eaters again, Chris. It's hard to believe that we'll never get another look at Lucius Malfoy, but I suppose it depends on how many things Rowling has to cram in to the 7th book!
I have read very little about Rowling and only that one interview that was linked to in this thread, but my sense is that she does not, at least at this point, feel an overwhelming drive to continue to explore this world in prequels or sequels. I wonder whether she'll publish book 7 and then wait around a bit and start itching to get back to Hogwarts. My sense is that right now, she doesn't think it'll happen.
Another question is, will she franchise out the world to other authors?
Okay, you know that Rowling's interview just fueled my passion for my own pet theory. She certainly seemed pretty willing to sneer at the idea of Snape as a triple-agent.
So, yes, I _am_ forced to agree that Dumbledore and Snape did have some sort of silent communcation up there on the tower. And okay, the more I think about it, the less I believe that Dumbledore would plead to save his own life. Although I cringed in the cave, seeing him do it there.
Eh. For a lot of reasons, Dd asking for death still disappoints me. I persist in hoping that Snape betrayed Dumbledore accidentally, and that one of the questions in Book VII will be whether Snape lets his betrayal lead him back to Voldemort, or whether he overcomes his self-loathing long enough to help Harry in the end.
It's more interesting to me if Snape's murder of Dumbledore was BOTH (a) something he chose, and was not ordered to do; AND (b) not a sign that he was Voldemort's evil stooge all along.
I can easily imagine Snape choosing to save himself at the expense of Dumbledore, both because he feared death and because he was quick-witted and realized that Harry needed a spy in Voldemort's camp more than Harry needed Dumbledore. Plus, Snape's choices were limited on that tower: he had to kill or die himself, and if Snape died, how could wandless Dumbledore overcome four death eaters? Snape wouldn't be as quick as Harry to believe that Dd can escape anything; Snape doesn't have that kind of spirit.
Or maybe we can even call it naivete. In Harrys' mind, Dd died because of Dd's flaw, his trust for Snape. I don't think Harry could conceive of Dd dying a regular old death at the hands of four death eaters, with or without his wand. Snape, on the other hand, would err too far in the opposite direction, and believe absolutely that Dd was about to die. In his own mind, Snape was trapped: he would believe that Dd COULDN'T survive the tower, whatever Snape chose. At least if Snape saved himself, he could still help Harry. (Or the Order of the Phoenix, if we believe Snape still hates Harry too much.)
I love the possibility that Snape repeated his own mistakes, that he doomed himself again by acting without all the information he needed. So what if Snape did not know, when he made the Unbreakable Vow, that Draco had been assigned to kill Dumbledore? Remember Snape's twitching hand at the end of the vow? What if he acted in blind service to Dd's cause, not knowing how his actions would end, just as he did when he delivered the prophecy to Voldemort? It's a perfect parallel: Snape acts without all the facts, and someone he loves, dies.
As for Dd claiming he knew what Draco was doing? I think that was a lie, part of Dd's campaign to turn Draco around and prevent him from killing (although I must concede, sigh, that Dd's odd comment about "my mercy" does suggest that he knew what Draco had sworn and was trying to help Draco preserve his soul by enabling Snape to do the killing). But I think it's at least possible that this was Dumbledore's huge mistake: forgetting that Voldemort was pitiless enough to sacrifice even children. Dumbledore admitted himself in Book V that HE errs on the side of over-protection. So I think Dd saw the necklace and the potion as diversions from Draco's unknown task, whatever he said to Draco on the tower at the end. It simply wasn't in Dumbledore's nature to imagine that Voldemort would send a child on such a suicide mission.
Rowling said in that interview that she expected careful re-readers on the Leaky Cauldron and Muggle-net to identify at least one more Horcrux within the week. So I guess that's my task when the adrenaline buzz from the new book wears off. That, and staying away from all these Rowling/Potter sites I had no idea existed until this week.
Oh yeah, the other Horcrux clue was supposed to be in an earlier book, not this one.
The idea that Dumbledore, Harry, or the SCAR (??!) could be horcruxes continues to strike me as absurd. Dumbledore says himself: "It is inadvisable [to use animals--presumably humans, too--to make horcruxes] because to confide a part of your soul to something that can think and move for itself is obviously a very risky business. ... [Voldemort] certainly likes to keep [Nagini, the snake] close, and he seems to have an unusual amount of control over her, even for a Parselmouth." {Pages 506-507} So a living Horcrux would be something Voldemort could specially control and would keep close to himself, presumably to ensure it took good care of his soul. That pretty much rules out Harry and Dumbledore, even setting aside the fact that Dumbledore says, "[Voldemort] seems to have reserved the process of making Horcruxes for particularly significant deaths. You certainly would have been that. ... I am sure that he was intending to make his final Horcux with your death. As we know, he failed." {page 506}
I know we're supposed to question all of Dumbledore's assumptions now, but there's no timeline for Voldemort to make a horcrux until he's regained power at the beginning of Book III. Voldemort couldn't have made Harry a horcrux, because he half-died on the instant he tried to curse Harry.
The triumphant gleam about Harry's blood probably just relates to Voldemort being more vulnerable to some spell involving Harry's blood now, or Voldemort not being able to remain alive if Harry dies (so that, even if the worst happened, Dumbledore could at least know that Voldemort would be pushed back into his not-dead/not-alive state again). I just don't believe it has anything to do with Horcruxes.
Have we added up all the deaths we know about involving Voldemort? The information has been pretty sketchy, but has Rowling mentioned the significant deaths? Presumably they would have come up in books IV and V. Then we could try to figure out if there were objects of Ravenclaw's or Gryffindor's hanging about at the times of the deaths....
Uff, I'm such a geek.
Ah, Jody, that's why we love you! I like your reading of Snape's action as a result of his OWN mistaken assumptions, not Dumbledore's.
Fully admit this is just random speculation but if Voldemort makes his horocruxes before/after major events when he is reborn and getting ready to "battle" harry after the tournament, could the redone hand he gave PP be a horocrux? Probably completely baseless, but thats the fun of predictions..
On Snape not knowing that Draco was supposed to kill -- re-reading the chapter Spinner's End, I am reminded that Cissy never does actually say what the Dark Lord ordered Draco to do. Indeed, looking at the dialoge, Snape does just what I do when meeting someone who obviously knows me but whom I don't recognize -- he seems to fake it! He says things like "I know too" without saying what he knows. He gives generic answers. In other words, the dialogue could be read as Snape trying to figure out what Cissy is actually talking about. This might also mean he is lying when he tells Bella that he was questioned by the Dark Lord. Indeed, as he says, Voldemort is the greatest Legilimens in the world, so the idea that Snape really is still a double-agent must somehow account for Voldemort's lack of knowledge. Are those who think Snape is still on Dumbledore's side suggesting that Snape was good enough to hide this from Voldemort? Or perhaps, did he never confront Voldemort at all?
Finally, in the first chapter -- why do you think the Ministers of Magic use the Floo Network to visit the muggle Prime Minister rather than apparating?
My theory is that Snape WAS Dumbledore's double agent, and that he was good enough at deception and occulmency to pull it off. I'm sure Snape WAS called to task by Voldemort (what we do see of Snape at the end of Book IV lines up with what he tells Narcissa and Bellatrix, that he hung around Hogwarts a few extra hours after V's return so that D could order him back) and all the answers he repeats sound utterly convincing. So if Snape's an incredibly powerful wizard in his own right (and I think there's plenty of textual evidence to support that assertion), then yes, I think he can deceive Voldemort.
Of course, abstractly, it's arguable that Dumbledore is always going to be more vulnerable to betrayal than Voldemort. D trusts people; V doesn't.
But regardless of Snape's double agency (inspired by his terrible regret after Lily Evans Potter's death), I still think it's possible that he was trapped into the Aveda Kedavra curse on the tower. And that one of the questions for Book VII will be, does Snape just give up and return entirely to Voldemort, or does he continue to try to help the Order, even as all of THEM try to kill him.
Ah, well, I'm going to need to put this out of my mind soon, or it will be an excruciatingly long two years. Makes me very grateful that none of the other books have been cliffhangers like this....
First, I would like to say thank you to Phantom Scribbler for allowing me to play in her sandbox with all of youse guys! Second, I want to shout out a big "Hellooooooo" to KLee - I'm so glad to see you here (in your own inimitable style, too). Third, thank you very much to Scrivener for the two links above. I read the blog comments there with great interest. Wow, I feel so at home here.
I'm not sure that I have very many original comments left in me after seeing everybody else's but I'll see what I can do:
Firstly, I agree with KLee that it's unlikely that Harry is a horcrux. It just doesn't make sense to me that Voldemort would choose to put a piece of his soul into someone that he wants to do away with. But if Voldemort is determined to put a piece of his soul into something connected with Gryffindor then might not that item have something to with Godric's Hollow? Perhaps a building or a statue or some other item of Gryffindor note?
I still believe that there is more to the Snape situation that has yet to be revealed. I note that the scene where Snape is described as looking like he was filled with hatred and revulsion just before he says the Avada Kedavra curse comes very shortly after the scene where Harry is similarly described as feeling repulsed and filled with self-hatred by continuing to follow Dumbledore's orders. I believe that those descriptions are significant in their similarities.
I like the theory that says that Kreacher accompanied Regulus to the cave when he retrieved the locket. It makes sense to me and it allows for the possibilities of some very interesting interactions between Harry and Kreacher - maybe even Dobby and Winky?
I understand from reading other interviews and fan sites that the color of Harry's eyes (Lily's eyes, remember) will become more significant in the next book. Also, I understand that one of the members of the Order of the Phoenix will be featured more prominently in Book 7 (Kingsley Shacklebolt? Charlie Weasley? Someone else?). And Dolores Umbridge will be back, too (go get her, Peeves!) I'm so curious to see how Rowling will fold these things into the various threads and come to a conclusion on the overall story arc.
And while I think that Harry dropping out of school offers Rowling a certain amount of artistic freedom in directing his story, I do hope that Harry seeks some kind of additional training before his final confrontation with Voldemort (perhaps from Mad Eye Moody or Remus Lupin?). For example, Harry really needs to work on his nonverbal spellcasting skills. Snape was quite right about that one and Harry would do well to follow this piece of advice (assuming one believes that Snape meant this to be a last piece of advice just before he left Hogwarts - which I do).
La Binsk
Perhaps Dumbledore was the one who accompanied Regulus Black to the horcrux in the cave. Then, when he brought Harry there, it will have all been part of this big performance so he could feign injury, etc, etc (all part of the Dumbledore is coming back line of thought). I guess that Dumbledore's behavior seems so completely out of character starting at that point.
Also, isn't there a locket that can't be opened at the Black House (from an earlier book)--that's probably the real horcrux. I wish Neville was a horcrux.
Wait, could the Room of Requirements be a horcrux: "I need a place to hide a piece of my soul, I need a place to hide a piece of my soul, I need a place to hide a piece of my soul." Oh, how about in here, a room for hiding a piece of one's soul?
As for Snape, the real coup would be if he turned out to be Voldemort's main man all along--you know, dash the hopes of ultimate goodness for millions of children.
ok, re-reading is dangerous to the mind, because now it's entirely a hunt for hints and errors.
so, on errors: in an Oct 2000 interview in Canada:
"One young Canadian boy earlier asked her how Dementors breed. "I was just so pleased that he thought about it and pleased that I had the answer," Rowling told The Canadian Press. These evil creatures don't, by the way, breed but grow like a fungus where there is decay."
But in HBP we see that they do indeed breed, creating a mist when they do.
Actually, I am intrigued by this image, trying to imagine both the breeding and the way in the mist then appears...
And now, for those who have bothered this far, spare me from my misery -- I can't remember what happens to Kreacher after he is sent to the Hogwarts kitchens where Dobby is working (and presumably Winky is still a butterbeeroholic). Remind me, please. Because it's all part of what must be a Book 7 theme, i.e. the denouement of the wizards vs. creatures theme, with Goblins, Giants, Centaurs and Elves among the species most likely to be given new status and new respect in the post-Voldemort world.
p.s. Ah, and on the race/class comments concerning Malfoy, Voldemort, and pureblood/muggles: I've been in a Jane Austen/Upstairs,Downstairs/Forsyte Saga kind of BBC kick this summer. One of themes there is the need for the impoverished aristocracy to reach "down" into the rising middle class for potential spouses who have a lot of cash earned through that despicable activity, "trade." But when you think about it, the muggles seem a lot like the bourgeoisie who are needed because there aren't enough of the aristocracy (or at least, enough with money) for the hoity-toity types to remain completely inbred. So again, with a nod to Phantom's comment about class, I do find myself seeing these relations as more reminiscent of the snobbery of Georgian England than the virulence of Hitler's Germany.
My nine-year-old niece called me when she finished the book this afternoon. "I'm so sad!" she said. "What's Harry going to do without Dumbledore to take care of him?"
"Do you think he can make it on his own now?" I asked.
"Well.... Hey, he still has Mrs. Weasley!"
Aw, the power of mother-in-law love! Why didn't I think of that?
Wow, a spoilerific commenting party!
Not only did my book contain several typos (and, in my opinion, a lot of iffy happenings), my first copy of the book was missing 33 pages! I returned it and found out later that I could have made big bucks for it on eBay...
I don't think Dumbledore's dead. I think Petunia will have a bigger role in the next book, and there's more to Trelawney than everyone thinks...
Welcome to the commenting pixie party, Adjunct Kait! Come on, give us more! What's your theory on Trelawney? Speculate, elaborate. We've got a lot of time to kill before the next book comes out...
Phantom, The Princess is almost there (one camp and one trip to NYC having interfered with her reading). As she went to bed last night (very late I might add), I asked what was happening in the book. She told me Dumbledore and Harry are about to go into the cave and get the Horcrux. I'm expecting tears today.
Your niece's comment about Mrs. Weasley--sweet. And your interpretation? Priceless!
Poof!
Have I mentioned that one of my superpowers as (musical flourish) Housewife... of... the... Universe is deleting rude comments, Amrick? If you don't like the chatter here, you are certainly welcome to go elsewhere.
I like that chatter, not the chit-chat.
*the chatter
Ok, Amrick, you're forgiven. But we're friends here; we chit-chat. If you want to get us back on track with the chatter, share with us your brilliant theories and observations about the book!
Theory: Snape is still 'good'.
Observation: The book was all about Snape.
Ok, I'm intrigued. *How* was the book all about Snape? He didn't appear much, and we didn't get much of a look at his classes. What are you seeing -- I mean, besides the title -- that's all about Snape?
I forgot to include my theories!
1.) I think Trelawney's cartomancy (?) will have greater importance in the next book. She got certain cards which seemed important, like "lightning in the tower" and stuff like that.
2.) Could Harry be a Horcrux?????
And I've always wondered...if the magic world is supposed to be so "secret," what about all of the parents and families of muggle-born witches and wizards??? They obviously know! I wonder if Dumbledore has to visit every muggle parent so they don't think it's a load of rubbish...
Nothing substantive to add, just wanted to say I've been enjoying this delicious discussion as a way of prolonging my enjoyment of the book.
Thanks!
Thanks for stopping by, Danigirl!
Can't people leave four more comments, just to round this thread off at an even 200?!!!
Anyone had new realizations? Are there new leaks Rowling-way?
Re: Trelawney. I noticed her card readings were actually correct in book 6! She didn't realize Harry was hiding from her, so she didn't know her readings were correct...but I found that part rather funny. Perhaps it's telling -- I wonder if she has a role to play yet. Dumbledore kept her around on purpose, and I'm hoping it's not just because he didn't want her prophetic skills to fall into the wrong hands.
And Phantom, I just want to say a big THANK YOU for hosting this fabulous confab! I've so enjoyed obsessively coming back for follow-up visits! It's helped make the come-down from the book a bit easier to take. Now we only have two and a half more months for our 'new' HP fix. (taps fingers impatiently)
Thank you for coming to the commenting pixie Potter party, concretegodmother! I've got to go look up what you say about Trelawney now...
Has Mr Blue finished the book yet? No one's had anything to add since September?
He still hasn't even finished Book 5.
(Rolls eyes.)
Ooo, what a juicy thread! I admit, I've only scanned and am holding off until I finish my epic re-reading of the whole series - only half of HBP left to go!
Thought you all might enjoy this article from Macleans magazine - some great theories and speculation.
http://www.macleans.ca/
article.j...9_107109_107109
I'll be back in half a book!
Commenting by HaloScan
