Title of Book 7 Harry Potter* SPOILERS* by msg

OTHER SCIENCE FICTION SERIES

Title of Book 7 Harry Potter* SPOILERS*

POSTED BY: MSG
UPDATED: Friday, January 12, 2007 23:09
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3140
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, December 21, 2006 7:33 AM

It's Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6200745.stm

Also if you're looking for new info try this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_potter_book_7

"A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort."- Albright

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 21, 2006 8:11 AM

LITTLEALBATROSS29

I want to re-read the HBP but am too traumatized .

The new title sounds ominous.

Bryce
******************************

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 21, 2006 8:22 AM

MSG

Really too ominous. I was thinking it sounded like finality but not too scary. I'm just so excited. A friend and I have had a friendly argument going about whether Snape is bad or good ( I say good for many reasons) and it'll be nice to settle it. I just hope I can accept it if he turns otu to be a bad guy. It might break my heart. I can deal with Dumbledore's death, but Snape is truly a traitor would just about kill me:(

"A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort."- Albright

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 21, 2006 8:27 AM

LITTLEALBATROSS29

I never liked him, so I want to see him fry for what he did.I want Sirius to come back & kick his ass.

I so don't want to believe that the next book will be the last.

Bryce
********************************

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 21, 2006 8:27 AM

FITCH66

I'm with you, he's good... if he was bad there would be no point in the whole first chapter, he would have killed Dumbledore anyway! Plus he reacts so badly when Harry calls him a coward... i.e is ashamed he killed Dumbledore to save his own life.

My money is on Draco Malfoy doing something good/noble in the last book aswell.

Of course, there are going to be more deaths, aren't there? You know, as in PLURAL characters dying. It will be a traumatic experience for all...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 21, 2006 8:30 AM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

::sighs::

And so, what started out as a wonderful book series, then crashed and burned, will be ending soon. Thank goodness.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 21, 2006 8:36 AM

FITCH66

Hmm... I agree with you a little... I didn't like it when Harry stated getting all 'OHMIGOD IM AN ANGRY SHOUTY TEEN WHO NOBODY UNDERSTANDS'
And recently I think ole' J.K has been writing a lot more with a film script in mind. But I'm still looking forwards to the next book

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 21, 2006 8:48 AM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

I don't know what she's been writing with in mind, but every relationship choice she's made makes me cringe and want to bang my head against a wall. Plus, all the character transformations are terribly unsatisfactory, and don't have the same quality to them as the first two books. I won't even touch the 4th book anymore, because the writing was bad enough the first time.

And, it's not that none of her ideas are good - because they are pretty good - but the quality of writing seems to have petered out.

Long story short, Harry should die, and Voldemort should take over the world, because that would be more realistic than what I think she's going to do.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 21, 2006 10:05 AM

MSG

Hmm since I am a huge fan, I really can't agree. I work all day every day with teenagers( I'm a teacher) and I'd say her "transformation" of the characters is spot on. Most kids go through a whiney self absorb why is everyone picking on me phase ( annoying but true) and the development of relationships is , to my mind very realistic with what I see among my students.
I just can't wait to see what happens next. Though she has hinted repeatedly that she is killing Harry so I'm not sure why you think she won't.

"A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort."- Albright

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 21, 2006 10:09 AM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

Quote:
Originally posted by msg:
Hmm since I am a huge fan, I really can't agree. I work all day every day with teenagers( I'm a teacher) and I'd say her "transformation" of the characters is spot on. Most kids go through a whiney self absorb why is everyone picking on me phase ( annoying but true) and the development of relationships is , to my mind very realistic with what I see among my students.

Well, as a teenager myself, I have to respectfully disagree.

Quote:
I just can't wait to see what happens next. Though she has hinted repeatedly that she is killing Harry so I'm not sure why you think she won't.

It's probably just that I haven't read the books enough to see anything, but I've had no indications from the books that Harry is going to die. Or, at least, if he does, that evil will control the world. At the heart of it, the Harry Potter books are very romantic that way.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 21, 2006 10:10 AM

FITCH66

Weeeell I know that everyone goes through that stage (having just come out of it) but I dont know anyone that yelled every other time they spoke... still like the books though of course.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 21, 2006 11:28 AM

MSG

No it's not in the books J.K. Rowling has stated several times that she doesn't want anyone to think she isn't going to kill Harry.

I'm sure you would disagree Yinyang. When I was your age I would have disagreed too, but wait until you've gotten to 25 or so and look back. I'm not saying my students (or you for that matter) are bad kids or unfeeling, just that it is repeatedly demonstrated through studies and direct observation that children go through a stage in teen age years where they are self absorbed. It's needed for them to develop and not a bad thing by any means.
I may be that Harry and his experiences don't really speak to you because you've not had a sense of connection to him, but I can promise you that in the 8 years I've taught teeenagers, Harry and his friends are very typical of the age...that may also be it. You are probably not a typical teen ( being more mature than most and all)and that may be why you don't feel Harry's very realistic:)

"A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort."- Albright

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 21, 2006 12:53 PM

CHINDI

MSG I am with you here.. I think Snape will turn out to be the tragic hero.. along shakespearian lines tragic.. he will do heroic things and only the reader will really know...

I think HP and Voldy will die together.. I think one of the Weasleys also dies, but not sure if it will be Ron or a parent...

I dont think Dumbledore is dead.. or he has become Hogwarts' horecrux... and I think JK has written a tremendous series that is spot on with the evolution of many teens.. not all, but many... I don;t think you are supposed to like HP when he is all moody and in your face, that is the point. ON THE OTHER HAND, all those grown ups flat out lied or hid info from him. He had a right to be angry.

I can imagine that this series is not for everyone, much as our beloved Firefly doesn't appeal to everyone.. but I will be sad when the series ends, and I cannot WAIT to see what JK does for the final book...

Chindi

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 21, 2006 1:01 PM

MSG

Chindi- I totally agree. Poor Snape. Dumbledore forced him to "kill" him and now he's going to have to be, just as Harry was, the person everyone thinks is a psycho when he's really a good guy.
I go back and forth on the Dumbledor is dead issue, but when you realize that she's gone to great pains to describe the effects of the Avada Cadavre curse as leaving the person wide eyed and staring with an expression of horror on their face and Dumbledore is peaceful with his eyes closed..well that makes it questionable... Still I can hardly wait for the last book even if it does make me sad to think it'll be over and there'll be no more Harry left:(

"A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort."- Albright

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, December 22, 2006 4:27 AM

PHOENIXROSE

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.

Quote:
Originally posted by Chindi:
I think HP and Voldy will die together.. I think one of the Weasleys also dies, but not sure if it will be Ron or a parent...

You're kidding, right? It's going to be Ginny! I don't think anything else will drive Harry to a murderous rage. This also fits with the development of Harry's 'angry' side. I really didn't like book five for a lot of reasons, but I do think there was a point to Harry's anger. It just needed a few more edits is all. That's the problem when someone gets really big and famous; no one will tell them they need to fix something because they're too busy telling them they're the best thing since sliced bread and toast with jam.
As for Snape, my big question would be why the hell he made the Unbreakable Vow in the first place? If he hadn't, I could believe he might still be one of the good guys, but he did and I think he's slimy and needs to die. If he dies defending Harry, I might forgive him. Maybe.
Will Harry die? I sure hope not. It's much more interesting to me if he goes on living and being all haunted by his losses and what he had to do, and is a crazy Defense Against the Dark Arts Teacher at Hogwarts, always giving the kids the evil eye and telling them to practice constant vigilence...

[]

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, December 22, 2006 4:30 AM

PENGUIN

Quote:
Originally posted by Chindi:
...or he has become Hogwarts' horecrux...

I hadn't thought of that! D'oh!

King of the Mythical Land that is Iowa

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, December 22, 2006 4:35 AM

LITTLEALBATROSS29

I will never forgive Snape.He's just rotten & Someone (Sirius) should kick his ass.I really don't believe that he was ever a good guy.But I guess we'll find out soon enough.And I think PR is right -Ginny will die, just so Harry can be even more tortured.Poor Harry.

Bryce
******************************

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, December 22, 2006 11:35 AM

ASORTAFAIRYTALE

What I keep wondering is why someone has had to die in every book since #4. I mean really, you still can have a good story without killing all the characters! I could deal with Sirius dying, but Dumbledore was just wrong. He was one of my favorites!
And yeah, I agree that Snape probably isn't entirely a traitor. Otherwise he wouldn't have save arry's life in the first one! Also, Dumbledore must have had some other reason for trusting him for so long.
I soo can't wait for the new one to come out!

---------
Love keeps her in the air when she outta fall down, tells you she's hurting before she keels. Makes her a home.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, December 22, 2006 11:45 AM

LITTLEALBATROSS29

I think that she had Snape kill him so that we could see thst Dumbledore makes mistakes too.He is only a oerson after all & not all knowing .
His trust of Snape was his downfall...

And I think Snape saved Harry because Voldemort wants to be the one to kill him.

I want this book out now !!!!

Bryce
***********************************

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 23, 2006 7:22 PM

RYAN786I

Hi, refugee from serenitymovie.org. And I kind of can't help but post my ever expanding "Reasons It Doesn't Appear Snape is Evil, and What I Think His Motives Might Be in not Being Evil" list (copy and pasted, so it might be a little confusing on some posts it references). It's long. Sorry:

First, of course, on the Astronomy Tower. Dumbledore pleads with Snape. First red flag, right there, no question. The reader knows, if they've read the book (and yes, I'm saying those who say Snape is evil haven't read the books), that Dumbledore simply would not plead for his life. It's not even a point of contention, it's fact. Dumbledore won't plead for his life (also, let's just note Dumbledore's complete lack of surprise at seeing Snape), so it's beyond any argument that if Dumbledore is pleading (and he is), it is for something other than his life. Given he says "Severus, please...", it seems quite evident Dumbledore is pleading for Snape to do something. Given we already know Dumbledore won't plead for his life, that's off the table. In the situation, it's apparent enough Snape is on the Death Eaters' side (and it would be abundantly apparent to Dumbledore who is supposed to be much brighter than any of us). So, it seems highly unlikely Dumbledore's pleading for any kind of general help. So, he's pleading with Snape, very much on purpose, very much aware of the circumstances and Snape's apparent allegiance at that point (that is, Snape is a Death Eater and may or may not have killed people in the school). So if he pleads, and it seems he did, what does he plead for? Not his life, that's out of the question. So, the only thing any rational person can arrive at. He pleads for precisely what he gets. A Killing Curse right to the chest, because at this point, if Dumbledore actually is pleading (given that we know he's unlikely to plead for anything), he's almost certainly pleading for something he expects he'll actually get. The only thing he gets after that point is Avada Kedavra.

Debate that if you like, that's fine. If it was the sole point, I'd be there with you. But, it's not. Move on, we're now on the Hogwarts grounds. Harry is chasing Snape. Now, first, Snape doesn't hurt Harry. I'm not saying kill, I'm saying hurt. Not once, nothing to stop him and take off. He plays with him, duels, gives him a crash course in the importance of non-verbal spells and Occlumency, and saves him from another Death Eater (it's explained, yes, but it's still very odd, especially when it's sort of "only" the Cruciatus Curse, something fully non-lethal though certainly debilitating and possibly damaging over an extended period). The only time Snape truly goes to hurt Harry is after Harry calls him "coward". If Snape's evil, coward shouldn't have as much effect. He hasn't been particularly cowardly in that regard, he's been loyally serving the Dark Lord for the best part of sixteen years and getting into a position to destroy Dumbledore. From the stance of a full-on Death Eater Snape, he should basically ignore "coward" or laugh at it and monologue on why he's not. Instead, he flares up and actually goes to hurt Harry. This fits with a good Snape, and I'll explain why next.

The Snape who killed Dumbledore was in no way the Snape we see when victorious. That guy is silky smooth, cool and calm and totally on the ball. The Snape we saw kill Dumbledore and we saw later after Harry called him a coward (actually, on the grounds most of the time), was the Snape we see when he's angry about something. We saw him in the Pensieve, getting Levicorpus used against him and embarassed in front of Lily (and having to be helped by her). He was exploding, pissed. The same Snape was present to catch Harry viewing the memory. This kind of seething, boiling Snape is what we when the man is upset and a bit off kilter, not really who we've seen when catching Harry doing something that'll get detention or generally make him happy. That guy's cool; the Snape killing Dumbledore was the angry one, not the guy who just pulled of the greatest deception in the history of the world.

Next, Snape didn't kill Flitwick. No reason not to. He didn't know Hermione and (Luna, right?) Luna were outside his office, and if he was truly a Death Eater and planning to lay waste to Hogwarts that night, why wouldn't he start with the unsuspecting and correspondingly more or less unprepared and unarmed Flitwick? Instead, he Stunned him and, upon being found by Hermione and Luna, he didn't do anything at all (notice, he did absolutely nothing to any student except Harry, and that was only after being called a coward a couple times). Doesn't follow for a hardcore evil Snape to not slay a single person in a battle where a few died or were maimed.

Then, there's the horribly convenient explanation in "Spinner's End". Perfect in every way, totally sets the reader up to look at every bit of everything Snape does as evil. It sets you up to be perfectly receptive to the idea that Snape has been playing a part the whole time (though, it leaves out one important bit of evidence I'll address next). It's actually decidedly clumsy (like the heavy-handed and unrealistic lesson in the pronunciation of "Serious" Black in "The Other Minister"). But, it's perfect to make you believe Snape is every bit as bad as he looks in the final chapters. It's perfect, far too perfect, far too set from the very beginning of the book and far too obvious for Rowling's writing style. There's clearly more to it, and I think it's that he's good.

Then, of course, the Department of Mysteries. Snape sent the Order to the Department of Mysteries. Why? One good reason will do. One person knew, Sirius, but he'd already taken off. Snape could've simply sat back, perfectly confident a full complement of Death Eaters could take on six kids and an Order member (which they could), but instead he decided to foil Voldemort's basically perfect plan to get the prophecy by sending in the Order. No benefit to his double agent position in the Order, clear debit to his master's goals. Doesn't make sense for an evil Snape. Evil Snape, he'd not say anything, Sirius, Harry, Ron, Hermione, Neville, Ginny, and Luna would die, and a horrible, tragic blow wouldn't been struck to the Order. But, no one would really suspect Snape did it, not at that point, with every possible witness exterminated. It's the clinching evidence, the giant red button that can't be explained for an evil Snape. It's actually all you need.

But, I'll give you one more. Dumbledore. He is a flawless judge of character. Not one genuine mistake all these years (as far as character judgment), and his one is this massive one, based off an excuse not one other teacher or Order member was willing to buy into? If not one of them were willing to believe it, how can anyone expect that Dumbledore truly believe it himself? Occlumency blocks Legilimency, it doesn't, near as my reading can tell, make someone believe you mean something that simple objective facts demonstrate as false (Snape's continuing hate of James, of Sirius, his later tormenting of Harry beyond what is really necessary, etc.). Sure, it's a bit easier for the characters in the book to, it's immediate, a fresh wound, and they lack the objective view us readers have. But, we see all the other stuff I mentioned. And this. All of that, all put together, the only rational conclusion is that Snape undeniably killed Dumbledore and that Snape is still quite good. Why did Snape kill Dumbledore, or rather, why did Dumbledore ask Snape to kill him? No clue, that's for book seven to explain. But it's fact that he did ask him to.

Oh, also, that forest conversation is the second one ever overheard by Hagrid. The first one, it was misinterpreted by Harry. It'd be a crime of overlooking parallels to assume Harry interpreted this one the right way.

As for why he became good, I think it's because he loved Lily. We know, that night in Godric's Hollow, that Voldemort gave Lily a chance to live. Not James, it seems, just Lily. But why?

The somewhat popular theories are sort of Vader-esque ones where Lily's a daughter or niece or whatever, but from what we know of Voldemort and what he thinks of the Riddle portion of the family (the only side that has any shot at producing Lily), it seems unlikely he'd be that fond of her, especially when she'd already "thrice defied" him and all. Also, it appears Voldemort essentially wiped out what was left of the Riddles, leaving at best distant relatives he'd have no knowledge of.

But, then, it's still vaguely conceivable he's her father. No. Apart from the way too Star Wars-y thing (he'd then be Harry's grandfather), it's just somewhat unlikely. He'd have needed to be with a Muggle at some time during which he was more concerned with beating his path to immortality. It seems an illogical tangent for him to take, shacking up with a Muggle woman and producing Lily (though, it's notable that there seems to be no significant similarities between Petunia and Lily, so this can't be completely ruled out). It would also cause issue with many of Harry's shared powers. They might not be a result of Godric's Hollow at all, but mere heredity. Overall, though, I don't think this path likely and see it as mostly impossible.

So we arrive at Snape. Snape's worst memory isn't, as a surface consideration would make one think, about being teased by James and Sirius. It's clear from that memory that it wasn't the first time and likely wouldn't be the last. The thing that appeared to be significantly different was Lily helping him and Snape lashing out at her quite horribly. It's not a very big leap to figure it's Snape's worst memory not because of what James and Sirius did to him, but because of what he did to Lily (or what he feels he did). It establishes a reasonable basis for a theory that he cares.

But, fast forward a few years, Snape's a Death Eater. Really, why not? The girl he loved took off with James Potter and the Half-Blood Prince proceeded to become the best of the best in the Dark Arts. Maybe to stick it to them, who knows? It's somewhat irrelevant. So Snape's working for Voldemort, and he somehow ends up listening to that door at the Hog's Head the night Trelawney had her prophecy.

Snape delivers the news to Voldemort, who proceeds to narrow down the target list. He discovers it's either the Longbottoms or the Potters. Dumbledore's theory of selection holds up well enough here, and how he decides on the Potters ultimately doesn't matter a lot anyway. He decides it's the Potters, and he sets out to deal with them.

But Snape, upon hearing who was about to bite the dust, realizes he's not a cold, heartless Death Eater after all. He loves Lily. But he also thinks he loves the Dark Arts. He's not a great person, Snape, so he doesn't really try and stop Voldemort. He just asks Voldemort to give Lily a chance, he might even crouch it in pretending he wants to torture her himself, no clue. But I think Snape asks Voldemort to spare her. It's the simplest explanation and requires fewer new plot elements (you couldn't get Voldemort is Lily's father into a book shorter than OotP, and 7's supposed to shorter, I hear), since large chunks of it would be potentially already set.

But, anyway, Lily doesn't take the chance Voldemort offers. He kills her. Now, Snape reall realizes he's not into this. He has a heart; it's not a great, stupendous heart, but it's there. No tears over James, and that's even understandable, but over Lily makes perfect sense. He realizes he's actually good, when you get down to it. And he goes to Dumbledore with this, begging for forgiveness and protection, swearing loyalty and everything, because it's true. And Dumbledore gives it.

Issues: Trelawney remembers Snape bursting in, suggesting the whole prophecy was heard by him. So why deliver just the one bit? There's no good scenario that doesn't have Dumbledore willingly signing away the lives of either the Potters or Longbottoms (since we know Snape delivers enough prophecy for it to be actionable), so I tend to chalk this up to a small continuity issue. Plus, Snape was caught, so his listening could've been interrupted only so far in, missing the rest of the prophecy, but bursting in only after Trelawney snapped out.

Another issue is Dumbledore during the trials the Pensieve flashes back to states Snape was spying before Voldemort's fall. But then it's revealed in HBP by Dumbledore again (though this time with evidence guaranteeing Snape couldn't have been working before) that he was still working with Voldemort. So any involvement with Dumbledore essentially must come at a minimum after Snape delivered the prophecy.

My ultimate stance is Snape is good and Dumbledore's good reason for trusting Snape is, really, no more than Snape's true love for Lily (and, just as importantly, a more than significant deficit of remorse over James; it's counterintuitive, but it's actually more genuine that way). It fits uncommonly well, much better than any other theory. Fewer assumptions dependent upon book seven revelations (which would be hard to fit in, given the suggest length), and it kind of just seems right to me.

To specifically address the question of this thread: What's the plan?, my guess is after Snape told Dumbledore, Dumbledore realized there was a chance his time was running short. I don't know that he exactly expected what happened to happen, but my guess is he knew it could and told Snape that in the case it did, he needed to kill him. Having an inside man with the Death Eaters to feed info was more important in Dumbledore's mind, I figure. Still, that may not be the reason. I do think, though, that Snape is good. It's just exactly why Dumbledore wanted Snape to kill him that's at question. I don't think there's a lot of real doubt that he did ask him to. /Extensive Defense of Snape, Who I Actually Do Dislike

Also, I find Harry's death unlikely for two reasons. First, the sheer bodycount of people who've died so Harry could live just makes it seem ridiculous he should die. Second, Rowling's dangled it way too often for me to buy that's really where she's going. She's never dropped plot points before, I find it unlikely she'd start with the biggest questions readers have. But it could be a red herring.

So, any thoughts on what "Deathly Hallows" means? After somebody posted this [url] http://tinyurl.com/y2p63v on another board (which apparently came from yet another one; scroll down to Hallows, by the way), I've become fairly certain Deathly Hallows is really just a synonym for the remaining Horcruxes, likely filter through Trelawney prophespeak. If "Hallows" can reference a sort of object, specifically a "sacred vessel", and you add on "Deathly"... There's at least a case that that's the intent. And it's also better than a lot of other interpretations focusing on taking All Hallow's Eve and pluralising it and stretching it into a reference to when the final confrontation will take place.

Anyway, that's my share of Harry Potter fanspew for the day. Enjoy.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 24, 2006 10:28 AM

LITTLEALBATROSS29

(and yes, I'm saying those who say Snape is evil haven't read the books)

I just have to say - that was so very insulting that I didn't even bother to read further.I've read the books at least 5 times and am entitled to my own opinion about Snape without being told I've never read them closely enough.

Bryce
***********************************

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 24, 2006 10:57 AM

RYAN786I

I would say it's been copy and pasted several times. That bit, I think, came from some board with, shall we say, more abrasive posters. Doesn't really belong there, but I actually had forgotten it was there in the first place. Apologies.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 24, 2006 12:47 PM

LITTLEALBATROSS29

No problem then, and certainly no hard feelings ! Happy holidays !

Bryce
*******************************

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 24, 2006 3:31 PM

MAGDALENA

"No power in the 'verse can stop me!"

I don't think Snape is truly evil though I think he would certainly struggles with his evil side... I believe there is a rage in him about his sense of morality - the juxtaposition is that Snape's early history was one of blind loyalty partly due to his anger at having been a half wizard in the first place and his anger at his father who was a muggle and didn't treat his mother well... then he sees someone like Harry's father who has the inate sense of cruelty that many teenagers have (please note tenns reading this, I said many... if you've ever been on the receiving end of their cruelty I think you'll agree) and to top it off the woman he adores, Lily Evans, pities him and ends up shunning him when he rejects her pity. This is almost the opposite of him as people still adore the Potters and keep mentioning what wonderful people they were - they were not evil, they were good and they gave their lives fighting Voldemort.

I wonder if Snape tried to save Lily (and James) when he found out Voldemort was going to kill them himself... I wonder if he did something to prove himself to Dumbldore and in so achieving that task Dumbledore hesitated to believe him when he came with the intelligence of what was about to happen (after all D believed that Sirius was the Potters secret keeper and he trusted him implicitly) so he set a task, and by the time the task was done and Snapes loyalty proven it was too late... but Harry survived... and Snape had to be reminded every time he saw Harry that he had taken his time to attempt to save the woman he loved...

Wow - this thread has an interesting effect on me!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I can put one foot in front of the other - I'm Magdalena, & I'm marching with the 76th" http://76thbattalion.homestead.com/index.html

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 12, 2007 7:38 PM

UNCOMPREHENDING

I would hope that Rowling is a deep enough writer that she gives Snape a reason for being perceivably evil. She's already got at least 2 purely bad characters (Voldemort and Lucius Malfoy). Snape is a subtle enough character that he needs a reason to do what he did (more than the raging jealousy we've been seeing over and over again).

I have to ask, though.... Deathly Hallows?!? WTF is a Deathly Hallow?

It's pretty obvious who RAB is, and I suspect that there will be either more on Sirius' background and family or perhaps Sirius himself will return, as he is the only character who gets killed off that we don't actually see die.

Man it takes a silly girl to lie about the dreams she has.
Lord it takes a lonely one to wish that she had never dreamed at all.
--Dashboard Confessional

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 12, 2007 11:09 PM

RHYIANAN

Quote:
She's never dropped plot points before, I find it unlikely she'd start with the biggest questions readers have. But it could be a red herring.

What exactly do you mean by this? Do you mean that the books have no predictablility, or do you mean that she's never left things out that were hinted at in previous books?

If you mean the former, than you are gravely mistaken. Many of the directions that she's taken have been easily predicted (such as relationships and which main characters will die). It all just takes careful reading.

I'll admit, there are a few things I didn't find myself, but right before book 5 came out, I had a conversation about the direction of the rest of the series (which means after book 4)with my high school lit teacher. She predicted most of what would happen relationship-wise (Harry/Ginny, Ron/Hermione, ect.) and also said Sirius, Dumbledore and Harry would end up dying by the end of the series.

She even backed up her reasons for why she thought that way. With the relationships, she cited the fact that Ron was absolutely obsessed with finding out how Hermione was getting to all her classes in book three (she added other examples as well, but I don't remember them). With Ginny/Harry, she said that Ginny would get over her crush and go to other guys and Harry would get jealous because he didn't have all her attention (I thought that was really weak, but hey, she seems to be right). For Sirius and Dumbledore, she said that Harry was an archetypual Orphan and that for it to conceptually work, all of his father figures would have to be taken out of the picture (yeah, I didn't get that one either, but once again, it worked out). Lastly, she said that Harry would have to die because of the way the scar bound him to Voldemort. She said that as long as the scar existed, Voldemort would never be able to truly die (remember, this is before we found out about the prophesy and horcruxes, but I think her reasoning is spot on once again).

And as for the person that said "why does she have to kill someone in every book since 4?" The answer is that Voldemort is back now. In the descriptions of the time when Voldemort dominated before, death and mayhem ensued. Voldemort is back and is recreating the last time when he had power. Expect death and dark times while Voldemort is alive. Another answer is that book 4 is when the true "war" against Voldemort started and we should expect casualties like in any war.

I'm a leaf on the wind

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER

POST DATE