Harry Potter [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

View Full Version : Harry Potter

Dumbledore lives

2006-12-05, 08:17 PM

I'm a huuuuuuuuuuge Harry Potter fan and I noticed there was no thread in Harry Potter in general. I might be wrong but if I am somebody will probalbly just lock the thread. I'd kinda like this to be a discussion and maybe periodically I'll come in with some new ones. Now I'd like to talk about the series in general, maybe late about specific things.

edit: I know J.K. Rowling said he's dead and even I think he is but he isn't. I know it doesn't make since

Bookman

2006-12-05, 09:28 PM

Well let's start with one thing

Actual spoiler for book 6

Dumbledore is dead.

Period. No way he's alive. JK has said he's dead.

This name of yours annoys me for some reason :wink:

Evil_Pacifist

2006-12-05, 09:31 PM

Quite right, oh Bookish One. Dead as dust.

The Vanishing Hitchhiker

2006-12-06, 04:30 AM

Dumbledore - the new Elvis!

2006-12-06, 05:31 AM

Except that Dumbledore really is dead. No question about it.

InaVegt

2006-12-06, 05:34 AM

I hate Harry Potter

The Vanishing Hitchhiker

2006-12-06, 05:53 AM

I hate Harry Potter

Every time you nest a spoiler box, god kills a kitten.

Dhavaer

2006-12-06, 06:15 AM

Every time you nest a spoiler box, god kills a kitten.

No, a kitten kills Superman (http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e100/Dhavaer/killsuperman6sr6su.jpg)

Aidan305

2006-12-06, 06:23 AM

Except that Dumbledore really is dead. No question about it.
Some would say that Elvis is really dead, no question about it, aswell.

But Rowling has confirmed many times that Dumbledore, though he will be playing a minor role in book seven, will no be coming back.

The Vanishing Hitchhiker

2006-12-06, 06:50 AM

Snape is dead. He was in a car crash, and he lost his hair.

Tharj TreeSmiter

2006-12-06, 03:38 PM

I really liked the first three movies, the fourth was ok. A few things bugged me first was that the movie played more like an action movie than the first three. That was ok since they had so much action stuff to get through but the biggest thing that really does bug me is the acting of Dumbledore. In the books he is always serene and in control, whereas the movie he's erratic and seems confused and fumbles and goes into a rage when harry's name comes out of the goblet. Not sure if it's the actor doing a poor job or the director totally ruining dumbledore's personality but it had better stop.

Dr._Weird

2006-12-06, 06:48 PM

It'll stop after the end of the 6th movie...

bosssmiley

2006-12-06, 06:53 PM

Why the spoiler boxes? Anyone who cares already knows what's happened, and anyone who doesn't care won't be bothered by whether a matter of complete indifference to them is spoiler boxed or not. :smallannoyed:

In other news: I'll be rooting for the kittens. :smallcool:

Sailacela

2006-12-06, 09:42 PM

Dumbledore Lives,

By what, specifically, do you base your conclusions? I've read the books and I tend to agree with the other posters' evaluations. I'm open to hearing alternate interpretations provided that they are backed up with something more than gut feeling. :smallwink:

McDeath

2006-12-06, 11:05 PM

For the love of Vietnamese soup, quit it with the spoiler tags and just put some on the thread title! Anyway, Dumbledore is dead. And the Harry Potter books ain't that great. They're very far from bad, but not the kind of thing we'll be studying in universities in twenty years.

Does anyone else here find Harry to be an incredibly annoying protagonist? But that's probably just my latent Evil genius coming out.

Shadow of the Sun

2006-12-06, 11:12 PM

Rich himself voiced my opinion of Harry Potter with the Larry Gardener comic. I read the books, mainly because they are better than some, but they are really eclipsed by other authors. I much prefer serious, mature books with an interesting, non stereotypical protagonist (Michael Moorcock's Elric series, as well as any of his other stories), or, silly, fun books that make fun of stereotypes while still getting a message across (Terry Pratchett. Any of his works)

Jerthanis

2006-12-06, 11:19 PM

I assume Dumbledore "lives" by continuing to affect his world. The same way Charles Xavier "died" in Age of Apocalypse, but because his presence was still felt, and his dream lived on he still "lived"...

In any case... Harry Potter. It's a good series that I've been reading since I was 10, and I'm 20 now. My mother was a librarian at the time and knew to order many copies of the book as soon as we read it, because we knew it was something special. Since book 4 I've stayed up until midnight to be one of the first to own a copy of the next book (and have steadily grown out of the average age of others doing the same)

My favorite book has to be the second one, because while it didn't have the best mystery or the most complicated plot, and the characters still had no idea which end of the wand shot the magic out as far as what they were capable of doing, it didn't have the worst mystery either and there was a fantastic climax and falling action. Book 4 gets props for its amazing mystery, but points get taken away for the painfully juvinile Yule Ball (not that it wasn't accurate to how the characters at that age would act, but it was still painful to read)

I was actually somewhat disappointed with the 6th book, feeling like it was too much of bridging the gap between book 5 and book 7. There was exposition, but little of it went anywhere. What little was actually learned was more about learning what Harry needed to do in the 7th book, meaning it was almost entirely transition. It almost felt like J.K. Rowling had a list of several things she knew she needed to have done before the 7th book started, and a couple of them fit sideways into book 6 with a little effort. For example, I was rooting for Ginny to pair up with Harry since book 2, but there had been very little setup for that, and the way it actually transpired seemed a little tacked on. Especially considering the way the book ended. "Harry, your superpower is that you can have friends, which is your only advantage over Voldemort." Harry: "Sweet, okay Ginny, we have to break up because I don't want you to be in danger." Ginny: "Nuh-uh" Harry: "Yeah-huh." Ginny: "Damn, okay." Hermione/Ron: "We're coming with, no matter what you say." Harry: "Nuh-uh." Hermione/Ron: "Yeah-Huh" Harry: "Damn, okay."

I still have hope that book 7 will be a thoroughly exciting conclusion to a brilliant epic.

Turcano

2006-12-07, 12:35 AM

edit: I know J.K. Rowling said he's dead and even I think he is but he isn't. I know it doesn't make since

No no no, you've got it all messed up. It's supposed to be "Harry Potter Lives" and "Dumbledore for President."

(Somebody please get that. I don't want to feel old.)

Wizzardman

2006-12-07, 01:00 AM

Does anyone else here find Harry to be an incredibly annoying protagonist? But that's probably just my latent Evil genius coming out.

Yeah, actually, I can definately agree with that. He seemed like a decently enjoyable protagonist in the first few books, but as the books have gotten darker, he's just gotten more and more... angsty. To the point of taking on a kinda annoying 'chosen one' shtick.

Which bothers me, because I thought the books were pretty good up until book 5, but after that, I've just kinda gotten tired of Harry himself. He jumps to conclusions too much, he thinks on his emotions, he has incredibly little empathy, and he's always whining about something. I'll admit, I was angsty in high school, but... well, dang.

Also, I think that Neville Longbottom has spent far too much time at the bottom of the heap. He's one of the only characters I can still relate to--he doesn't have any natural talent at anything but Botany, and yet he tries hard regardless of natural weaknesses. And what does he get for all his efforts? Nothing! Whereas Harry gets everything by a birthrite that, but for a flip of a coin, could have been Neville's. So Harry gets everything from his tragedy, but Neville's tragedy is an albatross hanging from his neck. Doesn't seem fair, does it?

Personally, and despite whatever JK Rowling says, I think that if she wanted to preserve the everybody-has-a-chance ideal that came from her first book [where the picked-on Harry turns out to have real potential], then Neville should be the one who kills Voldemort.

...With a shotgun. :smallbiggrin:

Indurain

2006-12-07, 01:30 AM

Also, I think that Neville Longbottom has spent far too much time at the bottom of the heap. He's one of the only characters I can still relate to--he doesn't have any natural talent at anything but Botany, and yet he tries hard regardless of natural weaknesses. And what does he get for all his efforts? Nothing! Whereas Harry gets everything by a birthrite that, but for a flip of a coin, could have been Neville's. So Harry gets everything from his tragedy, but Neville's tragedy is an albatross hanging from his neck. Doesn't seem fair, does it?

Mr. Longbottom will serve a great role in Book 7, don't you worry. It's HIS time to shine...I hope!!

"Harry, your superpower is that you can have friends, which is your only advantage over Voldemort." Harry: "Sweet, okay Ginny, we have to break up because I don't want you to be in danger." Ginny: "Nuh-uh" Harry: "Yeah-huh." Ginny: "Damn, okay." Hermione/Ron: "We're coming with, no matter what you say." Harry: "Nuh-uh." Hermione/Ron: "Yeah-Huh" Harry: "Damn, okay."

Wow...that really sums it up there. Well done!! And I generally agree with your points on book 6, though I never realised it until reading your post. Now I'll just have to go back to having GoF be my favourite again.

I really liked the first three movies, the fourth was ok. A few things bugged me first was that the movie played more like an action movie than the first three. That was ok since they had so much action stuff to get through but the biggest thing that really does bug me is the acting of Dumbledore. In the books he is always serene and in control, whereas the movie he's erratic and seems confused and fumbles and goes into a rage when harry's name comes out of the goblet. Not sure if it's the actor doing a poor job or the director totally ruining dumbledore's personality but it had better stop.

In the books, Dumbledore generally is erratic, and confused, and fumbles...but with purpose. He's a funny character, and was in the first two...sadly, Richard Harris passed on. To be replaced by Michael Gambon, who openly admits, he's never read the books, and doesn't plan to. So, his perception of Dumbledore is quite...skewed, shall we say?

No, a kitten kills Superman (http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e100/Dhavaer/killsuperman6sr6su.jpg)

BRILLIANT!!

That is all.

Bookman

2006-12-07, 01:34 AM

I liked Book 6.

Mostly cause of the nifty back story and etc. It appeased the nerd dom in me.......especially with there not being the whole "Big battle" at the end.

That's just me

The Vanishing Hitchhiker

2006-12-07, 02:31 AM

In the books, my favorite character is probably Lupin, mostly because I just plain like werewolves (this is all your fault, Scott Cohen (http://imdb.com/title/tt0207275/) and Sean Pertwee (http://imdb.com/title/tt0280609/)). But in the movies...gaah, that eyebrow-pencil moustache...
So in the movies, my favorite character is instead...Dudley Dursley. Let's think about this, shall we? The kid who plays Dudley is the only one who doesn't get to run around the pretty shiny wizarding school set, interacting with special effects that will be green-screened in later. He gets to sit around in a fatsuit for a few minutes of footage that may not even make it in the film (Goblet of Fire, I think, had no Dursleys in it whatsoever). And unlike the guys who play Harry or Draco, this is not exactly a role that will get the ladies all up ons. So yeah. Rock on, man, rock on.

I also have an annoying habit of rooting for those who are not the main character, but that's neither here nor there.

Dumbledore lives

2006-12-07, 08:33 AM

Okay it's been a good discussion but I'd like to talk about something that is very interesting. The department of Mysteries.

Stop talking about my name and Talk about Harry Potter!

Bookman

2006-12-07, 12:03 PM

Okay it's been a good discussion but I'd like to talk about something that is very interesting. The department of Mysteries.

Stop talking about my name and Talk about Harry Potter!

But but........your name is about Harry Potter :tongue:

And if you wish to start a discussion then choose to specify what you want to talk and begin discussing :wink: You can't say you'dlike to talk about something and then expect us to do it. We have to be led by the nose. :wink:

Now anyone be having the think that I think that Harry WON'T be going back to Hogwarts?

And in regards to ^'s sig how exactly do you mean Dumbledor isn't properly dead? He was a) hit by a curse and b) thrown of a 50 story building (or so).

Wizzardman

2006-12-07, 02:06 PM

But but........your name is about Harry Potter :tongue:

And if you wish to start a discussion then choose to specify what you want to talk and begin discussing :wink: You can't say you'dlike to talk about something and then expect us to do it. We have to be led by the nose. :wink:

Now anyone be having the think that I think that Harry WON'T be going back to Hogwarts?

And in regards to ^'s sig how exactly do you mean Dumbledor isn't properly dead? He was a) hit by a curse and b) thrown of a 50 story building (or so).

Well, Harry himself said he's not going back to Hogwarts this next year. I'm not sure I believe him [we all know how well he's done with the "not going back to the Dursley's/leaving the Dursleys forever" promise], but that's what he said, at least.

Jerthanis

2006-12-07, 09:20 PM

I liked Book 6.

Mostly cause of the nifty back story and etc. It appeased the nerd dom in me.......especially with there not being the whole "Big battle" at the end.

That's just me

I thought there was a big battle at the end... I mean, Dumbledore and Harry went into that cave where Dumbledore did everything. Then zombies occurred, and Dumbledore busted out with the shotgun... I mean, Wall of fire while Harry sat in the boat being as useful as a log. Then they went back to Hogwarts and traded curses with death eaters for a while... that was kind of like a big battle. The fact that Harry didn't do anything the whole time, or the fact that it was kinda boring might have made you think there was no big battle, but I'm almost sure I read a big battle at the end of book 6.

Now anyone be having the think that I think that Harry WON'T be going back to Hogwarts?

Well, here's my image of the ideal book 7: Harry grows stubble and rides around on a motorcycle, getting in barfights with dark wizards, beating info out of them as he slowly makes his way to the identity of... that guy who taunted Voldemort about stealing one of the thingies... phylactaries? (I'm big on details apparently) And makes his way around blowing up phylactaries and beating up more dark wizards. End with a climactic fight scene where Harry finally gets to be a badass... or Neville with a shotgun, but I don't want to get greedy. That'd be too awesome for words.

So I certainly HOPE Harry doesn't actually go back to Hogwarts.

magicmandy

2006-12-07, 11:14 PM

There really isn't a purpose to him going back to Hogwarts. It's TCB time B-)

Wizzardman

2006-12-08, 12:09 AM

Then zombies occurred, and Dumbledore busted out with the shotgun...

One of the things that will always bug me about Harry Potter is the whole "muggles are useless" scenario.

I know the books are focused on an escapist fantasy into the magical Hogwarts world, and about being different from everyone else, and how people without imagination are Hollow Men, but... I think the series would be horribly entertaining with the addition of one effect Muggle character. I know it would ruin a lot of the point Rowling is trying to present us with, but it would be so much... fun to give some of the more 'muggles are stupid' characters in Harry Potter a nice, pro-Muggle shock.

Think about it. The Death Eaters are running around throwing zombies at people, for crying out loud. If there's one thing we Muggles can deal with, its zombies. Especially ones that are afraid of fire. And I'm sorry, but the ability to kill thirteen people with one curse is insignificant next to the power of the for---[cough cough] modern technology. You got giants? Great. We've got rocket launchers. You've got a killing curse? We've got nukes. You've got wands? Great. Go watch Potter Puppet Pals. See how far wands will get you. You've got dementors? Great. We've got television. Let's see whose soul rots first.

Shadow of the Sun

2006-12-08, 12:27 AM

Genetically engineer a virus that feeds on magic- kill all magical creatures, become a Marvel ripoff, JK! You know you want to!

Eldritch Knight

2006-12-08, 12:31 AM

Think about it. The Death Eaters are running around throwing zombies at people, for crying out loud. If there's one thing we Muggles can deal with, its zombies. Especially ones that are afraid of fire. And I'm sorry, but the ability to kill thirteen people with one curse is insignificant next to the power of the for---[cough cough] modern technology. You got giants? Great. We've got rocket launchers. You've got a killing curse? We've got nukes. You've got wands? Great. Go watch Potter Puppet Pals. See how far wands will get you. You've got dementors? Great. We've got television. Let's see whose soul rots first.

:biggrin: Brilliant!

jmucchiello

2006-12-08, 02:02 AM

By what, specifically, do you base your conclusions? I've read the books and I tend to agree with the other posters' evaluations. I'm open to hearing alternate interpretations provided that they are backed up with something more than gut feeling. :smallwink:My only problem with Dumbledore really being dead is it screws up all the foreshadowing. Dumbledore has a phoenix for a sidekick. It would not surprise me to find out his wand also contains a phoenix feather: just like Vold's and Harry's wands do. Especially since V has come back from death and Harry survived a deadly curse.

Additionally, D ordered Snape to rejoin the Death Eaters. I can conceive a spell that bends the curse used to kill D such that witnesses think a deadly curse was cast but the target still lives. Can such a spell be created in Rowling's universe? I don't know.

It's funny but when I think about the ending to book 6 I can "see" Michael Gambon as D winking just before the camera cuts to Rickman blasting him. I know this isn't supported by the text but when I read the stories I see the actors. Not sure if this is good or bad since I add nuances that aren't there when it's me as director.

Turcano

2006-12-08, 02:06 AM

Well, here's my image of the ideal book 7: Harry grows stubble and rides around on a motorcycle, getting in barfights with dark wizards, beating info out of them as he slowly makes his way to the identity of... that guy who taunted Voldemort about stealing one of the thingies... phylactaries? (I'm big on details apparently) And makes his way around blowing up phylactaries and beating up more dark wizards. End with a climactic fight scene where Harry finally gets to be a badass... or Neville with a shotgun, but I don't want to get greedy. That'd be too awesome for words.

Come on. There's no reason why Harry and Neville can't both shoot him with a shotgun. There's plenty of Voldemort to go around. Or until the double-shotgunning, at least.

Wizzardman

2006-12-08, 03:13 AM

Come on. There's no reason why Harry and Neville can't both shoot him with a shotgun. There's plenty of Voldemort to go around. Or until the double-shotgunning, at least.

...And then Abraham Lincoln gets him with a machete....

Sorry, lapsed into the Ultimate Showdown for a second there.

Although I don't see why they all can't start shooting him. I, personally, can definately see an enraged Hermione Granger shooting Voldemort with a Light Antitank Rocket.

Manga Shoggoth

2006-12-08, 04:49 AM

When reading the most recent book, I came up with a method for Dumbledore to survive, based on information given in the books.

Simply put:

- Rowling had made a point in the book of describing how spells could be cast silently, in other words without the mock-latin phrases.
- Snape is under a magically-enforced oath to aid Malfoy.

So - in the fight scene - the following happens.

1. Snape uses a simple dueling curse on Dumbledore to blow him out of the window - the fall is (without some form of magical contingency) fatal, this fullfiling the terms of the oath. This is cast without the trigger phrase, as described above.

2. When doing a silent cast of the above, he says the trigger phrase for the killing curse. Note that in all the other occasions that the killing curse is used, the target drops dead. They are not blown across the room.

3. Dumbledore can then use some form of magical contingency to survive the fall, leaving something transformed into a copy of his body at the bottom of the tower.

Alas, Rowling then came up with the "Dumbledore is Dead" phrase.

Not a prediction, but I thought a really good end for Voldemort would be...
that he attempts to attack Harry's family, and Dursley uses his 12-bore (the one that was completely useless when used against Hagrid in the first book), and blows him away from behind.

This then gives him and his family hero status in the magical community, which is of course the very last thing they want...

I really don't know where Rowling is going to take the last book, but I am looking forward to it.

Wizzardman

2006-12-08, 01:55 PM

When reading the most recent book, I came up with a method for Dumbledore to survive, based on information given in the books.

Simply put:

- Rowling had made a point in the book of describing how spells could be cast silently, in other words without the mock-latin phrases.
- Snape is under a magically-enforced oath to aid Malfoy.

So - in the fight scene - the following happens.

1. Snape uses a simple dueling curse on Dumbledore to blow him out of the window - the fall is (without some form of magical contingency) fatal, this fullfiling the terms of the oath. This is cast without the trigger phrase, as described above.

2. When doing a silent cast of the above, he says the trigger phrase for the killing curse. Note that in all the other occasions that the killing curse is used, the target drops dead. They are not blown across the room.

3. Dumbledore can then use some form of magical contingency to survive the fall, leaving something transformed into a copy of his body at the bottom of the tower.

...Actually, last time someone got hit with the killing curse [Cedric Diggory] he did kinda get blasted back a few feet.

Blasting someone backwards is generally what Rowling does to make the spell look more powerful. At least, that's what I've assumed, given the whole Expelliarmus shtick blasting people back occasionally, and at least one standard curse knocking someone backwards.

Pensive Pine

2006-12-08, 03:32 PM

Something that's been bugging me lately, not relating to any specific book, but I can't help but think there are probably muggle-born wizards that prefer their muggle life. I mean, where are the muggle-borns who hate writing with quills, or get frustrated because their wizard friends don't get it when they talk about their favorite TV shows and movies? And hate leaving their Gameboy DSes and PSPs at home when they go to Hogwarts? The ones whose friends look at them funny because they're listening to Panic! at the Disco instead of The Weird Sisters?

Manga Shoggoth

2006-12-08, 04:10 PM

...Actually, last time someone got hit with the killing curse [Cedric Diggory] he did kinda get blasted back a few feet.

Blasting someone backwards is generally what Rowling does to make the spell look more powerful. At least, that's what I've assumed, given the whole Expelliarmus shtick blasting people back occasionally, and at least one standard curse knocking someone backwards.

In the film, possibly. It wouldn't look good on screen if Cedric just dropped dead. I don't have a DVD of the film yet, so I can't check that.

In the book the description is a lot more sparse - Harry and Cedric appear in the graveyard together, and Cedric is hit with the curse. He is still described as being next to Harry.

(I hiked across the house to get the book and check this - sad or what?)

However, the point is moot. Rowling has stated that Dumbledore is dead, and unless she is playing games then we have to assume that he is.

Logos7

2006-12-08, 04:28 PM

THeir's a fricken bowl of grey pea soup fill of his memmories? For all intensive parts of the story he's as their as anyother time he was their. For all we know their's a hidden painting being powered by the bowl, so their is someone that looks, talks, and acts like the Big D without D being alive (And no black magic involved ) Ghosts are another possibility, as are any of the silly things in the harry potter books

Dead means squate with magic.

I'm still rooting for neville and a fricken elephant hunting gun!

Logos

magicmandy

2006-12-08, 05:46 PM

Wizzardman

2006-12-09, 04:57 AM

ok...for all those that are still in denial about dumbledore being dead....what about him inhabiting his portrait in the headmasters office? He wasn't there before...and now he is. That HAS to lend some credibility to the fact that he is finished, dead, finito, not amongst us anymore, doing the jiggy with the zombies.

As much as we want them to continue, sometimes it's better just to let a dead subject stay DEAD...

Actually, this brings up a good point. Just because he's dead doesn't mean he has no effect on the world.

As for muggle-borns complaining about the Wizarding world, I seem to recall at least one of them being annoyed about the fact that no one in the Wizarding world plays soccer.

Bookman

2006-12-09, 01:10 PM

Actually, this brings up a good point. Just because he's dead doesn't mean he has no effect on the world.

As for muggle-borns complaining about the Wizarding world, I seem to recall at least one of them being annoyed about the fact that no one in the Wizarding world plays soccer.
And Jo has even said something along this extent. :biggrin:

And as for Muggleborns I'd say (this may sound bizzare I came up with this theory late last night in bed sometime) To be a wizard you have to have a certain extent of imagination and wonderment(IIRC). You AREN'T normal. You may be saying "Well Hermione isn't creative". Well she reads..........alot. That leads to an active mind.

I think that's where my mind was leading.......it was a long while ago.

The Vanishing Hitchhiker

2006-12-09, 06:56 PM

ok...for all those that are still in denial about dumbledore being dead....what about him inhabiting his portrait in the headmasters office? He wasn't there before...and now he is. That HAS to lend some credibility to the fact that he is finished, dead, finito, not amongst us anymore, doing the jiggy with the zombies.

Well, I believe the book says those paintings are put up by someone. They don't just magically appear, do they? Anyway, even that argument wouldn't work, since the portrait's been asleep since it was hung, which suggests some sort of trickery.
Anyway...zombie jiggy? Ew. Whatever happened to good ol' fashioned pinin' for the fjords?

Wizzardman

2006-12-09, 07:58 PM

Well, I believe the book says those paintings are put up by someone. They don't just magically appear, do they? Anyway, even that argument wouldn't work, since the portrait's been asleep since it was hung, which suggests some sort of trickery.
Anyway...zombie jiggy? Ew. Whatever happened to good ol' fashioned pinin' for the fjords?
Well, yeah, it was asleep the whole time since it came back. We only saw it for three seconds. And I think Rowling didn't want the portrait of Dumbledore providing comfort to Harry--it would ruin his already horribly angsty mood. :smallwink:

nifty>>virago<<

2006-12-10, 11:23 AM

so wait... people are actually still arguing about whether or not Dumbledore's really dead? that's utter insanity! not only did Harry see Dumbledore get hit with Avada Kedvadra but they watched the body be burned and then encased in the casket/tomb!!

"Then several people screamed. Bright, white flames had erupted around Dumbledore's body and the table upon which it lay. Higher and higher they rose, obscuring the body. White smoke spiraled into the air and made strange shapes: Harry thought, for one heart-stopping moment, that he saw a phoenix fly joyfully into the blue, but next second the fire had vanished. In its place was a white marble tomb, encasing Dumbledore's body and the table on which he had rested."

Also if he was still alive then why was Fawkes mourning him? and if that was the case couldn't we expect him to stay around since he was loyal only to Dumbledore?

Now the fact of Sirius being truly dead is in fact quite debate worthy. He never technically died, he fell through the tapestry and never came back out. We know nothing about the magical qualities of said tapestry so he could potentially return. I personally would love him to return but JK would have to explain it carefully, too short an explanation could disappoint readers.

But as much pain as it caused Harry to lose Dumbledore and Sirius isn't it really for the best? Knowing that he would eventually have to kill Voldemort or be killed by him, wouldn't getting too close to someone put them in immediate danger? Anger towards Voldemort also gives Harry more reason to kill him.
JK also said more people would die by the end of the series and personally I think it will more than likely be either Ron, Hermione, or Ginny. Or perhaps he will kill a member of the rest of Harry's only living family; Petunia, Vernon, or Dudley. Harry might not of ever felt loved by them but family is family.

As for the second discussion- the Department of Mysteries is supposed to remain just that, a mystery.

Dragonrider

2007-01-01, 01:51 AM

It seems to me that what she's doing is she's making it so that Harry has to shoulder responsibility. Despite everything he's done, there's always another person, a higher authority if you will, to pull him out--Dumbledore.

Assume Snape is good. I re-read the book recently, and I think that in the very first chapter, when Snape makes the Unbreakable Vow, he's trying to bluff Narcissa and Bellatrix into telling him what Malfoy's supposed to do--he doesn't actually know what he's swearing to do. Presumably he finds out at some point, and goes to Dumbledore--bringing in the argument Hagrid overheard between the two in the forest. Snape is tired of the charade.

Throughout the book, Dumbledore is preparing Harry to take over--like he knows that this is coming. Being Dumbledore, that doesn't surprise me. When he is pleading with Snape at the end I think he's telling him do it, you have to do it, not don't kill me.

I think he's got to be dead, JK Rowling's comments aside. Harry saw him, and fixed his glasses, knew he was dead. And they burned his body. Even in Harry Potter, you can't come back from the dead. The portrait, on the other hand (if the others in the office are any indication), seems to still exist to give advice.

GOD, SPEED UP TIME SO THAT I CAN READ THE 7TH BOOK! I BEG YOU!
=D
I can't wait to find out....just please, Jo, we beg, don't kill Harry! It would make an exciting end, but to come all that way only to find that he dies??? DON'T DO IT TO ME!

averagejoe

2007-01-03, 08:10 PM

You know what irritated me most about those angsty/emo bits of Harry that everyone's always whining about? They totally wouldn't have happened if Harry had just watched the Star Wars trilogy. Seriously, when reading the sixth book was anyone else thinking, "Harry! Don't give in to hate. That leads to the dark side!"

I have this dream where, in the seventh book, Ron and Harry are killed off in the first or second chapter (not Hermione, obviously, 'cause she's the smart, cautious one who's the only invaluable member of the trio, prophecies aside), and so Neville and Luna team up with that mysterious guy who left his initials in the fake hoaurcrux and have zany adventures all over the wizarding underworld, fumbling the whole way but making it through with pluck, valor, and general goodness. You know, completely opposite to now where it's always won by smarts and talent, even though Harry has the strength of character of a three year old.

Wizzardman

2007-01-04, 12:19 PM

Tharj TreeSmiter

2007-01-04, 01:23 PM

Ok who didn't know that dumbledore was going to die in the 6th book. I almost expected it in the 5th book.

In all the books she's been setting up that it's Voldie vs Harry but Dumbly's there to protect Harry hmmm so what would make the most dramatic ending, if his protector died... and so it happens.

All that said I like the books and am looking forward to reading it.

I've shared my theory of book 7 in the spoiler below

Harry Potter is one of the horcruxes. That would explain thier psychic link, his parsel tongue, and the wands. You make a horcrux when you murder someone and that's what he was planning on doing with harry. When he murdered his mother harry became a horcrux. So this means that to defeat voldie harry must die too, which would be the best ending (IMO) but it may turn out that "love" will break the horcrux and allow harry to survive.

nifty>>virago<<

2007-01-04, 06:48 PM

I don't think Harry is a horocrux... Voldemort wanted to use Harry's death as one not his mothers because he choose him as the boy in the prophecy... I don't know how long it would take but I doubt Voldemort had time to use Lily's death as one once he found out that he couldn't kill Harry

also I believe the initials on the note inside the fake horocrux stand for Regulus A. Black-- Sirius' brother that was killed by Voldemort

Tharj TreeSmiter

2007-01-04, 07:15 PM

Shadow of the Sun

2007-01-04, 10:13 PM

Since when has that meant anything? Do not put it past her to lye to waylay suspicion.

Pensive Pine

2007-01-04, 11:09 PM

That's true. I seem to recall there being a prominent poll on who would die in the 6th book while she was still working on it. Dumbledore was winning in a landslide, so JK personally said that Dumbledore was not going to die. It was on the news and everything. And yet, what happened? You know the answer.

Jewel Thief

2007-01-05, 12:48 AM

Harry Potter being a horcrux kind of works - the connection between him and Voldemort can then be explained a little better.

AmoDman

2007-01-05, 05:07 AM

i don't think he did it on purpose, I think he inteded to do it for harry death and either through the murder of his mother or the killing of his own body he made harry a horcrux. I'd be very surprised if he weren't since that's the best way to explain all the connections between them.

@^ and I'm pretty sure she has confirmed that RAB is not regulus A. black.

I actually thought Harry must be a horcrux immediately as well, but when you break it down the number of horcruxes doesn't seem to fit. We have the book, the ring, the snake, the locket (all confirmed), the cup of Hufflepuff Voldie was interested in as a strong possibility, and then an item from Gryffindor (though unlikely, as they are all accounted for) or an item from Ravenclaw. So either Voldemort perhaps had not made one of these items a horcrux yet and thus used Harry as emergency horcrux when the "accident" happened (to support the theory in one way), or Harry was an un-intentional 7th horcux (this seems very unlikely, as I doubt the "power of love" would've made that happen un-intentionally). That, or he's just not a horcrux. Voldemort has been trying to kill him, mind you. Doesn't seem like he'd do that to something that was holding him to this world, unless he just wanted that piece of his soul back.

As for RAB, if you look on Wikipedia Regulas Black has some extremely strong evidence. At least, the foreign translation evidence is enough to convince me that it's probably him, or at least someone from the house of Black. Because, straight from the Wiki entry -

In several foreign-language versions of the series, the surname Black has been translated into the respective language to carry the same meaning (that is, the colour black). In those cases, the 'B' in R.A.B. has been changed accordingly. For example, the Dutch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_language) edition uses the initials R.A.Z. in the locket note, and the Black family name is Zwarts. In the Norwegian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_language) edition, the note has R.A.S. (corresponding to the Svaart family), and the Finnish (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_language) edition has the letters R.A.M., (corresponding to the Musta family). In other editions where the Black family name is not translated to the local language, the initials remain "R.A.B.". For example, the Spanish translation keeps the family name as "Black", rather than translating it to the Spanish word for black ("negro"), and the initials remain "R.A.B.".
The fact that the initials R.A.B. correspond to the Black family name consistently across various language editions gives fair support to Regulus Black being R.A.B., or at least it supports a member of the Black family. There are, of course, other Black family members that could fit the identity of R.A.B. For example, Nymphadora Tonks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nymphadora_Tonks)'s mother Andromeda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andromeda_Tonks), whose maiden name was Black, and whose given name is uncertain; he also had an uncle named Alphard Black (whose name was stricken from the Black Family Tree (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_family_tree_%28Harry_Potter%29) for giving support to the disowned Sirius Black (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirius_Black)). R.A.B. could therefore stand for R. Andromeda Black or R. Alphard Black.

I think that's rather convincing evidence.

Now as for the "Dumbledore is dead" debate, I, too, am convinced he must be dead. Rowling has said it time and again. That, and I think it'd be a shame if he wasn't. As was mentioned earlier, Sirius never properl died, but what bothered me more about his death was the atrocious way it was written. It literally irks me to read those passages because they're so shaky and forced, not to mention the whole thing was unnecessary. Simply drama for drama's sake IMO, and, of course, everyone seemed to give up on him fairly quickly (that we saw). You'd think Dumbledore would be insisting results on the research of that veil asap.

But Dumbledore's death...fantastic. Written flawlessly, even if it was almost a repeat of the near exact situation that Harry experienced with Sirius (staring helplessly onward as it happened), but it was done right that time. Definite amount of believable feeling from all characters involved, and I do not believe this namby pamby nonesense about how, "oh, Snape didn't want to do it, he still could be good!" Pish on that, fact of the matter is he did do it. That's a death sentence for him right there in the proper form of justice, unless he can redeem himself.

However, the detail geek in me still feels the need to go back to the earlier quoted passage (to show that Dumbledore is indeed dead) to show the one thing that, in a world where he wasn't dead for good, could be the case and foreshadowing. The passage -

"Then several people screamed. Bright, white flames had erupted around Dumbledore's body and the table upon which it lay. Higher and higher they rose, obscuring the body. White smoke spiraled into the air and made strange shapes: Harry thought, for one heart-stopping moment, that he saw a phoenix fly joyfully into the blue, but next second the fire had vanished. In its place was a white marble tomb, encasing Dumbledore's body and the table on which he had rested."

Notice the bolded part. Did we ever get solid confirmation, besides what the characters thought, that that particular phoenix was Fawkes? It seems to me, as was mentione earlier, that a guy who keeps a phoenix as a sidekick might have more relation to phoenixes that we know of. That, or perhaps later from the ashes themselves, could've been a rebirth of Dumbledore...if one was attempting to grasp at straws. I do not believe it, but it is there.

purple gelatinous cube o' Doom

2007-01-05, 07:11 PM

First off, all the spolier boxes are really annoying and childish. Second, the title of the final book has just been released. It's Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

averagejoe

2007-01-05, 07:17 PM

Hmmm. I hope there isn't any more death in that book.

purple gelatinous cube o' Doom

2007-01-05, 07:21 PM

actually, J.K. Rowling said a while back that starting with Order of the Phoenix, that there would be one death per book. So Expect that someone will die in the last one.

Bookman

2007-01-05, 07:22 PM

actually, J.K. Rowling said a while back that starting with Order of the Phoenix, that there would be one death per book. So Expect that someone will die in the last one.

I'm thinking multiple people.

It is a sorta war type thing

ClericofPhwarrr

2007-01-05, 11:43 PM

I'm thinking multiple people.

It is a sorta war type thing

Everyone will die.

You know it's true.:smallwink:

J_Muller

2007-01-06, 01:27 AM

That, or someone finally gets their s*** together and just pops a cap in Voldemort's face with a good ol' .45.

Seriously, how inadequate is he when faced with modern arms? Sure, he can kill people by talking. A competent sniper could put a .50 BMG round between his eyes from 5000 feet, and he'd be dead before he finished saying "Avada Kedavra." And if that fails, there's always high explosives to fall back on. Tell him Harry's in a house, and the arrogant b******d will walk right in so you can blow it all to kingdom come with a thermobaric warhead. In an all-out war, humans win hands-down. I wonder how much wizards can do against a tank? I know a tank could do a lot against wizards.

But I've never read book 6, so maybe there's some secret thingy there that prevents Voldemort's death by normal means. It's really the only way Rowling could explain the fact that nobody ever thinks to just pull a gun and kill him right there.

Gralamin

2007-01-06, 02:54 AM

I believe that R.A.B Was confirmed before to be Regulus Black. This also Gives us a location for the locket.

a heavy locket none of them could open;

Order of the Phoenix, Page 108

Also an interesting note is that Regulus Died

'Regulus Black'. A Date of death (some fifteen year previously)...

Order of the Phoenix, page 104
Notice that Harry is 15.
[hr]
Also I too want to believe in Dumbledore living. Proof that he is dead that has been thrown around includes a sleeping portrait of him. I ask you one question. How do we know this is just a Portrait, used to help make it appear he's dead. Do we know how portraits that can move and make sounds are made? We know a portrait can move for sure (even in the first book, with the Dumbledore card), and I do not believe I remember it talking. And even if we did, its a pretty large jump of logic to say "All the other Hogwarts masters on the wall are dead, Dumbledore's on the wall, he must be dead." How do we know they are all dead? How do we know they just aren't put up when a headmaster leaves?
And other portraits in the castle talk. Does that mean whoever they where modeled after is dead? No. It's just another enchantment to make them more realistic.

WarriorTribble

2007-01-06, 05:00 AM

TBut I've never read book 6, so maybe there's some secret thingy there that prevents Voldemort's death by normal means. It's really the only way Rowling could explain the fact that nobody ever thinks to just pull a gun and kill him right there.He used a method of splitting his soul to prevent death, so conventional methods wouldn't work. Still doesn't explain why no one tried it though... I mean there are limits to technological ignorance.

In other news, I found it rather odd that memory altering charms aren't considered borderline unforgivable curses. We are the sum of our memories. Alter, or erase that, and you're basically modifying a person's as though they're little more than an inconvenience machine. It's an absolutely immoral practice.

To make matter even worse, while mind altering is bad if done to other wizards, it's perfectly fine to play around with muggle minds. The downright superiority complex the magic world (not even Harry & co. complain about this) has for mundanes is disgusting.

Bookman

2007-01-06, 08:57 AM

I believe that R.A.B Was confirmed before to be Regulus Black. This also Gives us a location for the locket.

Also an interesting note is that Regulus Died

Notice that Harry is 15.

It has never been offically confirmed. Merely heavily speculated.........like most things.

Also I too want to believe in Dumbledore living. Proof that he is dead that has been thrown around includes a sleeping portrait of him. I ask you one question. How do we know this is just a Portrait, used to help make it appear he's dead. Do we know how portraits that can move and make sounds are made? We know a portrait can move for sure (even in the first book, with the Dumbledore card), and I do not believe I remember it talking. And even if we did, its a pretty large jump of logic to say "All the other Hogwarts masters on the wall are dead, Dumbledore's on the wall, he must be dead." How do we know they are all dead? How do we know they just aren't put up when a headmaster leaves?
And other portraits in the castle talk. Does that mean whoever they where modeled after is dead? No. It's just another enchantment to make them more realistic.

And you can WANT him to be living but JK has said SPECIFICALLY that he is DEAD. But also I believe she has said thata he will probably communicate in some other form.

(I believe that's what was said)

So you have the option of a) he's a ghost, b) his portrait will talk or c) something brand spanking new

Don Beegles

2007-01-06, 04:33 PM

I'm reminded of Scrubs where JD asks the Hematopathologist to redo some tests. The HP asks him if he wants them redone becuase "YOu think I made a mistake, or because you want me to have?" JD replies that he wants him to have and eventually realizes that he dreamed the whole sequence. The tests were real, the patient had leukemia. Live with it.

Lord Fullbladder, Master of Goblins

2007-01-13, 01:46 PM

Let's see... I know I saw the REAL plot of Book Seven somewhere.. Ah, here it is.
__________________________________________________
For one to understand this plot, you should know something. Harry is Snape and Voldemort, and his own father and mother. How is this possible?

Time travel.

To explain it shortly, Harry was born, Harry's parents were killed, Harry gets thrown to his uncle's house, who hates him, Harry gets told that he is a Wizard, Harry goes to Hogwarts. In Hogwarts, he has a jolly good time, except the times he has to escape from being killed, or otherwise harmed by this and that, mostly this, which would be Voldemort.

Skipping ahead a bit, to the point Dumbledore dies and Harry leaves Hogwarts, he takes with him Ron, Hermione and Neville. Every general needs his troops, or every tough guy needs his cheerleaders. Something like that. Then they meet Snape, who tells where Voldemort could be lurking, since Harry is out to kill his nemesis. So, in the end they find Voldemort, and a battle of epic proportions begins. Just to be suddenly ended by Neville, who kills Voldemort, claiming that he would take Harry's place as the Half-Blood Prince, and upon his victory over Voldemort, Neville himself dies as well. To explain this sudden course of action, Neville thought about it, meaning that he and Harry both fit the prophecy's requirements, even if Harry would do all told in the prophecy, Neville still could be the one to kill Voldemort, which he does.

After all this, Harry decides that he can start living a normal life. A few years later, he has an identity crisis, and with the help of Magic, he changes his gender to female. As a way to honor his/her parents, Harry takes his/her mothers name, however, after a few years of living as a woman he is sad to notice that people are not accepting his gender change, being a famous person and all that. As a way to cope with the stress, Harry starts to learn difficult spells, spending countless hours inside his/her house. Soon he/she found a spell which allows time travel, and after thinking about the possibilities, he/she decided to travel into the past, where they would not know that he/she is in fact Harry Potter who changed his gender, and he/she could live his/her life peacefully.

Time travel however, requires a lot of strength from a Magic-caster, making it something you cannot do that often. So, Harry travels back in time, and meets a nice guy, who he.. well fine, who she later on marries, and has a child with, a healthy boy. Life seemed swell for him finally.

But then, one fateful night, while she is with her husband in their child's room, watching his peaceful sleep, suddenly, Voldemort barges into the house, and to the room. At that point Harry realizes what she has done, she has become her/his own mother. There is a sudden flash, and Harry realizes that she has been teleported back in time. Knowing that she must protect himself as a child, to keep the Time-continuum in one piece, as if he/she failed to do so, it could mean the collapse of the universe due to such a severe time-mess up, she changes her gender back to a male, and gets friendly with his female self, to keep her/himself safe.

However, Harry falls in love with himself/herself, and thinks that "no point fighting urges", ending up with the two getting married, and having a child, which would grow up to be Harry himself.

We again come to the point of the timeline where the two Harry's are in the room, watching the sleep of their son, who in reality is both of them. Harry decides that he must kill Voldemort to keep the timeline in shape, and to give him a chance to live a normal life for a while, maybe even change his own past.

Voldemort barges into the room again, and there is another bright flash, and finds himself to be an old man this time. Trying to make his way in the world where he was suddenly thrown, he ends up joining a criminal gang, and while they go rob a house, Harry barges into a room, and there he sees himself, as both his father, mother, and of course, himself as a child.

At this point he realizes how screwed up his world in reality is, and starts to hate himself for messing things up this badly, again there is a bright flash, and he founds himself in the past. There he changes his appearance to that of a young man, to keep suspicions low, and the amount of trouble relatively low to keep it from adding up to his very-very-very screwed up life.

All these problems have started to get to himself, and ends up with him creating a huge self-hatred towards himself. He decides to go to work in Hogwarts, the only place which he can even call home in his life. He ends up as a Potions class teacher, which is the one field where he never was very good at, hoping to better himself on the field while working.

Ten years later, a certain young boy comes to school, after all the shapeshifts Harry has forgotten his original shape. He can only ponder why does the boy look so familiar, but he knows one thing. He does not like him, who obviously does not like him either, hatred between the two grew more and more as time passed. Then one day, Harry comes to school again, and sees an old man near the wall jabbering something, and for being a brewing pot of hatred, Harry kills the old man without a single thought about it, and at that point, he notices and identifies his young self close.

At that point Harry realizes that he is Snape, and fails to understand how was he able to destroy his own life so completely well. He realizes that he has to accomplish certain things in the timeline, or else, the world, the universe, would end up collapsing as a result of a timecontinuum ripture.

Harry, or Snape, tells Neville, where to find Voldemort, because he finally wants to end his existance to keep things from getting even worse, if possible. Just when they are about to find Voldemort, the kids that is, Snape-Harry thinks about his past, and starts to understand why has he teleported back and forth in time from the point he ran to the room with his own parents, who in fact both are him. Someone has to send them back and forth in time, and to accomplish that, Snape-Harry travels back in time to his room, and hides behind a potted plant.

Finally, all five of him inside the room, and Voldemort-Harry barges in, Snape-Harry leaps up, and with a display of insane Magical feats, he sends the three selves of him to different points of time, where he himself had been transported earlier in his time-skipping life, to keep the timeline in order.

However, the strain from such powerful Magic being casted in such a short period of time, Snape-Harry's body withers to that of an old man, and finally he realizes that he has a way to keep his timeline in order, and maybe even bring an end to his pitiful self. However, his young self is still in his bed, unharmed. Remembering the scar in his forehead, Snape-Harry considers his options, and casts a curse on himself, creating the scar shaped like lightning to his young selves forehead, which is meant to bring misfortune and accidents to his life. If he would be lucky, the misfortunes the curse would bring, would end up killing Harry as a young boy before he has chance to do any of the things he would do otherwise.

Finally, Snape-Harry teleports forward in time, to find out if the curse he cast on himself has killed him, but as a result of his body suddenly growing old and weak, the timetravel is not as accurate as it would have been before, throwing him to a place way off from his original plan. He finds himself in an old wrecked house, and a few seconds later after his arrival, four young people run inside the house.

He instantly identifies the people, who are no else than Neville, Ron, Hermione, and himself, Harry Potter. Just as Harry is about to cast a spell on Snape-Harry, Neville knocks Harry over, saying that he would take his place as the Half-Blood Prince, and instead of Harry, he casts a spell, killing Voldemort, and himself while at it. During his last seconds, Voldemort, who in reality is Snape-Harry thinks that he is finally able to get rid of all the problems he brought upon himself, and promptly dies as a happy man, who messed up his life in ways that no man has done before.

averagejoe

2007-01-13, 05:08 PM

Skipping ahead a bit, to the point Dumbledore dies and Harry leaves Hogwarts, he takes with him Ron, Hermione and Neville. Every general needs his troops, or every tough guy needs his cheerleaders.

What are you talking about? Hermione IS the team. If anything, Harry is Hermione's cheerleader, he just has that whole "prophecy" thing going on. Plus his name's on the cover. You don't take Hermione for moral support, you take Hermione because she makes sure you win.

Lord Fullbladder, Master of Goblins

2007-01-13, 07:06 PM

Your not getting the big picture here. The big picture currently consists of nineteen paragraphs and a few erroneous statements that are just as true as the correct ones.

That and it's not exactly my spoiler explanation. But it is the best.

Dumbledore lives

2007-01-13, 11:28 PM

As far as deathly hallows goes, it's a war, people die in wars, many people die in wars. To comment on some other things J.K.R. has neither confirmed nor disconformed R.A.B.'s identity though personally I think it is Regalus and that the locket they couldn't get open was the locket. I don't think Harry is a Horcrux because he was the intended 7th kill. Another thing about Dumbledore being alive, if I may quote the 2nd book
"you will find that I will only truly have left this school when none here are loyal to me. You will also find that help will always be given at Hogwarts to those who ask for it."
This quote says alot of things and I just realized as I was typing this that Harry should go back to Hogwarts. Not as a student but looking for advice or help.

Steward

2007-01-14, 12:41 AM

What are you talking about? Hermione IS the team. If anything, Harry is Hermione's cheerleader, he just has that whole "prophecy" thing going on. Plus his name's on the cover. You don't take Hermione for moral support, you take Hermione because she makes sure you win.

I love how you could read that entire piece of insanity and only find a problem with that particular line.

averagejoe

2007-01-14, 07:51 AM

I love how you could read that entire piece of insanity and only find a problem with that particular line.

It seemed like that was the only line with the potential to be not on purpose wrong. Besides, some things just need to be said. :smallbiggrin:

twerk_face

2007-01-16, 10:11 PM

Dumbledore - the new Elvis!

speaking as a true HP lover--

hahahahahahahahah nice.

ClericofPhwarrr

2007-01-17, 03:55 AM

Let's see... I know I saw the REAL plot of Book Seven somewhere.. Ah, here it is.
__________________________________________________

(Much good text)

Nice. If that happened, Harry Potter would be my absolute favorite series ever, bar none.

Soniku

2007-01-17, 08:05 PM

I do like Harry Potter books, I'm not sure why I like them so much but their very good :smallbiggrin:

Anyway, just to add a few barely possible but interesting things to the old dead Dumbledore thing, because I can:

[Long, boreing text]

Until I spotted a few extra lines in a different release of the 6th book (I think it was the US version, but not sure) I thought he was dead, but something got me thinking: In these lines shortly before his death he says to Malfoy that he could hide him and make it seem as if he was dead. I'm not sure of the exact wording but I'll bet a few here have that edition :smalltongue:.

Plus, when he died he had a nice long description of slow-mo falling and lots of Hollywood features that generally described the stunning spell they use as opposed to the "fall down and die" that usually happens with Avada Kedvadra... and this was from Snape, who we already know can create spells.

I might just be grasping at nothing here, but between the tip-off on how he could make someone seem to be dead and the odd description I just get that feeling that something odd is going on, especially when the text has been removed from my edition (mabey Rowling realised it was too big a hint? I dunno)

Anyway, apart from that there are a million and one ways for a wizard to escape that funeral, mabey it wasn't even him, just a magically created dummy.

And finally, Rowling said Dumbledores dead... but he had a brother who is still Dumbledore. I'm not sure on the source of when she said it but did she specify it was Albus?

[end long text block]

Any feedback on my random theorys appreciated, and sorry if I managed to repeat what anyone else said :smalltongue:

Shadow of the Sun

2007-01-17, 09:01 PM

His brother was alive and at the funeral. His brother is the bartender of the Hog's Head.

ClericofPhwarrr

2007-01-18, 01:11 AM

I might just be grasping at nothing here, but between the tip-off on how he could make someone seem to be dead and the odd description I just get that feeling that something odd is going on, especially when the text has been removed from my edition (mabey Rowling realised it was too big a hint? I dunno)

If I was Rowling, I'd put details like those in just to throw people off. I mean, the FUN you can have as a famous author... :smalltongue:.

ravenkith

2007-01-18, 11:23 AM

Dumbledore died, it's true.

But there's nothing to stop him from coming back to life, especially seeing as how it's already been proven that such things are possible: for a Phoenix, at least.

Fawkes (Dumbledore's phoenix familiar) conveys a number of benefits, according to the books. Among them are the healing abilities of his tears, and the fierce, fierce loyalty of the bird in question.

The phoenix himself has the power to regenerate, spontaneously converting to Ash, and being reborn.

But we never got a full listing of the benefits offered by having a phoenix familiar.

It is possible (if not likely) that Fawkes did indeed fly into the funeral, and perhaps use some magical energy to restore Dumbledore. Perhaps the 'marble coffin' is not a coffin, but rather, an egg?

It's a possibility. A farfetched one, but then, we are dealing with fantasy, here.

As to the plot of the final book, it obviously will involve harry attempting to fight the Death Eaters, alone, at least to start with.

I think he'll have some early successes, and then (as Harry is wont to do), get into trouble that is over his head, only to be bailed out by his friends.

Ideally, once his friends get back into the action, they'll team up with Fred & George, and use some of the 'dirty tricks' the twins have come up with as weapons.

Then it'll all come down to a climactic battle, where Neville ends up being the one who throws the last dirty trick at voldemoort, causing him to screw up a killing curse, having it reflect back on himself (a la weasely's slug spell).

This means that the prohecy is fulfilled on both sides of the equation: 1, because the trick shop would never have happened without Harry's support, and thus, the 'weapons' used to defeat voldemoort could not have been developed, and 2, because Neville is the one who finally gets voldemoort with one of said weapons.

Ron is important because he's the one that ties the Weasley's to Harry, causing Harry to fund the shop in the first place, and Hermione's important because she was the one who comes up with the idea of using the tricks as weapons, and was smart enough to keep Harry alive and kicking through his early years.

I think Ron'll kick it, and Harry'll end up marrying Ginny.

Meh, I don't know, it's fun to speculate though.

Lorddarthpaul

2007-01-25, 03:59 PM

But but........your name is about Harry Potter :tongue:

And if you wish to start a discussion then choose to specify what you want to talk and begin discussing :wink: You can't say you'dlike to talk about something and then expect us to do it. We have to be led by the nose. :wink:

Now anyone be having the think that I think that Harry WON'T be going back to Hogwarts?

And in regards to ^'s sig how exactly do you mean Dumbledor isn't properly dead? He was a) hit by a curse and b) thrown of a 50 story building (or so).

You all better be careful ok? one false step around me or my freind here mister dubledore lives and i will sick my rancor on all of you and laugh while you are screaming in agony and being ripped apart.:smallmad:

[/URL]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4b/ARancor.jpg/330px-ARancor.jpg (http://www.mds.mdh.se/~uks/starwars/pix/movie/rancor.jpg)[URL="http://www.mds.mdh.se/~uks/starwars/pix/movie/rancor.jpg"]

Lorddarthpaul

2007-01-25, 04:01 PM

yo, dumble aren't you forgetting something? you know, like oh i don't know THE WHOLE FREAKING CHUNK THATS MISSING FROM MY most delicate NOSE!!!!!??

Baron Von Mod: Although fairly tame in this instance, masking of swearing is not permitted on thes boards.

Lorddarthpaul

2007-01-25, 04:03 PM

***Scrubbed***

Lorddarthpaul

2007-01-25, 04:04 PM

HAHAHAHAHAHA YO DUMBLE STOP ME NOW ITS ME LORD VOLDY!!!! HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAAHAHAHAHHHHHAHAHAHHA(man ical laughter continues)

Baron Von Mod: Please dont use all caps. It's considered rude and implies shouting. The odd post here and there, fair enough if there is a reason. As a series of spam like post? Not appreciated at all.

Don Beegles

2007-01-25, 04:21 PM

I know I shouldn't bite the spammer's bait, but I just gotta say that that was interesting.

polaris1110

2007-01-31, 12:45 PM

My favorite book has to be the second one, because while it didn't have the best mystery or the most complicated plot, and the characters still had no idea which end of the wand shot the magic out as far as what they were capable of doing, it didn't have the worst mystery either and there was a fantastic climax and falling action. Book 4 gets props for its amazing mystery, but points get taken away for the painfully juvinile Yule Ball (not that it wasn't accurate to how the characters at that age would act, but it was still painful to read)

Painful to read, while yes I agree that it was not the best chapter (and it was even more dreadful in the movie) it was better than the chapter that ruined book two: The Deathday Party. Of all of the bad chapters ever written in the Harry Potter books, and there have been a couple, this was the absolute worst. If it hadn't of taken me an hour to trude through the waste of time that was "The Deathday Party" I would have liked the book much more.

cthulhu_waits

2007-01-31, 02:39 PM

I don't think Harry is a horcrux. If Voldemort had used Lilly's death to turn Harry into a horcrux, then why would he immediately have tried to kill Harry? And it could turn out that I'm wrong about that, but I don't think you could do a powerful piece of dark magic like a horcrux spell accidentally.

And as another poster said, Voldemort has tried many a time to kill Harry. If Harry is a horcrux, then Voldemort doesn't know it. And if it turns out that he is, doesn't that sort of remove the threat from Harry?

Voldemort: And now, Harry Potter, at long last you will die!

Harry: Um, doesn't that mean you'll be killed too, sir?

Voldemort: !#^&%!!! Geez, why didn't I think of that?!

Lorddarthpaul

2007-02-06, 05:42 PM

I know I shouldn't bite the spammer's bait, but I just gotta say that that was interesting.

*flabergasted* Of course it was intresting! what did you expect, a silent mime? well?

So anyways good news harry got married!!..... to moaning myrtle*hahahahahha*

twerk_face

2007-02-06, 09:18 PM

Mr. Longbottom will serve a great role in Book 7, don't you worry. It's HIS time to shine...I hope!!

Wow...that really sums it up there. Well done!! And I generally agree with your points on book 6, though I never realised it until reading your post. Now I'll just have to go back to having GoF be my favourite again.

In the books, Dumbledore generally is erratic, and confused, and fumbles...but with purpose. He's a funny character, and was in the first two...sadly, Richard Harris passed on. To be replaced by Michael Gambon, who openly admits, he's never read the books, and doesn't plan to. So, his perception of Dumbledore is quite...skewed, shall we say?

BRILLIANT!!

That is all.

LOL I agree with almost everything you say here. I feel the same way about everything, except that i never liked 6 better than 4. 4 is the best:smallbiggrin:

Plus, life is ufair : D Neville is the representation of this.

twerk_face

2007-02-06, 09:34 PM

:smallamused:
One of the things that will always bug me about Harry Potter is the whole "muggles are useless" scenario.

I know the books are focused on an escapist fantasy into the magical Hogwarts world, and about being different from everyone else, and how people without imagination are Hollow Men, but... I think the series would be horribly entertaining with the addition of one effect Muggle character. I know it would ruin a lot of the point Rowling is trying to present us with, but it would be so much... fun to give some of the more 'muggles are stupid' characters in Harry Potter a nice, pro-Muggle shock.

Think about it. The Death Eaters are running around throwing zombies at people, for crying out loud. If there's one thing we Muggles can deal with, its zombies. Especially ones that are afraid of fire. And I'm sorry, but the ability to kill thirteen people with one curse is insignificant next to the power of the for---[cough cough] modern technology. You got giants? Great. We've got rocket launchers. You've got a killing curse? We've got nukes. You've got wands? Great. Go watch Potter Puppet Pals. See how far wands will get you. You've got dementors? Great. We've got television. Let's see whose soul rots first.

*Falls down laughing*

Seriously dude, this is like the only post i have ever read that really made me crack up. I just got the immage of a huge battle going on in manhatten where the DE raised Inferi swarms to attack the city. One of the inferi is closing in on a main character, about to kill him/her. S/He is on the ground, with their hand raised in futile protest, when the Inferi's head explodes. Samual L. Jackson walks up with a shotgun smoking in one hand, looks at him/her with a raised eyebrow, and just walks off.

Laloni

2007-02-07, 11:04 AM

Wizzardman

2007-02-07, 11:27 AM

:smallamused:

*Falls down laughing*

Seriously dude, this is like the only post i have ever read that really made me crack up. I just got the immage of a huge battle going on in manhatten where the DE raised Inferi swarms to attack the city. One of the inferi is closing in on a main character, about to kill him/her. S/He is on the ground, with their hand raised in futile protest, when the Inferi's head explodes. Samual L. Jackson walks up with a shotgun smoking in one hand, looks at him/her with a raised eyebrow, and just walks off.
...That's beautiful. :smallbiggrin:

Somehow or another, we need to convince JK Rowling to add Samuel L. Jackson in as a new character for the last book.

Muz

2007-02-07, 02:30 PM

I don't think Harry's a horcrux, but I'm guessing the psychic connection does have something to do with the failed horcrux-making attempt. Just sort of a side-effect of being near the spell when it went all wonky.

But I've never read book 6, so maybe there's some secret thingy there that prevents Voldemort's death by normal means. It's really the only way Rowling could explain the fact that nobody ever thinks to just pull a gun and kill him right there.

They can't just pull a gun and kill Voldemort because, as mail is delivered by owls, guns are delivered by eagles, and all of the eagles are busy carrying Frodo and the Ring to Mordor. :smallwink:

Sewer_Bandito

2007-02-07, 03:20 PM

They're very far from bad, but not the kind of thing we'll be studying in universities in twenty years.

Does anyone else here find Harry to be an incredibly annoying protagonist? But that's probably just my latent Evil genius coming out.

Many people would argue the stuff being read in schools right now is terrible :smallwink: Anyway, if I was forced to read a Harry Potter book for school, I'd be a happy camper.

Personally I thought the Harry Potter books were fun and entertaining. Despite Harry annoying the hell out of me in the last 3(ish) books, I've thought everyone of them was great.

edit: And as for Harry being a horcrux, that would be totally awesome. That would mean he would have to kill himself! There's no ending to a series that would be happier than that.

afternoon

2007-02-07, 03:42 PM

As far as the style and composition of the Harry Potter books, they're designed for entertaining as many people as possible. That doesn't mean that it's good writing. Somehow, soap operas remain popular...

Harry Potter's just an annoying lead character because everything good just kind of falls into his lap, and you *know* that he's narratively invincible, and all setbacks are temporary.

Anyways, it would make sense if the sorting hat were a horcrux.

Muz

2007-02-07, 05:01 PM

Harry Potter's just an annoying lead character because everything good just kind of falls into his lap, and you *know* that he's narratively invincible, and all setbacks are temporary.

Many heroes from classical Greek/Roman myth had things handed to them by the gods when they'd have otherwise failed, but the Greeks/Romans looked on this as "This guy must be fantastic, because the gods favor him enough to help him" rather than "This guy only wins because he gets help from the gods."

I'm not trying to say the Harry Potter series equals The Iliad or anything, just taking the opportunity to point out a different way of thinking. ...Though I suppose my point here is largely academic and tangential. :smallbiggrin:

AmoDman

2007-02-07, 06:51 PM

Many heroes from classical Greek/Roman myth had things handed to them by the gods when they'd have otherwise failed, but the Greeks/Romans looked on this as "This guy must be fantastic, because the gods favor him enough to help him" rather than "This guy only wins because he gets help from the gods."

I'm not trying to say the Harry Potter series equals The Iliad or anything, just taking the opportunity to point out a different way of thinking. ...Though I suppose my point here is largely academic and tangential. :smallbiggrin:

No, it's fairly spot on. Such molds can be identified in most fantasy/myth in one fashion or another. We're just less accepting of the obvious norm nowadays in the abundance of literary saturation that our society enjoys.

Muz

2007-02-07, 07:04 PM

No, it's fairly spot on. Such molds can be identified in most fantasy/myth in one fashion or another. We're just less accepting of the obvious norm nowadays in the abundance of literary saturation that our society enjoys.

Thank goodness for that saturation, though.
"So what's on TV tonight?"
"The Iliad."
"AGAIN??!"
:smallbiggrin:

...We now return you to the regularly scheduled thread, already in progress.

Wizzardman

2007-02-07, 08:59 PM

Many heroes from classical Greek/Roman myth had things handed to them by the gods when they'd have otherwise failed, but the Greeks/Romans looked on this as "This guy must be fantastic, because the gods favor him enough to help him" rather than "This guy only wins because he gets help from the gods."

I'm not trying to say the Harry Potter series equals The Iliad or anything, just taking the opportunity to point out a different way of thinking. ...Though I suppose my point here is largely academic and tangential. :smallbiggrin:
Greek and Roman mythology was written in a time where literature was considered genuinely new, and Deus Ex Machina was a popular plot device. A lot of things have changed in the literary world since then.

Muz

2007-02-07, 11:42 PM

And they will again, that's the beauty of it. :smallwink:

But again, I'm not really trying to defend HP so much as just pointing out another viewpoint in an "isn't this interesting?" sort of way. :smallsmile:

AmoDman

2007-02-07, 11:44 PM

Greek and Roman mythology was written in a time where literature was considered genuinely new, and Deus Ex Machina was a popular plot device. A lot of things have changed in the literary world since then.

Epic of Gilgamesh...and beyond. Literature's been around. Sorry, it just annoys me when people assume that ancient cultures were too stupid to record stories. True, most were oral, but writing was very common to the Greeks and Romans...not deific. Their myths played key roles in identifying cultural identities, and some even make fun of the norms (Ie. Ovid...known for making heroes and "gods" look less than respectable).

Wizzardman

2007-02-08, 12:26 AM

Epic of Gilgamesh...and beyond. Literature's been around. Sorry, it just annoys me when people assume that ancient cultures were too stupid to record stories. True, most were oral, but writing was very common to the Greeks and Romans...not deific. Their myths played key roles in identifying cultural identities, and some even make fun of the norms (Ie. Ovid...known for making heroes and "gods" look less than respectable).
I know. That's why I wrote "was considered."

To a certain extent, literature was new back then. After all, so little of literature survived the oral history period--survived even to the days of Homer, much less up to this day--that from our perspective, they were almost making it up as they went along. And as a lot of the ideas and techniques that came before the Greeks were lost, we have no real way of knowing what they said, or learning from their stories, save through what the Greeks and other early civilizations wrote about them. So we have to interpret the Greeks and other heavily-writing-oriented civilizations as the 'first' because we don't really know what went on before them.

...Back to the topic at hand:

Muz has a point. At the moment, the Deus Ex Machina and Mary Sue-ism that Rowling presents aren't popular at the moment--but they were popular at one point (the Greeks, as well as more recent periods), and might be popular again soon. Especially given Rowling's success with Harry Potter. So maybe we shouldn't make fun of HP so much for these things.

But, then again, Jane Austen was writing her stuff when writing novels first became popular. And making fun of her never gets old.

Caelestion

2007-02-08, 05:19 AM

Wizzardman

2007-02-08, 11:43 AM

As I recall, Horace Walpole, Britain's first First Lord of the Treasury, wrote the first Gothic novel in 1764 or so - The Castle of Otranto, I believe.
Jane Austen wasn't writing until at least 70 years later, I think.
...Well, to be fair, it was my crazy Romanticism teacher from college that called Austen one of the early novelists, so I kinda got that from her.

But novels really weren't popular until Austen's time, anyway--gothic novels got a lot of attention, but they were all focused on one theme, and weren't exactly a diverse genre. And 70 years isn't that long of a time for the development of new literary styles (especially if novels in that 70 year period were generally restricted to the gothic supernatural theme, and the era that these first novels were produced wasn't exactly that accepting of the new literature form).

Edit: ...It appears I have killed the thread.

How much xp do I get?

Lorddarthpaul

2007-03-02, 11:17 AM

ha ha have you guys noticed how dumbles gone!?

Kantur

2007-03-02, 12:20 PM

I could easily be misremembering, but didn't Voldemort make so many Horcruxes partly as an obsession with powerful magical numbers (With seven being said powerful magical number)? (Ok, I'm nearly, very certainly definite on that point) And in the back of my mind, there niggles a quote along the lines of "Yes, I'm sure that he'd like the idea of splitting his soul into 7 parts." Which leads the mathematician in me to say this: That'd mean 6 horcruxes. One containing a piece of his soul each and the one inside himself - a seventh horcrux would mean his soul would be in eighths and not the nice magical number...

(And unfortunatly I won't be able to reply to any comments on that 'til Sunday, so if you raise a good point, please don't get impatient.)

AmoDman

2007-03-03, 06:11 PM

knownaspirate

2007-03-04, 12:46 AM

Dumbledor/Black Rant Everyone keeps going on and on about Dumbledor. Big whoop. While I did shed tears when he was killed, (Snape is totally my THIRD favorite) everyone is forgetting the importance of one person who I KNOW is not dead. Sirius Black.
I know he couldn't have died that easily. Becuase he was hit with a red beam of light, not green. So I know he wasn't killed in one hit.
I think that he'll be helping Harry on the way to kill Voldemort. Can't wait till he comes back!

7th Book Spoiler? July 21st!!! I also think that the 7th book will be in 2 parts. SO harry said that he's not going to go back to Hogwarts, and that he's going to find all the pieces of Voldemorts soul. 13? I think they said. It's been awhile since I read the book. But it's going to take him more than a year to find all 13. Even if Ron and Hermione (yeah I spelt her name wrong... woot) and all of thier friends (Krum, the Twins, Ginny) help out. Someone's going to get killed off. So to restate my point. Book 7. Two Parts.

It wouldn't hurt my feelings if Harry was killed off. The books could go on without him. Also... I'm secretly wishing that he loses and Voldemort takes over the world. How awesome would that be:smalltongue: ALthough this will NEVER happen... call it wishful thinking :smallbiggrin:

On another note... Long Live Professor Snape!!!
also
my favorites 1.) Sirius Black 2.) Lupin 3.) Snape

averagejoe

2007-03-04, 01:58 AM

Volde shouldn't win, that would be lame, the underdogs should keep him down. Luna is so much better than all of the characters mentioned in ^ put together. And Mad Eye should do something crazy.

Emperor Demonking

2007-03-04, 07:31 AM

knownaspirate, Black wasn't killed by the spell he was "killed" by going past the veil. Also their are 6 horucruxes as the poster before you mentioned.

Kantur

2007-03-04, 10:05 AM

I don't think Harry is a Horcrux because he was the intended 7th kill.

(Emphasis my own) - I'm fairly sure Voldemort's killed more than 6 people before Goblet of Fire intentionally, so I was taking that quote as a reference to Horcrux kills - 7 kills, 7 horcruxes.

It's possibly just been too much reading of Harry as a Horcrux theories elsewhere, combined with possible mis-rememberings of posts about the number of horcruxes they believed had been made, making me tetchy.

That Lanky Bugger

2007-03-04, 10:17 AM

Regarding Horcruxes, from book 6:

1) Marvolo Gaunt's ring. This was destroyed by Dumbledore.

2) Tom Riddle's diary from the Chamber of Secrets. Destroyed by Harry Potter himself.

Suspected by Dumbledore (with the information passed on to Harry):

3) Slytherin's Locket. Stolen by RAB, status unconfirmed. Based on the initials for RAB and a sentence in Order of the Phoenix, this one may in fact be located at Number 12 Grimmauld Place.

4) Hufflepuff's Cup. Status unknown, but likely undestroyed.

5) A relic belonging to either Godric Gryffindor or Rowena Ravenclaw. Likely a Ravenclaw relic because the only two known Gryffindor relics have both been under Dumbledore's care ever since Voldemort was a boy.

6) Nagini, Voldemort's snake.

The seventh piece of Voldemort's soul is confirmed to still be in Voldemort's body, so the above account for all the Horcruxes.

Yes, I'm a Potter geek.

Wizzardman

2007-03-05, 01:54 AM

AmoDman

2007-03-05, 03:39 AM

I hate to burst your bubble on this, but... Black did fall through the Veil Between Life and Death--at least, that's what I've been interpreting Rowling's metaphor for that room to be, as it was a veiled archway with voices coming from 'the other side'--so I'm fairly sure he's very dead. Now, he could come back as a ghost or zombie or something similar, but I'm quite certain that he is no longer among the living.

What happens when a living body falls through this supposed veil? How do they wander this "realm" of the dead whose normal inhabitants are not corporeal? Do you know? Does anybody? It pisses me off to no end that everyone just seems to write it off as death when they in fact appear to not know. No bubbles have been burst. Rowling's lack of writing experience is all that's been so far illustrated.

Wizzardman

2007-03-05, 11:23 AM

What happens when a living body falls through this supposed veil? How do they wander this "realm" of the dead whose normal inhabitants are not corporeal? Do you know? Does anybody? It pisses me off to no end that everyone just seems to write it off as death when they in fact appear to not know. No bubbles have been burst. Rowling's lack of writing experience is all that's been so far illustrated.
...Who was implying that the 'veil' showed any weakness in Rowling's writing? It means she's using archetypal metaphor for the mystical gap between life and death. Such metaphors are part of the epic narrative style [which is the style that the Harry Potter story appears to follow], so Rowling using them is a sign of good writing skill.

For most of the Harry Potter series, Rowling has kept to the archetype, and I would be surprised if she decided to go against it now. If she doesn't, then he's dead, but probably will find some way of coming back to haunt us later--possibly as a ghost, possibly by someone 'breaching the veil,' possibly by being rescued by a flying spaghetti monster, whatever. If she does break with the archetype, then tossing Black through the veil was merely a silly excuse to get him out of the way for a book, and then Deus Ex Machina him back into existence. Personally, I think the first one is more likely.

knownaspirate

2007-03-05, 05:30 PM

Hmm i want to apoligze for messing up the numbers. I don't know why I was thinking 13... my bad =)

As for the Black thing. *sigh* I'm in denial. But you know, it's all good. I have a feeling that like Dumbledor he'll play a part in the books to come.
As for me wanting him to come back, a girl can dream can't she?

AmoDman

2007-03-06, 08:50 PM

...Who was implying that the 'veil' showed any weakness in Rowling's writing?

Ummm, let's try all the characters reactions to his falling through the veil? (I was implying this...flat out stating, actually) She was just lost in what to do with it post-"Death" and ended up doing nothing. As well as, in my personal opinion now, the absolutely horrid writing she forced down my throat when she finally decided to kill him. There was no good reasoning for it, it was all shock value (that noted, I think Dumbledore's death was written fantasticly).

Wizzardman

2007-03-06, 11:26 PM

Ummm, let's try all the characters reactions to his falling through the veil? (I was implying this...flat out stating, actually) She was just lost in what to do with it post-"Death" and ended up doing nothing. As well as, in my personal opinion now, the absolutely horrid writing she forced down my throat when she finally decided to kill him. There was no good reasoning for it, it was all shock value (that noted, I think Dumbledore's death was written fantasticly).
...All right, I'll agree that that particular scene wasn't exactly well written, and was in fact, rather forced. Which is part of the reason why so many people are obsessed with the thought that Black may not be dead--because the scene was so forced that it couldn't have been his proper heroic death scene. I wouldn't exactly call it a sign of lack of writing skill, but it certainly could have used some work--I had blamed it on the fact that she's rushing through these books at 600+ pages every two years or so. No one can produce quality writing at that pace.

I didn't see where you were going with your first statement--my fault.

AmoDman

2007-03-06, 11:46 PM

I didn't see where you were going with your first statement--my fault.

Sorry if I had an antagonistic tone, though. The "Sirius Black Fiasco" as I like to call it is the only thing about the series I just detest. Thinking about the way it was handled just, :mad: . It was just plain bad...and it's made worse by all his hubbaloo about "two...no, three maybe! characters who are going to die in the next book." Ugh. Just write a good story...there's no need to attempt to retain success by shock value. It's unnecessary. Some people worry about Harry's fate in the next book...I worry about the fate of any strong characterizations left that may or may not be offed for no apparent reason. I really hope Rowling somehow denies my sinking expectations on this point...and even defies herself and makes something of the Black "death," even though she already failed at a proper reaction to it in the first place.

tyr

2007-03-08, 01:31 PM

I'm not certain, but didn't Rowling mention in an interview somewhere that one of the reasons for killing of Black had to do with that communication mirror and his flying motorcycle? Harry broke the mirror, but maybe it's still useful somehow. And I wonder how well broomstick might prepare one for riding said bike.

averagejoe

2007-03-08, 09:39 PM

Ugh. Harry Potter meets Easy Riders.

kpenguin

2007-03-08, 10:56 PM

Mmm.. Harry Potter. I used to like the books, but after rereading them I've come to dislike it. I dislike it for two main reasons:
1) I can't connect to Harry Potter. I can connect to his sidekicks and even Lord Voldemort, but not to the main character himself. He's too much of a Larry Stu.
2) The way that magic is portrayed lacks in the way versmilitude.

Soveliss

2007-03-09, 12:08 PM

I heard that Dumbledore dies is that true?:smalleek:

kpenguin

2007-03-09, 01:49 PM

I heard that Dumbledore dies is that true?:smalleek:

As of the last book:
yes

Muz

2007-03-09, 07:43 PM

*snip* ...As well as, in my personal opinion now, the absolutely horrid writing she forced down my throat when she finally decided to kill him. There was no good reasoning for it, it was all shock value (that noted, I think Dumbledore's death was written fantasticly).

I'm not really defending Rowling's writing here so much as the concept of characters in (any) book dying in general: who says everyone dies for a good reason? Life's not like that.

(And I now must undercut the seriousness of my statement with a quote that forced its way into my mind while writing the above and must be shared: "Don't let Krusty's death get you down, son. People die all the time, just like that! Why, you could wake up dead tomorrow! ...Well, good night!" :smallbiggrin: )

AmoDman

2007-03-10, 07:15 PM

I'm not really defending Rowling's writing here so much as the concept of characters in (any) book dying in general: who says everyone dies for a good reason? Life's not like that.

(And I now must undercut the seriousness of my statement with a quote that forced its way into my mind while writing the above and must be shared: "Don't let Krusty's death get you down, son. People die all the time, just like that! Why, you could wake up dead tomorrow! ...Well, good night!" :smallbiggrin: )

In your average story, true, people can die all the time...but stories are about character. Even though she did kill Sirius (randomly), there was no point to it. It was hardly dealt with, just whined and then 'OK'. It fed off of the previous attatchment readers had with Sirius simply not being there any more without actually supporting it itself. Drama for drama's sake, IMO.

MeklorIlavator

2007-03-10, 09:39 PM

Just a question, was anyone else freaked out by the whole "beast" inside Mr. Potter? I mean, some of those lines read like something out of a horror flix(the beast inside harry purrs:smalleek:)

DomarSaul

2007-03-11, 03:55 PM

Heh, I enjoyed the "beast" metaphor for Harry's (vaguely inappropriate)lust for a girl who's part of his surrogate family. I believe Harry and the Potters, the Wizard Rock genre's foremost artists, but it well in their song "My Wizard Scar Still Burns for You."

Your mom is like a mom to me/And your brother is like a brother to me...Ginny Weasley you're so dreamy...Ron's gonna kill me