(no subject)

[a_t_rain]

The Great Canon Re-Read continueth apace...



– I’d totally missed the fact that Crouch the Younger practically confesses in front of the Tri-Wizard judges and champions right after Harry’s name comes out of the Goblet, telling them 1) that somebody wants Harry dead; and 2) how this person ensured that Harry’s name was entered into the tournament. And, of course, nobody listens to him. Cool customer, Crouch.

– I’m intrigued by Ollivander’s choice of spells in the scene where he’s testing the wands. He makes Fleur’s wand produce a bunch of flowers – an obvious pun on her name – and conjures a flock of birds from Krum’s (appropriate, for a Quidditch player). Cedric’s wand gives off “a stream of silver smoke rings,” which doesn’t seem to mean much at the time – but much later, Cedric’s shade is described as looking “as though it were made of the solidest, densest smoke.” And Harry’s wand produces a fountain of wine (I’m guessing there’s some Christian symbolism in play here, with its connotations of blood and sacrifice?) Ollivander is awfully spooky when you think about him.

– I like the glimpse we get of Percy, looking “very white and somehow much younger than usual,” after Harry drags Ron out of the lake. (I’m also fond of him in PoA, when we see him betting money he doesn’t have on Harry’s Quidditch matches and jumping up and down, “all dignity forgotten,” after a victory.) Percy’s a good kid – the trouble with him is that he is a kid, promoted into two positions of immense responsibility before he’s developed a commensurate amount of judgment, and too proud to admit he’s in over his head. I think he’ll be all right once the battle lines are out in the open.

– Nice to see Hagrid finding his groove as a teacher; he does fine with the unicorn foals, and his lesson with the Nifflers is about as close to a model CoMC lesson as anything we’ve seen. Take that, Professor Grubbly-Plank.

– I’ve said this before at FA and Mugglenet, but I’m more convinced than ever that Ludo Bagman was guilty (and is the “too cowardly to return” Death Eater missing from the graveyard scene). Rookwood promised him a position at the Ministry in exchange for his information, and sure enough he ended up with one – Head of a Department, when he assuredly didn’t get there on merit.

– OK, I have a theory about why Voldemort didn’t die on Halloween ‘81. He thinks he’s alive because one of his experiments with immortality succeeded – but I suspect this is typical Voldemort-style hubris, and the real unknown factor is the circumstances surrounding his birth, which JKR has promised we’ll be learning more about. I think Tom Riddle’s mother, like Harry’s, chose to save her son’s life at the price of her own, and he’s got some of the same “lingering protection” that Lily’s sacrifice conferred on Harry. (I’m also toying with the idea that he may somehow have erased this protection by choosing to be “reborn” through a procedure that doesn’t involve his mother at all – hence Dumbledore’s gleam of triumph?)

Comments

[lazy-neutrino.livejournal.com]

I've always liked the weighing of the wands as well (think it's called that), although I had missed out on the Cedric-smoke thing. I couldn't make head or tail of that, although the others seem straightforward.

Agree with you about Bagman. I've never liked him. It'd be nice to see him unmasked as a very senior DE this time round, though! What happened to Rookwood in the end? I forget. (Don't rush off to look it up - just wondered if you knew.)

[a-t-rain.livejournal.com]

Rookwood was one of the DEs who break out of Azkaban in OotP. I think he gets re-arrested at the end of the book, since he's in the Department of Mysteries battle, but I'm not 100% sure. (I don't think he was the one who got Bagman a job, for obvious reasons, but Lucius Malfoy could have done it, and there may well be other DEs in the Ministry who haven't yet been unmasked.)

[persephone-kore.livejournal.com]

OK, I have a theory about why Voldemort didn’t die on Halloween ‘81. He thinks he’s alive because one of his experiments with immortality succeeded – but I suspect this is typical Voldemort-style hubris, and the real unknown factor is the circumstances surrounding his birth, which JKR has promised we’ll be learning more about. I think Tom Riddle’s mother, like Harry’s, chose to save her son’s life at the price of her own, and he’s got some of the same “lingering protection” that Lily’s sacrifice conferred on Harry. (I’m also toying with the idea that he may somehow have erased this protection by choosing to be “reborn” through a procedure that doesn’t involve his mother at all – hence Dumbledore’s gleam of triumph?)

Okay, this is a fascinating possibility, and I'm not sure I'd be at all surprised if you're right.

[a-t-rain.livejournal.com]

The one big stumbling block, I have to admit, is that JKR has said we ought to ask what some of those measures Voldemort took to ensure his immortality were, which suggests that they're not going to be wholly irrelevant. But they could turn out to play in unexpected ways.

[mafdet.livejournal.com]

Percy: Yes, he can be annoying at times, but I agree, he's just a kid! He's only nineteen in GoF and twenty in OOtP, which to me means that a lot of his actions were a product of youthful hubris and lack of judgment. And (I'm referring to OOtP, of course) I don't think Arthur's attitude toward him is really helping. I like Arthur, and don't think he's a bad dad or a monster, but it's pretty obvious that the Twins and Ginny are his favorite children. I think he just likes Fred and George better, and almost vicariously lives through them when it comes to youthful cutups.

It's obvious to me that Percy really cares about Ron and Ginny. I would like to see a sadder-but-wiser Percy back in the family fold eventually.

Ludo Bagman: There is something smarmariffic about him, I agree; and I wonder if he'll be revealed as the flip side of Dolores Umbridge. That is, a "nice person" who is also a DE. Umbridge was a truly loathsome person, but not a DE. It would be interesting to get the opposite of that, because as Sirius pointed out, the world is not divided into good people and DE's.

And I like the idea about Tom Riddle's mother! Very interesting! That would explain why she "died in childbirth" in an era when maternal deaths were so greatly reduced. Dying of "heartbreak" and in childbirth sounds too hokey and melodramatic to be true, though it is a plot device and an archetypal one.

[a-t-rain.livejournal.com]

Percy: Yes, he can be annoying at times, but I agree, he's just a kid! He's only nineteen in GoF and twenty in OOtP, which to me means that a lot of his actions were a product of youthful hubris and lack of judgment.

Eighteen in GoF and nineteen in OotP, actually -- Rowling's site says his birthday is in August, which would make him one of the youngest students in his year.

I would like to see a sadder-but-wiser Percy back in the family fold eventually.

I think we'll see it -- probably sooner rather than later.

And you're right, it would be nice to see a Death Eater who doesn't ooze evil through his pores.

[sprite6.livejournal.com]

– I’d totally missed the fact that Crouch the Younger practically confesses in front of the Tri-Wizard judges and champions right after Harry’s name comes out of the Goblet

I know! Karkaroff even says, "You've given this a lot of thought, Moody." I think it's a brilliant bit of foreshadowing.

[hannahmarder.livejournal.com]

Percy’s a good kid – the trouble with him is that he is a kid

I have developed a lot of liking for Percy since I researched his character for writing Seeing Red. When you look through the earlier books, it seems that JKR is trying hard to point out that Percy isn't all bad. There's his concern for Ginny in CoS, his upset over Penelope when she's attacked, and his 'following Harry around like a very pompous guard dog' in PoA, as well as the things you mention.

I don't think for a moment that he's gong to become a DE. I think the fondness for this theory is partly to do with the labelling of any negative character trait as evil. Percy is pompous and ambitious, therefore he's evil. The same sort of argument as is used by some fans for DE!Ron - jealousy = evil. Percy makes a lot of mistakes, but they are perfectly forgivable ones, especially given his age.

I’m more convinced than ever that Ludo Bagman was guilty
It's an interesting theory, one that I'm never sure whether I agree on or not. I agree that it's credible, I just don't know if I feel that that's what JKR will do. Has he not been cut from the film of GoF? That may be an indication that he's not ultimately that important - or then again, it might not. I don't have much faith in the films, but if he was going to be important in HBP and b7, wouldn't JKR have told them to keep him in?

I still go for the standard interpretation of the 'missing three'; Snape=left forever, Karkaroff=too cowardly, Crouch=loyal servant. But there are so many possibilities - I just hope we do find out for sure which is correct by the end of b7.

I’d totally missed the fact that Crouch the Younger practically confesses in front of the Tri-Wizard judges
There's another bit that I like in GoF, where JKR practically spells it out in the space of two pages, yet you don't see it till you re-read. When Snape threatens Harry with the veritaserum, you get the information that someone has stolen ingredients from Snape's store and that these are needed to make polyjuice, closely followed by a reference to Moody only drinking from his hipflask. I rememeber reading it for the second time and laughing. I like the way she does the plotting in GoF, I think it's very clever. It's my second favourite book after CoS.

OK, I have a theory about why Voldemort didn’t die on Halloween ‘81.
It's a possibility. I've heard so many theories about this, and they all sound pretty good. I like this one, because we know that LV holds this ancient magic in contempt - so wouldn't it be ironic if it's that which has been keeping him alive. I still like the idea that he didn't actually use an AK on Harry, though there are some strong arguments against it. Though I suspect in the end it'll turn out to be something that no one has ever thought of.

[a-t-rain.livejournal.com]

I still go for the standard interpretation of the 'missing three'; Snape=left forever, Karkaroff=too cowardly, Crouch=loyal servant.

It's a possibility, but it leaves some big unanswered questions: 1) Why is Snape still alive and, apparently, still spying? and 2) Why would Voldemort be willing to let Karkaroff suffer a lesser punishment than death, when it seems to be a generally known fact that Karkaroff ratted out his comrades and Voldemort has previously had people killed for less? Bagman, at least, seems to have kept his lips sealed, and he's in enough trouble now that Voldemort might have some hope of his return.

The movies have been cut to the bare bones in any case, so it wouldn't surprise me if an entire subplot got the chop.

I don't think for a moment that he's gong to become a DE. I think the fondness for this theory is partly to do with the labelling of any negative character trait as evil. Percy is pompous and ambitious, therefore he's evil. The same sort of argument as is used by some fans for DE!Ron - jealousy = evil. Percy makes a lot of mistakes, but they are perfectly forgivable ones, especially given his age.

Yeah, and he also doesn't have a motive to become a DE. He's not on their side ideologically (he had, and may still have, a Muggle-born girlfriend); he really doesn't have the temperament to join a terrorist organization, being fond of rules, order, and doing things by the book; and for the moment, he's openly estranged from his family, which makes it unlikely that they'd try to put pressure on him by threatening the rest of the Weasleys.

[dizzy-chisel.livejournal.com]

Excellent observations. Much that I had either forgotten or never noticed.

I'm glad you're doing this, since I find myself exceedingly busy at the moment.

– Nice to see Hagrid finding his groove as a teacher; he does fine with the unicorn foals, and his lesson with the Nifflers is about as close to a model CoMC lesson as anything we've seen. Take that, Professor Grubbly-Plank.

My impression is that Hagrid is nowhere near a bad teacher, despite his insecurities and unconvential persona. In book 5, Grubbly-Plank is totally unconcerned about Harry's class' fitness for the OWLs. And she is an excellent teacher (I like her a lot, btw -- smoking the pipe, helping Hedwig, being totally loyal to Dumbledore even though she could very well pay lip service to the criticism Umbridge expects from her... Grubbly-Plank fiction, anyone?). It's just that we only get to see a partial view of what Hagrid actually teaches -- and it's usually tinged with a bit of comic relief. Book 3 leaves you with the impression Hagrid only taught flobberworms, for example, but on the "realistic fiction" level this is simply impossible.

The description of Harry's OWLs -- the subjective, "how well have I done" feeling -- also shows he's quite at home in CoMC (and quite competent in Astronomy, for example).

[a-t-rain.livejournal.com]

Yeah. I have to admit I have a total soft spot for Hagrid, both in general and as a teacher (because what new teacher hasn't known the oh-God-what-do-I-say-now feeling?) so my reading may be biased, but he certainly knows his subject, and most of the kids seem to end up knowing it, too.