December 5, 2005: Did you surf here from Google? Visit my new blog, Fantasy Fiction for Christians. 
Friday, November 18, 2005: Have you seen The Goblet of Fire? Tell us what you think!
Update IV (11/1): Continue discussing Harry Potter theories here.
Update III (10/28): More evidence for my Dumbledore-was-already-dead theory: As Draco prepares to kill his headmaster at the end of Book 6, Dumbledore tries to convince Draco that he can protect him and his family from Voldemort if he refused to carry out the Dark Lord’s mission. Draco doesn’t believe him, but Dumbledore says, “He cannot kill you if you’re already dead.” (Book 6, p. 591)
This has a double meaning: 1) It implies that Dumbledore must have faked people’s deaths before to protect them from Voldemort (Regulus Black?); and 2) Major hint from JKR: Snape didn’t kill Dumbledore because he was “already dead.”
——————————————————————————————
Update (10/27): STOP! This post contains spoilers of Book 6, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.
Townhall.com has published my article/review, Harry Potter and the Charmed Christians. (The typo in “HogwartsProfessor.com” will be fixed.) I didn’t know it would be up so soon (last night), so I’ll spend the next hour or so this morning filling this post with my theories about the series, and links to articles and other resources.
If you’re a Christian and object to reading Harry Potter, please refrain from commenting. This thread is for Christians and non-Christians who have read the books. If you’re compelled to preach and just can’t hold it in, please e-mail me.
I’ll briefly discuss some of my views on Book 6. They could fill this whole blog, but I’ll try to contain them. Those who haven’t read the series, including Book 6, or haven’t seen the movies will have no idea what I’m talking about. The post is written mainly to fans, so I won’t go into detail explaining certain things.
First, the title of the book should tip you off as to who/what is most important now that we’re nearing the end of the series. We know the Half-Blood Prince is Professor Severus Snape. So through most of the book, Harry was emulating a man he despised, a man who helped him excel (indirectly) in potions class, a class normally unpleasant for Harry. Snape is important in this book for so many reasons, and one of them is the fact that he killed the beloved headmaster of Hogwarts, Albus Dumbledore.
Although Snape seemed to play a more prominent role in Order of the Phoenix, his role in Book 6, though less prominent, is much more important. We learn that he’s a half-blood; that is, his pure-blood mother married a Muggle (non-magical person). He finally became the Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher, his dream. I can write about the implications of these two things all day, but I won’t.
The most important Snape-related event was the Unbreakable Vow he made with Narcissa Malfoy. Many theorize that the vow was to kill Dumbledore if her son wasn’t able to, so that Lord Voldemort wouldn’t kill the 16-year-old Draco if he failed. I buy that, as most readers probably do. But let’s skip ahead.
It seems clear to me that Snape was a spy for Dumbledore, and he killed his trusting friend as part of his continuing role as a spy. That’s the most common belief among fans.
Second, Snape’s act brings us to a point where many disagree. I am firmly in the Dumbledore-is-dead-and-not-coming-back camp. But here’s a theory that’s probably not too common: Dumbledore didn’t “die” at the end of Book 6. He was dead before Book 6 began.
It’s here that we come full circle with Snape and why I think he holds an important key to the whole mystery. In Book 1, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, J.K. Rowling dedicated a chapter to “The Potions Master.” She did an excellent job establishing his character as rude, mean, and generally nasty. One of the intriguing things about these books is that Rowling mapped out the whole series, roughly, from the start, so everything is important, no matter how seemingly trivial.
The scene where Snape asks Harry questions about obscure potion ingredients that he can’t answer appears, on its face, to be a sadistic exercise in humiliation, but I think the scene means much more than that. I believe Snape is trying to find out whether Harry is as talented in potion making as his mother was. That may not seem important, but at this point we still don’t the nature of Snape’s relationship with the late Lily Potter (Was he in love with her?) or whether he was present when she was killed protecting her son.
I could spend all day talking about that, too, but I’ll let you theorize in the comment section. The most important part of the scene is Snape’s monologue about the power of potion making. He seemed enthralled by his own words. Before I get to those, let’s skip ahead a bit. He asks Harry what you’d get if you added powdered root of asphodel to an infusion of wormwood, where you’d find a bezoar (a stone from the stomach of a goat), and the difference between monkshood and wolfsbane. While each question is important, I will focus on the bezoar.
As readers know, a bezoar was featured prominently in Book 6. Earlier that year in potions class after he saw a reference to bezoars in the HBP’s old book, Harry remembered what Snape said about bezoars several years before: they will save you from most poisons. Harry remembered this information in class and when his best friend Ron was poisoned. That should’ve tipped us off that Snape was the Half-Blood Prince and, therefore, very important in Book 6. Rowling referred back to that conversation in Book 1 for a reason.
Let’s back up to Snape’s monologue just before he focuses on Harry. Snape says:
You are here to learn the subtle science and exact art of potion making. As there is little foolish wand-waving here, many of you will hardly believe this is magic. I don’t expect you will really understand the beauty of the softly simmering cauldron with its shimmering fumes, the delicate power of liquids that creep through human veins, bewitching the mind, ensnaring the senses… I can teach you how to bottle fame, brew glory, even stopper death — if you aren’t as big a bunch of dunderheads as I usually have to teach. - Book 1, pages 136-137
At first reading, it sounds interesting but unimportant, but it leads us back to Dumbledore. As I stated earlier, I believe Dumbledore was already dead at the beginning of Book 6 because of this:
I can teach you how to bottle fame, brew glory, even stopper death.
Rowling’s books are filled to the brim with subtle clues. At the beginning of Book 6, we learn that Dumbledore was injured dealing with a cursed ring, a horcrux (an object where a person conceals part of his soul), which blackened his hand. His hand looked dead because it was. In fact, so was he. I believe Dumbledore was fatally injured but somehow managed to live long enough to get to Snape. In order to continue guiding and training Harry in his ultimate task — to hunt down the rest of the horcruxes and battle Voldemort — he needed more time. So Snape, “The Potions Master,” mixed a concoction that would “stopper” Dumbledore’s death. I repeat: Rowling referred back to that conversation in Book 1 for a reason (several, actually).
In other words, Dumbledore was a walking dead man. I’d read this theory on one of the many fan sites, and it made perfect sense to me, so much so, that I was creeped out by it. We all knew a major character would die in Book 6, but look what Rowling has done: the character was already dead at the beginning of the book! The tragic scene at the end was all part of an act set up by Snape and Dumbledore, which brings us to the end of the book.
We know with 99.9 percent certainty that Dumbledore wasn’t afraid of death, so when he said “please” to Snape as he stood defenseless, I knew instinctively he wasn’t begging Snape to spare him. Let’s finish Dumbledore’s sentence: “Severus…Severus…please…do what you promised. Kill me.”
So, what does it all mean? That Snape had to do something he hated: “kill” Dumbledore, although Dumbledore was already dead/dying. The point is that no one else knew about his putting a stopper on the headmaster’s death. Snape had to do what he did in front of the Death Eaters (and Harry) in order to continue “spying” for the Order of the Phoenix (although the members don’t know it) and because he’d promised Dumbledore that when the time came, he would.
I believe Snape will be the sacrificial lamb in Book 7. It will be revealed that he is indeed a “good guy” and will prove crucial in defeating Voldemort.
On a side note, I don’t think R.A.B. is Regulus Black. Rowling wouldn’t make it that easy. I think R.A.B. are three individuals or Snape himself.
Those are my theories. There are many, many other clues to dissect and points to discuss, but for the sake of brevity, I’ll stop. I look forward to reading your theories.
Christians, how do you handle objections to Christians reading the books?
Update II: My thoughts on R.A.B. from the comment section:
Regulus Black as R.A.B.? In Order of the Phoenix we learned he was only 19 when he died and wasn’t a talented wizard. How could someone so young and mediocre mastermind his way into that cave, make it pass the traps, and steal the horcrux? What about that potion in the basin? Who else but a great wizard/witch and potions master could figure out how to get around it without getting himself killed?
Nope, J.K.R. is trying to get us to look in the wrong direction.
Regarding certain references I made in the comment section, here are links to interviews with JKR verifying the notebooks filled with backstory and series being plotted out from the beginning claims.
—————————————————————————————————-
- For the hard-core Harry Potter fan, check out the Harry Potter Lexicon and The Quick Quotes Quill, a collection of J.K. Rowling’s media interviews.
- For Christian fans, I recommend every article on John Granger’s site.
- Harry Potter criticism
- Harry Potter: Can A Wizard Teach Moral Lessons?
- Hoodwinked by Harry? (I met Mark D. Roberts at GodBlogCon.)
- Is “Harry Potter” Harmless?
- Harry Potter and the Existence of God
- J.K. Rowling, Inkling?
- Severus Snape: The Unlikely Hero of Harry Potter book 7
- Deconstructing Rowling
- David Wayne: 1) Are “Harry Potter” and “Left Behind” Pretty Much the Same Thing?, 2) The Subtly Christian Worldview of J. K. Rowling and Harry Potter, 3) Shadowmancer - Hotter than Potter!, 4) Harry Potter is Heating Up Again, 5) The limits of metaphor
Ten Points from Gryffindor for Being a Smarmy Little Know It All
La Shawn Barber has a column on Christianity and Harry Potter. I’m now a big Potter fan since SarahK got…
Trackback by IMAO — 10.27.05 @ 11:28 am
One of the intriguing things about these books is that Rowling mapped out the whole series from the start . . . .
Are you sure? I don’t know much about her, but I recall the standard story that she was living on public assistance, writing the first book in her spare time, and got some sort of arts grant to finish it. She only wrote the second book after the first was successful. Although it’s obvious there’s an ongoing story at the end of the first book, it’s hard to imagine she really planned a 7-volume series before she had even finished the first one or had any reason to imagine she would even be able to do so. Has she said she planned it out? And if so, why did it take so long to finish #6?
Comment by Kevin T. Keith — 10.27.05 @ 11:39 am
I will link to site with nothing but Rowling interviews, but I recall her saying that she has boxes of notebooks fill with backstory and other info on the whole series. She plotted out the story, though filled in details and clues later. Bottom line: She’s always known what would happened from beginning to end, although she says Book 7 has not been written expect for the last chapter, or something like that.
Comment by La Shawn — 10.27.05 @ 11:43 am
Now that’s a theory that I’d not heard before. Of course, if that’s the truth, Snape is going to have the devil’s own time convincing Harry of it…
My current theory is that Harry won’t survive Book 7; he will sacrifice himself to rid the world of Voldemort. Perhaps Snape will be required to “stopper death” for Harry the same way he did for Dumbledore, both confirming his story and giving Harry the time he needs to finish his quest.
And yeah, I do think that Snape was in love with Lily, and that’s part of why he was in league with Dumbledore in the first place: to protect Harry, who has his mother’s eyes and reminds him so much of her. (And perhaps also to avenge her death at the hands of his erstwhile master, Voldemort.) Rowling’s already said too much about the redeeming power of love for this to fall by the wayside.
Another prognostication: Draco Malfoy is Snape’s dual. He’s no doubt humiliated by his failure to kill Dumbledore, on top of the humiliation of his father being imprisoned in Azkaban, and anxious to prove himself. He will complete his descent into darkness in Book 7, falling even as Snape redeems himself.
And, of course, Ron and Hermione will definitely be an item at the end. But that part should be obvious.
And, about the movies: I think Alan Rickman was the perfect choice to play Snape; he’s able to put just the right cultured sneer into Snape’s voice. I want to see how he does with the meatier material of Books 5 and 6. (It may be no coincidence; remember, Rowling approved the initial casting of the first movie herself…perhaps she did so with the complete saga in mind.)
Comment by Erbo — 10.27.05 @ 12:14 pm
Thanks for commenting, Erbo. About Alan Rickman, I think he takes away from Snape’s nastiness. Every time I see Rickman, I think of his role as Hans Gruber in “Die Hard.” He was a bad guy, but I really liked him.
The way Snape is described in the book, his appearance is hideous: sallow skin, greasy hair, yellow teeth — Rickman is not portrayed that way and is not as nasty as in the book. He’s…too attractive to be Snape. Know what I mean?
Comment by La Shawn — 10.27.05 @ 12:17 pm
Love your theory and hope that it proves true. There’s something about Snape that rings true when I integrate it into your hypothesis. The whole series has been fantastic, and I applaud Rowling’s talent. She has held my interest, whilst I find the great majority of the NYT recommendations to be quite boring. Go figure. (Yup, I know, it could be a critique of me….)
Comment by Da Coyote — 10.27.05 @ 1:09 pm
La Shawn Barber has a lengthy and fascinating post on Harry Potter. Warning: Spoilers if you haven’t read books 6. Possibly even spoilers for book 7 (it’s all theory and guesswork, but she’s probably guessed right). If you want to be surprised by book 7, you may want to skip this one.
Pingback by Infinitely Prolonged — 10.27.05 @ 1:11 pm
Your column was excellent. As a huge longtime Narnia fan and a new fan of Tolkien, I think that Rowlings belongs with that pantheon of great storytellers who transcend the boundaries of Christian teachings to give us great literature.
My nine year old and I have read the books together, Book 6 being a three-day marathon during the hot days of July. To him, the magic is an incidental but necessary element in the timelessness of the stories. How to capture magic in today’s world of Gameboys and the internet? He adores the friendships between the characters, the challenges of Quidditch and dealing with prefects, the relationship between teachers and students. Every book expands upon his imaginary Hogwarts, where the interesting creatures he conjures in his mind are much more important than the magic spells.
For myself, I tend to be a nut about tidying loose ends in a storyline, especially one that extends over seven books. I too have read that Rowlings plotted out the story and created the entire backdrop of the magical world long before she wrote the first book. It was always intended to be a 7 book series, which is why they promoted the first book as Year One at Hogwarts.
Rowlings seems as obsessive about details as a writer as I am as a reader. We have a theory in our household that Harry is the ultimate Horcrux and will have to be sacrificed to defeat He who must not be named. We also think that we will learn a lot more about Harry’s father in the final book, who is a bit of an unknown.
I disagree with you on Rickman as Snape. I can’t think of better casting. While Rickman might be too attractive visually, he is perfectly poised to present the complexities of the grown-up Snape as well get to understand his role better. Now, Snape being in love with Lilly is a new one…. Have to share that with the family.
Thanks for the great column.
Comment by Robin — 10.27.05 @ 1:28 pm
I find your arguments compelling, except the one about Regulus Black. I think that it’s no problem that that’s so obvious. What isn’t so obvious is if we have come across the ‘missing’ horcrux earlier in the series. My suspicion is that the best candidate is the ‘heavy locket that none of them could open’ in ‘The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black’ in Order of the Phoenix. If this surmisal is correct then it is a no-brainer that Regulus put it there but a wealth of possibility opens up as to who now has it. Outside possibilities are the Weasley twins, who were busy pocketing doxies and Wartcap powder while cleaning up the house but much more likely lines of investigation are divided between Kreacher who was attempting to ‘smuggle things away under his loincloth’ and, of course, Mundungus Fletcher the thief, recent procurer of Harry’s portable inheritance from Sirius.
O, and one more thing, I also disagree with you about the Prince. I suspect, in spite of the chapter heading, ‘The Flight of the Prince’ and Snape’s appropriation of the title that it will turn out that the ‘Hermionutics’ are, as usual, right and that Snape’s mother, Eileen, was the Prince. Otherwise, how come the book is so old?
Comment by John Kilpatrick — 10.27.05 @ 1:28 pm
John - Interesting. So you think Snape was lying about being the Half-Blood Prince? We know from the last chapter that the book belonged to his mother Eileen, so it’s plausible that the book, although old, was passed down to Snape. The questions are: 1) Why was the book left in the potions class cabinet or supply closet in the first place, and 2) Do we know Eileen’s parentage? Is she a pure-blood and if so, how could she be a half-blood? Perhaps she was using “half-blood” differently from common usage.
Interesting…
Robin - Thanks for theorizing!
Comment by La Shawn — 10.27.05 @ 1:35 pm
Let’s get 2 things out of the way: I’m a Christian and an avid reader of a wide spectrum of books, from historical records to science fiction.
When the Harry Potter series came out and gradually expanded its reach across the reading community, I had no interest either way. I didn’t understand why various religious organizations criticized the books as devil-worship and tried to get the books removed from bookstores while the books were critically acclaimed by the usual pundits including the NY Times book review.
Perhaps I’m not the kind of Christian you’re looking for because I played the card game Magic: The Gathering while I was in high school (I’m 27 now) and I never considered it to be much more than entertainment while my mother considered it to be devilish and pagan. I’ve never been one to think that mere words in a book or games that children play can manipulate an individual unless responsible adults neglect to teach these children right and wrong.
Finally this year I had some free time and read the 6 novels that comprise the Harry Potter saga. For the most part I was unimpressed. The story lines were fairly typical and while some aspects were imaginative, nothing really stood out to me as a book that should be given accolades for great literature or burned at the stake for heresy. They were just books of fiction.
That said, I do think that Snape and Dumbledore worked out an arrangement to get Snape back into “he who should not be named”’s inner circle. I’m just curious how to explain Snape using one of the forbidden spells which carry an immediate prison sentence. Not to mention that Harry is supposed to try and kill Snape on sight. Then again, they played that game in book 3 and Harry ended up wishing Sirius Black would become his adopted father.
All in all, I’m just glad these books have gotten some kids interested in reading again and I hope that it gets them to read more. I know that in my youth, LOTR, David Eddings books, Dragonlace and several others got me started reading and I hope these books do the same for others.
BTW, I’m looking forward to the movie coming out shortly because I felt that Book 4 was by far the best of the 6 Harry Potter books that have been written.
Comment by NJRob — 10.27.05 @ 1:37 pm
La Shawn I think that there is something of the ‘sons and mothers’ thing going on, that Snape didn’t plant the book but knew jolly well that Harry had got hold of it, that some of the spells in the book were Snape’s rather than his mother’s and that his ‘lie’ was a pointer to something he expects Harry to work out rather than the opposite. Yes, now you mention it, it could be that we are jumping to conclusions about what Eileen Prince might have meant by half blood; Prince was a family name turned into a title so why not something similar for half blood? That being said, I’d have to read the book again to look for her parentage.
Comment by John Kilpatrick — 10.27.05 @ 2:00 pm
Back to Horcruxes… my son believes that Mundungus Fletcher is under the Imperio Charm in Book 6, and that he has stolen the charm found by RAB (Regulus Black).
While I agree to an extent about the theme of sons and mothers, I find a constant theme throughout is Harry’s attachment to father-like figures. Professor Lupin, Sirius Black, Dumbledore, all of these men knew his father and provide that stability from time to time. Losing Dumbledore, the most constant of those figures, literally throws Harry out on his own for the first time. He is now an adult and will have to act on his own without the comfort of knowing that Dumbledore will be there behind him.
Or will Dumbledore return as Gandolf did? Gandolf the Grey fought the firey evil below the earth and returned as Gandolf the White to lead the men of Middle Earth to their destiny. Is Rowlings inspired by Gandolf in her depiction of Dumbledore?
This has been such an engaging conversation. Thank you!
Comment by Robin — 10.27.05 @ 3:16 pm
Robin, if you read some of the articles on John Granger’s site, which I link to, you’ll find a lot of info about Rowling’s inspirations. Granger talks about her education in classical languages and such, and she’s steeped in Christian Medieval symbolism, for example, and the whole canon of English literature. All of it is fascinating.
And notice in the books that when characters die, they stay dead. I don’t think Dumbledore is coming back except as a portrait. I think he left Harry an important message/clue, so in that sense we’ll “see” him in Book 7.
About the Horcruxes, part of me believes that Harry’s scar is one, but according to what we’ve learned in Book 6, they require some kind of spell to create. I don’t think Voldemort could’ve made one accidentally. I don’t know. Something to consider.
Comment by La Shawn — 10.27.05 @ 3:18 pm
Well LaShawn, I have considered reading the Harry Potter series after seeing the movies. Now I think I will! I didn’t read this post to not get the spoiler.
Comment by Randy — 10.27.05 @ 3:35 pm
OH , I didn’t say that your townhall column convinced me it would be worth the effort.
Comment by Randy — 10.27.05 @ 3:37 pm
Randy - You may notice how eager I am to talk about the books because I reply seconds after commenters post!
Yes, read the books. Much richer and more detailed than the movies, which are good in their own right. You will notice big differences in certain places, but Rowling has retained creative rights to the movies. I read somewhere that certain changes in the movies also serve as clues for the series and should be considered when trying to unravel the mystery.
Comment by La Shawn — 10.27.05 @ 3:38 pm
If you want to discuss Harry Potter somewhere other than your own blog, I rec. http://www.sugarquill.net. Their forums are very good and they have some of the most polite and well-informed discussions on the net.
I enjoyed your column and also this entry. I am partial to your ‘Dumbledore was already dead’ theory. It’s something interesting to ponder as I listen to the audio books with my husband.
Comment by sariah — 10.27.05 @ 3:57 pm
Thanks, sariah. As you listen, pay special attention to “death,” “dead”, or decayed references in relation to Dumbledore. In the Great Hall at the beginning of Book 6, either Ron or Hermione say something about his hand looking dead. All clues to either his actual death at the end, or the one at the start of the book. It’s forshadowing the ending or clueing us in on the beginning.
Comment by La Shawn — 10.27.05 @ 4:05 pm
Ha…you’re fun La Shawn. I am traveling to Boston tomorrow and might pick up the first book to take with me.
Comment by Randy — 10.27.05 @ 5:33 pm
Wow, La Shawn! I just read the article you linked to by John Granger “Harry Potter and the Inklings.” How illuminating. I always wondered why I struggled with Philip Pullman’s trilogy - my husband loves them, yet I never felt an affinity for the characters. There is no warmth to the story. The central idea is imaginative, the writing is very good, but it lacks that essential spark to good literature, particularly that directed toward young adults. I can also say that I have yet to meet a kid who loved the books and I live in a collegetown filled with very liberal families. Granger’s guess that Gilderoy Lockhart is Pullman is very humorous and very telling of Rowlings’s greater ambitions for her tales - caricatures of modern writers and their degree of self-importance is terribly funny to someone who lives around the large egos of the university elite.
Granger makes a very good case for the comparisons between C.S. Lewis and Rowlings - as I read I kept thinking yes! What is most striking to me is Harry Potter as the “everyman.” He is a reluctant hero, a character wrestling with his destiny, and his battles are internal as well as external. Furthermore, every character is a complex one with the exceptions of Hagrid and Professor McGonagall. Dumbledore is given to second guessing his decisions as he assumes the unofficial leadership role of the wizarding world. Snape is portrayed as a blight to Harry’s existence who might ultimately serve as Harry’s accomplice in the defeat of Voldemort.
That Rowlings can provide these wonderful characters, give us humorous moments in the best Jane Austen tradition and serve up the best tale of adventure in our time is simply remarkable. When I read her books, I am simply stunned that she has so deftly and confidently picked up the mantle of great storytelling - with all the depth and imagery of past works - and managed to make it timely as well.
I also think that R.A.B. is indeed Regulus Black. Not every clue has to be well-hidden and I suspect that making it easy to remember the locket and return to the chapter in which it was initially written about serves as a clue itself. What else was in the cabinet and in the room in the Order of the Phoenix?
I am so glad that you are encouraging those who have kept away from the books for a variety of reasons to pick them up. The movies are no substitute.
Comment by Robin — 10.27.05 @ 5:44 pm
I recently finished reading books 4, 5 and 6 back-to-back-to-back. I’ve seen the first three movies and it is hard to go back and read the books now that I know pretty much what happened. Maybe I’ll skim them at some point to pick up on the differences.
I am looking forward to seeing the movie for book 4 in a couple of weeks. I’m sure they are already in pre-production for book 5. If they haven’t cast it already, my wife suggested the perfect actress to play the totally contemptible Dolores Umbridge: Barbra Streisand.
Just picturing Babs being carried off into the forest by a horde of centaurs warms my heart. She’ll never do it, though.
Comment by Ben Pugh — 10.27.05 @ 6:02 pm
Any reasonable Christian with strong faith and grounding in reality should have no trouble whatsoever with these books. My family and I have enjoyed them from the start. In fact, we’ve already worn out the bindings of at least a couple of them, and my 8 year old read “Goblet of Fire” in just over a week.
The books are wonderful stories, keep our fevered imaginations engaged, and we love second-guessing Rowling. We’ve been wrong before, but we’ve also been right. Mrs. Woody picked up on the Harry/Ginny and Ron/Hermione couplings ‘way back in Book 2.
My girls have loved our little tradition of “magic stories” that Daddy spins as he tucks them into bed at night. I use unique spins on fairy tales of all sorts, as well as Aesop’s Fables, and not a few stories out of the scriptures. They love ‘em all.
I, too, congratulate Rowling for doing such an admirable job of re-energizing a new generation (and a few old ones) of readers. Long live Potter!
Comment by Woody — 10.27.05 @ 6:02 pm
That’s a very interesting theory. I had a hard time believing that Snape would kill Dumbledore heartlessly, and this theory allows Snape to do the dirty deed without being too dirty himself.
I disagree on the RAB reference though. Shortly after the book release, someone asked her about RAB, and this was the exchange:
“JKR: Ohhh, good.
[All laugh.]
JKR: No, I’m glad! Yes?
MA: Can we figure out who he is, from what we know so far?
[Note: JKR has adopted slightly evil look here]
JKR: Do you have a theory?
MA: We’ve come up with Regulus Black.
JKR: Have you now?
MA: Uh-oh.
[Laughter.]
JKR: Well, I think that would be, um, a fine guess.”
At times in the past when she was asked question about topics she didn’t want to reveal, she often made similar statements.
Comment by Kristin — 10.27.05 @ 6:17 pm
I think the big problem some Christians have is that they assume (without reading the books) that the books are endorsing witchcraft. But they aren’t. These aren’t books about “normal” kids who tap into secret powers. They are books about kids in an altogether made-up world.
Saying these books are “un-Christian” is ignorant. They are fiction. They are not a “how to” guide for the occult. One of the best movies of all time is “Star Wars.” I know a great many Christians who love it. But “Star Wars” has a number of problems from a Christian standpoint: first off, there is The Force! But what about the existence of other worlds? Not mentioned in the Bible. What about other intelligent races, races which apparently have souls (as they are part of The Force)? Is there room in Christianity for that? If God made Man in His own image, did He make the aliens too? Were they in His own image? Then which image is His? People who die come back from the dead (Obi-Wan appears as a ghost). But according to the Bible, the dead go to Heaven (at least the good ones). Once joined with God in Heaven, all earthly matters are supposed to be meaningless. “Star Wars” is fundamental incompatible with Christianity every bit as much as the Harry Potter series… and yet…
Christians tend to like “Star Wars” because A) they recognize that it is fantasy, not reality and B) it is a great movie with universal themes about the battle between good and evil–themes that relate to the Christian view of good and evil.
And yet, they can’t make this same leap of faith with Harry Potter.
Memo to Christians: Harry Potter isn’t real. There is no danger of your children running off to Hogwarts to learn withcraft. And if your kids do take it to the extreme and try to mimic the words of motions of Hermione (”it’s levi OH sah!”), they won’t produce any results.
Comment by Gullyborg — 10.27.05 @ 6:45 pm
La Shawn: I wasn’t thinking in terms of Rickman’s physical appearance, but more in terms of the tone of voice he uses and the personality he conveys. (I usually think of him in the context of another character, too…that of Alexander Dane/Dr. Lazarus in GalaxyQuest, who has a similar kind of sneering, haughty nature about him.)
I note that at least one online merchant has started selling T-shirts proclaiming “Snape Is Innocent.” It appears you’re not the only one that feels he’s not as bad a guy as his actions in HBP made him out to be.
Comment by Erbo — 10.27.05 @ 7:17 pm
on Snape:
I am convinced that Snape was in love with Lily and hated James Potter because of it. He wanted James dead so he could have Lily. But he couldn’t kill him, because then Lily would hate him forever. Therefore, he became a disciple of Voldemort, hoping that he could get another Death Eater or Voldemort himself to kill James.
When Voldemort kills James and Lily, he kills James without discussion, but practically begs Lily to spare herself, to give up Harry. But she defends Harry with her own life, thus destroying Voldemort. Why did Voldemort even bother to give Lily any chance? Why didn’t he just kill her to begin with, without giving her the means to sacrifice herself in order to shield Harry? Obviously to me, he was tyring to reward Snape.
But his (Voldemort’s) plan backfired, in more ways than one.
Now, Dumbledore alone trusts Snape. Why? Because he knows about his feelings for Lily. And he knows that Voldemort’s betrayal broke Snape, and Snape wants revenge more than anything, perhaps even life. And as Dumbledore keeps reminding us, LOVE is the most powerful magic of all. But he can’t go around telling people WHY he trusts Snape for a number of reasons: it might get back to Voldemort, it would make the situation with Harry even more awkward, etc.
So now Snape has been a spy for Dumbledore all this time. But the Death Eaters, and perhaps even Voldemort, haven’t trusted him. Well, he certainly has their trust now! I hadn’t thought about Dumbledore already being dead until now, and it makes perfect sense. Since Dumbledore was already dead (or at least, always a potion away from death), he was ready to go.
He may have already been in this shape when Snape made the unbreakable vow. Surely, Snape would have thought about the possibility of what could happen if he had to choose sides with other Death Eaters, or even Voldemort, present. He would have discussed it with Dumbledore. And Dumbledore would have told him to turn against him in order to gain the trust of the enemy. And if that meant killing Dumbledore, so be it. Dumbledore doesn’t fear death. At age 150, perhaps he had already been cheating death for some time and was ready to go, but was only clinging to life in order to protect us all from Voldemort’s return.
So Dumbledore knew all about Snape and the unbreakabke vow. And he then begged Snape to do it, in order to get him closer to Voldemort.
Now… Dumbledore being dead before then…
He certainly was more distant in general than in previous books. And he was also much more eager to personally pass on knowledge to Harry. Perhaps he was acting as one would act, knowing death was imminent. And if he was “stoppering death” through Snape’s potions, how long could he keep it up? Without a Philosopher’s Stone or Unicorn Blood (he never knew how to make the one, and would never spill the other), he can’t put off death forever. Potions can only last so long. He may have had little time, whether or not Snape killed him.
Knowing his own end was near, he had to ensure that Harry learned about the Horcruxes and such, because it wouldn’t be long before he was gone.
Also, just because Dumbledore is dead, it doesn’t mean he can’t continue to impact the living. What about his portrait in the Headmaster (er… Headmistresses) office? What power does it have? Does it know everything he knew in life?
And what about the Veil? You remember, the veiled archway in the Department of Mysteries? The other side of the Veil is the afterlife. Luna and Harry could hear voices from the other side. If Harry goes back there, will he be able to contact Dumbledore?
What if Harry goes through it?
So far, no one has come out of it… that we know of. Sirius fell through it and vanished–presumed forever dead. But maybe he just doesn’t know that, from the other side, he can just walk back through? What if Harry crosses through, then crosses back?
R.A.B.:
I am sure this is Regalus. There was also an uncle with an “A” name (can’t remember who) so it makes sense that Regalus would have that as his middle name, as a family name. The real horcrux is the mysterious locket no one could open. Regalus is dead, but how did he really die? The assumption is that he was killed by Voldemort or the Death Eaters for treason. Perhaps… but perhaps it was indirectly? What if he was killed trying to break the horcrux, the way Dumbledore was injured and possibly killed by the ring?
The note in the fake locket was addressed to “Dark Lord.” That is how Death Eaters talk. So whoever R.A.B. is, he/she/they was a Death Eater. That COULD be Snape. But… if Snape was R.A.B., then he would have told Dumbledore! And if Snape knew as much about the horcruxes as R.A.B. apparently knew, it wouldn’t have been such a mystery to Dumbledore, who relied on Harry to get the missing memory from Slughorn. Dumbledore wouldn’t have gone after a fake Horcrux, or invested so much into Harry and Slughorn, if Snape was R.A.B.
The only other good theory on R.A.B. is the muggle that Voldemort tortured in the cave. She obviously knew where the cave was. And, while I can’t remember her name, there was a connection to the R.A.B. initials. As Dumbledore explained to us, one wizard alone couldn’t have obtained the locket, and two wizards couldn’t have taken the boat (Harry not counting as a wizard due to being underage). What if that girl from the cave grew up and, knowing about the wizarding world because of Tom Riddle, married a wizard? She could have led him to the cave, where as a team they could have done the same things Dumbledore and Harry did.
But I think the locket at the Black house makes the R.A.B./Regalus connection too strong. That’s R.A.B. The mystery will be what happened to the locket, and how to break it without dying like Regalus.
This just came to me right now—
What if Harry has the locket, but can’t break it. He faces Voldemort again at the Department of Mysteries. He stands in front of the veil, looks Voldemort in the eye, holds up the locket, and says, “remember this?” then calmly steps across the threshold as Voldemort screams his last breath, while Snape turns on his master…
PERFECT!
Comment by Gullyborg — 10.27.05 @ 7:32 pm
But… if Snape was R.A.B., then he would have told Dumbledore! And if Snape knew as much about the horcruxes as R.A.B. apparently knew, it wouldn’t have been such a mystery to Dumbledore, who relied on Harry to get the missing memory from Slughorn.
Well done, Gullyborg. I hadn’t thought about that…
But…
Regulus Black as R.A.B.? In Order of the Phoenix we learned he was only 19 when he died and wasn’t a talented wizard. How could someone so young and mediocre mastermind his way into that cave, make it pass the traps, and steal the horcrux? What about that potion in the basin? Who else but a great wizard/witch and potions master could figure out how to get around it without getting himself killed?
Nope, J.K.R. is trying to get us to look in the wrong direction.
I don’t know about that locket, either. If it’s a horcrux, why didn’t Voldemort curse it like he did the ring so no one would destroy it?
Interesting theories. This is too fun. I may have to re-read all six books to pick up on subtle clues I missed the first time around.
Comment by La Shawn — 10.27.05 @ 7:49 pm
I agree completely with everything you said. I read this theory on another site and have been convinced of it ever since. And I agree with you about R.A.B. not being Regulus either.
Comment by Anna — 10.27.05 @ 7:53 pm
There was a big ruckus here in our county in one of the local school districts. A couple petitioned the school to take HP out of the library, out of the classroom, etc. The thing is, the woman is an acquaintance of mine…and I was uninformed at the time. When I then read the books and was charmed by them, she was not longer charmed with ME.
Hh
Comment by Hannah — 10.27.05 @ 9:33 pm
Yes, I am a Christian, and yes I have read them. And I like them very much, in fact I am recovering from surgery by listening to them on my iPod. The magic doesn’t bother me because I don’t think it’s the point, only the medium. The point is that there is very much evil in this world, yes, even a very evil person who wants go get us all. But with courage and by using our strengths we can fight him. And we can defeat him.
Excuse me, but I need to go back to the third book…!
Comment by CalGirl — 10.27.05 @ 9:38 pm
Kevin T. Keith said: Are you sure? I don’t know much about her, but I recall the standard story that she was living on public assistance, writing the first book in her spare time, and got some sort of arts grant to finish it. She only wrote the second book after the first was successful. Although it’s obvious there’s an ongoing story at the end of the first book, it’s hard to imagine she really planned a 7-volume series before she had even finished the first one or had any reason to imagine she would even be able to do so. Has she said she planned it out? And if so, why did it take so long to finish #6?
Well, she *did* have a young, very young child to take care of. She says that book 7 is going to take a long time because of her baby girl. Plus, even if you have a whole story mapped out, writing it down is really hard.
And, she did say that she had notebooks and boxes full of stuff on HP, and that before she wrote the books she made up all the people in Harry’s year, and all their stories. But I can’t find the interview that she that in, sorry.
Oh, and as I was reading through one interview I came across this bit, which made me wonder if Dumbledore was not planning to die:
ES: Was Dumbledore planning to die?
JKR: [Pause.] Do you think that’s going to be the big theory?
MA & ES: Yes. It’ll be a big theory.
JKR: [Pause.] Well, I don’t want to shoot that one down. [A little laughter.] I have to give people hope.
Keep the cogs turning.
Comment by Pipsqueak — 10.27.05 @ 9:45 pm
Oops. Sorry for the mess up in formatting. I didn’t mean for everything I said to be in italics.
I think I fixed it.
- Admin
Comment by Pipsqueak — 10.27.05 @ 9:47 pm
In Half-Blood Prince, Horace Slughorn mentions the Smith brothers when he meets Harry. He mentions that he had Regulus in Slytherin, but that he “would have liked the set.” Slughorn favored students for many reasons, but the phrasing puts Regulus on an equal footing with Sirius. Slughorn is presented as the kind of person who would immediately drop an inconvenient acquaintance. If Regulus really lacked talent it is unlikely that Slughorn would raise the example while trying to impress Harry.
I have not searched Order of the Phoenix to check my memory, but I believe that the dismissive view of Regulus Black came from Sirius, who calls his brother an idiot in context of Regulus’s infatuation with Voldemort. Whatever the virtues of Sirius, he is presented as a person given to harsh judgments and acerbic comments. Am I missing some other source of evidence about Regulus’ lack of talent?
Also, Regulus’s age shouldn’t be an issue. Didn’t Dumbledore tell Harry that one of the problems of age is the tendency to underestimate youth? I think that the topic even comes up in the cave.
On the subject of Snape, there is another bit of evidence in his favor. He never ceases to be a teacher to Harry. Even as they battle after Dumbledore’s death Snape gives Harry precise information on what Harry is doing wrong, and what he will have to learn in order to have a chance to succeed if he fights Voldemort. It’s a very odd set of instructions to hurl at a sworn enemy.
Your theory about Dumbledore’s death is intriguing, and very possibly right. At a minimum it gives me an excuse to re-read the book with that idea in mind.
Thanks,
Joseph
Comment by Joseph — 10.27.05 @ 9:57 pm
Pipsqueak, here’s the link to info about backstory and notebooks:
http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-1.htm
Here’s a link to an interview verifying the entire series has been plotted out from the beginning:
http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/0700-ap-woods.html
Joseph, you’re right about the assessment of Regulus’s talent coming from his brother. We can look at it several ways: brotherly contempt, the truth, or a bit of both.
I like my Dumbledore theory, too. It’s different, that’s for sure.
Comment by La Shawn — 10.27.05 @ 10:03 pm
Thanks for the links… I knew she said it somewhere!
Comment by Pipsqueak — 10.27.05 @ 11:22 pm
well, great. now you’ve done gone and got me thinking about harry potter conspiracy theories again.
dumbledore being already “dead” is a fascinating theory; even twisted little me hadn’t thought of that one yet.
what i did notice and remember was snape’s book 1 reference to “stoppering death”; and slughorn’s repeated references to harry whipping up a picture-perfect “draught of living death”.
hmmmm. what might such a potion be good for?
Comment by biggus rickus — 10.28.05 @ 4:14 am
If I am not mistaken, the draught of living death is one that causes a person to seem dead when he’s not. I don’t think it’s a zombie-producing potion, is it?
Comment by CalGirl — 10.28.05 @ 10:47 am
i think Dumbledore wasn’t dead at the beginning of the book, or he’d have already been a portrait. also, don’t you need a Sorcerer’s Stone to stopper death? the only known one was destroyed in book 1, though i suppose Dumbledore could have made another one, since he knew the formula.
i also think that’s the main way Dumbledore will communicate with Harry in 7 (portrait). he’s done so much that Harry can go to pretty much any wizarding institution and find Dumbledore. also, he may have had his mirror with him when he died, because i think that’s how the entire Order communicates. if he had his mirror, there’s that. also, Fawkes. Fawkes has left Hogwarts, but Harry is too. i think Fawkes will be keeping an eye on Harry.
R.A.B. - i have to agree that he would have been too young to have been a wizard great enough to get through the potion. but then again, Harry, Ron and Hermione, with Neville, Luna and Ginny, probably could have gotten it… but did Regulus have friends that close, and were they all that powerful? and could a bezoar have counteracted the potion? maybe if Snape was with Regulus…
i like your theory that R.A.B. is more than one person. Remus (ooh, or Rubeus, who’s not even fully qualified), Aberforth (Dumbledore’s brother) (or could be Arthur Weasley) (Arabella Figg?), B… not sure. Bertie Bott! or R.A.B. could be Mr. Borgin, whose full name is yet undisclosed. he’s visibly shaken by dark wizards. maybe relunctantly on their side?
i once had a theory that it stood for Rosmerta A. Barmaid. but i don’t think that’s right.
Snape’s definitely good, Dumbledore was pleading with him to kill him…
about Gullyborg’s locket theory. if it has a permanent sticking charm on it, then it probably does have to go through the black veil. or go into the fires at mordor, one.
now. i’m a firm believer that Harry is a Horcrux and must die. the clues to him being a Horcrux are sooo many, not the least of which is the great wizarding power that Harry possesses, and the access to Voldemort’s thoughts, even when not making eye contact. but what about the spell? i think Rowling is going to explain that if you kill twice in a row and try to kill a third time immediately, that the third time can backfire and you perform the Horcrux spell inadvertently. so Harry’s a Horcrux, but Voldemort doesn’t know it. there are two unknowns. a Ravenclaw or Gryffindor relic, and Nagini? nah. he wouldn’t be happy with 3 of 4 houses as Horcruxes. a Ravenclaw relic AND a Gryffindor relic (Harry being the Gryffindor relic, because the Sorting Hat and the sword are well-guarded).
perhaps he’ll try to kill Harry, and if he succeeds, he leaves himself vulnerable for Snape to kill him, because by that time, the other Horcruxes will have been destroyed. they’ll figure out when Nagini dies that she’s not a Horcrux, that there’s another.
ok, i’ll stop.
Comment by sarahk — 10.28.05 @ 11:15 am
Thanks for stopping by, SarahK.
As far as I know, not all dead wizards become portraits, although it seems all dead Howarts headmasters/mistresses become portraits. I think if that’s the case, there was something about Snape’s potion that must have feigned “life” or something.
The PS is one way to stay alive, but I think by the “stopper death” remark, Snape meant he could make a potion since he was talking about it in that context.
It’s fun to theorize, isn’t it? Reading all six books gives us so much to work with: what we know, what we think are reasonable possibilities, and what we don’t know.
i think Rowling is going to explain that if you kill twice in a row and try to kill a third time immediately, that the third time can backfire and you perform the Horcrux spell inadvertently.
If that’s the case, I think Rowling would’ve given us some kind of hint or clue about the “third time” theory. I think it would be cheating if she sprang it on us in Book 7 as a brand new revelation. Part of the fun is realizing the clues were right there for us to read the whole time.
Comment by La Shawn — 10.28.05 @ 11:23 am
What a great essay, La Shawn, and the comment thread equally as fascinating.
Okay, here’s my take. The true subject of Madame Trelawny’s prophecy was not Harry Potter. It was Neville Longbottom. Recall that the prophecy (that neither can die while the other lives) was made about a boy child born on July 31st. Dumbledore tells Harry Potter that two children were born that day — he and Neville.
Neville will die heroically, saving the day, proving the prophecy correct. Dumbledore knew this all along, but like the “Secret Keeper,” he cannot tell Harry or anyone else. He can only leave a few subtle clues.
My favorite foreshadowing of this is in Book One. Remember who wins the House Cup? It is Neville, for being braver than Harry, Ron, or Hermione. Dumbledore says “It takes great courage to stand up to your enemies, but to stand up to your friends takes even more.” Then he awards Neville ten points.
This would be the twist to end all twists. The hero of the magical world, the one who ends Voldemort for good, is Neville Longbottom.
Comment by Bonnie — 10.28.05 @ 12:23 pm
JKR answered a question about what significance Neville has as the boy in the prophecy, on her website on one of the FAQ question polls, and this is what she said:
What is the significance of Neville being the other boy to whom the prophecy might have referred?
JKR Finally, I am answering the poll question! I am sorry it has taken so long, but let me start by saying how glad I am that this was the question that received the most votes, because this was the one that I most wanted to answer. Some of you might not like what I am going to say - but I’ll address that issue at the end of my response!
To recap: Neville was born on the 30th of July, the day before Harry, so he too was born ‘as the seventh month dies’. His parents, who were both famous Aurors, had ‘thrice defied’ Voldemort, just as Lily and James had. Voldemort was therefore presented with the choice of two baby boys to whom the prophecy might apply. However, he did not entirely realise what the implications of attacking them might be, because he had not heard the entire prophecy. As Dumbledore says:
‘He [the eavesdropper] only heard the beginning, the part foretelling the birth of a boy in July to parents who had thrice defied Voldemort. Consequently, he could not warn his master that to attack you would be to risk transferring power to you.’
In effect, the prophecy gave Voldemort the choice of two candidates for his possible nemesis. In choosing which boy to murder, he was also (without realising it) choosing which boy to anoint as the Chosen One - to give him tools no other wizard possessed - the scar and the ability it conferred, a magical window into Voldemort’s mind.
So what would have happened if Voldemort had decided that the pure-blood, not the half-blood, was the bigger threat? What would have happened if he had attacked Neville instead? Harry wonders this during the course of ‘Half-Blood Prince’ and concludes, rightly, that the answer hinges on whether or not one of Neville’s parents would have been able, or prepared, to die for their son in the way that Lily died for Harry. If they hadn’t, Neville would have been killed outright. Had Frank or Alice thrown themselves in front of Neville, however, the killing curse would have rebounded just as it did in Harry’s case, and Neville would have been the one who survived with the lightning scar. What would this have meant? Would a Neville bearing the lightning scar have been as successful at evading Voldemort as Harry has been? Would Neville have had the qualities that have enabled Harry to remain strong and sane throughout all of his many ordeals? Although Dumbledore does not say as much, he does not believe so: he believes Voldemort did indeed choose the boy most likely to be able to topple him, for Harry’s survival has not depended wholly or even mainly upon his scar.
So where does this leave Neville, the boy who was so nearly King? Well, it does not give him either hidden powers or a mysterious destiny. He remains a ‘normal’ wizarding boy, albeit one with a past, in its way, as tragic as Harry’s. As you saw in ‘Order of the Phoenix,’ however, Neville is not without his own latent strengths. It remains to be seen how he will feel if he ever finds out how close he came to being the Chosen One.
Some of you, who have been convinced that the prophecy marked Neville, in some mystical fashion, for a fate intertwined with Harry’s, may find this answer rather dull. Yet I was making what I felt was a significant point about Harry and Voldemort, and about prophecies themselves, in showing Neville as the also-ran. If neither boy was ‘pre-ordained’ before Voldemort’s attack to become his possible vanquisher, then the prophecy (like the one the witches make to Macbeth, if anyone has read the play of the same name) becomes the catalyst for a situation that would never have occurred if it had not been made. Harry is propelled into a terrifying position he might never have sought, while Neville remains the tantalising ‘might-have-been’. Destiny is a name often given in retrospect to choices that had dramatic consequences.
Of course, none of this should be taken to mean that Neville does not have a significant part to play in the last two novels, or the fight against Voldemort. As for the prophecy itself, it remains ambiguous, not only to readers, but to my characters. Prophecies (think of Nostradamus!) are usually open to many different interpretations. That is both their strength and their weakness.
So I don’t think that he has something to do with the prophecy anymore. I think he could have if Voldemort had tried to kill him, but V. chose Harry.
Comment by Pipsqueak — 10.28.05 @ 1:39 pm
While I agree with your Snape-assisted/already-dead Dumbledore theory, I must part with your interpretation of the “stopper death†passage.
You equate Snape’s professed ability to stopper death with an ability to arrest death in its tracks. But in the context of a sentence about teaching how “to bottle fame, brew glory, even stopper death,†the word “stoppering†must be taken to mean “corking†(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stopper_(plug)). Furthermore, the rest of the passage discusses the creation of fame and glory with potions, not controlling them, as you suggest Snape’s ability to stopper death does. Stoppering death, then, refers to being able to create and cork up a bottle full of death – poison, in other words. It does not address whether Snape can halt death’s progress in Dumbledore.
Of course, none of this precludes the possibility that Snape can do what you suggest (and I agree) he has done. I just don’t think this passage is relevant in the way you suggest.
Fascinating discussion, and thanks for the links to additional resources.
Comment by Quicklime — 10.28.05 @ 1:57 pm
But the plug motif is exactly what I had in mind. I recall stoppers from my thankfully-brief chemistry days in high school.
This is the image: I saw the death curse about to spread throughout Dumbledore’s body, beginning with his blackened hand. I don’t know the how of all this, but he somehow contacted Snape, whose potion “plugged up” the death that was about to spread through Dumbledore’s body. In my view, the word “stopper” could mean a literal stopper or a figurative one.
It would’ve been helpful to say that in the post, but I guess I thought readers would see the image in my head.
Thanks for playing, Quicklime! Can’t wait for Book 7…
Comment by La Shawn — 10.28.05 @ 2:04 pm
WOW La Shawn - I thought *I* was getting too involved with Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.
Every night (most times) my wife & daughter would listen to me read Half-Blood Prince and all of us just could NOT believe that (1) Dumbledore was really dead, and (2) that Snape really killed him (we’ve all suspected that Snape’s loathing of Harry was some sort of an act).
Comment by Mad Mikey — 10.28.05 @ 2:39 pm
It’s good to see this theory getting some play again. I first heard it from John Granger (who predicted several books back that Dumbledore must die). His work has been very, very thorough (and he’s quite a good correspondent, too.)
If you get the chance, read Granger’s books. He makes some particularly good connections with medieval alchemy, and he remarks that Rowling keeps to the same pattern in the climax of every book: Harry has a death “experience” before returning to life in triumph. Get that research in your head, then read the scene in the cave again. It’s just awesome.
Comment by slarrow — 10.28.05 @ 5:51 pm
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
I may have mentioned in my Former Blog that Jane and I are Harry Potter fans. We saw the first movie without having read the book; since then, my practice is to read the book once by myself, and then…
Trackback by Jungle Pop — 10.29.05 @ 4:47 am
Thanks for this! It was very interesting reading and definitely thought provoking! You know of course, that I am going to have to go back and read all the books again lol. I am linking to this.
Comment by Rachel — 10.29.05 @ 4:36 pm
Those who like Harry Potter and who have read all 6 books, should definitely shoot over to this site. Interesting theories abound and now I am wanting to read all the books again!!! Let me know what you think (if you pop over! This especially means you RORY!).
Pingback by Life Being Beautiful — 10.29.05 @ 4:42 pm