Harry Potter and The Half-Blood Prince- spoiled.

Robert · **Posted:** Wed Jul 20, 2005 2:03 pm

Fiddelysquat wrote:

jellyoflight wrote:

Had a mini-brainwave.

In PoA, when Harry has the flashbacks of his parent's death, Lily is called a "silly girl" by Voldie whilst protecting Harry.

Hermione's been reffered to as a "silly girl" lots of times, by Rita Skeeter and also by Snape.

We know they were both good at Charms (Hermione got something like 112% on a Charms test, and it's been mentioned lots of times about Lily being good at Charms), and good at potions (Slughorn says lots of times that Lily had a natural ability, and it's been mentioned/hinted lots of times that Hermione is quite good), so they were probably both clever. Charms and Potions lead me to think that perhaps Lily was good at logic, like Hermione.

So, what if Hermione dies whilst trying to protect Harry?

Oooh, the conspiracy!

*sorry if this doesn't make much sense, I'm tired

*

I kill Rowling if that happens.

I've been thinking that both Ron and Hermione will sacrafice themselves for Harry. And then of course Harry dies, along with Voldermort, wizarding world goes back to there lives. Bada Boom, Bada Bing.

Tharkun · **Posted:** Wed Jul 20, 2005 2:15 pm

Thus far, my arguments have only served to make the Snape matter ambiguous, but here's the death-stroke to the denial theory, and good riddance to it.

Bellatrix wrote:

Never used an Unforgivable Curse before, have you, boy? You need to mean them, Potter! You need to really want to cause me pain - to enjoy it -

I was pounding my fist into the book after I remembered that one, all right.

However, there's still some explaining to do as to Dumbledore's Freezing Charm and Snape showing Fudge his arm.

TDG · **Posted:** Wed Jul 20, 2005 2:25 pm

As much as I hate to admit it, Snape probably will end up being good. Remember, take everything not stated as a fact by a relaible source with a pinch of salt. A Death Eater trying to prevent the only boy who lived through Voldemort's attack from using a torture curse on her isn't the most reliable sources. Much like Aunt Petunia claimed Lily came home each holidays and flaunted her magic by transfiguring things, people aren't the most reliable sources in the book

Snape may not have wanted to enjoy it, but he may have been able to do it never-the-less.

The fact that the last bit sees added on in an after-thought by Bellatrix, I imagine you only have to mean for the person to be tortured, under your control or dead.

Besides, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to realise J.K. Rowling doesn't always remember things said in the past

(*Dranzer*) · **Posted:** Wed Jul 20, 2005 3:47 pm

fzun wrote:

bgryph wrote:

gaterion wrote:

Since Dumbledore destroyed the ring, I don't think that only Harry can destroy the Horcruxes.

Well, yeah, but Dumbledore was permanently injured by it and Harry wasn't.

Because the ring had a curse on it while the diary didn't.

Unharmed? He had a fang stuck in his arm if you recall!

bgryph · **Posts:** 674 **Joined:** Wed Jun 02, 2004 8:56 pm

Tharkun wrote:

Thus far, my arguments have only served to make the Snape matter ambiguous, but here's the death-stroke to the denial theory, and good riddance to it.

Bellatrix wrote:

Never used an Unforgivable Curse before, have you, boy? You need to mean them, Potter! You need to really want to cause me pain - to enjoy it -

I was pounding my fist into the book after I remembered that one, all right.

However, there's still some explaining to do as to Dumbledore's Freezing Charm and Snape showing Fudge his arm.

I recall that, too, but I'm not sure it means much. Remember we've seen Bellatrix AK a fox, and Fake Moody used all 3 Unforgivable Curses on spiders. No deep animosity there. Fake Moody also used Imperious curses on students, without (apparently) alarming Dumbledore.

So I figure the most it can mean is that:

a) to make the Unforgivable Curse work, you have to be really serious about it, not just upset and angry. Harry apparently wasn't really serious about torturing Bella even though he was angry. Snape would have been serious about killing Dumbledore even if he were acting on Dumbledore's orders.

b) to make the curse work you have to be the kind of person who would use them: to enjoy causing pain, or, in the case of the AK, to be a ruthless killer. Good or evil, I have no doubt that Shape can be a ruthless killer.

Jen · **Posts:** 974 **Joined:** Tue Jun 29, 2004 1:56 pm

Dumbledore was so freaking stupid this book it made me very, very mad. (A.k.a. is there any logic in these sitatuions?)

He said the potion had to be drank because you couldn't get it out with your hands. Why not take it out and dump it? If that would go into the water or something, get a goblet, fill it, put it down, get another, fill it, put it down, etc. until it was empty. Why drink it though?

Dumbledore is an... uh... mind reader (can't remember the word

). He needed Proffesser Slughorns memory, why not just go and get it?

Throughout a lot of the book they were talking about how wizards could do magic without their wands. When Dumbledore was disarmed by Malfoy, why didn't he in his mind, freeze him, disarm him, take Harry's cloak and cover him with it, and continue on into the castle before backup came for Malfoy?

I had a lot of other things I'm not really understanding, but I've convienently forgotten.

Tharkun · **Posted:** Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:22 pm

I wouldn't be surprised if Crouch Jr. and Bellatrix did enjoy those spells, and I doubt word of the lesson reached Dumbledore, because Fake Moody implied that it was Dumbledore's idea. And there has to be some reason Harry's Cruciatus Curse didn't work - he was definitely serious about it.

Jen: Good point about the damnable potion, but...

"The mind is not a book to be opened and read at will."

It was magic without speech, not without wands.

Asthaloth · **Posts:** 4284 **Joined:** Mon May 31, 2004 4:48 am

if Voldemort was smart enough to bewitch the cave to dispell any water giving spells, (not to mention his Stint of Necromancy) dontchya think there would be somthing preventing just chucking the potion away? :roll:

and if Snape was working on orders from Dumbeldor like i suspect, why would he want to bumb off malfoy anyway.

fzun · **Posted:** Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:58 pm

(*Dranzer*) wrote:

fzun wrote:

bgryph wrote:

gaterion wrote:

Since Dumbledore destroyed the ring, I don't think that only Harry can destroy the Horcruxes.

Well, yeah, but Dumbledore was permanently injured by it and Harry wasn't.

Because the ring had a curse on it while the diary didn't.

Unharmed? He had a fang stuck in his arm if you recall!

The fang was from the basilisk, it didn't have anything to do with the book.

the_dog_god wrote:

We know Voldemort approached Dumbledore about a job teaching defense against the dark arts. We know he hadn't fully seperated his soul into 7 pieces because his appearance hadn't fully changed. A lot of the book was about Non-verbal spells and as Dumbledore said, both he and Voldemort knew that Voldemort wouldn't get that job. Perhaps Voldemort had an alternate motive ? We know his Death-Eaters were near Hogwarts, awaiting his return. Perhaps he had killed and seperated part of his soul unto the Sword or Sorting Hat. Again, trinkets. Though they weren't trinkets of somebody he had killed, neither was the Snake or the Diary. What leads me to believe the Hat has a bigger chance as it represents the seperation of nemesis houses (IE : Gryffindor and Slytherin) rather than Godric's sword which represents Gryffindor. What was stopping Voldemort from completing the final stages of the Horcrux non-verbally whilst in that office ?

How could he make a Horcrux out of the sword when it wasn't pulled out of the sorting hat until Harry in his second year?

And that's a really interesting theory, but wouldn't Dumbledore have noticed if Voldemort was making an object in his office into a Horcrux? Wouldn't Voldemort have had to point his wand at it, and don't they take a lot of concentration? Not to mention Dumbledore would have probably seen the spell shoot from his wand, wouldn't he?

Sapphire Faerie · **Posted:** Thu Jul 21, 2005 1:42 am

Maybe it wasn't the Avada Kedavra that killed Dumbledore, maybe it was the fall from the astronomy tower.

The curse kills instantly, right?

Quote:

A jet of green light shot from the end of Snape's wand and hit Dumbledore squarely in the chest. Harry's scream of horror never left him; silent and unmoving, he was forced to watch as Dumbledore was blasted through the air. For a split second, he seemed to hang suspended beneath the shining skull, and then he fell slowly backward, like a great rag doll, over the battlements and out of sight

Ok, the curst hits him. Was Snape serious enough for the curse to kill Dumbledore? Maybe it only knocked him backward. We really don't have enough info about what happens when you use the killing curse without really meaning it. Dumbledore is being thrown off the tower, and Harry still can't move. Is Dumbledore still alive at this point? It isn't until a few moments later, after Snape, Malfoy, and the Death Eaters have exited the towertop that Harry realizes he can move. Maybe it was just the fall that killed him.

.:Compact Disk:. · **Posted:** Thu Jul 21, 2005 1:55 am

Jen I agree with Setekh. There was only one goblet. They had no others. The Goblet was the only thing that could enter the sheild thing. And there would be (I can't remember whether there was but Voldemort wouldn't leave something as impartant as that out :roll:

) a non-spilling charm on it.

Vodemort made it so that the potion HAD to be drank. End of.

Chass: Interesting thought.

Tharkun · **Posted:** Thu Jul 21, 2005 2:19 am

Why would Snape want to bump off Malfoy, no matter where his loyalties lie (and who do you guys think you're kidding?) I mean, as far as we know, the second clause of the Unbreakable Vow, where he swears to protect Malfoy, is still in effect. It's the only thing that could keep Malfoy around for the seventh book, frankly.

Y'know, there really was something different in the style of OotP. That one I took ages to adjust to, but this one's in my system like highly emotional sugar.

Did those of you who didn't think Dumbledore was going to die note that "anguish" was a bit of a strong word to use for Rufus Scrimgeour being a butthead? Ah well, it's still a pithy quote, even if it's JKR's most poorly-placed land mine to date.

Oh, interview. Not that it'll do any good - I have experience with denial and interviews - but here:

Emerson's Interview wrote:

MA: OK, big big big book six question. Is Snape evil?

JKR: [Almost laughing] Well, you've read the book, what do you think?

ES: She's trying to make you say it categorically.

MA: Well, there are conspiracy theorists, and there are people who will claim -

JKR: Cling to some desperate hope [laughter] -

ES: Yes!

MA: Yes!

ES: Like certain shippers we know!

[All laugh]

JKR: Well, okay, I'm obviously – Harry-Snape is now as personal, if not more so, than Harry-Voldemort. I can't answer that question because it's a spoiler, isn't it, whatever I say, and obviously, it has such a huge impact on what will happen when they meet again that I can't. And let's face it, it's going to launch 10,000 theories and I'm going to get a big kick out of reading them so [laughs] I'm evil but I just like the theories, I love the theories.

Matterbug · **Posted:** Thu Jul 21, 2005 2:26 am

Yay, finally finished. It was such a great book, probably one of my favorites. Also a very sad one.

I dislike Snape still, I assume he will turn out to be good, because that's a nice little turn of events- but I still dislike him.

And I was also right about Snape being a double agent. No one I told that to believed me. Pheh.

I hated to see Dumbledore go, but it was neccesary. It follows the classic epic storyline, where the main character is taught by a mentor, but then the mentor dies/leaves and the main character is left to use the teachings for themselves.

But.... no Hogwarts next year? That makes me sad.

TDG · **Posted:** Thu Jul 21, 2005 5:11 am

I think its stupid of Harry not to go back to school really. I mean, he couldn't even touch Snape with one of his spells and hge had just killed Dumbledore. How the heck is he supposed to even phase Voldemort ? (Unless we have another little wand battle and the ghosty people hold him back)

Was anybody else glad to see Dumbledore die ?? He's always annoyed me...I mean, Voldemort is the great evil who ruled for a decade or so and yet when he faces Dumbledore after returning (stronger than ever) at the Ministry, Dumbledore seems to have no problems absolutely kicking poor Voldy's behind. He seems to know exactly what spells are placed where when he enters the cave in Book 6 and he seems to have a way out of everything. In other words, he's a damn godmoder!

Plus his funeral was unbelievablly cheesey...

Yes, I'm a heartless... :evil:

Shoyru_Lover · **Posted:** Thu Jul 21, 2005 6:15 am

Is it just me... or does J.K Rowling use the word serrendipitous a gazillion times?

Pink Poogle Toy Forum

Harry Potter and The Half-Blood Prince- spoiled.

Who is online