quote:Blacwolve, if Mrs. Norris is not an animagus, then why does Filch call a cat "Mrs. Norris?"
Why do people name their cats Mrs. Whiskers or Mr. Bottomsley? People are weird, and Filch certainly fits that bill.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Snape loved Lilly, and hated James. So Snape thinks "Ok, if I cant have Lilly, I will go after the next best thing!" So he starts going with Petunia. But then Petunia finds out during a......"personal moment" (To put it lightly) that Snape is really in love with Lilly, and then calls it off right there!
Petunia blames it on Lilly, possibly accusing her of casting a love spell on Snape to love her instead of Petunia.
Lilly and Snape where not together but still kept in touch. Perhaps Snape let Lilly know a lot of information about Voldemort because he loved her, and this is why Voldemort told Lilly to step aside when he was going after Harry.
LOVE TRIANGLE! Its like a magical Days of our Lives! My wife laughed at me. Oh well
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: There are tons of creatures that have magical properties, but there are also several intelligent non-humans who can either do magic outright or who have special abilities. Veelas and Leprechauns have special powers, and aren't human, or as a race, necessarily derived from humans. House Elves also have their own kind of magic that is not dependent on humans.
All hominid. Therefore (and I admit I'm assuming, but it is true in a great many of the traditional sources JKR is drawing from), derived from humans.
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: Thanks, rivka. I stand corrected. Should have looked it up. Animagus and humagus sound better.
Yeah, and homunculus means something rather different. (which is why I even noticed -- I know the word from some book or other.)
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: Unicorns are magical. So are centaurs--remember the one who teaches a class in magic at Hogwarts? Dragons arguably are magical too, since they do not naturally exist.
Centaurs are also human-derived. Good point on the unicorns (whose blood is definitely magical) and dragons (whose scales are). However, they ARE magic; they don't DO magic. I still think only humans and human-derivatives can actually do magic.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My theories are quite complicated, based on some questions I've been asking myself.
What aspect of the founder's artifacts made Voldemort pursue them? Was it just that they represented Hogwarts or is it something more related to the nature and roots of magic? if the latter is true does that make them more powerful or more likely to prevent death?
Why would Voldemort trust Snape originally and recently (pre dumbledore death)?
Who went with RAB into to the cave? How would the potion affect other magical species? How likely is Voldemort to overlook those he would be inclined to despise (such as muggles or house elves or centaurs) when concocting the potion? Is that a clue towards the protections on the other horcruxes (ie Dobby and Firenze help Harry acquire/break their protections)?
What is up with the non core jeesh handing Harry notes from Dumbledore, why didn't Ron hand one to Harry (they were the two new beaters, Ginny, Hermione, and Luna)? Are the notebearers connected to the lesson that Harry received (such as Ginny delivering the note where Harry learns the full significance of the diary)?
Can Harry kill Voldemort with a horcrux? The best protection Dumbledore could give to the Sorcerer's Stone was very clever. What if Voldemort hid the sword in the hat in a similar manner, knowing he (Voldemort) would never be able to withdraw it again, but ensuring a part of his soul would always be at Hogwarts ready to return? That would mean Harry foreshadowed how he will kill Voldemort when he killed the Basilisk (also when he destroyed his first horcrux). Does Voldemort become stronger when attacked by a horcrux, or do both die? Could Harry use the Horcruxes to shield himself from avada kedavras from Voldemort, forcing Voldemort to destroy his own horcruxes?
so my theory is: Voldemort intended to use the founder's artifacts (cup, sword, locket(stone?), wand) as horcruxes because they embodied the elements of magical heritage. They were symbolic, magically significant, and already shown to possess a singular longevity in comparison to the rest of the Founders' era. The final three horcruxes would also need to be linked. Think about the potion that revived him--servant, father, enemy--and how the Diary and Ring horcrux (tied to his life/family as well) were formed. His final horcrux would be formed from the death of his greatest enemy, the one destined to destroy him. This explains Dumbledore's look of triumph--Voldemort was vulnerable--Harry had not been killed, his death (and the subsequent horcrux from it) had not completed Voldemort's magic. This is also why Voldemort insisted on no deatheater killing Harry, because Voldemort had yet to form the final horcrux. Because he only formed six before Lily's protection 'killed' him.
(What object would the seventh horcrux have been?)
After returning, it seems he created a seventh in the form of Nagini, based on how Harry saw through Nagini's eyes as well as Voldemort's (indicating a split in the soul Harry is magically connected to by the Avadada Kedavra that failed to kill Harry and connects him to Voldemort) at different points, but this still lacks the magical seventh protection because one horcrux had already been destroyed, so Voldemort still isn't safe. And his oppurtunity is destroyed because he split himself without the death of his greatest enemy (perhaps he used a traitor/former servant, Karkaroff, instead) and it no longer achieved the desired seven splits, and his soul will be too diluted to make an additional split.
So here's my theory as to why Dumbledore trusted Snape. The deatheaters knew there was a traitor to the Order, but the traitor was unknown to all the death eaters save Voldemort until Pettigrew revealed the Potters' location. Voldemort, triumphant, presented Pettigrew to his death eaters, After Voldemort left, Snape snatched Pettigrew and took him to Dumbledore (and Hagrid), and jointly they made Pettigrew reveal the location of the Fidelius Protected House--therefore Snape betrayed Voldemort before his downfall in a desparate attempt to save Lily.
Snape has hated Harry ever since because Lily didn't survive, but Harry did. And Harry's fame for surviving, and the relative obscurity of Lily's sacrifice* as the true slayer of Voldemort must have further enraged Snape. Harry then getting all the credit for magically defeating Voldemort must have just made it worse. Only Dumbledore and Snape understood what had actually killed Voldemort, Lily's magic, not Harry's. Lily's death was never properly honored, in Snape's mind.
Dumbledore and Snape (and possibly the Order) left to round up the deatheater ringleaders, Hagrid was entrusted with Harry and told to arrive at Privit Drive, later. Sirius found out from Hagrid where Dumbledore was keeping Pettigrew and chased Pettigrew to the town of their confrontation before Dumbledore could stop him, because at that point, Dumbledore was performing the magic that would protect Harry for the next sixteen years.
Since Pettigrew had framed Sirius in front of witnesses and because Dumbledore had essentially singlehandedly rounded up every major death eater and had them imprisoned and awaiting trial, the Ministry acted with the one 'death eater' in their control and imprisoned him without trial before Dumbledore or Snape could ever give evidence to save him. Since the press got ahold of the story, it was impossible to turn popular opinion on Sirius Black's status as the worst of the death eaters, completely preventing Dumbledore from saving the one innocent the Ministry arrested. It was Dumbledore's preoccupation with Sirius Black that allowed a few death eater ringleaders like Malfoy, Nott, Crabbe and Goyle to walk free on technicalities, a side effect that was aided by a Ministry now worried Dumbledore was going to accuse them of a mindless purge, of imprisoning innocent(s); they were worried he might raise popular opinion against them, Dumbledore alone benefitting from the political capital of victory in the war. So in a sense Dumbledore is responsible for their freedom, one of the more enormous mistakes of his life.
I have a side theory that Snape and Dumbledore were already in tentative negotiations, but it's more oddball and has to do with RAB and Sirius. I think Snape joined Voldemort (he's not a follower) only because Sirius was a leader in the Order, and the war offered him an oppurtunity to kill Sirius. I think before Pettigrew was revealed as the traitor to the death eaters, the rumor amongst the deatheaters was that the traitor was Sirius, because Regulas was passing information about his brother to Bellatrix without realizing it was being used against his brother, a realization that eventually caused Regulas to turn on Voldemort. But the rumor that he was fighting on the same side as Sirius was enough to cause Snape to see about betraying Voldemort to fight against Sirius from the other side. But it was the oppurtunity to save Lily's life and caused Snape to turn traitor on Voldemort. And it was Snape's information about the location and identity of the deatheaters that proved invaluable to rounding them up. And it was probably Snape's refusal to clear Sirius that insured Sirius stayed in prison.
*(the most powerful magical acheivement ever, stopping the unstoppable curse, destroying the most powerful dark wizard ever)
quote:"Based on Rowling saying that one character who has never done magic will do some in an extreme circumstance late in life"
Could Rowling be saying "A character who has never done magic in the books will do....etc."
That allows for even Percy Wesley to fit the bill, unless there is an instance of him performing magic that I cannot recall, obviously he does use magic, just saying there is no instance of it happening.
I wonder if there are other wizards and witches who simply have not been recorded to have performed magic.
JKR has said, "There is a character who does manage, in desperate circumstances, to do magic quite late in life, but that is very rare..."
Just had time to check the exact wording, this means it's someone who has never done magic before, and someone who is quite late in life, not just later than normal magic age.
Posts: 5362 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:You do realize, that somewhere, in some parallel dimension of ours, that this exact plot will actually be written by Rowling.
I personally, am hoping it's not in our reality.
So, MMI gets me a-thinkin', if you guys could live in any parallel dimension that you chose (remembering that EVERY possible plot situation will occur in at least one other dimension), which plotline dimension would you choose?
Put in English, how would the plot proceed in Book 7 if you got to choose it, no matter how unlikely? The only catch is that it cannot obviously contradict what has already been written, since you will be choosing a dimension that has followed Rowling's books exactly, word-for-word, up through book 6.
(Why do I suddenly feel like a Star Trek nerd?)
Personally, I would like a few things to occur:
1) Voldemort will come across some huge mistake or oversight on his part, that will lead to his undoing (since Harry will have discovered this weakness). It will be really cool, for us the readers, to watch Voldemort come to realization with his own mistake, since he values his superiority so much.
2) Hagrid will somehow help Harry, in the end, defeat Voldemort in some noble way. I don't know why, but I really want to see Hagrid do some serious magic, while acting the Hero to save Harry. (mind you, Hagrid will not defeat Voldemort, just help Harry survive the battle).
3) Draco will eventually realize, through some action on Voldemort's part, how rotten the evil side is. He will realize that Voldemort actually cares nothing for him. It will give him the wake-up call he has needed. He will be the one to kill his own father in an attempt to stop his father from killing or hurting someone else.
4) We will learn that Snape is good, and he and Dumbledore had a very good reason for Snape killing the latter. Snape will be put in a situation where Harry is the only one who can save him. Harry will face one of the toughest decisions of his life, as he must decide whether to trust Snape and save him, or kill him (or at least let him die). Harry will save him, and Snape will be humbled enough to actually thank Harry. Snape will then teach Harry enough things to give him the final preparation (i.e. legilimency (sp?) training) to defeat Voldemort.
5) Harry and Ginny will get together. At least one thing good needs to happen to Harry in his life.
That's all for now. What does everyone else want?
Posts: 684 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I remember reading J. K. Rowling in an interview saying that she'd been to a Harry Potter fansite and posted her own (anonymous) take on what was going to happen... and no one believed her or paid any attention to her.
So, heck, Christine could actually BE J. K. Rowling having fun making some bets before book 7 comes out... Posts: 2911 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:"Based on Rowling saying that one character who has never done magic will do some in an extreme circumstance late in life"
Could Rowling be saying "A character who has never done magic in the books will do....etc."
That allows for even Percy Wesley to fit the bill, unless there is an instance of him performing magic that I cannot recall, obviously he does use magic, just saying there is no instance of it happening.
I wonder if there are other wizards and witches who simply have not been recorded to have performed magic.
JKR has said, "There is a character who does manage, in desperate circumstances, to do magic quite late in life, but that is very rare..."
Just had time to check the exact wording, this means it's someone who has never done magic before, and someone who is quite late in life, not just later than normal magic age.
Forgive me if I missed this debate, but why can't this "late in life" character be Filch? We've seen him trying to learn magic with that QuikSpell packet - if Mrs. Norris really died or if the Death Munchers stole his manacles, I can see him snapping and letting a few sparks fly.
Posts: 3932 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Does that quote regarding a late-bloomer necessarily refer to an upcoming incident in book 7? Rowling has revealed on several occasions that for many characters she has developed very extensive life-histories that will not be revealed to readers because of either editting or a lack of necessity. No doubt she has stories for very minor character mentioned only in passing. It may not be important to the plot that we know about a certain character who can perform magic in times of crisis, but such information may help her understand her own universe or reason through the actions of related characters. It doesn't mean it will appear in the seventh book.
Does that make any sense?
Posts: 1733 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by plaid: I remember reading J. K. Rowling in an interview saying that she'd been to a Harry Potter fansite and posted her own (anonymous) take on what was going to happen... and no one believed her or paid any attention to her.
So, heck, Christine could actually BE J. K. Rowling having fun making some bets before book 7 comes out...
If that were the case, she could actually afford to pay us if she were somehow wrong!
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, Shanna, it does refer to something coming up in book seven according to the information she has given out that Mugglenet has compiled.
Carrie, it could be Filch, really it could, and that leaves it pretty much 50/50. I'm saying it couldn't be Dudley and probably won't be Vernon. And that it won't be Percy or someone simple like that who just does nothing in the books.
Posts: 5362 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by plaid: I remember reading J. K. Rowling in an interview saying that she'd been to a Harry Potter fansite and posted her own (anonymous) take on what was going to happen... and no one believed her or paid any attention to her.
So, heck, Christine could actually BE J. K. Rowling having fun making some bets before book 7 comes out...
If that were the case, she could actually afford to pay us if she were somehow wrong!
Oh no! You got me! LOL
I don't believe that even JK Rowling has a TRILLION dollars. Last I heard, she was a poor, struggling billionaire.
I have been told (by my husband) that he is only supporting my writing career because he expects me to become as rich as JK Rowling. He's given me one year from publication...which was last October. No pressure or anything! Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:"Based on Rowling saying that one character who has never done magic will do some in an extreme circumstance late in life"
Could Rowling be saying "A character who has never done magic in the books will do....etc."
That allows for even Percy Wesley to fit the bill, unless there is an instance of him performing magic that I cannot recall, obviously he does use magic, just saying there is no instance of it happening.
I wonder if there are other wizards and witches who simply have not been recorded to have performed magic.
JKR has said, "There is a character who does manage, in desperate circumstances, to do magic quite late in life, but that is very rare..."
Just had time to check the exact wording, this means it's someone who has never done magic before, and someone who is quite late in life, not just later than normal magic age.
Forgive me if I missed this debate, but why can't this "late in life" character be Filch? We've seen him trying to learn magic with that QuikSpell packet - if Mrs. Norris really died or if the Death Munchers stole his manacles, I can see him snapping and letting a few sparks fly.
Guys, didn't this theory come out before book six came out? The person who manages to do magic later in life is Meriope. It's already happened.
Posts: 4089 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It might have come out then and might actually refer to that, but it is still listed on mugglenet as current for book seven. While I don't take mugglenet as 100% always true, I don't think they would have it on the book seven plot list if it actually reffered to the sixth book.
Posts: 5362 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would like to quote something and ask you guys what you think. This is an excerpt from an interview with JKR by mugglenet shortly after the release of Book 6:
quote:MA: Okay, big, big, big Book 6 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.
Anyway...it's not entirely clear, but this interview is one of many reasons that I have for thinking Snape is evil. She didn't come right out and say it, but it's the, "Cling to some desperate hope." line that's really got me bugged. Now, I'm going to try to be open-minded about this because, as I said, it wasn't clear. I'm wondering what else you think she might have meant by this, especially from those of you in the "Snape is still good" camp. Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
SHe's also been hinting since the beginning that she's going to kill off Harry. I think she just likes to make sure she doesn't give anything away.
I'm still in the Snape is not evil category. OSC just wrote an essay supporting the 'good Snape' theory for a book of essays about Snape that's coming out. I think it's called The Great Snape Debate. I can't' wait to read it all. Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
Well, I have no brains inside of my head, but still! JK Rowling is still playing you like a fiddle! Snape is good! I swear!
Posts: 910 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I wouldn't go that far! I have plenty of reasons from the books alone to suppose that Snape has truly converted. Reasons, I think, that require far less explanation than the other side. Still, I felt that this supported my original ideas.
I was very disappointed when OSC came out with his "Snape is a good guy" theory. I so rarely disagree with him about popular culture. Actually, it's down to this and the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy...
Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wait a minute, Christine, you seem to be completely ignoring the part where JKR explicitly states she's not going to say anything that will spoil the question...so why do you cling to the idea that she's contradicting herself?
Just because a hope is desperate doesn't mean it's false.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know OSC is writing a book on Snape, but you mention he has already written an essay on it that you have read? Where is that essay? I can't find it.
Posts: 684 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh gosh, it was a while back, just after the book came out. I *think* it was one of the essays he posts on his site regularly. It would probably take me forever to find it. I'll see if I can find some time later on.
Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Christine: I was very disappointed when OSC came out with his "Snape is a good guy" theory. I so rarely disagree with him about popular culture. Actually, it's down to this and the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy...
I was just wondering where he talked about Snape being a good guy, and hitchhikers guide for that matter. I Am utterly hopeless, i couldn't even find anything about Harry Potter
Posts: 21 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
All right, you guys made me go look and it turned out to be easier to find than I thought. I put "Snape" in the search blank up at the top and got the article on the firs go:
posted
Is this the essay you are talking about, Christine? I do remember reading this one, now. I was thinking it was a more recent essay.
I also forgot that OSC also believes (or at least used to believe) that Dumbledore will actually come back somehow. Since JKR already said he will not be coming back, I think it's safe to say that OSC is wrong, unless JKR wants to mislead us so much that she would blatantly lie. I doubt that.
Edit* Looks like you beat me to it. Posts: 684 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, what JKR actually said is not that Snape is evil, but that she herself is evil. In other words, expect anything in the last book. Remember, ever since book 3, her novels have been getting "darker" and "darker," in the eyes of virtually all critics. How dark is JKR going to go? Maybe the British Prime minister will have MI6 locate Hogsmead, Hogwartz, and Diagon Alley, and then he will nuke the whole Wizarding World--at least in the British Isles.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I actually wouldn't be surprised if there were some more Muggle involvement in the last book. They're certainly mentioned a bit more lately.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Who here has heard anything from JK Rowling regarding how much her ideas have progressed since she wrote the first Harry Potter. There seems to be a lot of continuity from her first to last book, which required foreknowledge of how everything would take place.
Or has she pulled off a George Lucas, only with more skill, in that she has come up with major plot additions or changes along the way, while keeping the plot smooth and relatively contradiction-free. (or maybe completely contradiction-free, I'm not sure)?
For instance, did she originally plan to make these books get progressively darker and more adult, or was that an early decision-change due to the fact that her books were appealing to adults just as much as kids?
Or was Snape originally supposed to become this controversial character, or were her original plans to just keep him as the grouchy DADA teacher?
Posts: 32 | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: I actually wouldn't be surprised if there were some more Muggle involvement in the last book. They're certainly mentioned a bit more lately.
True Story, the first chapter of book 6 I seriously doubt is the end of the matter.
I expect this conflict to reach quite far out into the muggle world, obviously it won't envelope everything but I expect alot of devastation on the muggle side.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Me, Myself, and I, (we need to give you a nickname, such as MMI or something--just too much to type),
I think, barring minor changes along the way, that the major plot points were decided by the author when she first started. Of course, she didn't know how well her books would sell at first, so she wrote them in a way that would let each book stand on its own, in case no more were written. Yes, there have been changes along the way, I think, but the important stuff probably hasn't, for the most part.
I think she always knew Dumbledore would die, and that Snape would be where he is now. I think she has said she has extensive histories of each character, which would support her foreknowledge.
But I can't say officially, I don't keep up with the interviews she gives.
Posts: 684 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
She said she was killing two people she hadn't originally planned to kill, and keeping one alive. I'm not sure if that means she didn't plan to kill them when she started writing book one, or when she started writing book seven (and they just had to die as she was writing it out).
Posts: 5362 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
De lurking.... I have been reading this thread with delight. Can’t wait to find out who is right.
I have to fall on the Snape is good side. I never bought his explanations to Bellatrix about how he never left the dark lord's service in HBP. I don't think she did either which is why he had to make the unbreakable vow. He's had way too many opportunities to kill Harry and Dumbledore. Plus J.K. will have to come up with a really good reason why Snape didn't kill Harry eliminating both of his dark lord’s most powerful enemies at the end of the book.
I am forced to go with what I think is the most obvious scenario: Dumbledore knew he was dieing from the potion and/or the injury to his hand and he also knew about Snape’s unbreakable vow so he arranged his own end to put Snape in a position to do the most damage.
Don’t get me wrong Snape is not a nice person, but that is what makes him so interesting, a person doing the right thing in spite of his truly rotten personality.
With all of Rowling’s emphasis on the power Voldemort doesn’t have, and having set Harry up as the self sacrificing type it may mean Harry will have to die. “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.” I hope not… I would like to see a happy ending. There has already been enough sadness in the series. I am not sure how else Harry can use love to defeat Voldemort other than to sacrifice himself like his mother did. This time it will be after all the horcrux are destroyed so Voldemort will be destroyed. My take on the prophecy is that it doesn’t guarantee that one will survive, it just says neither can live while the other is alive and at least one must die by the hand of the other.
Posts: 555 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, all I have to say is that Rowling will have to make murder ok if Snape is really "good" (as if things are ever black and white...a point she has tried to make in all her books). I still don't buy Dumbledore asking Snape to do it and even if he did, I still don't think it's all right to murder someone in cold blood. Then again, I do not believe that the ends usually justify the means. If Rowling takes this path, she will have her work cut out for her to convince mt that it's all right. To me, this matter goes beyond the specifics of what happens in the next book. You guys could be right -- Snape could be good. I'd say the odds are at least 50/50. I am honestly worried that after all I've put into the series, after how much I've liked it thus far, I may not be able to accept the ending.
I would have to agree that the explanation to Belatrix was weak and unbelievable. I do not believe that Snape never left Voldemort's employ. I am reasonably sure that when Dumbledore first trsuted Snape, it was right to do so (whatever that reason was).
Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:If it comes as any consolation, I think that there will be plenty to continue arguing and speculating about, even after 'Deathly Hallows' comes out. So if you're not yet ready to quit the message boards, do not despair
posted
Keep in mind, JKR has said that there's something we don't know about Lily that will be important. So we're probably missing the one bit of information that will tie everything together.
Does it seem odd to anyone else that we know almost everything about James, his personality, his friends, his school exploits. But we know next to nothing about Lily?
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I reread the end of HBP last night and after some thought I have a new theory on Snape. I think Dumbledore sent him back to Vold to be a spy, but L.V. would have been most suspicious, not telling him anything important, but allows him to stay around to find out what he is up to. So Snape is bluffing when he says he knows about Draco’s assignment. He is trying to find out what it is and is then backed into a corner where he has to make the unbreakable vow not even knowing what the assignment is. Snape is not above taking some chances and breaking some of the rules so makes the vow to gain the death eater’s trust.
Then as the year goes on he would have surely figured out the assignment was to kill someone. Harry would have been the most likely candidate, which given Snape’s genuine dislike of Harry he may not have had that much of a problem with. Especially not knowing the entire prophecy and believing Dumbledore could protect him. He wouldn’t have thought the target could have been Dumbledore since no one would have believed Draco could have gotten anywhere close to pulling it off.
Then when Snape gets to the roof, he figures out who the actual target was but having made the unbreakable vow he has no choice but to kill the one person who really trusted him. He then has no choice but to join the Death Eater in earnest, no one else will have him. How interesting would it be to see how Snape deals with this particular hell. Knowing it was his mistake that forced him to kill the one man he looked up to. Will he seek his revenge upon Voldemort in an attempt to atone for his sins and regain some shred of dignity? Or will he feel all hope is lost and join what he feels is the winning side?
Rowling said we will still be debating this after the last book so I doubt it will be a clear cut answer. Just like in real life we may never truly know all of some of the characters motivations.
Posts: 555 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
SC -- You're going to make me reread the sixth book, aren't you? I was just about to say that of course Snape knew the mission, but now I'm second guessing. I do have to say that your theory is MUCH closer to what I think than anything else -- especially the "Dumbledore asked Snape to to it" and "Snape is still good" stuff. I'm absolutely positive that one way or another, the question of Snape's loyalty is far more complicated than good or evil. I'm sure he has switched sides at least once in his life (from Voldemort to Dumbledore). I'm sure he was good for a while and I don't know exactly what made him decide to go back.
Oh well, I was probably going to reread all the books before #7 came out, anyway. Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Looks like we'll be seeing OSC's official theory on the subject soon. In the latest review column he mentions that he's going to have an essay in a forthcoming book called The Great Snape Debate.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I was just about to say that of course Snape knew the mission, but now I'm second guessing.
I've always thought that it's crystal-clear that Snape did not know Malfoy's mission until after he agreed to it.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:I was just about to say that of course Snape knew the mission, but now I'm second guessing.
I've always thought that it's crystal-clear that Snape did not know Malfoy's mission until after he agreed to it.
Why? The only time we overhear Snape and Malfoy talking about it, Snape doesn't ask what his mission is, only what he is trying to do so he can help him. It always sounded to me as if Snape were asking what his specific plan was, not who his target was. Also, Dumbledore knew all alone. And, for that matter, so did I. It was never a question -- not even the first time I read the book. That, of course, could have clouded my reading of it but I don't think so. I would say at the least that it is not "crystal clear" that Snape knew or didn't know. Perhaps you can cite me a reference that suggests otherwise?
Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
Actually, I don't think Dumbledore knew all along. I think Snape told Dumbledore once he found out, and Dumbledore refused to do anything about it because it would kill Snape. Which is what Snape and Dumbledore were arguing about.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Snape tells Mrs. Malfoy and Bellatrix he knows what the mission is, but he never actually says anything about it. Later when he confronts Draco he is supposed to already know what the mission is, to indicate otherwise would be to admit he was lying before.
As far as Dumbledore knowing, He says he knew at the end of the book, but it could have been something he figured out after the cursed necklace and poison wine showed up. Who Draco's target was may have been what he and Snape were arguing about when Hagrid over heard them?
Posts: 555 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm with Tom on this one. I thought it was clear that Snape bluffed his way into the unbreakable vow and then was rather perlexed when he realized what he had vowed to do. My theory is that the Snape/Dumbledore argument was Dumbledore telling Snape to do what he had to do...or, in other words, fulfil his unbreakable vow if it came down to it. So Dumbledore didn't ask Snape, but he was willing to take the fall to keep Snape's cover.
Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Like I said, it does seem plausible that Snape didn't know...my only point was that the book does not say one way or another. It is hardly "perfectly clear" because it is not explicit anywhere in the text. The truth is that we still know very little about Snape, especially considering what an important character he has been throughout the series. We don't know who he has lied to and when -- although he must have been lying to someone at some point. I look forward to having a lot of this cleared up in the seventh book. In the meantime, I really wish people would quit telling me what is and is not "perfectly clear" -- especially when discussing things that require reading between the lines. (And if this doesn't require reading between the lines -- if there is something explicit -- then find a book and quote it to me.)
Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
