posted
We've had Hogwarts students disarmed left and right since book two. Why do y'all think that their wands never change allegiances and became less useful to the owner? Because the original owners kept using them? If Dumbledore had stayed alive after being defeated by Draco, would he have remained the master of the Elder Wand?
----
Why does everybody assume that the Kings Cross scene was a dream/imaginary? I'm assuming that the stuff that Dumbledore told Harry was true and came from Dumbledore himself, and not just something that Harry made up.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: We've had Hogwarts students disarmed left and right since book two. Why do y'all think that their wands never change allegiances and became less useful to the owner?
What makes you think any other wand has this property? It appears to be unique to the Elder Wand. Other wands "choose their owners."
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: Why does everybody assume that the Kings Cross scene was a dream/imaginary? I'm assuming that the stuff that Dumbledore told Harry was true and came from Dumbledore himself, and not just something that Harry made up.
I agree. In fact, Dumbledore said as much!
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:What makes you think any other wand has this property?
Because Harry and Hermione weren't able to effectively use other people's wands that they hadn't won (the blackthorn wand and Bellatrix's wand), but Harry was able to effectively use Draco's normal wand after he defeated him.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just wanted to check in and say that I finished. Great ending! I'd participate but I can't slog through 7 pages right now. Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: Does anyone else think a book from Neville's perspective of his year as a rebel leader at Hogwarts would be pretty good? It would only have to synch up with the DH plot at a few points (mostly the end).
I would love to read Potter's Shadow. Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:What makes you think any other wand has this property?
Because Harry and Hermione weren't able to effectively use other people's wands that they hadn't won (the blackthorn wand and Bellatrix's wand), but Harry was able to effectively use Draco's normal wand after he defeated him.
Actually, Harry did much better with the blackthorn than the other. It seemed to me a question of incompatible personalities much more than anything else.
Much as Harry hates it, he and Draco are actually alike in many ways.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
How did he do better with the blackthorn wand? He used Draco's wand very effectively through all the action chapters at the end of the book. What did he do with the blackthorn wand?
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok, I take it back. I re-read some significant passages (most notably Ollivander on p.493), and it is the taking that is significant. He specifies that "when a wand has been won, its allegiance may change." However, he also qualifies that with "de4pends on the manner of taking" and "depends on the wand itself." So, any wand in the past that was taken by Expelliarmus may or may not have switched allegiance.
I expect that if it were part of a classroom exercise, it wouldn't. Also, much was made of the fact that Harry tends to use this particular spell much more than others, who prefer stunning or killing.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, allegiance switching doesn't mean the wand is useless... just that it's not at it's full functionality. Voldemort uses the Elder wand effectively but finds that it's no different than any other wand for him. Harry just has particular problems with the one which leads them to delve into the question of wand allegiance.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I actually had to think about the whole wand switching allegiance thing a bit too. I mean, any practice session in school might put you in danger of losing your wand! But I think that wands are a bit more intelligent about it than that and even -- that if you are disarmed but manage to get your wand *back* that it knows and prefers its original master. Like they said, it depends upon the manner of the disarming. When Harry took Draco's wand it was completely against Draco's will in a battle situation and Harry was grabbing for keeps. The blackthorn wand, on the other hand, probably would have worked for Ron (who bested its owner to get it) but for Harry, it couldn't work.
Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
A lot of what was happening with Harry and the Blackthorn wand was his belief that his phoenix feather wand was exceptional and had allowed him to survive the duel at the end of book 4. He worried that a lot of his "talent" lay in that wand.
I'm still not sure what happened when his wand attacked Voldemort on its own in the first battle. I know it was explained. I just didn't quite understand it. Seizing Draco's wand mattered because Draco was master of the Elder Wand, I think.
quote:Why does everybody assume that the Kings Cross scene was a dream/imaginary? I'm assuming that the stuff that Dumbledore told Harry was true and came from Dumbledore himself, and not just something that Harry made up.
Because Rowling said people can't come back from the dead. I don't mean it was a dream in the sense that it was a figment of his imagination. He went to a metaphysical location where he was able to talk to someone who was dead. As I mentioned before, I don't think he was the master of all death, just that he posessed an escape from Avada Kedavara. Otherwise this is Harry Potter and The Green Mile, no?
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
But some people are simply unable to play; they have lost the faculty; it has atrophied, or stiffened up with age. I used to be able to bend my back so far I could touch the back of my head with my toes. I can't do that now. So I understand those who take no delight in fairy tales or fantasies. I pity you, but in truth, Harry Potter is not for you. Go back to reading stock reports or instruction manuals or whatever you do with your unfantastical mind.
quote: He also reads female voices – or at least young female voices – with a sort of lingering whine at the ends of sentences.
The combination means that whenever he reads Hermione saying, "Harry!" – which she says a lot – it comes out like baby talk: "Hawweeeeee." This is really unfortunate. In fact, I daresay Dale's reading of young women is the weakest part of his performance.
YES! Thanks, Mr. Card. I complained about this for weeks after listening to PoA and GoF on a long car trip. My best friend and I still call each other "Hawwee" when we're whining about something.
Posts: 6367 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
Truth to tell, I don't care for Stephen Fry's reading (in the UK version of the audio books) reading of girls any better.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Good, makes excellent points, but he bothers me so much when he goes on about elitists because I really don't understand what that means! You do have cynical people who say, "No, I won't read it, it's a children's book" But I think most of the books intended for children are the best books ever. Way better than these frustratingly bitter adult novels that are dark and cynical and have too many descriptions of bodily functions.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Warning: Long post ahead! I read the whole thread and assembled responses all in one post.
quote:I wish someone would have offed Umbridge. I think I would have killed her myself for mounting Moody's eye on her door. She has to be evilest character in the book save Voldemort.
In some ways, I find Umbridge to be far more evil than Voldemort. I think I say that because for me Voldemort had become a very flat sort of character—appropriate for a being who had shattered his soul into 7 pieces. It was like he was just an echo if the hate and rage of the original Tom Riddle and nothing more. It was almost an animalistic, instinctive sort of evil. Umbridge—she was fully human. I hold her more responsible for understanding how evil she was, therefore more accountable for it, therefore more evil.
quote:The only thing I would have wanted was a little more back ground information on what happened afterward. Did the trio go back to school the next year?
Heh. I saw this, and I wondered to myself if anyone was going to accuse Rowling of being anti-school. You've got Fred and George who left early to go on to a glorious career as entrepreneurs, Harry, Ron and Hermione skipping out on their last year, and the school was horribly controlling under both Umbridge and (I can't say Snape) who were those two again? Seeing as I am about to embark on a homeschooling journey myself, I can't help chuckling a little. But Hogwarts overall was portrayed as a wonderfully fun, exciting place to be.
quote:I think the reason Kreacher didn't apparate Regulus out of there was because he was following his orders to a T, and couldn't have known if Regulus would want him to interfere or not.
Agreed! We have to remember that these elves don't think the way we do, as was made clear when Kreacher embraced evil ideologies that were held by his masters because they were kind to him, and rejected ideologies of the family member who was unkind. While Dobby's efforts to save Harry in a previous book (don't remember which) were made of his own “free” will, Kreacher may have been so beside himself with grief that coming up with alternate solutions would have been completely beyond him. As for Kreacher being prepared ahead of time, if he was anticipating anything it was probably having to drink the potion again himself. Just as it wouldn't occur to him to disapperate to save himself the first time, it wouldn't occur to him to bring water for himself the second time.
quote:One thing that I would liked to see in the epilogue was Uncle Dudley showing up to help send his favorite nephew off to Hogwarts.
That would have been a nice touch.
quote:Who was the person who would do magic late in life under extraordinary circumstances?
I would've liked to have seen this person be Petunia. She was bitter and jealous that she did not have powers of her own.
quote:I was a bit let down by the epilogue. We didn't learn anything about the futures of the characters, really. We knew Harry would marry Ginny and have children, but what did he end up doing?
I have thought about this myself, and I like that it comes away with the message that family is what is lastingly important—the things wisdom and confidence Harry passes on to his son, that is what matters most.
quote:I think the biggest thing that bothered me about the epilogue is that we didn't find out anything IMPORTANT. Chiefly among these is what the heck are Harry, Hermione, Ginny, and Ron DOING with their lives? Do they all just sit at home and raise their children?
I happen to think that raising one's children is the more important than one's profession. Rowling doesn't seem nearly as interested in telling us what her characters end up doing as setting up the next generation. Not that I think she is setting up for a new series, but that this is important to completing her storytelling. I'm OK with Rowling deciding what is and is not important on this matter.
(from the Epilogue thread)
quote:The reason for the off-camera wedding, deaths, discoveries, and the lightweight epilogue is obvious: J.K clearly left huge wide-open areas for fanficcers to leap merrily into. I anticipate lengthy, conflicting explanations of each of these scenes and lots of "Harry Potter: The Missing Years" stories to keep those fan sites active for years to come.
Ha!
quote:Voldster didn't seem to be very surprised when Harry wasn't dead again.. I suppose he got use to being a failure in that area.
Yeesh. The boy who lived, indeed! Survived the killing curse from the most powerful of dark wizards three times, all without raising a hand to defend himself.
quote:I don't like how there wasn't much of a 'reaction' factor for Harry after watching Snape's memories.
Amen! For that reason, I was deeply touched when I learned he'd named a son after him and told his son what a courageous person he was. :sniff:
quote:I was a "Snape is Good" man, and got totally suckered in... I spent the first 3/4 of the book thinking "oh well... guess I was wrong about him... maybe she was too busy wiht other plot twists and couldn't find the time to write him a little more complexity... pity." Then he gave Harry his memories and... wow, what a great chapter that was.
Me too, me too! :grin:
You know, I was so certain that the silver doe was from Ginny. Just as Tonks' petronus turned into a wolf after she fell in love with Lupin, it made sense to me that regardless of any previous mention of Ginny's petronus (if there had been any) it could easily have turned into the natural mate of a stag.
I must declare, I was very disappointed that Ginny didn't have her amazing moment of heroism or crucial roll to play. All we hear of her doing is trying to steal the fake sword of Griffondor—and even that failed. -_- I am hoping that just as the fifth HP movie slipped in some precious moments between Harry and Sirius, the seventh movie will give us a little more gratifying Ginnyness.
quote:I wonder how much of Snape's memories Alan Rickman will be able to play. I guess he wears quite a bit of makeup anyway.
My guess is they will use the same young actor they used in the fifth movie's flashbacks.
quote: I wish the Snape story arch could have been told throughout the book instead of all at once. I’m not sure how it could have been done, but after book 6 I figured he would play a much more central roll in book 7.
I'm not exactly sure what I think, but this did cause me much consternation! Because I was a firm “Snape is Good” believer, I was having a really hard time with them leaving that so long to the end. Now that I know, I imagine it will just enrich the whole experience when I reread the books.
quote:Snape only regretted his actions when they led to Lily's death. Where is the remorse for all the other deaths that occurred at his hands or because of information he gave Voldemort when he really was working for him? Not until he was dead / about to die do we see real remorse.
I agree with you, Snape was not a large-hearted man, to be sure! But my heart aches for him all the same. When people grow up so tortured, often their ability to love is stunted for life.
quote:For whatever reason, I have had an affinity for Snape since book one, which had added gravity to every scene/event involving him since then. Every mean thing he did seemed rather petty and superficial while every good thing he did was quietly heroic. To me, that implied he was hiding something much deeper, tortured even, in his personality. After book six I felt convinced that Lily had been the object of his affection. I couldn't think of anything else that completed the puzzle more smoothly.
Well said.
I thought Snape's last statement: “Look at me” was giving Harry unlimited permission to see and understand who Snape really was, rather than just to know that he was supposed to die. I thought it was a last, overt sign of the affection he had developed for the more grown-up, ennobled Harry Potter.
quote:As an afterthought I almost think Rowling added it so that she could have Harry make a more personal statement about Snape.
Quite possible. And appealing to those of us who think this epic tale was as much Snape's as Harry's.
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:In some ways, I find Umbridge to be far more evil than Voldemort. I think I say that because for me Voldemort had become a very flat sort of character—appropriate for a being who had shattered his soul into 7 pieces. It was like he was just an echo if the hate and rage of the original Tom Riddle and nothing more. It was almost an animalistic, instinctive sort of evil. Umbridge—she was fully human. I hold her more responsible for understanding how evil she was, therefore more accountable for it, therefore more evil
So totally agree.
And I loved the epilogue.
(I got home last night, ripped open the book, read for three hours despite being exhausted, and was able to finish it this afternoon while Bridey took a nap.)
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:That would have made Dumbledore either a liar or a fool for telling her that she didn't have any magical abilities when she wrote to him.
I was allowing for the possibility that she didn't have them when they corresponded and developed them later. The statement from Rowling seemed to suggest a "late bloomer" under unusual circumstances.
quote:This is really unfortunate. In fact, I daresay Dale's reading of young women is the weakest part of his performance.
Ugh. Agreed. But I also find some of his acting off the mark. Sometimes he just "gets it wrong." But he is so charismatic, so entertaining, that I enjoy his reading in spite of these flaws. Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
We've never seen anything like that in any of the books. Either a person is a witch/wizard, a squib, a muggle, or non-human. There really isn't any grey area.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Does anyone else find it oddly presumptuous that OSC is making such detailed predictions about Rowling's future actions?
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anyone want to bet on whether we'll get another Harry Potter story before we get another Lord of the Rings book?
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beverly: Does anyone else find it oddly presumptuous that OSC is making such detailed predictions about Rowling's future actions?
No more presumptuous than when I've made predictions about what she'll do next.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I enjoyed reading his predictions. I'm thinking there is a bit of OSC's own experiences after writing his first bestseller (Ender's Game) projected onto JK.
Edit:
For example:
quote: that Harry Potter was somehow of a lesser breed because it was written in such a way as to include children in its audience)
Sub Ender's Game for HP, and maybe OSC once read a review criticizing EG for being accessible to children and these were his thoughts.
He then goes on a rant about how if she chooses to go back to HP world, she shouldn't feel like she's retreating and that it is a mark of failure. Ender sequels and Shadow series, maybe?
----- I kind of came up with this whole idea as I'm writing this post.
Edit again:
quote: In fact, she will write an inventive new children's novel – a standalone book, and not a very thick one – and take delight in inventing new worlds and exploring new characters. She will also write children's books that have no fantasy in them.
Heh. Sub political thriller for new children's novel. Sub "books with no science fiction in them" for "children's books with no fantasy in them". I think I'm onto something here.
posted
Ah man, I finally finished the book, its 5 AM now, but just so we all know, that last 19 years later seen, David Tennant as Potter and Chris Ellericson as Ron, I know Tennant was Crouch Junior in book 4, but damnit it would seem so perfect for me, sine I am not sure if special effects are good enough to visibly age Potter to 36 years old.
Amazing how when enough people are together we could call all these endings, amazing, the book was great and a fitting end to the series, I would love to have more Potterverse books, maybe as wide ranging and all encompasing as Forgotten Realms is? Dozens of books by different authors?
Also who else imagine themselves as a recurring character when they read books?
IP: Logged |
posted
I re-read King's Cross, Prince's Tale, and the last actual chapter last night and some things became clear for me that weren't at the end of the marathon reading. Most of these are things people have said at one point or other. Harry doesn't die. Dumbledore says "I think not" in response to his direct question.
The tormented baby thing was what used to be the horcrux of Voldemort in Harry, but as Harry later tells Voldemort, the soul still in him is like that, if not less. Dumbledore indicates that in describing the creation of the horcrux in Harry.
Harry is healed of the connection between him and Voldemort when Voldemort AK's him. Whether he would know parselmouth at that point is a question.
Harry's motivation for looking at Snape's memories was Snape looking into his eyes. I felt less that Snape's death had been ironically pointless.
The problem is now I have to go back and read the story of the 3 brothers. Much more hazardous in terms of not being able to stop
Oh, yeah, I was going to say Lily probably changed her mind about James when he saved Snape from Sirius' prank. She began to find him not reprehensible then, except when he inverted Severus, but at that point Severus blew it, and James started being humble.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I now see that the Snape chapter was the heart of the book, which was about remorse. It is immediately preceded by Voldemort saying "I regret it." which I take to me he is sorry to have lost a valued lieutenant. He only has concern for what his action has cost him, none for what it cost his victim.
In reading the final showdown, I wondered if Harry couldn't have done a better job in encouraging Tom's remorse than to say "arise from the dust and become a man" (as it were). He could have called on the regret over killing Snape. Well, catching the elder wand will be a classic cinematic moment, so I guess I can overlook it.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Does anyone else find it oddly presumptuous that OSC is making such detailed predictions about Rowling's future actions?
I mean, yes, but wouldn't you agree that OSC has a sort of uncanny way of extrapolating the development of human character? I think that's why I like his books so much. (Not that Rowling is a "character" but that she has character.)
Plus, did you read his Snape essay? I thought it was spot-on. There was even more presumption in there.
Posts: 6367 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am borrowing a comment from someone on another forum. I really liked it and want to share it with y'all:
quote:After many losses, I was very glad that there was such a resounding victory on the side of good. One of my main complaints (although they are few) about LOTR is the way that good always seems the poor cousin of evil. Just barely surviving being wiped out... just barely snatching certain death from the jaws of victory.
I have often thought this--many stories make evil so much more powerful than good. That has always bothered me a little. At first I was annoyed by the overwhelming power Harry had over Voldemort. I thought to myself, was Harry ever really in danger from Voldemort? Was there ever really a danger?
But the more I think of it, the more I like the way she tells the story. His triumph was in becoming the sort of person Dumbledore was hoping, trying for. But Harry chose it, in spite of the many, many times he was tempted and almost chose otherwise. He chose to be truly, and resoundingly GOOD. And in that choice, he dispelled evil, it had no power over him, and that protection even spread to those he loved. Beautiful, just beautiful!
quote:Plus, did you read his Snape essay? I thought it was spot-on. There was even more presumption in there.
You know, I started reading it, but I never finished it. I imagine if Card is spot-on with his thoughts on Rowling, I'd be amazed and impressed rather than annoyed. Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Except this protection everyone was talking about wasn't all that obvious. He was still dueling 3 wizards at once, Neville escaped the hat, Hagrid appeared at times to be under the imperius curse. There were a couple of hints about his muffliato not sticking. I think Rowling didn't really choose as she should have whether Harry was protecting them or not. It points for me to the possibility that she changed her mind late in the game about Harry not dying. I definitely see where he says it, it just doesn't make a lot of sense.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by pooka: Except this protection everyone was talking about wasn't all that obvious. He was still dueling 3 wizards at once, Neville escaped the hat, Hagrid appeared at times to be under the imperius curse. There were a couple of hints about his muffliato not sticking. I think Rowling didn't really choose as she should have whether Harry was protecting them or not. It points for me to the possibility that she changed her mind late in the game about Harry not dying. I definitely see where he says it, it just doesn't make a lot of sense.
Why was it supposed to be obvious? In the case of Harry as a baby, he used the killing curse and the protection had to work its magic, but Voldemort never tried a killing curse (as far as I could tell). It seems obvious to me that it wasn't just some silly "none of your spells will work on me" protection. I mean, silencing the crowd isn't really hurting them. On the other hand, when the crowd grew outraged they were able to break the silence with the help of the protection.
Personally, I'm glad it wasn't just a bold line in the sand kind of protection or it would have made the rest of the book kinda boring. Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Except when Voldemort blast three dudes off their feet... what was that, psychosomatic on their part? It just doesn't make a lot of sense. Then again, I could see where it's supposed to be the whole big point. I don't know. I wish I understood how it fit in with the creation of the Deathly Hallows.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
That actually reminds me of one of my favorite lines from the book: Voldemort, grumbling about how his new wand hasn't been exhibiting particularly powerful magic, observes "I am exceptional, of course. But..."
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by pooka: Except when Voldemort blast three dudes off their feet... what was that, psychosomatic on their part?
Voldemort used Cruciatus on Harry even when he was protected. It's not as though the protection makes people invulnerable.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So I bought it on impulse last night, even though I could've just waited another day to borrow it from a friend. But I bought it, got home around ... 10ish, started reading around 11 (PM), finished at 5:50 AM. 6 hours isn't that bad, is it? Anyone keeping track of who read it the fastest?
I haven't read this whole thread yet (I'm a wee bit tired ), but my initial thought is that I liked the 6th one better. It seemed like the big climactic battle and all that jazz was really ... congested. I will say I liked it. Definitely wasn't disappointed. I really liked Snape's memories, I sort of liked the whole "Deathly Hallows" plot, I loved Neville being so freaking cool ... I liked a lot of it. I'm disappointed that neither of the big 3 died (Ron, Hermione, or Harry). Well, technically Harry died, but not really. And Hagrid didn't die either. Or Ginny. I mean, come on ... Mad Eye, Fred, Remus, and Tonks? That's the best she could do?
The main part I'm still undecided about is whether or not I enjoyed the questing nature of the book. I mean, I enjoyed it immensely, but I'm not sure I appreciate it. The other 6 really weren't as quest oriented. I don't know the right words to describe it, but this one, with the Ministry of Magic, the Gringott's incident, Malfoy's house, Godric's Hollow, Gryffindor's sword, etc etc ... It was different. I will say I kept thinking "This will make one freaking awesome movie. Or two."
Last thing - Did the Ministry of Magic part strike anyone else like a computer game? I kept on picture Ron, Harry, and Hermione as blockish little figures on a screen jumping to the different levels of the ministry, with dialog bubbles popping up whenever they thought or said something, and dramatic type music every time the objective changed. Maybe it was just me though.
Posts: 2827 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Well, technically Harry died, but not really
Technically, he never did.
It's hard to say either way. Dumbledore specifically said that Harry could choose to move on to the next life or go back and defeat Voldemort.
He was not dead, but I wouldn't say he was alive just as he'd always been the rest of the books. Had Harry opted to move on to the next life what difference would have taken place in his body?
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"That actually reminds me of one of my favorite lines from the book: Voldemort, grumbling about how his new wand hasn't been exhibiting particularly powerful magic, observes "I am exceptional, of course. But...""
Tom, it sounds like you're training to be Voldemort. Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think he would have had to choose whether or not he wanted to "go back" if he hadn't "gone" in the first place.
Posts: 6367 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
