|
Post by jode* on Jul 25, 2007 9:06:36 GMT
Something has just occurred to me. It might just be that I hadn't taken it in when I was reading, but how can Ron and Harry apparate when they didn't pass their tests. Harry didn't even take his, as he was too young in the HBP. I can't remember if Harry did actually apparate anywhere without Hermione, but Ron did. Harry apparated Dumbledore from the cave to Hogsmeade at the end of book 6, so he must have been pretty good at it! I guess if you're on the run, you don't really care whether you've passed your test or not!
|
|
|
Post by Becky on Jul 25, 2007 9:20:45 GMT
Yeah, but wouldn't the Ministry have some kind of sensor on the ones who haven't passed, and since the Death Eaters took over the Ministry, that would be kind of dangerous. I think when Harry apparated Dumbledore the Ministry wouldn't be able to tell it was him because they would have assumed it was Dumbledore, much in the same way as children from wizarding families can get away with a bit of magic at home.
|
|
|
Post by jode* on Jul 25, 2007 10:28:13 GMT
Hmm, as the 'sensor' that picks up underage magic stops when you turn 17, this probably applies to apparating too. I know not everyone would have passed their test by 17 but as the sensor stops you would probably have to actually be physically caught doing it without a license.
That's my guess anyway.
|
|
|
Post by somethingbiblical on Jul 25, 2007 13:38:13 GMT
The test is basically to make sure you can do it without splicing yourself, it's a safety thing and so the ministry don't have to keep coming to fix you, rather than them keeping tabs on who can apparate
|
|
|
Post by Nurse Dunkley on Jul 25, 2007 14:12:26 GMT
Ah yes, that's what I wanted to ask -
At the beginning when they were leaving Privet Drive, didn't they say that they couldn't disapparate or use the Floo Network because the Death Eater Infected Ministry would be monitoring them both. So what then changed which allowed Harry Ron and Hermione to disapparate all over the place for the rest of the book? I must have missed something.
|
|
|
Post by longsnakemoan on Jul 25, 2007 15:17:11 GMT
Dammit! Mr. Weasley was the character that JK gave a reprieve to. I almost got both my sweepstake deaths!!! In other good news: "J.K. Rowling told TODAY’s Meredith Vieira she "probably will" publish a Potter encyclopedia, promising many more details about her beloved characters and the fate of the wizarding world beyond the few clues provided in the seventh book’s epilogue. The encyclopedia would include back stories of characters she has already written but had to cut for the sake of narrative arc (“I've said before that Dean Thomas had a much more interesting history than ever appeared in the books”), as well as details about the characters who survive “Deathly Hallows,” characters who continue to live on in Rowling’s mind in a clearly defined magical world. Hogwarts, for example, has a new headmaster (“McGonagall was really getting on a bit”), and Rowling said she can see Harry going back to give the "odd talk" on Defense Against the Dark Arts. That class, by the way, is now led by a permanent professor since Voldemort’s death broke the jinx which didn’t allow a teacher to remain in the position for more than a year. " However, she's also said this won't be for ages as she wants a break. I'd predict summer 2010 (same gap between 4th and 5th when she had a break to have a baby). There's another Harry Potter book to look forward to!!!! Hurrah, a new book because I want to know the backstories of the following people. Professor Sinistra: She's mentioned loads of times and yet we never see anything of her. She always sat next to Snape too so I reckon she was his bit on the side. Maybe she dressed up in a red wig, who knows. (inspired by Angel there). Charlie Weasley: Come on son, give us a clue. The rest of the pureblood families because really am I arsed about Sirius, no he was moaning cunt. The Longbottoms: Neville and family deserve some respect.
|
|
|
Post by somethingbiblical on Jul 25, 2007 16:20:38 GMT
Ah yes, that's what I wanted to ask - At the beginning when they were leaving Privet Drive, didn't they say that they couldn't disapparate or use the Floo Network because the Death Eater Infected Ministry would be monitoring them both. So what then changed which allowed Harry Ron and Hermione to disapparate all over the place for the rest of the book? I must have missed something. Monitoring the house, and whether any magic was done there. The floo network wasn't connected there either and Pius thingy made it an offence to connect the house to the network. They could disapparate anywhere outside of Privet Drive cause Harry wasn't 17 anymore and didn't have the trace on him, but couldn't do any magic in Privet Drive cause then the Death Eaters, having infiltrated the Ministry, would know that there were people there.
|
|
|
Post by Nurse Dunkley on Jul 25, 2007 18:53:00 GMT
Thanks! That all makes sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by somethingbiblical on Jul 26, 2007 0:55:28 GMT
*smiley face*
What I really wanna know is who was this mystery magic-in-late-life person supposed t'be.. That storyline must've got edited out.
|
|
|
Post by somethingbiblical on Jul 26, 2007 1:32:32 GMT
I really, really, REALLY hate snobby LOTR fans who think they're better than me because they like a tortuous pile of shit that some dude who clearly had severe autism spent years obsessing over and I like a fun, witty series that works on a variety of levels. LOTR only has one level: shit.
|
|
Lisa
Su Pollard
Campaigning for the ghostly return of Toby - always my favourite serial killer
Posts: 454
|
Post by Lisa on Jul 26, 2007 7:31:53 GMT
[quote author=jode board=books thread=1151698299 post=1185178997 We think we understand; the only thing left is why the Elder wand had chosen Draco as it's master at the end???
I think this was because Draco was meant to kill Dumbledore and the wand had got a bit ahead of itself, I don't know, I was getting so confused. I'm sure my neighbours were getting a bit tired of hearing me screaming 'it's meant to be a children's book! For children!' every 5 minutes. I'm sure even The Satanic Verses wasn't as complicated. Still it was ace, although was getting a bit bored of the 'they're in grave peril, oh, no, now they've had another lucky escape.' On that basis I thought Voldermort probably had a point about accidents and luck.
For me, the epilgue runied it totally and made me pull a twisted disapproving look as I put it down. They are sounded like horrible smug marrieds who think they're better than everyone. "Grandad Weasley won't want you marrying a pure blood" or whatever that line was - oh, so now we're encouraging discrimination against pure bloods are we?!
I think Harry probably emotitionally bullies Ginny because he's the chosen one who saved the wizarding world. Would she not have liked to have chosen a name for one of the children? Albus Severus, James and Lily... please... and JK says she had this written from the beginning? It was so naff.
Thought I couldn't cry as much as when Dobby died but when Mrs. Weasley shouted 'not my daughter you bitch' I cried like a baby. I don't know why, must be homesick!
I thought Snape looking into Harry's eyes was a bit pervy, like he was fantasising over a 17 year old boy. Then Bellatrix moaning 'my lord' as to a lover. I was reading sex all over the place, leading me to believe that JK's been too busy writing to get any. But then, I always suspected Dumbledore of trying to groom Harry so maybe I'm just looking for problems.
I think I'm in love with Neville... Lisa Longbottom.... hmmmmmm.
|
|
nixxxon
Jane Asher
This is a two-sets-of-marigolds problem
Posts: 239
|
Post by nixxxon on Jul 26, 2007 10:08:17 GMT
I thought Snape looking into Harry's eyes was a bit pervy, like he was fantasising over a 17 year old boy. To be fair, where that particular 17-year-old boy's concerned, Snape would hardly be alone in that respect. This probably won't help...
|
|
Lisa
Su Pollard
Campaigning for the ghostly return of Toby - always my favourite serial killer
Posts: 454
|
Post by Lisa on Jul 26, 2007 10:14:29 GMT
Ahhh Nixxxon, you've made me very happy now - I like to think that's him at the press conference announcing our engagement!
|
|
|
Post by somethingbiblical on Jul 26, 2007 13:06:40 GMT
I thought Snape looking into Harry's eyes was a bit pervy, like he was fantasising over a 17 year old boy. Then Bellatrix moaning 'my lord' as to a lover. I was reading sex all over the place, leading me to believe that JK's been too busy writing to get any. But then, I always suspected Dumbledore of trying to groom Harry so maybe I'm just looking for problems. Heh, I liked the quote in the newspaper from Rita Skeeter... something like "Some called the relationship between Dumbledore and Potter unhealthy... even sinister"
|
|
|
Post by longsnakemoan on Jul 26, 2007 15:18:04 GMT
I really, really, REALLY hate snobby LOTR fans who think they're better than me because they like a tortuous pile of shit that some dude who clearly had severe autism spent years obsessing over and I like a fun, witty series that works on a variety of levels. LOTR only has one level: shit. I hate Lord of the Rings. Eight pages to describe a room in some house which wouldn't even make it onto Location Location Location. No thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Cherubic on Jul 26, 2007 20:17:41 GMT
I can stand it no longer. Harry Potter is godawful. How can seemingly nice, normal, intelligent people enjoy it? JK Rowling makes CS Lewis look like fucking Shaft.
Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
|
|
|
Post by xenomaniac on Jul 27, 2007 20:03:31 GMT
Was a good ending and managed to do everything I wanted. Could have done without the epilogue.
What really wound me up was Umbridge. The whole point of her in book 5 was to show that people could do bad things (or get in the way) without being totally evil/deranged and there she is in book 7 being a complete Nazi. I was quite upset.
In fact, apart from a handful of people were any of the wizarding world worth saving? No, they were mostly awful.
Edit: Also, not a single Slytherin stayed to help defend Hogwarts? What a load of shit! You may as well say 1/4 of the population are fuckers by birth.
|
|
|
Post by somethingbiblical on Jul 28, 2007 19:02:08 GMT
I think Harry probably emotitionally bullies Ginny because he's the chosen one who saved the wizarding world. Would she not have liked to have chosen a name for one of the children? Albus Severus, James and Lily... please... and JK says she had this written from the beginning? It was so naff. Aye, surely if they were going for the let's name them after dead people angle, Fred would've got a look in, given he was Ginny's brother!
|
|
|
Post by longsnakemoan on Jul 28, 2007 19:42:09 GMT
When I read Harry and Ginny I always hear Depeche Mode's 'Master and Servant' in my head.
|
|
|
Post by LoveMusic on Jul 28, 2007 21:56:32 GMT
Wow. Neville is hot! Woah.
I thought that too, Ginny is obviously sidelined. Harry would get the kids in a divorce.
|
|
|
Post by frapperia on Jul 29, 2007 0:30:59 GMT
Yeah, Matthew Lewis has said he has to have his ears stuck back for the role, and has had to wear a fat suit, and many other things to change his appearance, so it's a nice surprise when he looks rather better in real life!
|
|
|
Post by Nurse Dunkley on Jul 29, 2007 0:36:31 GMT
THERE IS A ROBOT DISGUISED AS A HUMAN BEHIND FIT NEVILLE. What really wound me up was Umbridge. The whole point of her in book 5 was to show that people could do bad things (or get in the way) without being totally evil/deranged and there she is in book 7 being a complete Nazi. I was quite upset. Yes, I thought that and was fuming. FUMING. But then later on it explained about the influence that the one ring horcrux has on the wearer and I stopped fuming because it all made sense.
|
|
|
Post by somethingbiblical on Jul 29, 2007 0:38:57 GMT
Umbridge WAS evil though.. she set dementors on Harry, and she was gonna crucio him!
|
|
|
Post by Nurse Dunkley on Jul 29, 2007 0:43:30 GMT
I can't be sure that I'd not try similar if in the company of Harry (especially if he's Daniel Radcliffe), yet I'm not evil.
|
|
nixxxon
Jane Asher
This is a two-sets-of-marigolds problem
Posts: 239
|
Post by nixxxon on Jul 29, 2007 15:36:49 GMT
Aye, surely if they were going for the let's name them after dead people angle, Fred would've got a look in, given he was Ginny's brother! But Ron and Ginny still have four older brothers, and with the Weasleys' tendency to breed like rabbits one of them is bound to have named one of their spawn after Fred. Probably George, who married Angelina Johnson, since EVERYONE always marries their high-school sweetheart and that is the law. (I can't actually remember if Angelina went out with Fred or George, but then again she probably doesn't either. It's not like she's got much choice - "I'll have the one with a pulse, please!") This also explains why Ron & Hermione came up with the random names Rose and Hugo, as every other name in the world had already been taken by a Weasley.
|
|