Intriguing Things JKR has said

No spoilers are allowed in these areas. Please make sure you've read our Deathly Hallows Conduct Notice (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=108001)!



okay so I was going through the Lexicon and "Accio Quote" and I found some interesting things:


Rowling's quality control is legendary, as is her obsession with accuracy. She's thrilled with Stephen Fry's taped version of the books, outraged that an Italian dust jacket shows Harry minus his glasses. "Don't they understand that they are the clue to his vulnerability?"

this intrigued me. What could she mean by this? Is this "the key" as she states? What could it be surrounding? Or is this just completely innocuous?


Josh from Cottenham Village College: Right at the beginning, when Voldermort tried to kill Harry, how did Voldermort and Harry both survive?
JK Rowling replies -> That is the crucial and central question and if I answered it there would be hardly any point writing books six and seven... so I won't!

this is before HBP is released so, does she mean Horcruxes? Or something else

interesting no? discuss!

Todd: You mentioned before in the video that you had written the final chapter, but umm, how do you know when to stop writing an ending?

J.K. Rowling: How do I know when to stop?

Todd: How do you know when to stop, yeah?

J.K. Rowling: Well I think some of the reviews of Phoenix suggest that I didn't know when to stop ha ha (crowd laughs). Well, I decided, you know, sixteen years ago, or thereabouts where I was going. And I will say, I'm quite a long way into writing book seven now. And there's a lot still to explain. I hadn't really realized... There's still a lot to find out, and there's a lot to figure out... and I'll probably leave some loose ends hanging that you'll be able to say, "Oh, well, in book eight, she'll explain why" (crowd screams approval). "You mentioned the toad!" That's not significant, by the way, just to save myself 500 letters. "You mentioned the toad!"

Yes, but I do know where I'm going, I really do know where I'm going. I'm really going to miss writing Harry Potter; I will miss it fiendishly. Twenty-seven? Any thoughts on twenty-seven? (crowd laughs). No, I've plotted it out, and I think you'd start to see that I was running out of plot if I pushed it past this (crowd applauds).

What do you think the loose ends are that she will leave?

1) I think the glasses are a clue about the "Harry filter"; that Harry sees things based on what he knows or feels when there's a whole lot he doesn't know (like Quirell having Voldemort on the back of his head, so he suspects Snape instead.)

2) Yes, that's about Horcruxes.

3) Oh, maybe things like the origin of Dementors, and how House Elves with their powerful magic became enslaved and what the goblin rebellions we keep hearing about where fought over. I don't think she'll leave any major plot points hanging.

I've always been intrigued about why Aberforth Dumbledore is associated with goats. Jo said she 's******ed' when she was writing that 'clue.' So, something about Aberforth and goats is a clue? A clue about what?

I agree with Shewoman that Harry's glasses being key probably refers to the 'Harry filter,' and that LV not dying when he AK'd Harry was indeed about Horcruxes, IMO.

As far as the loose ends go I believe that she will have many many interviews where she will answer questions to close off some loose ends that the fans would like to know about. I think anything important to the actual story will be tied up though. There are people and groups of fans that want answers to alot of questions that don't necessarily have anything to do with the plot. I think there are going to be a whole lot of questions still about Snape. People will want to know things about him that wont be answered in the plot of the story. I am thinking those are the kinds of loose ends she is talking about.

1) Do we know how "bad" Harry sees without his glasses?
Because when he's not able to see anything without them, that woul be a huge disadvantage. That's the only conclusion I have in mind.

2) Maybe the Horcruxes but maybe things we haven't noticed yet!?...
This question leaves a huge room of discussion ;) We're just able to wait for the final book.

3) Loose Ends are in every book. The author isn't able to put all the information in it. I believe many explanations are raising another hundred of questions. So in my opinion it's okay. But I can't foresee the loose ends ^.°
Nothing about the main plot ( I hope so).

As far as your second point goes, Horcruxes are what she was reffereing too. They are central to book six and they will be central to book seven. I'm just certain of that.

I've always been intrigued about why Aberforth Dumbledore is associated with goats. Jo said she 's******ed' when she was writing that 'clue.' So, something about Aberforth and goats is a clue? A clue about what?

No, she meant the goat smell was a clue to the personality of the barman - because it was mentioned in a previous book that Aberforth has been prosecuted for improper use of spells on goats. So the goat smell was a clue to Aberforth being the barman.
Actually, I didn't catch that clue, but I guessed it was Aberforth because Harry thought he looked familiar - I just went back to the photo of the order and picked the person with the biggest likeness.

What does "the Harry filter" have to do with vulnerability? I think it's something about Rowling's desire to write a hero with glasses - a normal, human hero.

As far as the loose ends go I believe that she will have many many interviews where she will answer questions to close off some loose ends that the fans would like to know about. I think anything important to the actual story will be tied up though. There are people and groups of fans that want answers to alot of questions that don't necessarily have anything to do with the plot. I think there are going to be a whole lot of questions still about Snape. People will want to know things about him that wont be answered in the plot of the story. I am thinking those are the kinds of loose ends she is talking about.

Exactly, I think most of the loose ends will be unimportant stuff.
One of my questions that I don't think will be answered is where did they get the spider from that was in the maze in GOF? I read an editorial a long time ago that suggested that this spider is actually Snape. I like that idea.

Something else intrigueing JKR said in an interview (http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-vancouversun-wyman.htm):

Is she a Christian?

''Yes, I am,'' she says. ''Which seems to offend the religious right far worse than if I said I thought there was no God. Every time I've been asked if I believe in God, I've said yes, because I do, but no one ever really has gone any more deeply into it than that, and I have to say that does suit me, because if I talk too freely about that I think the intelligent reader, whether 10 or 60, will be able to guess what's coming in the books.''

If she talked too freely about her belief in Christianity, then everyone would be able to guess what's coming in the books? Very interesting! What does it mean?

The eyeglasses being a part of his vulnerability is pretty interesting. It makes me think of the fact that he shares his mother's eyes. She's the one that gave him the protection and I wonder if there's any clue hidden there. Maybe Harry wears glasses for a reason and not just the simple answer JK gave that she wanted her hero to wear glasses.

Cheers :tu:

well how many heros really wear glasses.? how many heros who will kill someone as huge as voldi would be wearing ordinary myopic glasses..?harry is a very unassuming regular sort of a hero.. not really mentioned to be very good looking.but i dont think it really has alot to do with the plot itself.. like i dont thnk he will lose his glasses right at the end and get killed cause he cant see. i think its just to make him look kinda sad and sweet.. esp when the nose bridge was taped.badly treated boy, lost his parents, cruel uncle and aunt.. and he was the greatest wizard of all times.. just a way to build up a character for children.

If she talked too freely about her belief in Christianity, then everyone would be able to guess what's coming in the books? Very interesting! What does it mean?

It could mean a number of things. Some christians emphasise the sacrifice of Jesus, others his teaching, others God's love, others complicated theology, etc.

Obvious possible themes are:

sacrifice: Harry? Dumbledore (already)? Ron (like in the chess match in PS/SS)?
redemption: Snape? Draco?
love: Harry's secret weapon? (This is a bit schmaltzy if you ask me.) Lily.
meek inheriting the earth etc: Neville.
turn the other cheek: Wormtail's debt to Harry? The whole soul?


I don't suppose it will mean discovering that the earth is only 6000 years old or anything like that! Nor is it likely we'll find the sort of gross apologetics found in CS Lewis.

The fact that Harry wears glasses and the fact that he has his mother's eyes has always intrigued me. We still don't know what Lily did for a living, although we know she was good at potions and charms. Somehow, I think it has to do with divination - being able to see. As poorly has Harry has done in divination classes, there have been times when he did make accurate predictions. Could Harry and Lily both be seers?

Something else intrigueing JKR said in an interview (http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-vancouversun-wyman.htm):



If she talked too freely about her belief in Christianity, then everyone would be able to guess what's coming in the books? Very interesting! What does it mean?


I wonder if Sacrifice, Death, and Resurrection are the answers here? Maybe Harry will have to die, but not a "proper" death. JKR has indicated in interviews that there are different types of death.

I recall she has mentioned there is no return from a "proper death" in the series. If you go along with the "Harry-Crux" thought, then his death might liberate the 6th peice of Voldemort's soul. But a resurrection of Harry ... well, could lead to some interesting thoughts.

Not to stray too far off, when I say "resurrection", I don't mean the Christian sort - i.e., laying in the tomb for 3 days. I guess it's more of a resusitation. When I took CPR, the instructor made a point of saying if a person has a stopped heart and you are not able to revive them, YOU didn't kill them, they were already dead.

Just my 2 knuts worth.

I think the horcrxes fill that place quite well, they are indeed the plot of bok 6 and 7, no point in writting if she hadtalked about that.. loose ends? probably silly things that we all still want to now... like the fact that Ron's eyes are blue.. when it never gets mentioned in the series..small things i hope.. how ever.. (i know many complained about the lenght) but i don't mind good, long, exhaustive explanations that make herdo a big fatty like OOTP... it's the last!! let's get it all... trees will grow back (only kidding there enviromentalists!)


and about vulnerability.. Harry probably admits to himself he's no Cedric.. round glasses are not tipically erm.. for want of a better word, hot/cool.. he nevr had friends before.. and he got beat up so often they were always broken at the bridge.. it's hard to let your head get inflated by fame and magic and all the things that come with being the boy who lived, when there's that constant reminder.. right there.. actually on your nose.. at least that's how i see it.. it just makes us love our hero more..


I don't suppose it will mean discovering that the earth is only 6000 years old or anything like that! Nor is it likely we'll find the sort of gross apologetics found in CS Lewis.

what do you mean by gross apologetics? :S but i think that sacrifice and love are the christian traits in the series though...

Lilly sacrificed herself for Harry. Dumbledore sacrificed himself for Harry.
And in "small ways" Ron and Hermione have too, not that important, but still, they've done so several times in the book.

About his glasses - I agree that it shows his vulnerability. Harry is just a normal boy, all he would ever want is a normal, teenage life (or normal wizard life), with his friends and parents. Not having to fight the deadliest wizard currently alive.

I've always wondered why Harry's eyes are green, though.
We will probably get this answered in book 7, JK states that his eyes are important to the plot.
But why he has green eyes is still a mystery to me. According to physics, it's very unlikely (maybe even impossible, it depends on James' genes).
According to physics, green is a "weak" eye colour. Colours like brown, black and such will always overrule green and blue.
It's highly unlikely that James had blue or green eyes, considering that he had black hair.
It's possible that one of James' parents had blue/green eyes, but the other one had brown, and in that case, James won't have brown eyes but he will still have the genes for it. (People who aren't much into physics might not get this, but at least I'm trying to explain. :P)
In that case, there's a 25% chance that their kid will have green eyes. But if both his parents had a dominant eye colour (for instance brown) he would have all-brown dna in his eyes and transfer this on to Harry, and in that case, James' eye colour would overrule Lilly's, in other words, Harry couldn't get green eyes.

Hope that wasn't too complicated.

I've always wondered why Harry's eyes are green, though.
We will probably get this answered in book 7, JK states that his eyes are important to the plot.
But why he has green eyes is still a mystery to me. According to physics, it's very unlikely (maybe even impossible, it depends on James' genes).
According to physics, green is a "weak" eye colour. Colours like brown, black and such will always overrule green and blue.
It's highly unlikely that James had blue or green eyes, considering that he had black hair.
It's possible that one of James' parents had blue/green eyes, but the other one had brown, and in that case, James won't have brown eyes but he will still have the genes for it. (People who aren't much into physics might not get this, but at least I'm trying to explain. :P)
In that case, there's a 25% chance that their kid will have green eyes. But if both his parents had a dominant eye colour (for instance brown) he would have all-brown dna in his eyes and transfer this on to Harry, and in that case, James' eye colour would overrule Lilly's, in other words, Harry couldn't get green eyes.

Hope that wasn't too complicated.
James had hazel eyes. The genetics of hazel eyes aren't well-established (mostly because the term 'hazel' is a bit difficult to define). Eye colour genes are more complicated as they come in several flavours anyway:
B=bey2 (dominant - some melanin made)
b=bey2 (recessive - not much melanin made)
G=gey (dominant - some melanin made)
g=gey (recessive - not much melanin made)

These genes work together to give brown, blue or green eyes. For instance; bb bb gives blue eyes, while green eyes could be bb Gb or bb GG.

Hazel eyes indicate something else going on: probably a different gene altogether has come into play which is modifying what's there already. It's known that it's possible for a blue-eyed parent and a green-eyed parent to have hazel-eyed children though, so it's perfectly possible that James could carry genes to give green eyes while having hazel eyes himself.

James had hazel eyes. The genetics of hazel eyes aren't well-established (mostly because the term 'hazel' is a bit difficult to define). Eye colour genes are more complicated as they come in several flavours anyway:
B=bey2 (dominant - some melanin made)
b=bey2 (recessive - not much melanin made)
G=gey (dominant - some melanin made)
g=gey (recessive - not much melanin made)

These genes work together to give brown, blue or green eyes. For instance; bb bb gives blue eyes, while green eyes could be bb Gb or bb GG.

Hazel eyes indicate something else going on: probably a different gene altogether has come into play which is modifying what's there already. It's known that it's possible for a blue-eyed parent and a green-eyed parent to have hazel-eyed children though, so it's perfectly possible that James could carry genes to give green eyes while having hazel eyes himself.

wow .. now this has been given alot of thought.. nice..!

First, great clue finds ! My own research on interviews is limited so I enjoy these tantallizing tidbits when I come across them.


Originally Posted by Reader's Digest, 2000
Rowling's quality control is legendary, as is her obsession with accuracy. She's thrilled with Stephen Fry's taped version of the books, outraged that an Italian dust jacket shows Harry minus his glasses. "Don't they understand that they are the clue to his vulnerability?"


The hardest one since Harry is not the only one who wears glasses. "The clue to his vunerability" I can see it as a verification of his humanity, it puts wizards on our level to see them have a normal affliction that is not cured by magic. Dumbledore, McGonnegal, James and Harry all wear glasses and it is most touching when Harry puts Dumbledores back on in the end. Is it any more than that? A connection for the readers. Or has she made it his Achilles heel, the one spot where if hit he can be killed? I doubt that.


Originally Posted by World Book Day Chat
Josh from Cottenham Village College: Right at the beginning, when Voldermort tried to kill Harry, how did Voldermort and Harry both survive?
JK Rowling replies -> That is the crucial and central question and if I answered it there would be hardly any point writing books six and seven... so I won't!


Horcruxes and the determination to survive death is what saved Voldemort, and Lily's love and willingness to sacrafice herself to save Harry is his key, but there may be a bit more to be explained yet.


Quote:
Originally Posted by An Evening with Harry, Carrie and Garp:
Todd: You mentioned before in the video that you had written the final chapter, but umm, how do you know when to stop writing an ending?

J.K. Rowling: How do I know when to stop?

Todd: How do you know when to stop, yeah?

J.K. Rowling: Well I think some of the reviews of Phoenix suggest that I didn't know when to stop ha ha (crowd laughs). Well, I decided, you know, sixteen years ago, or thereabouts where I was going. And I will say, I'm quite a long way into writing book seven now. And there's a lot still to explain. I hadn't really realized... There's still a lot to find out, and there's a lot to figure out... and I'll probably leave some loose ends hanging that you'll be able to say, "Oh, well, in book eight, she'll explain why" (crowd screams approval). "You mentioned the toad!" That's not significant, by the way, just to save myself 500 letters. "You mentioned the toad!"

Yes, but I do know where I'm going, I really do know where I'm going. I'm really going to miss writing Harry Potter; I will miss it fiendishly. Twenty-seven? Any thoughts on twenty-seven? (crowd laughs). No, I've plotted it out, and I think you'd start to see that I was running out of plot if I pushed it past this (crowd applauds).


I know what she means, when I am doing a painting I never quite seem to finish it, I can go back years later and still find things to touch up or add. I realy don't see how she can finish it all up in one book and not leave us all feeling empty. Twenty-seven, the number of chapters in the final book?


Is she a Christian?

''Yes, I am,'' she says. ''Which seems to offend the religious right far worse than if I said I thought there was no God. Every time I've been asked if I believe in God, I've said yes, because I do, but no one ever really has gone any more deeply into it than that, and I have to say that does suit me, because if I talk too freely about that I think the intelligent reader, whether 10 or 60, will be able to guess what's coming in the books.''

Quite a bit of food for thought in this bit. How would Jo's belief play into the Deathly Hallows? In the movies the Castle has a cathedral, we can see the cross on the tower, but it's not in the books. A divine intervention perhaps? We've already had that in a sort when the spirits help Harry in GoF. Resurrection as someone else mentioned? I can't see how this would help Harry win the final battle, Jo has said there is no coming back. Will it be God's love unleashed that destroys Voldemort? Can Harry call on an Archangel in the final battle?
Guess I'll have to wait and read the book. :relax:

RavenEye: Aha... I didn't really know what eye colour James had. :) Thanks...

I thought more like this:

Harry (green eyes)= gg
Lilly (green eyes)=gg
James (hazel eyes)=as you said, either hh or Hg or HH.
HH/gg=hazel eyes, hh/gg(both recessive)=50/50 shot, Hg/gg=could very well be green.
I'm not that good with physics and hey I'm only in tenth grade so... :P

"Accio Quote" is a pretty nice site.



Nina: I just wanted to know what Hermione would see if she looked into the Mirror of Erised?

J.K. Rowling: Well -- (crowd laughs and applauds) -- at the moment, as you know, Harry, Ron, and Hermione have just finished their penultimate year at Hogwarts and Hermione and Ron have told Harry that they're going to go with him wherever he goes next. So at the moment I think that Hermione would see most likely the three of them alive and unscathed and Voldemort finished.

But I think that Hermione would also see herself closely entwined with...another...person (crowd roars and applauds loudly). I think you can probably guess. Thank you, very good question. I've never been asked that before.

we have to remember also this is Jo's world I mean we could be reading too much into this (of course there is no such thing eh?) Physics may not apply in her world but the fact that Harry and Lilly both have green eyes is central to the plot obviously and it needs to be this way

Something else intrigueing JKR said in an interview (http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-vancouversun-wyman.htm):
If she talked too freely about her belief in Christianity, then everyone would be able to guess what's coming in the books? Very interesting! What does it mean?
About his glasses - I agree that it shows his vulnerability. Harry is just a normal boy, all he would ever want is a normal, teenage life (or normal wizard life), with his friends and parents. Not having to fight the deadliest wizard currently alive.
I've always wondered why Harry's eyes are green, though.
We will probably get this answered in book 7, JK states that his eyes are important to the plot.
But why he has green eyes is still a mystery to me. According to physics, it's very unlikely (maybe even impossible, it depends on James' genes).
According to physics, green is a "weak" eye colour. Colours like brown, black and such will always overrule green and blue.
I think Harry's vulnerability through his glasses and his general 'not-quite-hero' persona goes hand in hand with Biblical doctrine
1 Corinthians 1:26-27 'Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong.'
Harry was 'just Harry' before he was called to be this 'chosen one'. He's not brilliant, or persuasive, or a pure-blood; but he's made a fool of Voldemort despite his wisdom and strength.

I wonder if Harry's eyes were green and he had poor vision before that night at Godric's Hollow? Would be an interesting question for JKR, doubt she'd answer it though:).
It could mean a number of things. Some christians emphasise the sacrifice of Jesus, others his teaching, others God's love, others complicated theology, etc.
Obvious possible themes are:

sacrifice: Harry? Dumbledore (already)? Ron (like in the chess match in PS/SS)?
redemption: Snape? Draco?
love: Harry's secret weapon? (This is a bit schmaltzy if you ask me.) Lily.
meek inheriting the earth etc: Neville.
turn the other cheek: Wormtail's debt to Harry? The whole soul?

I don't suppose it will mean discovering that the earth is only 6000 years old or anything like that! Nor is it likely we'll find the sort of gross apologetics found in CS Lewis.
I think sacrifice and redemption are going to be huge themes in 7, we can be pretty sure of that based on what we know.
JKR seems to have tried to make the whole 'secret weapon of love' thing less 'schmaltzy' :) in 7 through Harry's discussion with Dumbledore. I think she's simply trying to make the dichotomy between Harry and Voldemort even more pronounced--similar backgrounds and yet choices have made the difference between good and evil.

And I agree that we won't see any Christian apologetics in 7 which is fine with me. I have great respect for Lewis--he is an intrepid analogist! I think he would approve with how JKR has formed HP. Stories and analogies are far better teachers than memorization and effect people far more deeply as they come to understandings on their own.

I think sacrifice and redemption are going to be huge themes in 7, ...

Yes I think you are proabably right, I just hope it is done well. I think this was badly handled in the Matrix trilogy, spoiling an otherwise promising story.

I think it will be done well because, come on, how much do we love the first six books? But I do find it interesting that there was so much discussion on the likelihood of Harry having green eyes...so let me put it this way. The only person on my mother's side of the family to have light eyes was her grandmother. On my father's side, it was only an aunt and possibly my grandmother. His eyes were hazel, and my mother's a very dark/almost black brown. My brother married a blond-haired and blue-eyed woman. They have five children. One has blond hair and blue eyes, the next has green eyes and slightly darker blond hair, the next has light brown hair and brown eyes, the next is blond and blue-eyed, and the last is blond (though her eye color has yet to be officially determined, but it will be either blue or green). So really, it is very possible for Harry to have green eyes because you have to look at a family history to determine how likely it is for him, but to my knowledge we aren't given that information.

Yes I think you are proabably right, I just hope it is done well. I think this was badly handled in the Matrix trilogy, spoiling an otherwise promising story.
True, the first Matrix was so excellent, I was disappointed with the last 2. But to have a really good redemption/sacrifice type storyline there has to be quite a lot of content and emotion behind it, which is difficult to establish and portray in a 2 hour movie.

JKR has had almost 2 decades to craft this storyline, and there is already so much depth and emotion in it that I have faith she can pull it off beautifully.
With or without a Gandalf moment :) which by the by is a movie where I think sacrifice was portrayed very well!

I would think that Harry had green eyes before LV's fall because everyone who sees him says that he has his mother's eyes-i.e. he got them from her. Unless, of course, his eyes changed when her protection came over him. I do find it interesting, however, that his eyes are vibrantly green and that AK is a green spell.

Also, to add yet more eveidence to the biology theory, my husband has green eyes and both his parents have hazel.

I don't think Harry's eye color is a result of the avada kedavra curse, it seems to me as though he just inherited the color from his mother. How would the curse change his eye color anyway? Of course we have no way of seeing if this is the result in every survivor of the curse because Harry is the only one. Still, I believe it is just a coincidence.

I just thought I'd comment with a bit of personal experience with the eye color topic. My eyes are a very dark forest green. I'm the only one in my family to have the color - my mom has light sapphire blue, and my dad has a darker navy blue, while my grandparents have either blue, hazel, or brown. So obviously it's either a very recessive trait or a mixing of the genes.

Yeah I agree, that the clue about Aberforth and the goat smell was just telling us that he was Albus' brother.

About the eyes - I don't think the colour is what's significant - I thought it was just that he has his mother's eyes. I have this very loose theory at a certain point he will find in himself his mother's greatest gift - love - which is the power to see people's souls as they are, to see the beauty in each person. So then Harry will find the ture meaning of the power of love and see everything through his mother's eyes. Here's where my theory breaks though - how will this help him? I've considered the possibility of him seeing Severus the way his mother has seen him, in a very sudden manner, somehow, and thus being finally able to trust him - not by conviction or evidence, but intuitively. This is very brittle, I agree, but I'm at the first stages of contemplating now. So, all in all, my point is, that only when he sees with his mother's eyes (that are also his) he will comprehend what Dumbledore had been telling him about his power.

And I remeber something about certain scenes in the PoA film were believed to be giving something od the future plot away, so if it's Remus' telling Harry about his mother's ability to see other people's beauty even when they couldn't see it themselves, that sort of complies with my theory.

On the other hand, love failed Dumbledore - in OotP. I don't know where this is going, sorry... :hmm:

Here's another christian theme I had forgotten: The infancy narrative. (Not an exclusively christian theme of course, but nor are any of the others.)

There may be something unusual or magical about Harry that marked him out from conception/birth to be different. The prophecy would be part of that, but there may be more to it.

okay so I was going through the Lexicon and "Accio Quote" and I found some interesting things:

Originally Posted by Reader's Digest, 2000
Rowling's quality control is legendary, as is her obsession with accuracy. She's thrilled with Stephen Fry's taped version of the books, outraged that an Italian dust jacket shows Harry minus his glasses. "Don't they understand that they are the clue to his vulnerability?"

this intrigued me. What could she mean by this? Is this "the key" as she states? What could it be surrounding? Or is this just completely innocuous?

I like this quote, it reminds me of the bit in Some Like It Hot where Sugar says she prefers men with glasses because they look more helpless. Perhaps glasses are just a symbol of Harry's other vulnerabilities.

About the eyes - I don't think the colour is what's significant - I thought it was just that he has his mother's eyes. I have this very loose theory at a certain point he will find in himself his mother's greatest gift - love - which is the power to see people's souls as they are, to see the beauty in each person. So then Harry will find the ture meaning of the power of love and see everything through his mother's eyes. Here's where my theory breaks though - how will this help him? I've considered the possibility of him seeing Severus the way his mother has seen him, in a very sudden manner, somehow, and thus being finally able to trust him - not by conviction or evidence, but intuitively. This is very brittle, I agree, but I'm at the first stages of contemplating now. So, all in all, my point is, that only when he sees with his mother's eyes (that are also his) he will comprehend what Dumbledore had been telling him about his power.

And I remeber something about certain scenes in the PoA film were believed to be giving something od the future plot away, so if it's Remus' telling Harry about his mother's ability to see other people's beauty even when they couldn't see it themselves, that sort of complies with my theory.

On the other hand, love failed Dumbledore - in OotP. I don't know where this is going, sorry... :hmm:

I do believe that JKR did say that it wasn't the color that was important, just the fact that they were exactly like Lily's. Holding that true, we can abolish any theories relating to AK.

But on to the other idea of Lily "seeing people's true beauty even when they couldn't see it in themselves." I think this is a real power. And of course, the theories here all come back to Snape. I am reminded of a scene in canon, you will all have to remind me where it is but I do believe it is in book 6. Harry is asking Dumbledore if he truly trust Snape and Dumbledore pauses for a moment as if thinking about something. He then nods ands says that he, without a doubt, trusts dear Snape.

A lot has been made of the Snape <3 Lily theory and this is definitely not going there! But is it possible that Dumbledore trusts Snape so much because Lily trusted Snape. Could Lily TRULY see the real Snape. (For my fellow Buffy/Angle fans, think of Lorne's ability to see people's souls). Perhaps when Dumbledore took that pause to think, he wasn't reflecting on whether he really trusts Snape or not, he was considering whether or not to tell Harry why he does trust him.

But how does this play into the plot? Well, obviously Harry now has this same ability, but it is "blocked" by his glasses. Could it be that in the end Harry will "see" Snape at a critical moment. Will that be enough for Harry to truly trust him? And if all this is true, then why hasn't Dumbledore ever told Harry about this? Why hasn't anyone, for that matter?

But how does this play into the plot? Well, obviously Harry now has this same ability, but it is "blocked" by his glasses. Could it be that in the end Harry will "see" Snape at a critical moment. Will that be enough for Harry to truly trust him? And if all this is true, then why hasn't Dumbledore ever told Harry about this? Why hasn't anyone, for that matter?

Nice idea, but how could it be "blocked" by glasses? How horrible for Harry if he has to wander round banging into things just so he can see people clearly when he does find them...

Sorry, but speaking from experience it is horrible not to have your glasses if you need them: people turn into flesh-coloured blurs and you can't recognise people and places - don't wish this for Harry, please!

I think this is also this topic, so please forgive me if it isn't, but I was re-reading PoA and found a quote of Fudge saying
Dumbledore... had a number of useful spies.
One of them is Snape, clearly, but who else might be spying for Dumbledore?
If this isn't the place to discuss this please could someone tell me where a thread about it might be?

Oh, don't I know it. I'm legally blind without my glasses or contacts. I'm not sure how bad Harry's vision is, so maybe he's not as dependent on his glasses as we. I kinda feel like trying to figure out this eye connection thing is a lot like stumbling around without our glasses in the dark. We can't really see shapes, but if we squint hard enough and walk around waving our arms about, we might run into something useful!!

I made that connections because of the whole "his glasses are his vunerability." Which could mean if he loses them, he becomes more powerful... too "superman" for everyone? Yeah, I'm thinking so too!

About the eyes - I don't think the colour is what's significant - I thought it was just that he has his mother's eyes. I have this very loose theory at a certain point he will find in himself his mother's greatest gift - love - which is the power to see people's souls as they are, to see the beauty in each person. So then Harry will find the ture meaning of the power of love and see everything through his mother's eyes. Here's where my theory breaks though - how will this help him? I've considered the possibility of him seeing Severus the way his mother has seen him, in a very sudden manner, somehow, and thus being finally able to trust him - not by conviction or evidence, but intuitively. This is very brittle, I agree, but I'm at the first stages of contemplating now. So, all in all, my point is, that only when he sees with his mother's eyes (that are also his) he will comprehend what Dumbledore had been telling him about his power.


I LOVE this theory. It (or something on the same lines) would make perfect sense. Dumbledore has made it clear that Harry's power of love came from his mother, and it pops up in cannon all the time that his eyes are just like Lily's.
Let's stop and think about the people Harry truely hates.... not is annoyed by or whatever, but actually HATES. Only three come to mind: Malfoy, Umbridge, and (of course) Snape.
Obviously, he and Malfoy have hated each other for years, but alot of their difficulties could really be marked down to school-boy pettiness (in a wizarding sort of way, I know there are people i would have loved to hex in high school). In HBP, Ron and Hermione are constantly trying to steer Harry away from his Malfoy-is-a-death eater theory, to no avail. Maybe he sees something in Malfoy that they cannot.
Now, we all know that Umbridge was a NASTY piece of work. Between her racism, control-freakishness, and the whole making harry make himself bleed thing, there is obviously alot to see to be hated there, even to the blind.
But Snape is the inigma.... if Lily saw something redeeming in him, could see the beautiful part of Snape (a beautiful part of snape... ew), why can't Harry? Similar to Malfoy, (and i'm talking VERY generally here, i know) Harry and Snape's animosity towards each other really was a disliked student and pupil. The teacher makes the student do hard work as a punishment, grades unfairly, constantly looks down his nose at you, ect. And in return, the student sees nothing good. (I've had teachers like that too). Building on Yoana's theory, maybe Harry is incapable of seeing the good in Harry simply because the glasses block that ability.....
Does anyone know if Harry has seen any of these three hatee's without his glasses on?

Let's stop and think about the people Harry truely hates.... not is annoyed by or whatever, but actually HATES. Only three come to mind: Malfoy, Umbridge, and (of course) Snape.
I would add to the list: Voldemort, Belatrix, and Lucius. He hates people like Draco and Lucius because they like the Dark Arts and follow Voldemort. Belatrix he hates for those reasons plus the fact that she killed Sirius. I think the reasons he hates Voldemort are evident.

I love Jo's theme of love but the fact that Harry can hate intrigues me. We know he is going to use love to defeat Voldemort, but does that mean he has to let go of his hate? "Seeing" these people a different way through his eyes is an interesting theory. I just don't know that Voldemort has any redeeming qualities that would make him appear any differently. The others I'm sure have some.

When it comes to eye color, it's uncertain what "hazel" actually means---sometimes it's a light brown, sometimes it's a combination of colors---for instance, my eyes are "hazel," but really they're two different colors: brown around the pupil, while the rest is sort of green-gray (incidentally I am also the child of a green-eyed parent and a hazel-eyed one, in which case the hazel is sort of an amber color, but her eyes also change to a greenish color sometimes). Eye color is very complex but it's logical Harry could have green eyes especially if there were lighter eyes in James's family, or if his were part green or something.

Concerning Harry's eyes, meanwhile, I think there is a relation to the vulnerability associated with the glasses and the fact that he has Lily's eyes.

I have come to think that the big reason Harry's eyes are like Lilly's is important has already come to pass. The reason Slughorn gave Harry the memory that confirms Voldemort made multiple Horcruxes and was going for a 7 part soul was that Harry reminded him of Lilly. I am fairly sure this information is considered very critical by JKR and the unlocking of what Harry has to do to destroy Voldemort. What is a more important plot point than this? It would be nice if they have more meaning than that, but I think we tend to over analyze these things. There can not be a whole lot more plot twists as we only have 1 more book and the path is all ready known!

Mercer
Elf of Old

I love Jo's theme of love but the fact that Harry can hate intrigues me. We know he is going to use love to defeat Voldemort, but does that mean he has to let go of his hate? "Seeing" these people a different way through his eyes is an interesting theory. I just don't know that Voldemort has any redeeming qualities that would make him appear any differently. The others I'm sure have some.

I beleive you're right Artemis, might we have glimpsed the key to that already? Harry has an enormus capacity for empathy. When he sees Snape in a memory as a tortured child for example. I'm sure he is able to understand Tom Riddle the boy a bit for his being deserted by his Father and Grandparents. And remember how the pity he feels toward Luna along with her words helps to lift the pain somewhat?

I am thinking that it is not legilimency that is the common factor between Lily and Harry but maybe they are Empaths. This could also further explain why Harry channels LV's feelings and emotions.

Harry can allow his empathy to override the hatred for all of them, thus onverting the negative feeling to a positive one and feeding the positive emotions, into what? Voldemort himself or some device inside the love room of the MoM?

Not that I want to see a sobbing Emo Harry. :lol: Maybe I've just seen one to many Star Trekk episodes. I mean Pigmy puffs do remind me of Tribbles. :rotfl:

I love Jo's theme of love but the fact that Harry can hate intrigues me. We know he is going to use love to defeat Voldemort, but does that mean he has to let go of his hate?

Don't think so. Voldemort is just Harry without his mother's blood (her Muggle blood, ie Aunt Petunia) and the capacity to love. And by love I mean he understands that he is fundamentally the same as other people, even if there are special things about him. Unlike Voldemort who thought he was special and was determined to distance himself from all aspects of his own humanity because human weakness disgusted him.

The glasses are one of the most intriguing aspects of the books. They crop up so many times - not only do Harry, James, Dumbledore and McGonagall wear them...so did Moaning Myrtle-she was teased about them which led to her being in the bathroom and dying because of the Basilisk. Hermione repeatedly repairs Harry's glasses and shows him the impervius charm so that he can see in bad weather...WHY?

Does it make legilimency more difficult? (Can anyone remember if he took his glasses off during Occlumeny with Snape?)
Is it a way of keeping what he sees within his own head...bouncing the views back so that Voldemort can't see them?

Is she a Christian?

''Yes, I am,'' she says. ''Which seems to offend the religious right far worse than if I said I thought there was no God. Every time I've been asked if I believe in God, I've said yes, because I do, but no one ever really has gone any more deeply into it than that, and I have to say that does suit me, because if I talk too freely about that I think the intelligent reader, whether 10 or 60, will be able to guess what's coming in the books.''

Hallows, to me mean Saints. ( All hallows day...All saints day; Hallowed be His name...Sainted be His name; All Hallows Church...All Saints Church etc)
I am not Catholic, but understand that in the past Saints were often martyrs (those who die for their beliefs), die for the lives of others etc

Canonization, the process the Church uses to name a saint, has only been used since the tenth century. For hundreds of years, starting with the first martyrs of the early Church, saints were chosen by public acclaim. Though this was a more democratic way to recognize saints, some saints' stories were distorted by legend and some never existed. Gradually, the bishops and finally the Vatican took over authority for approving saints.

I wonder if we will find out what wizards believe happen to souls when they die. We have heard mention of ghosts, the soul as precious, the veil, death as the next great adventure...but its all hanging...I think it will be explained further.
Lily might fit the category of being a Saint in the most traditonal sense....so maybe wizards have their own way of classifying those who die for their cause as special.

I think Deathly Hallows might refer in some way to those who have died for their cause-on the evil side. It sounds like "Death eaters"...simply because Deathly Saints makes no sense...it is saying the same thing. To me its like its saying "evil Saints" or Saints which cause death...which is really weird...but so are a lot of things in the Wizarding World!!

I have come to think that the big reason Harry's eyes are like Lilly's is important has already come to pass. The reason Slughorn gave Harry the memory that confirms Voldemort made multiple Horcruxes and was going for a 7 part soul was that Harry reminded him of Lilly. I am fairly sure this information is considered very critical by JKR and the unlocking of what Harry has to do to destroy Voldemort. What is a more important plot point than this? It would be nice if they have more meaning than that, but I think we tend to over analyze these things. There can not be a whole lot more plot twists as we only have 1 more book and the path is all ready known!

Yes, that's a good point. And although it's fascnating to theorize on Harry's eyes, tey may have served their pyrpose already, I agree.

I like the idea that Harry will have to let go of his hatred in order to truly embrace his power, the power that will enable him alone to defeat Voldemort...which is love, of course. It would kind of go with JKR's quote about being a Christian, because what Jesus preached was not to hate but rather love your enemies. It would go in line with her not being willing to divulge her beliefs if it included having to love your enemies before you could really do what needed to be done.

Don't think so. Voldemort is just Harry without his mother's blood (her Muggle blood, ie Aunt Petunia) and the capacity to love. And by love I mean he understands that he is fundamentally the same as other people, even if there are special things about him. Unlike Voldemort who thought he was special and was determined to distance himself from all aspects of his own humanity because human weakness disgusted him.

This is an excellent observation, in simple words. I had never thought that way about them, but now I do. You totally won my admiration :clap:

It really fits what you guys are saying. I belonged to the camp of Harry-will-not-die.
Of course I do not want to see him dead, I love Harry! But the likeliness of him making the ultimate sacrifice to destroy evil is very big. :no: :upset: :sad:

It is in line with Christian belief, the sacrifices the good must make to defeat evil.
Harry will have t make sacrifices, big sacrifices. this can mean many things, but harry would not endager or sacrifice someone he loves. Out of love for them he would die for them..

I find the title of the seventh book a lot intriguing. All of us have poured over the title but it still remains a mystery to be fathomed.

first of all i'd like to thank pokemasterfelx for starting this EXCELLENT discussion - after all, what better way to understand the story (and predict what's coming next) than from the author's own words? =)

secondly, i agree very strongly with yoana's idea about harry having lily's eyes - not just eye colour. to be able to see the good in people who don't appear remotely nice on the surface is a rare trait - we do know that Jesus himself hung out with the worst kind of people in his day, prostitutes, tax collectors (who basically cheated everyone of their money) and other people who were generally disliked. i also like the prediction that harry will have to INTUITIVELY learn to trust Snape in a moment, because such love is an inherently illogical thing, and goes well with the "Love your enemies" theme. not saying that that is what i THINK will happen, but rather that it is a scenario which will work very well with the kinds of themes that JKR has brought up so far.

i DON'T think that this theme can be freely applied to Voldemort, unfortunately. Recall at the end of OotP when Dumbledore is telling Harry that he is setting too much store by the prophecy - "Imagine for a moment that you'd never heard of the prophecy" etc etc... Harry says this, "I'd want him dead." Also, remember what Dumbledore said in the fight at MoM? "I admit that killing you alone would not satisfy me...." Even DD, the father figure and dispenser of all wisdom hates LV....

The thing is that LV in this set of stories is the personification of evil. Hence the moniker "The Dark Lord". Hence the use of prophecy to identify him as the Dark Lord - he is the ultimate baddie! I think many of us would be quite disappointed if LV did not die in the end after what happened to DD and Sirius... to follow on with the Christian analogy, think back to OotP, after Harry gets out of the Pensieve memory where Bartemius Crouch sent his son to the Dementors... Harry was thinking something along the lines of... "Voldemort was the cause of all this..." ... all the suffering, all these broken lives, they all had their root cause in Voldemort. Which agrees very well with the overarching story in Christianity - man was created good, but Satan deceived us, and has brought much evil into the world, teaching us to hate each other, sowing much enmity and discord.... sound familiar? =)

I'm personally quite happy to find out that JKR is a christian. I'm christian myself, and i have really found that many of the themes that she's brought across in the books really resound with me and what I believe... it is extremely true that stories and 'fiction' bring across values far better than any role-playing exercises in Moral Ed. class could ever do... I personally thoroughly enjoyed the all 7 books of the Chronicles of Narnia by CS Lewis, and found that they taught me many things about my faith too. and didn't Jesus himself constantly use parables in his teachings? =)

I have come to think that the big reason Harry's eyes are like Lilly's is important has already come to pass. The reason Slughorn gave Harry the memory that confirms Voldemort made multiple Horcruxes and was going for a 7 part soul was that Harry reminded him of Lilly. I am fairly sure this information is considered very critical by JKR and the unlocking of what Harry has to do to destroy Voldemort. What is a more important plot point than this? It would be nice if they have more meaning than that, but I think we tend to over analyze these things. There can not be a whole lot more plot twists as we only have 1 more book and the path is all ready known!

I don't think that was the big reason. I remember reading somewhere that eyes were important to Legilimency because they're the windows to the soul. Well what do you spend most of your time doing, looking into other people's windows or looking out of your own? I think Harry's been learning to see through Lily's eyes, which probably means that she became a Legilimens at some point and so will he.

Didn't Jesus also tell his followers to be as cunning as the snake and as innocent as the lamb? That idea really typifies Harry in my view. The snake's eyes are very dangerous things — the basilisk killed with it's eyes, Harry saw Mr. Weasley's attack through the eye of the snake — but Harry has to understand what it's like to be the snake in order to ultimately defeat the snake. That he's been able to do this, get into Voldemort's head and see through his eyes without being corrupted, is what I chalk up to the power of love.

This is an excellent observation, in simple words. I had never thought that way about them, but now I do. You totally won my admiration

Thanks! :D

The thing is that LV in this set of stories is the personification of evil.

I agree. My most recent theory on this is that the "magic" of the books is a combination of bravery (fire, Gryffindor, lion), intelligence (air, Ravenclaw, eagle), hard work (earth, Hufflepuff, badger), and cunning (water, Slytherin, serpent). After all, if no kid knows which house they'll be in before the Sorting, then all wizards would have to be all four of these things. And Muggles certainly aren't all four of these things.

Then there's the fifth element, love or the divine or what have you. I suspect the Dark Arts are any magic performed without this component, which is why they are eternal and ever-changing (just like the Dark Arts teachers :lol:). But even the Death Eaters, the Malfoys and Bellatrix and all, have some capacity to love, and should according to Jo be considered redeemable. The Dark Lord is the only one who absolutely does not have this love component anywhere in him, so yes, I definitely think he's the embodiment of evil in the books.

"Don't they understand that they are the clue to his vulnerability?"


Jum! Could this actually mean that the glasses are actually be "covering" his vulnerabilty?
His eyes maybe?

This is from Wikipedia.com:
Vulnerability is the susceptibility to physical or emotional injury or attack. It also means to have one's guard down, open to censure or criticism; assailable. Vulnerability refers to a person's state of being liable to succumb, as to persuasion or temptation

Could having Lily's Eyes be a vulnerability? :no:
This was what first came to mind ... i have never seen that quote before.

Didn't Jesus also tell his followers to be as cunning as the snake and as innocent as the lamb? That idea really typifies Harry in my view. The snake's eyes are very dangerous things — the basilisk killed with it's eyes, Harry saw Mr. Weasley's attack through the eye of the snake — but Harry has to understand what it's like to be the snake in order to ultimately defeat the snake. That he's been able to do this, get into Voldemort's head and see through his eyes without being corrupted, is what I chalk up to the power of love.

The verse you are referring to, Matt. 10:16, isn't talking about being cunning, but rather being wary and wise as most snakes are wont to be. It's a warning to watch out for those that would do you harm. The innocence refers to a dove, and it's more like saying make sure that you are blameless, because the verse is meant as advice in times of persecution.
As far as the idea of Harry being cunning and innocent, I'm not sure those are the words that I would use to describe him. I think that cunning has too negative of a meaning. It implies deceit and being willing to do anything, which is a Slytherin trait, but not one I believe lies in Harry. There are things he is not about to sacrifice. However, I do think that if you take the meaning of that verse as a warning to be careful of those you trust it could apply to Harry, though only in an advisory capacity and not as a trait found in him. And for the innocence, I think that Harry's journey is more of a falling away of his innocence in the sense that he has to learn and face hard truths, as well as be witness to many things that people consider to add to the loss of innocence in children. I do not think that he is completely blameless (his rash actions did cost Sirius his life, in a way), and I do think he will have to make decisions that will cost the lives of others and put some blame to him.

About the Harry being able to feel sympathy-theory, I remember in HBP after they found out Tom's mother died and he was left at an orphanage and Harry felt sorry for him, Dumbledore says something along the lines of "you don't really feel sorry for Voldemort?" I wasn't surprised that Harry did, I was rather surprised that Dumbledore didn't. He sunk a lot in my eyes then. I thought he saw the humanity in everyone, the soul in every death eater. I thought he might see that Voldemort has a terrible backstory that might be the reason for things he does, that could be his vulnerability. That he was able to see that behind it all, Voldemort is still the lonely, scared, bitter young boy he once was.
I thought Dumbledore couldn't hate. That's why I thought all of this was weird.
I felt sorry for Voldemort myself and I think that could be why I found it so weird.
But I'm always told that I have sympathy with people no one likes. I usually try to see the good in everybody and I do believe that every man is equal no matter what he does or how many he has killed, he's still a human being and should be treated that way.
I guess I'm just kind of over-sympathic, like I felt sorry for the 9/11 terrorists for instance. They must have had a horrible life, to be able to do something like that.
I have fought with people over it but it's just how I am. If Harry's like that I don't really see how it helps him that much. I mean, yeah, he might feel sorry for Snape or see the good in him - but that will help him how?

The glasses are one of the most intriguing aspects of the books. They crop up so many times - not only do Harry, James, Dumbledore and McGonagall wear them...so did Moaning Myrtle-she was teased about them which led to her being in the bathroom and dying because of the Basilisk. Hermione repeatedly repairs Harry's glasses and shows him the impervius charm so that he can see in bad weather...WHY?

Perhaps the glasses are symbolism that he needs help to see properly. As he stands by himself, he's just a teenager under incredible duress. He needs aid and support from others in order to figure out the correct path in life, and has been depending on his friends to help see him through. If Harry is something along the lines of an empath, why did he not realize what Quirrell was up to, or what Snape wasn't up to in SS? Harry isn't always right. He's certainly right sometimes, but not enough for me to think that he has some extra ability tied to knowing the hearts of those around him. Perhaps having Lily's eyes ties into this--he needs her eyes, her help, to see things clearly. And maybe one of those things is, actually, eventually, what Snape's true nature is, or at least what Lily saw in him. The glasses are there to show that he can't do this on his own.

Obviously this is all just half-baked and off the cuff, but if the glasses are a clue to Harry's vulnerability, I think that vulnerability could be that he's kinda lost without help.

About the Harry being able to feel sympathy-theory, I remember in HBP after they found out Tom's mother died and he was left at an orphanage and Harry felt sorry for him, Dumbledore says something along the lines of "you don't really feel sorry for Voldemort?" I wasn't surprised that Harry did, I was rather surprised that Dumbledore didn't. He sunk a lot in my eyes then. I thought he saw the humanity in everyone, the soul in every death eater. I thought he might see that Voldemort has a terrible backstory that might be the reason for things he does, that could be his vulnerability. That he was able to see that behind it all, Voldemort is still the lonely, scared, bitter young boy he once was.
I thought Dumbledore couldn't hate. That's why I thought all of this was weird.
I felt sorry for Voldemort myself and I think that could be why I found it so weird.

It doesn'tsay anywhere that Dumbledore hadn't felt sympathy for Tom when he first knew his story, it doesn't even say that he wasn't feeling any even at that precise moment - he just points to Harry that Harry himself, th ultimate enemy of Voldemort, can and does feel sorry for him. I think he's trying to show him that after all Voldemort is human like everyone else and can induce symapthy.

About the Harry being able to feel sympathy-theory, I remember in HBP after they found out Tom's mother died and he was left at an orphanage and Harry felt sorry for him, Dumbledore says something along the lines of "you don't really feel sorry for Voldemort?" I wasn't surprised that Harry did, I was rather surprised that Dumbledore didn't. He sunk a lot in my eyes then. I thought he saw the humanity in everyone, the soul in every death eater. I thought he might see that Voldemort has a terrible backstory that might be the reason for things he does, that could be his vulnerability. That he was able to see that behind it all, Voldemort is still the lonely, scared, bitter young boy he once was.
I thought Dumbledore couldn't hate. That's why I thought all of this was weird.
I felt sorry for Voldemort myself and I think that could be why I found it so weird.

It doesn'tsay anywhere that Dumbledore hadn't felt sympathy for Tom when he first knew his story, it doesn't even say that he wasn't feeling any even at that precise moment - he just points to Harry that Harry himself, th ultimate enemy of Voldemort, can and does feel sorry for him. I think he's trying to show him that after all Voldemort is human like everyone else and can induce symapthy.

I agree with the both of you

Everything that has been said in the books regarding Voldemort from the POV of him makes him out to be an evil, tyrannica, almost not humanl person who is VERY afraid of death. He wants nothing more than to live forever and to be remembered for the "greatness" and "purification" in his eyes that he bestowed upon the wizarding world. However by DD's POV he is just an ordinary orphan who had wizarding powers and ultimately due to his greed, malice and will to dominate over people he grew into the abomination called Volemort. DD's refusal to call him by the name that he has been known by and become infamous for being shows that he still sees Tom as that ordinary orphan he met so many years ago and nothing more.

Could having Lily's Eyes be a vulnerability? I think it is more that the glasses are the vulnerability. Although they allow him to 'see', they prevent him from seeing through Lily's eyes. The glasses in affect are the Harry filter. Once he is able to see the world (and people) clearly and accurately, the way Lily did, he may not need the glasses anymore.

Lily’s eyes didn’t recognise the traitor Peter Pettigrew, so I wouldn’t put much store in those eyes making him able to see everything. Especially not if a person is a trustworthy.

They mentioned an interesting quote from JKR on Mugglecast yesterday and I wondered what everyone thought of it:
JKR, 2005
There's a theory - this applies to detective novels, and then Harry, which is not really a detective novel, but it feels like one sometimes – that you should not have romantic intrigue in a detective book. Dorothy L. Sayers, who is queen of the genre said — and then broke her own rule, but said — that there is no place for romance in a detective story except that it can be useful to camouflage other people’s motives. That's true; it is a very useful trick. I've used that on Percy and I’ve used that to a degree on Tonks in this book, as a red herring. But having said that, I disagree inasmuch as mine are very character-driven books, and it’s so important, therefore, that we see these characters fall in love, which is a necessary part of life.
What do you think she means about "romantic intrigue" camoflaging people's motives? How did this apply to Percy and to Tonks? Will this play a part in 7?

They mentioned an interesting quote from JKR on Mugglecast yesterday and I wondered what everyone thought of it:

What do you think she means about "romantic intrigue" camoflaging people's motives? How did this apply to Percy and to Tonks? Will this play a part in 7?

I think it applied to Percy via Penelope Clearwater, but I don't remember the exact mechanics.

It applied to Tonks with her mood in HBP. She wasn't depressed about Sirius' death, she was depressed about Lupin pushing her away.

They mentioned an interesting quote from JKR on Mugglecast yesterday and I wondered what everyone thought of it:

What do you think she means about "romantic intrigue" camoflaging people's motives? How did this apply to Percy and to Tonks? Will this play a part in 7?
Percy's meetings with Penelope had him skulking about the dungeons in CoS - it made him look kind of shady and put him in position when Harry and . At the end of the book it was out in the open when Ginny revealed it.

As for Tonks, she was obviously off her game through much of HBP. Snape was abusing her over it. And Harry took it as pining or feeling guilty over Sirius, but in fact it was over Lupin and his reserve.

No doubt romance will play a part in DH, perhaps comic relief between Ron and Hermione, perhaps that final 'oomph' Harry needs to defeat Voldie.

Percy's meetings with Penelope had him skulking about the dungeons in CoS - it made him look kind of shady and put him in position when Harry and . At the end of the book it was out in the open when Ginny revealed it.

As for Tonks, she was obviously off her game through much of HBP. Snape was abusing her over it. And Harry took it as pining or feeling guilty over Sirius, but in fact it was over Lupin and his reserve.

Ohh, I'd forgotten about that from CoS! (it's my least favorite of the books so I haven't read it in a while). okay!

I think the camoflaging of motives might link with Snape's having been "loved".

All the following can be found at Accio Quotes, but these all apply to "Deathly Hallows"

"Key things happen in Book Two [“Chamber of Secrets”]. No one knows how important those things are … yet.”

- Interview with IGN.com, 2002


“Harry was very well protected until the end of Book Four [“Goblet of Fire”], which is the end of an era for him.”

- Interview with CBC Hot Type, 2000


“The fourth [“Goblet of Fire”] is a very, very important book. Well you know because you read it, something incredibly important happens in book four and also it's literally a central book, it's almost the heart of the series, and it's pivotal. It's very difficult to talk about and I can't wait for the day someone's read all seven and I can talk completely freely about it. But it's a very, very important book.”

- - Interview with cBBC Newsround, 2000


“MA: Does the gleam of triumph [at the end of “Goblet of Fire”] still have yet to make an appearance?

JKR: That's still enormously significant. And let's face it, I haven’t told you that much is enormously significant, so you can let your imaginations run free there.”

- Interview with the Leaky Cauldron, 2005


“David Moulds for the News of the World - How does Aunt Petunia know about dementors and all the other magical facts she knows?

JK Rowling: Another very good question. She overheard a conversation, that is all I am going to say. She overheard conversation. The answer is in the beginning of Phoenix, she said she overheard Lily being told about them basically.

Is that true?

JK Rowling: Yes. The reason I am hesitant is because there is more to it than that. As I think you suspect. Correctly, but I don't want to say what else there is because it relates to book 7.”

- Interview with ITV, 2005


“Peter: ... and I was wondering, are we going to learn a lot about Harry's mother?

Lydon: Will we?

JKR: yeah, you will. Erm - it's - errr - yet again kind of the - in - you won't find out ... OK, in book three, you're absolutely right, you find out a lot about Harry's father. Now, the - the important thing about Harry's mother - the really, really significant thing - you're going to find out in two - in two parts. You'll find out a lot more about her in book five, or you'll find out something very significant about her in book five, and you'll find out something incredibly important about her in book seven. But I can't tell you what those things are, so I'm sorry, but they - yes, you will find out more about her, because they're - both of them are very important in what Harry ends up having to do.”

- Interview on WBUR radio, 1999


[the question everyone should be asking, according to Rowling] “Why did Dumbledore have James’ invisibility cloak at the time of James’ death, given that Dumbledore could make himself invisible without a cloak?”
- “NAQ” from Rowling’s website, 2004


“There are two questions that I have never been asked but that I should have been asked, if you know what I mean. If you want to speculate on anything, you should speculate on these two things, which will point you in the right direction. The first question that I have never been asked—it has probably been asked in a chatroom but no one has ever asked me—is, “Why didn’t Voldemort die?” Not, “Why did Harry live?” but, “Why didn’t Voldemort die?” The killing curse rebounded, so he should have died. Why didn’t he? At the end of Goblet of Fire he says that one or more of the steps that he took enabled him to survive. You should be wondering what he did to make sure that he did not die—I will put it that way. I don’t think that it is guessable. It may be—someone could guess it—but you should be asking yourself that question, particularly now that you know about the prophesy. I’d better stop there or I will really incriminate myself. The other question that I am surprised no one has asked me since Phoenix came out—I thought that people would—is why Dumbledore did not kill or try to kill Voldemort in the scene in the ministry. I know that I am giving a lot away to people who have not read the book. Although Dumbledore gives a kind of reason to Voldemort, it is not the real reason.”

- Interview at Edinburgh Book Festival, 2004


[Not really related to the story, but it caught my eye!]

“I have a very violent rabbit”

- Interview with Scholastic Chat, 2000


“What did the Potter parents do for a living before Voldemort killed them?

A. I'm sorry to keep saying this, but I can't tell you because it's important to a later plot. But you will find out later! ”

- Interview with Scholastic Chat, 2000


[about whether the Lestranges were sent after Neville to kill him]
“No, they weren’t, they were very definitely sent after Neville’s parents. I can’t say too much about this because it touches too closely on the prophecy and how many people knew about it, but the Lestranges were not in on the secret.”

- From Rowling’s website, 2004


“I keep killing all my favourite members of the Order of the Phoenix, but there is one member of the Order of the Phoenix that you have not yet met properly and you will ¬¬ well, you know that they are a member, but you haven't really met them properly yet and you will meet them in seven, so I am looking forward to that.”

- Interview with ITV, 2005


“Have any of the Hogwarts professors had spouses?

JKR: Good question - yes, a few of them, but that information is sort of restricted - you'll find out why…”

- Interview, BBC Red Nose Day chat, 2001


“JKR: No, it's just studying. The Department of Mysteries is all about studying. They study the mind, the universe, death…

MA: Are we going back to that room, that locked room?

JKR: No comment.”

- Interview from Leaky Cauldron, 2005


“The final chapter is hidden away, although it has now changed very slightly. One character got a reprieve, but I have to say two die that I didn't intend to die ...”

- Interview with R&J, 2006


[about how readers will respond to the final book] “I think some people will loathe it, some will love it, but that's the way it should be.”

- Press Conference at Radio City, 2006


“ Yes, I do know what's going to happen in the end. And occasionally, I get cold shivers when someone guesses at something that's very close, and then I panic and I think, "Oh, is it very obvious?" and then someone says something that's so off the wall that I think, "No, it's clearly not that obvious!"”

- Interview with BBC Radio4, 2005



[upset at an Italian cover, which shows Harry without glasses] “Don't they understand that they are the clue to his vulnerability?"

- Interview with ‘Reader’s Digest’, 2000


“And if you were offered a post as a teacher at Hogwarts what subject would you most like to teach?”

“Oh I think definitely Charms - I see that as the most imaginative bit of magic because you're adding properties to an object.”

- Interview with cBBC Newsround, 2000


Now the tough part - waiting for July!

""Key things happen in Book Two [“Chamber of Secrets”]. No one knows how important those things are … yet.”

- Interview with IGN.com, 2002"
That's to do with book 6; the diary is a horcrux. That's obviously an enourmously important part of the deathly hallows, but it's more relating to HBP (as that's where you find out about them).

"“Harry was very well protected until the end of Book Four [“Goblet of Fire”], which is the end of an era for him.”

- Interview with CBC Hot Type, 2000"

Not too sure on this one.

"
“The fourth [“Goblet of Fire”] is a very, very important book. Well you know because you read it, something incredibly important happens in book four and also it's literally a central book, it's almost the heart of the series, and it's pivotal. It's very difficult to talk about and I can't wait for the day someone's read all seven and I can talk completely freely about it. But it's a very, very important book.”

- - Interview with cBBC Newsround, 2000"

Voldemort rises again. Also, could be (almost certainly) relating to the 'gleam' in Dumbledore's eyes that we will find out about in book 7.

"
“What did the Potter parents do for a living before Voldemort killed them?

A. I'm sorry to keep saying this, but I can't tell you because it's important to a later plot. But you will find out later! ”

- Interview with Scholastic Chat, 2000"

Order of the Phoenix...though I suppose that's not really a "living". That's all I can work out.

"“I keep killing all my favourite members of the Order of the Phoenix, but there is one member of the Order of the Phoenix that you have not yet met properly and you will ¬¬ well, you know that they are a member, but you haven't really met them properly yet and you will meet them in seven, so I am looking forward to that.”"

100% it's Aberforth Dumbledore.

OK, I'm going to ask this once again, I hope I'm not being boring already -you'll find out something very significant about her in book five - so what did we learn about Lily Evans in book 5 that's so significant? I mean, if we go back to book 5 and trace every word that's written about her, which was the significant part??

OK, I'm going to ask this once again, I hope I'm not being boring already -you'll find out something very significant about her in book five - so what did we learn about Lily Evans in book 5 that's so significant? I mean, if we go back to book 5 and trace every word that's written about her, which was the significant part??
The most obvious thing would be that she opposed the Marauders when they were being bullies and expressed contempt for James Potter. Perhaps also that she defended people like Snape against bullying.

Well here is my two cents worth. JKR is famous for hidden meanings and looking at things in an abstract kind of way. There is much to learn from the saying "the eyes are the windows to our souls". It is obvious through her interviews, discussions, etc. that Harry's eyes will be an important part of book 7.

Having his mothers eyes could mean several things. For instance: #1 It could give him the ability to see things no one else could see. #2 Don't forget that Voldemort did not intend to kill Lily Potter. But, by doing so and allowing her to die for her son could have transferred whatever powers she had into Harry. (And not just love) #3 It could be possibly that Voldemort would remember something about Lily by looking into Harry's eyes.

I don't think JKR intends anyone to believe that Voldemort is remorseful or loved Lily Potter enough not to kill her, but I think we do have to wonder WHY he did not intend to kill the mother of the "chosen" one. Had she done something prior to him becoming so evil that he was willing not to kill her. Did he owe her a life debt like Wormtail owes Harry? Just a thought!

I think also in book 5 we find out that because she died protecting Harry, refusing to step aside, it invoked the magic we now know protected Harry in SS/PS, and in a way in book 5 when possessed by Voldie. D'dore goes on at length about Harry's ability to love despite having a horrible childhood being a protection for him, and his main strength.

The quote about finding something out about Lily in book 7, and the significance of Harry having her eyes always puts me in mind of the convo between Lupin and Harry in the PoA movie. Speculators always point to that scene as a likely candidate for JKR's comment about unintentional foreshadowing in that movie.

Lupin's line "she could always see [my emph] the good in others, even when they couldn't see it in themselves" leads me to think that perhaps in 7 Harry will gain this ability, and that in turn will allow him to defeat Voldie. The glasses might come off in 7. Hence, their being his vulnerability -- he is in danger of being overcome until he can shed them (ie, his inablility to see good in certain others), at which time he is no longer vulnerable.

This also evokes the Christian theme -- we are called to love (there's that word again) all others, and see the good (God) in them, in spite of their sinful nature.

Regarding the glasses/ eyes: since joining Mugglenet has prevented me from reading the books anymore without constantly reading into and speculating about every detail, I keep seeing phrases stand out such as "he pushed the hair back from his eyes" preceding some revelation of Harry's, or a bout of clear thinking from him, or "he pushed his glasses further up on his nose" before similar events. It seems as if his poor eyesight is a symbolic mental haze, and the glasses or an unobstructed view symbolizes a crisper mental perception.

Regarding book 4, the gleam, a turning point, etc. -- I feel that Voldie having Harry's blood running through his veins is the crucial piece here. Voldie sees it as gaining an ability and overcoming a problem. However, I think Ddore knew or guessed that the Love blood now in Voldie's veins will assist in his downfall. Remember how painful it was for Voldie to possess Harry in 5 due to the Love factor? Once again, Voldie discounted that power.

"Jo came down to the set at one point and I said, "Oh hello, why are you here today?" And she said, "Oh I just need a break from the book - Dumbledore's giving me a lot of trouble." And I said, "But isn't he dead?" And she said, "Well, yeah, but it's more complex..." I was like, [briskly] "OK, i'm not gonna ask anything else!"


What do you think it means? Is it Dumbledore in the portrait? Or Dumbledore beyond the veil?

This was jsut recently posted on Mugglenet, an interveiw, one where JKR visited the set Ootp:

The Times Online and The Observer have both released new interviews with the Harry Potter actor.

Of particular interest to book fans, the latter website provides an interesting experience Dan had with Jo during one of her OOTP set visits:

"Jo came down to the set at one point and I said, "Oh hello, why are you here today?" And she said, "Oh I just needed a break from the book - Dumbledore's giving me a lot of trouble." And I said, "But isn't he dead?" And she said, "Well, yeah, but it's more complex ..." I was like, [briskly] "OK, I'm not gonna ask anything else!""

Ok so are we talking about Albus here? Or Aberforth? Or someone else?

Michael Gambon???

Michael Gambon???

I'm sry I afraid I don't follow?

"Jo came down to the set at one point and I said, "Oh hello, why are you here today?" And she said, "Oh I just need a break from the book - Dumbledore's giving me a lot of trouble." And I said, "But isn't he dead?" And she said, "Well, yeah, but it's more complex..." I was like, [briskly] "OK, i'm not gonna ask anything else!"

What do you think it means? Is it Dumbledore in the portrait? Or Dumbledore beyond the veil?

Or Pensieve memory? or hallowed spirit? or some sort of will?

I don't know, but it's definitely an interesting quotation.
Isn't everything "more complex"!?! Nothings ever simple with her, that's why we love her :lol:
Well we all know there was something more to the tower scene, there are just so many possibilities that it's impossible to know.

It could mean a number of things. Some christians emphasise the sacrifice of Jesus, others his teaching, others God's love, others complicated theology, etc.

Obvious possible themes are:

sacrifice: Harry? Dumbledore (already)? Ron (like in the chess match in PS/SS)?
redemption: Snape? Draco?
love: Harry's secret weapon? (This is a bit schmaltzy if you ask me.) Lily.
meek inheriting the earth etc: Neville.
turn the other cheek: Wormtail's debt to Harry? The whole soul?


I don't suppose it will mean discovering that the earth is only 6000 years old or anything like that! Nor is it likely we'll find the sort of gross apologetics found in CS Lewis.

How about Resurrection? *cough* DUMBLEDORE *cough*

What do you think it means? Is it Dumbledore in the portrait? Or Dumbledore beyond the veil?

I don't know, but that is definitely one of the most interesting quotes I have heard so far. One thing is clear, though; A Dumbledore, whether Albus, Aberforth, or both, will play an important role in DH. I can't wait to see what happens. Accio July 21st, 2007!

Oooh, a fun brainteaser. Let me see......

1. I always believed Harrys glasses represented that somthing or someone was obstructing his vision from the truth. About what, I have no idea. But a fun tidbit! Someone should email Mugglecast with that one!

2.Obviously she meant that the particular question about Harrys survival has to do with the somthing answered in book seven, but Voldemorts survival was answered in book six, which meant horcruxes.

3.Their are sooooo many loose ends that Im sure we'll be bickering on and on well after DH was released. For instance, the little things like Rita Skeeter, does she get hers. Or like she said, Nevilles Toad from Uncle Algea, was he significant.

Personally, I think Nevilles going to die because of his Grandmothers relentless campaign on what a dissapointment he is. How horrified would the old bat be then, eh.

Or Pensieve memory? or hallowed spirit? or some sort of will?

I don't know, but it's definitely an interesting quotation.
Isn't everything "more complex"!?! Nothings ever simple with her, that's why we love her :lol:
Well we all know there was something more to the tower scene, there are just so many possibilities that it's impossible to know.

We have to remember that JKR has repeatedly said through her characters, especially Dumbeldore, "No, Harry. There is no way to bring back the dead." or somthing like that.

So if Dumbeldore is giving her alot of trouble, plot wise, that could mean anything. Back story, Aberforth, a will, his pensive, a journal, his silver whirring trinkets and so on.

so now dumbledore wil be in the last book in some form.. i mean she is having trouble with him.. i guess that means he can talk to harry through his potraits. that what i make of it.

If she meant Aberforth wouldn't she of said "Aberforth is giving me troubles"? Everytime someone mentions Dumbledore they automatically think of Albus.

i think it will be "more complex" than the portrait, and the pensieve, because those are things that are obvious options for dead people... if it's "more complex", i guess that there's a need to bend the "normal" rules of magic somewhere for DD to give proper advice, as himself rather than just as an impression (which is what the portrait is). the quote which spings to mind is actually this:

"My dear harry, do you think the dead truly ever leave us? *i can't remember the exact wording of this following part here* They are always there with us when we need them the most. Prongs rode again tonight."

But good catch with the Aberforth reference. Totally forgot it could be "the other Dumbledore." Seems the more plausible explanation, actually, although I'd be surprised if JKR refers to Aberforth as Dumbledore...

It could be Aberforth. Though I think Jo would call Dumbledore 'Dumbledore', and Aberforth 'Aberforth'. No, I definitely think she's talking about Albus Dumbledore here.. and it could be anything, of course he's dead, but it could be his will, his portrait, his chocolate frog cards, his memories he left for Harry. It could be some sort of letters or messages he left out. Or maybe Harry goes back in time and has to reason with DD about something.. you never know. But Jo said its complex -- now I'm interested! The complex-er, the better, I always say. :)

I'd find it more intriguing if she had said something like "Snape is giving me trouble." :p

I would love it if she said that snape was giving her trouble:D! Having thought about it more i'm leaning towards it being Dumbledore's portrait. UGH!!! OK can it be July 21 already;) lol

Forgive me I read this wrong, Don't mind my message

“Have any of the Hogwarts professors had spouses?

JKR: Good question - yes, a few of them, but that information is sort of restricted - you'll find out why…”

- Interview, BBC Red Nose Day chat, 2001


I can't even imagine how this could be significant.
We know for a fact that Hagrid is not married since he's off flirting with Olympe. Also, I think we can assume, based on the way Sirius treats Snape, that Severus isn't married (I think he would have brought it up in his taunting if he had a living wife).

I suppose I could see Trelawney, McGonagall, Sprout, Sinistra, etc. married but I can't imagine how one of their spouses could be important enough to cause the information to be "restricted".

I suppose Snape having a deceased spouse could have an effect on his loyalties in some way but that seems like a rather dull direction to take it IMO.

Does anyone have any other theories about what direction this "restricted information" could lead or how it could be important?

I can't even imagine how this could be significant.
We know for a fact that Hagrid is not married since he's off flirting with Olympe. Also, I think we can assume, based on the way Sirius treats Snape, that Severus isn't married (I think he would have brought it up in his taunting if he had a living wife).

I suppose I could see Trelawney, McGonagall, Sprout, Sinistra, etc. married but I can't imagine how one of their spouses could be important enough to cause the information to be "restricted".

I suppose Snape having a deceased spouse could have an effect on his loyalties in some way but that seems like a rather dull direction to take it IMO.

Does anyone have any other theories about what direction this "restricted information" could lead or how it could be important?


I think I might have a tiny inkling as to why this knowledge is restricted. This is a theory but I think that Madame Irma Pince, might be Snape's Mom, Elieen Prince. (Irma Pince = Im a Prince) So if that is true, that might be the reason Snape turned to spying for Dumbleodore. I had a thread about this subject up a while ago, I don't know what happened to it, or if it still exsists. If it doesn't exsist I mgiht rewrite it, again.

I think I might have a tiny inkling as to why this knowledge is restricted. This is a theory but I think that Madame Irma Pince, might be Snape's Mom, Elieen Prince. (Irma Pince = Im a Prince) So if that is true, that might be the reason Snape turned to spying for Dumbleodore. I had a thread about this subject up a while ago, I don't know what happened to it, or if it still exsists. If it doesn't exsist I mgiht rewrite it, again.
Umm...I suppose that's possible, but that would be a parent not a spouse.

Umm...I suppose that's possible, but that would be a parent not a spouse.

Hmmm... your right, sry I wasn't thinking about that. Well then maybe McGonagall and Dumbledore are married? Alot of people have thought that..... :hmm: And the reason that it might be 'restricted' is because one wouldn't want dark wizards to get ahold of this information... ?

Just off the top of my head cause I was thinking about it a few hours earlier:

JKR said that if Harry had not destroyed the diary and memory Riddle became fully alive, "..it would have strengthened the present-day Voldemort considerably."

I think it is important we understand what she meant cause we may be able to glean something from the horcruxes here and the way the weapons surrounding the actual object might be used. is it possible in DH that there will be two Voldemort's at once at some point? :no:

Although we can't know for sure if she is going to explore that possibility.

Just off the top of my head cause I was thinking about it a few hours earlier:

JKR said that if Harry had not destroyed the diary and memory Riddle became fully alive, "..it would have strengthened the present-day Voldemort considerably."

I think it is important we understand what she meant cause we may be able to glean something from the horcruxes here and the way the weapons surrounding the actual object might be used. is it possible in DH that there will be two Voldemort's at once at some point? :no:

Although we can't know for sure if she is going to explore that possibility.

Well if Harry's scar is a Horcrux, and Voldy tries to possess Harry again.... that could kinda be counted as two Voldy's at the same time?

The question about spouses and restricted information reminded me of one of my favorite Dumbledore moments - especially when Hunter pointed out that one might not want Dark wizards to get hold of the information. From OOP (slightly abridged) -
"There is a room in the Department of Mysteries...that is kept locked at all times. It contains a force that is at once more wonderful and terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of nature...It is the power held within that room that you possess in such quantities and which Voldemort has not at all...It was your heart that saved you."
Along with the power involved with love, there is also vulnerability - the prospect of family members going missing or being killed in an attempt to lure away a particular teacher or teachers could leave the school vulnerable in a variety of ways. Dumbledore himself set many of the enchantments around the school, but is it stated that he set all of them, or are there others we haven't seen examples of (like everything through the trapdoor in SS) as additional insurance against unwelcome intruders (e.g. maybe on the far edge of the forest, a border of venomous tentaculas or something, in case the prospect of acromantulas isn't intimidating enough.)
I do want to find out though. I've wondered about Dumbledore / McGonagall, too, but I've also always suspected Madame Pomfrey had a thing for him, too.

The question about spouses and restricted information reminded me of one of my favorite Dumbledore moments - especially when Hunter pointed out that one might not want Dark wizards to get hold of the information. From OOP (slightly abridged) -
"There is a room in the Department of Mysteries...that is kept locked at all times. It contains a force that is at once more wonderful and terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of nature...It is the power held within that room that you possess in such quantities and which Voldemort has not at all...It was your heart that saved you."
Along with the power involved with love, there is also vulnerability - the prospect of family members going missing or being killed in an attempt to lure away a particular teacher or teachers could leave the school vulnerable in a variety of ways. Dumbledore himself set many of the enchantments around the school, but is it stated that he set all of them, or are there others we haven't seen examples of (like everything through the trapdoor in SS) as additional insurance against unwelcome intruders (e.g. maybe on the far edge of the forest, a border of venomous tentaculas or something, in case the prospect of acromantulas isn't intimidating enough.)
I do want to find out though. I've wondered about Dumbledore / McGonagall, too, but I've also always suspected Madame Pomfrey had a thing for him, too.

I forgot about Pomfrey.. :hmm: That could be a possibilty too....

regarding spouses- I've thought that Dumbledore was at some point married and might have even had kids and that Grinderwald (thats not right- too late- you know who I mean), murdered them. What caused me to think this is DD's ranting in the cave- if what he speaks are his own memories and not explained another way, perhaps he was forced to see his family killed at some point. Knowing his personalilty and love of children, it is hard to believe he spent 150 years alone and unloved by a woman.I don, however , know why this would be restricted info but could see why keeping other teacher's spouses secret would protect them.

Along with the power involved with love, there is also vulnerability - the prospect of family members going missing or being killed in an attempt to lure away a particular teacher or teachers could leave the school vulnerable in a variety of ways.

I do want to find out though. I've wondered about Dumbledore / McGonagall, too, but I've also always suspected Madame Pomfrey had a thing for him, too.

That's true. Even though it is Harry's fight he has the loyalty of many people behind him--people who have embraced the vulnerabilities associated with love/family/loyalty in ways that the DE's have not. Maybe combining those forces could play a role--but that still seems rather insubstantial to cause a info restriction on their marital status. :shrug:

As for DD/MM, Dumbledore is at least 80 years older than McGonagall. She was at school with Tom Riddle, so Dumbledore was a very old man when she was born. I guess it's not completely impossible, just a bit squicky IMO! :lol:

regarding spouses- I've thought that Dumbledore was at some point married and might have even had kids and that Grinderwald (thats not right- too late- you know who I mean), murdered them. What caused me to think this is DD's ranting in the cave- if what he speaks are his own memories and not explained another way, perhaps he was forced to see his family killed at some point. Knowing his personalilty and love of children, it is hard to believe he spent 150 years alone and unloved by a woman.I don, however , know why this would be restricted info but could see why keeping other teacher's spouses secret would protect them.
:agree: Yea, I can't imagine Dumbledore never being married either, and Jo did say we'd learn more about DD's family in 7. You may have something there...And if she's holding back spouse info about Dumbledore she'd hold it back about all the other faculty as well to keep us off course. :cool:

I am always dumbfounded by what J.K. said when asked about the "curse" that Dumbledore used in the DoM.

Forgive me, for I don't recall the exact quote, but I believe she mentioned something about "learning about Dumbledore's past" (along with making a *clicking* sound with her mouth).

I just can't grasp why she would bring up Dumbledore's past, when asked about a spell. Obviously, he would have learned the spell sometime in the past, and possibly by one of his family members, but is the fact that he knew the spell in the first place more important than the spell itself? Or perhaps how he learned it?

I suppose I could be reading too much into this, since obviously J.K. isn't going to give anything away about future plots, but it still keeps me thinking..... :err:

Something else intrigueing JKR said in an interview (http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-vancouversun-wyman.htm):



If she talked too freely about her belief in Christianity, then everyone would be able to guess what's coming in the books? Very interesting! What does it mean?

That's really interesting... what could Christianity have to do with the ending?? Maybe someone coming back from the dead? Someone sacrificing themselves to save the world? OK that's mostly Catholicism, but still. Interesting.

It reminds me of something interesting JKR said about OoTP in her interview with Emerson and Melissa..she said she couldn't cut parts of it, because they were important if she was to be fair to readers when they find out the resolution in Book 7....I wonder what that means?

OK I just had a thought about the Christianity being linked to the ending of book 7...the definition of Hallow, as a verb, is to "make holy or sacred"....

That's really interesting... what could Christianity have to do with the ending?? Maybe someone coming back from the dead? Someone sacrificing themselves to save the world? OK that's mostly Catholicism, but still. Interesting.
It could be because of the most powerful force being love. :)

OK I just had a thought about the Christianity being linked to the ending of book 7...the definition of Hallow, as a verb, is to "make holy or sacred"....

It is intriguing that telling us about her belief in Christianity would give to much away, but...careful now....telling us that telling us about her belief in Christianity would give too much away, won't give too much away.

This suggests that she has a somewhat unusual angle on Christianity. This doesn't help us that much. There are 1000s of little (and large) Christian groups with unusual ideas, and reams of theological musings that never quite caught on.

True..but also the big things that spring to mind are love, sacrifice, death, re-birth...but yes, at this point I think people (especially me, for I nearly invented a theory surrounding flobberworms) are clutching at whatever clues they can to think of the ending.

I was just rereading a quote from JK about ;harry glass being his vunerability', on page 1 then further down the conversation turned to trewlaney, and maybe lily and harry being seers...so what if harrys glasses stopped him from 'seeing'...whenever he looked into the crystal ball he just saw a cloudy image...WITH his glasses ON, but if he was to take his glasses off, what would he see?
Would the haze and clouds turn into something more significant?
His glasses are his vunerability because they are stopping him truly 'seeing' what he needs to...any thoughts?

True..but also the big things that spring to mind are love, sacrifice, death, re-birth...but yes, at this point I think people (especially me, for I nearly invented a theory surrounding flobberworms) are clutching at whatever clues they can to think of the ending.
I personally refuse to think of the sacrifice aspect as a clue for book 7. It would be just depressing (and I'm on the Harry will live side)
I more think that it's about love being stronger than hatred. About what Christianity tells people, to love your neighbour as yourself, etc, as a hint for the power that Harry has but Voldemort has not.

I've always been intrigued about why Aberforth Dumbledore is associated with goats. Jo said she 's******ed' when she was writing that 'clue.' So, something about Aberforth and goats is a clue? A clue about what?

Ummm, i think this one was a little joke for the more mature readers of the book. I live in a relatively rural part of the English country side and theres quite a lot of jokes about men with goats/sheep etc... (and scarily based on real happenings!) i know i may be way off the mark, and it may actually be a very important part of the whole story, but its not too far off to think that Jo hides little inuendos for the adult readers. Children's readers are always adding stuff like that in to keep the adults who have to read, or be read the books amused. if your still not sure, just watch any British pantomine!

I too always thought it was just a little adult joke.. nothing will come of it, I'm sure.

I personally refuse to think of the sacrifice aspect as a clue for book 7. It would be just depressing (and I'm on the Harry will live side)
I more think that it's about love being stronger than hatred. About what Christianity tells people, to love your neighbour as yourself, etc, as a hint for the power that Harry has but Voldemort has not.

It is depressing, but it's also a fairly common theme throughout the books (sacrifice I mean)..Lily sacrificing herself for Harry, Harry telling Pettigrew he should have sacrificied himself to save his friends, Harry and Cedric sacrificing their chance of the glory of the Triwizard Cup so they could share it, maybe Dumbledore sacrificing his life for greater good..? I'm not saying just because Jo mentioned Christianity it means DD chose to die, just that it's an interesting link. The love part is interesting too.

I aggree with the whole sacrificing theme, but i think JKR might have referred to the love theme, which includes sacifice. The DoM is still coming into play...

That's really interesting... what could Christianity have to do with the ending?? Maybe someone coming back from the dead? Someone sacrificing themselves to save the world? OK that's mostly Catholicism, but still. Interesting.

Excuse me, but how is that specifically Catholic as opposed to more broadly Christian? We all use the same four Gospels, Acts, and the Epistles. Most of the protestants, orthodox and other non-Catholic Christian denominations reject as 'inspired' the apocrypha (Baruch, Maccabees, and a few others). We all believe in Jesus sacrificing himself to save the world and rising from the dead. Is there some other bit of Catholic dogma you had in mind?

Honestly, I don't think she'll use the sacrificial theme any more than she has already. It would be too much, especially if it turns out that Dumbledore sacrificed himeslf (which I believe he did). I don't think Harry will sacrifice himself. It would be way too dramatic and not in Jo's register at all.

Excuse me, but how is that specifically Catholic as opposed to more broadly Christian? We all use the same four Gospels, Acts, and the Epistles. Most of the protestants, orthodox and other non-Catholic Christian denominations reject as 'inspired' the apocrypha (Baruch, Maccabees, and a few others). We all believe in Jesus sacrificing himself to save the world and rising from the dead. Is there some other bit of Catholic dogma you had in mind?

I agree. All Christian denominations believe that Jesus sacrificed himself to save us all - it isn't peculiar to Catholics.

I personally refuse to think of the sacrifice aspect as a clue for book 7. It would be just depressing (and I'm on the Harry will live side)
I more think that it's about love being stronger than hatred. About what Christianity tells people, to love your neighbour as yourself, etc, as a hint for the power that Harry has but Voldemort has not.I agree with you. Love needs to win over evil.

I don't think Harry will sacrifice himself. It would be way too dramatic and not in Jo's register at all.

I think in a way, Harry is sacrificing himself, for the Wizarding World.
But if he were to jump in front of the Avada Kedavra, for Neville, I don't think he would do something like that.
He's better off alive.

I don't know if anyone else brought this up but in reference to the glasses quote and Harry's glasses being his "vulnerability", I just today caught something re-reading OOTP: its the last battle when Voldemort possesses Harry and taunts DD to kill him. The pain in Harry's head leaves and " Harry was lying face down on the floor, HIS GLASSES GONE......" Then, just two lines down, another clue,"..Harry opened his eyes, SAW HIS GLASSES LYING AT THE HEEL OF THE HEADLESS STATUE".
Now, if you remember, Harry has always had some connection to Voldemort and would often feel a sharp pain depending on V's mood or proximiy. BUT, the only time Harry was possessed by Voldemort was in his nighttime dreams or WHEN HE HAD HIS GLASSES OFF! The whole time he's dreaming about the hall in the DOM , Dumbledore explains that VOldemort was leading him which is why it was so important to learn occlumency. So, I speculate that Harry is most vulnerable when his glasses are off. With them on, Voldemort can make a connection but not totally possess him. Why? I have not sticking idea at all. Whatcha think?

BUT, the only time Harry was possessed by Voldemort was in his nighttime dreams or WHEN HE HAD HIS GLASSES OFF! Then how would the glasses be a vulnerability? With this line of thinking the glasses would be a means of preventing LV possesing him. I wonder if the glasses act as a sheild of sorts? Refracting any intrusion attempts. This again would be a positive thing.
The vulnerability aspect I think could possibly be that if they prevent something entering, they may be preventing something going the other way as well. The glasses themselves could be what we have called the Harry filter. Although they help him 'see' , they prevent him from seeing people clearly, the way it has been implied that Lily did. (did that make sense??)

Then how would the glasses be a vulnerability? With this line of thinking the glasses would be a means of preventing LV possesing him. I wonder if the glasses act as a sheild of sorts? Refracting any intrusion attempts. This again would be a positive thing.
The vulnerability aspect I think could possibly be that if they prevent something entering, they may be preventing something going the other way as well. The glasses themselves could be what we have called the Harry filter. Although they help him 'see' , they prevent him from seeing people clearly, the way it has been implied that Lily did. (did that make sense??)

yeah- you made sense! I get what you're saying. But isn't the quote of JKR's that the glasses are the "KEY to his vulnerability?" The word key would , imo, mean to lead us to the clues regarding his glasses, thereby making the connection between what happens when they're off. But, as you said, if they work one way, why not the other?

yeah- you made sense! I get what you're saying. But isn't the quote of JKR's that the glasses are the "KEY to his vulnerability?" The word key would , imo, mean to lead us to the clues regarding his glasses, thereby making the connection between what happens when they're off. But, as you said, if they work one way, why not the other?When you put it that way, both senarios would fit as leaving him vulnerable either way. With them off, he is vulnerable to the side of evil, but when they're on, he is unable to see the truth of those around him, which leaves him vulnerable in the sense that he isn't able see who is really there to help.

The Aberforth and goat connection, as I see it, is much more then an little "adult" joke. I think it can tie very well into the sacrifice theme itself actually. Seeing as Aberforth could be seen as a "goat." Goat's being at one point the most sacrificed animals, be it for the "scapegoat" to bear the sins of a community. Maybe even some relation to an Ibex, where Aberforth sends himself into grave danger but bounces right back from it. Goats in China also represented strength, masculinity, and solar, or good (yang).

I just personally feel the "symbolism" is important.

As for Harry's glasses, the are 'filtering' his perspective, maybe the distorted view on "reality" is what gives him the ability to be a good person, but when taken out of the fantastical fairytale of good. He is vulnerable to Voldemort because he is no longer distorted... Yeah, thats a little far out there.

Excuse me, but how is that specifically Catholic as opposed to more broadly Christian? We all use the same four Gospels, Acts, and the Epistles. Most of the protestants, orthodox and other non-Catholic Christian denominations reject as 'inspired' the apocrypha (Baruch, Maccabees, and a few others). We all believe in Jesus sacrificing himself to save the world and rising from the dead. Is there some other bit of Catholic dogma you had in mind?

OK, I wasn't saying or implying only Catholicism is about love and sacrifice...maybe I should have phrased my post better. I'm not a practising Catholic although I do know more about that religion than others, although that doesn't mean I'm trying to spout any dogma, at all. When I was writing about sacrifice and re-birth I was specifically thinking of what I know about it, which comes from Catholicism. That's all.

When you put it that way, both senarios would fit as leaving him vulnerable either way. With them off, he is vulnerable to the side of evil, but when they're on, he is unable to see the truth of those around him, which leaves him vulnerable in the sense that he isn't able see who is really there to help.

I don't think the vulnerability is something physical, it's more in the sense to portray harry as a normal person, with faults and shortcomings, but he still has the power to vanquish the dark lord. it makes it easier to relate to his character. that's just my opinion.

I think the christian statement is very interesting, thats why I wann throw in some things:

another key point of christian belief is immaculate conception :D
although I am not sure, if that could be a part of HP, it was used for Star Wars though. And, connecting with that, but being more catholic, the worshipping of the mother, Mary.

I am not sure about the english name of that story, but there is the story of the bad son who returns home being welcome inspite of all his deeds.
Came into my mind at once.

Also came into my mind:

The Fall of Lucifer
Hiobs story

and many other things, but I jsut cant connect anything to HP.

Here is a quote from JK Rowling that I have never seen discussed before. It came from this source if anyone wants to check it out (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/arts/3004456.stm)

Here, Jeremy Paxton was interviewing Rowling and he asked about shipping for book 6. Notice how she switches to talk about book 7. (i had to reread it a couple of times before i fully caught that)

JP: Unlikely pairings? Not Hermione and Draco Malfoy or anything like that?

JKR: I don't really want to say as it will ruin all the fan sites. They have such fun with their theories - and it is fun, it is fun. And some of them even get quite close. No-one has ever - I have gone and looked at some of it and no-one's ever... There is one thing that if anyone guessed I would be really annoyed as it is kind of the heart of it all. And it kind of explains everything and no-one's quite got there but a couple of people have skirted it. So you know, I would be pretty miffed after 13 or 14 years of writing the books if someone just came along and said I think this will happen in book seven. Because it is too late, I couldn't divert now, everything has been building up to it, and I've laid all my clues.

Notice how she doesn't really answer his question about pairing-- instead she starts talking about the "heart" of the series. At first I thought that this would be horcruxes, because that seems to be the thing that explains everything that nobody guessed.

But upon re reading, I believe she is talking about something in book 7. In the last two sentences she is talking directly about book 7, how she has laid the clues for "this," whatever this is. She says everything has been "building up to" something in the seventh book. So now my question is: what could possibly be so important to be revealed that everything has been leading up to it? What has she been laying clues about all this time?

Now for my ramblings, if you don't mind.

Of course ther is not way to know until next month, but we can speculate. Horcruxes were pretty critical, i thought, to the series, but it appears that there is something even more important. But what could that be? We could kind of guess about Horcruxes by using what we already knew and the following logic:

LV tried to kill Harry with the Avada Kedavra curse, but it rebounded.

LV should have been killed by the rebounded killing curse, as it is "unblockable"

However, he did not die. Which leads us to believe...

That something was either keeping him alive, or holding him back from death.

And thus we could reasonably deduce from what we knew that LV had something(s) that was keeping him from death.

I would suspect that we could use similar logic to deduce what this revelation would be. But herein lies the problem. I really can't think of any occurance in the books that did not happen the way we were led to believe. This is where I need your help. What happened in the first 6 books that still needs explaining?

The other alternative I can think of for this revelation would be that there is something that is drastically different from what we believe, ie a MAJOR plot twist (which we know Rowling loves)

But I can't really get any farther than this. What do yall think?


I think the christian statement is very interesting, thats why I wann throw in some things:
...

and many other things, but I jsut cant connect anything to HP.

I think the American cover shows a scene beyond the veil- (old arches, the curtains, the blue light on the wood like the dept of mysteries, etc.). This seems to be a different realm- possibly a world between ours and death. I think it would put an interesting in to the series if Harry does not die, but if he lives forever beyond the veil- where Sirius and maybe even the rest of his family (e.g. Lily and James, maybe DD) are.

It is worth noting that "Beyond the Veil" is a vital part of Old Testament Biblical theology. In Moses's Tabernacle, there was a Holy place where sacrifices and offerings were made. Within the Holy Place was a room that was seperated from the tabernacle by a veil that covered what was known as the Holy of Holies, or the Most Holy Place. The Israelite High Priest would venture beyond the veil once a year (like on Hallows Eve wear the realm between the living and the dead is closest?) to offer Sacrifices to God. The Israelites would tie a rope to the high preist, so that if he died in the Holy of Holies, they could pull him out, because anyone besides the high priest who tried to pass beyond the veil would instantly be killed. Is it possible that there are certain individuals in Harry Potter who can enter the veil without veing killed? Mrs. Rowling has said that she doesn't think the books are that secular, so is it possible that the Veil from the Bible is a basis for the veil in HP?

The Veil certainly seems to be a portal of some sort- becuase Sirius falls through it but does not come out the other side.

I think the American cover shows a scene beyond the veil- (old arches, the curtains, the blue light on the wood like the dept of mysteries, etc.). This seems to be a different realm- possibly a world between ours and death. I think it would put an interesting in to the series if Harry does not die, but if he lives forever beyond the veil- where Sirius and maybe even the rest of his family (e.g. Lily and James, maybe DD) are.

It is worth noting that "Beyond the Veil" is a vital part of Old Testament Biblical theology. In Moses's Tabernacle, there was a Holy place where sacrifices and offerings were made. Within the Holy Place was a room that was seperated from the tabernacle by a veil that covered what was known as the Holy of Holies, or the Most Holy Place. The Israelite High Priest would venture beyond the veil once a year (like on Hallows Eve wear the realm between the living and the dead is closest?) to offer Sacrifices to God. The Israelites would tie a rope to the high preist, so that if he died in the Holy of Holies, they could pull him out, because anyone besides the high priest who tried to pass beyond the veil would instantly be killed. Is it possible that there are certain individuals in Harry Potter who can enter the veil without veing killed? Mrs. Rowling has said that she doesn't think the books are that secular, so is it possible that the Veil from the Bible is a basis for the veil in HP?

The Veil certainly seems to be a portal of some sort- becuase Sirius falls through it but does not come out the other side.


that bit is quite interesting, thanks! That theory seems quite likely to me, and I am kinda thinking, that Sirius still has to play a part.
But then, the question is, who can go through the veil without dying and what could it mean for HP7

I am not sure about the english name of that story, but there is the story of the bad son who returns home being welcome inspite of all his deeds.
Came into my mind at once.

For your reference, in English it is called "The Prodigal Son". (The dictionary gives the source as Luke 15: 11-32, I'm many years removed from remembering where all these verses were from childhood :D.)

http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/1000-vancouversun-wyman.htm

Is she a Christian?

''Yes, I am,'' she says. ''Which seems to offend the religious right far worse than if I said I thought there was no God. Every time I've been asked if I believe in God, I've said yes, because I do, but no one ever really has gone any more deeply into it than that, and I have to say that does suit me, because if I talk too freely about that I think, the intelligent reader, whether 10 or 60, will be able to guess what's coming in the books.''


I wonder if Sacrifice, Death, and Resurrection are the answers here? Maybe Harry will have to die, but not a "proper" death. JKR has indicated in interviews that there are different types of death.

I recall she has mentioned there is no return from a "proper death" in the series. If you go along with the "Harry-Crux" thought, then his death might liberate the 7th peice of Voldemort's soul. But a resurrection of Harry ... well, could lead to some interesting thoughts.

Not to stray too far off, when I say "resurrection", I don't mean the Christian sort - i.e., laying in a tomb for 3 days. I guess it's more of a resusitation. When I took CPR, the instructor made a point of saying if a person has a stopped heart and you are not able to revive them, YOU didn't kill them, they were already dead. But successful application of CPR can possibly revive the person, or in other words, bring them back from the dead.

So, for him to die, but be resusitated, say by a Phoenix tear, or a wizard equivilant of a cardioversion (cardiac shock), .... (shrug).

There is an excellent theory on another board called the Rebirth Theory that ties in with this thread. It is well thought out, and tightly linked through all 7 books. For reference, http://www.darkmark.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=54191 .

Sacrifice is not the key point of Christianity as I understand it. Rebirth and Renewal are. I believe that accepting Sacrifice as the end all of Christianity is a disservice.

JKR: I don't really want to say as it will ruin all the fan sites. They have such fun with their theories - and it is fun, it is fun. And some of them even get quite close. No-one has ever - I have gone and looked at some of it and no-one's ever... There is one thing that if anyone guessed I would be really annoyed as it is kind of the heart of it all. And it kind of explains everything and no-one's quite got there but a couple of people have skirted it. So you know, I would be pretty miffed after 13 or 14 years of writing the books if someone just came along and said I think this will happen in book seven. Because it is too late, I couldn't divert now, everything has been building up to it, and I've laid all my clues.

Since the interview started off by talking about pairings is there a pairing that we should be looking for, but haven't? It can't be Lily/Snape--JKR said people have skirted the [relationship] issue but no one's come close. Well the LE/SS ship has been come at from all angles so I doubt that is it. My guess is that it has something to do with the marauder days...

that bit is quite interesting, thanks! That theory seems quite likely to me, and I am kinda thinking, that Sirius still has to play a part.
But then, the question is, who can go through the veil without dying and what could it mean for HP7

Well, if the cover indeed shows us a scene from beyond the veil, than we know that Harry and Voldemort can both enter and stall alive-- but can they get out? hehe i wonder if they can-- or if rowling will end the series where Harry has vanquished LV somehow, and forevermore lives beyond the veil where sirius, and maybe his mom and dad, and even dumbledore end. that would be a solemn ending! haha

I've always wondered why Harry's eyes are green, though.
We will probably get this answered in book 7, JK states that his eyes are important to the plot.
But why he has green eyes is still a mystery to me. According to physics, it's very unlikely (maybe even impossible, it depends on James' genes).
According to physics, green is a "weak" eye colour. Colours like brown, black and such will always overrule green and blue.
It's highly unlikely that James had blue or green eyes, considering that he had black hair.
It's possible that one of James' parents had blue/green eyes, but the other one had brown, and in that case, James won't have brown eyes but he will still have the genes for it. (People who aren't much into physics might not get this, but at least I'm trying to explain. :P)
In that case, there's a 25% chance that their kid will have green eyes. But if both his parents had a dominant eye colour (for instance brown) he would have all-brown dna in his eyes and transfer this on to Harry, and in that case, James' eye colour would overrule Lilly's, in other words, Harry couldn't get green eyes.
Hope that wasn't too complicated.

You've got this completely backwards I'm afraid.

Brown is a dominant colour, blue is recessive. Green is recessive to brown, but I don't know if it's recessive or dominant to blue. In this case, it doesn't matter because James had brown eyes and Lily had green. If we assume, for simplicity's sake, that eye colour is controlled by the interaction of 2 genes only (one from each parent) then we know James had at least one brown gene, because he has brown eyes. But because brown is dominant, one brown gene is enough to give him brown eyes. His other gene might be brown - but it could also be green or blue or hazel. Given that Harry has green eyes, it's reasonable to assume James had one brown gene and one green gene.

Lily had green eyes. We know green is recessive to brown, so Lily cannot have had any brown genes. We don't know if green is dominant or recessive to blue. If green is dominant to blue, then Lily could have had two green genes, or one green and one blue gene. If green is recessive to blue, then Lily must have had two green genes, because one of each would have given her blue eyes.

So Lily had at least one green gene and James had at least one green gene, they met and Harry has green eyes.

There are lots of people in Britain with dark hair and light eyes, particularly those of Irish origin. There was an influx of Spanish settlers in Ireland (I think there was a shipwreck) and that brought dark hair and eyes to the country. Many Scots and Irish have black hair and blue eyes with pale skin.

My dad has hazel eyes - a mixture of brown and green - and my mum has blue eyes. I have very dark green eyes, and my brother has grey eyes.

I've just read the post after yours which says James had hazel eyes. So he probably had a green gene, which Harry inherited along with one from Lily. Or maybe he had a green gene from James and a blue one from Lily and green is dominant so he has green eyes...

About the Harry being able to feel sympathy-theory, I remember in HBP after they found out Tom's mother died and he was left at an orphanage and Harry felt sorry for him, Dumbledore says something along the lines of "you don't really feel sorry for Voldemort?" I wasn't surprised that Harry did, I was rather surprised that Dumbledore didn't. He sunk a lot in my eyes then. I thought he saw the humanity in everyone, the soul in every death eater. I thought he might see that Voldemort has a terrible backstory that might be the reason for things he does, that could be his vulnerability. That he was able to see that behind it all, Voldemort is still the lonely, scared, bitter young boy he once was.



Dumbledore says "Could you possibly be feeling sorry for Lord Voldemort?" I don't think he's not feeling sorry for him. I think he's making Harry see that Voldemort came from a horrible, unpleasant, sad background and that he does deserve sympathy and pity for that. He's challenging Harry's expectations and letting him see the human who became the monster. And he's showing Harry where Voldemort's inability to accept death as part of life comes from - he is so full of bitterness and anger towards his mother for dying and leaving him alone, he can't accept that "weakness" (which is really just part of being human) in himself.

“The fourth [“Goblet of Fire”] is a very, very important book. Well you know because you read it, something incredibly important happens in book four and also it's literally a central book, it's almost the heart of the series, and it's pivotal. It's very difficult to talk about and I can't wait for the day someone's read all seven and I can talk completely freely about it. But it's a very, very important book.”

- - Interview with cBBC Newsround, 2000

I'm pretty sure she's referring to Voldemort using Harry's blood in his resurrection and thereafter being able to touch him.

“MA: Does the gleam of triumph [at the end of “Goblet of Fire”] still have yet to make an appearance?

JKR: That's still enormously significant. And let's face it, I haven’t told you that much is enormously significant, so you can let your imaginations run free there.”

- Interview with the Leaky Cauldron, 2005
I wish people would stop referring to it as a gleam of triumph. It was a gleam of something like triumph.

The other question that I am surprised no one has asked me since Phoenix came out—I thought that people would—is why Dumbledore did not kill or try to kill Voldemort in the scene in the ministry. I know that I am giving a lot away to people who have not read the book. Although Dumbledore gives a kind of reason to Voldemort, it is not the real reason.


I assume because there was no point trying to kill him until the Horcruxes are destroyed.


JKR said that if Harry had not destroyed the diary and memory Riddle became fully alive, "..it would have strengthened the present-day Voldemort considerably."

I think it is important we understand what she meant cause we may be able to glean something from the horcruxes here and the way the weapons surrounding the actual object might be used. is it possible in DH that there will be two Voldemort's at once at some point?

I take this to mean that if the diary hadn't been destroyed with the bit of Voldemort's soul in it, there would still be 5 Horcruxes plus Voldemort to be destroyed, rather than 4 plus Voldemort. I don't think there could be 2 Voldemorts.

regarding spouses- I've thought that Dumbledore was at some point married and might have even had kids and that Grinderwald (thats not right- too late- you know who I mean), murdered them. What caused me to think this is DD's ranting in the cave- if what he speaks are his own memories and not explained another way, perhaps he was forced to see his family killed at some point. Knowing his personalilty and love of children, it is hard to believe he spent 150 years alone and unloved by a woman.I don, however , know why this would be restricted info but could see why keeping other teacher's spouses secret would protect them.

Oooh, I love the idea of Dumbledore reliving the deaths of his family. That makes a lot of sense. But I don't believe it would be possible to keep the fact that people were married a secret. Their families and friends would know. The couples would live together. The marriage would be registered. Children can't be kept invisible and away from the world. It's just not workable. But, I can't imagine that any of the Hogwarts teachers are currently married, unless they or their spouses walk out of the grounds every morning and night and apparate to work/home elsewhere. Maybe the teachers are all single, or widowed.

I've always been intrigued about why Aberforth Dumbledore is associated with goats. Jo said she 's******ed' when she was writing that 'clue.' So, something about Aberforth and goats is a clue? A clue about what?.

sorry if this has already been asked, but i keep hearing about aberforth and goats... what book was that in???

sorry if this has already been asked, but i keep hearing about aberforth and goats... what book was that in???

bezoar maybe?

A pairing nobodies figured out? Something central to the plot? Lily and Voldemort! He killed her and James because she was the closest thing he had to a meaningful relationship. Of course, for that to be true you'd have to ignore the huge time gap between their stints at Hogwarts and that would just be silly. I actually thought I had it there for a minute.

sorry if this has already been asked, but i keep hearing about aberforth and goats... what book was that in???

GOF - In Hagrid's cabin, when the Trio go to confront Hagrid about hiding out after Rita Skeeter's "half-giant" expose. Albus Dumbledore is there and tells them about Aberforth's "sins of the past" :D. (Near the end of chapter 24, page 454 US). Hope this helps.

ok... thanks...

The quote about pairings that no one has thought about before has me guessing. People have speculated about the Lily/Snape relationship and someone even suggested a Lily/Voldemort relationship. I just can't picture that one since she was dating James by their seventh year at Hogwarts.

I've been thinking about this one and in POA movie(I know its not book canon) but it seemed that Lupin was kind of talking sweetly when he was reminicing(sp?) about Lily and her seeing the good in others. Could Lily/Lupin have been a possible couple before James/Lily?

Tell me if I'm just being a little nuts here...

Perhaps his glasses being the "clue to his vulnerability" was less literal and more symbolic. Looking straight ahead out of glasses narrows your vision - and this fits Harry to a T. He fails to see the big picture at times, and when his tunnel of vision has him convinced of something, he fails to see the wider truth.

We have seen this play out in each book - Harry being sure of the traitor when it turns out to be someone else. Maybe, in relation to DH, this tells us that this vulnerability will affect him at a crucial moment, where he will need to open his mind, per se, and overcome his weakness. It could relate to Snape or something else, perhaps.

First, we should ask ourselves if the pairing Rowling spoke of is a current couple or couple from the past. The current couples who are either together or kind of together but not married are Harry/Ginny, Ron/Hermione, Bill/Fleur, and Tonks/Lupin. Rowling has already sunk the Neville/Luna ship.

It seems Lily has been identified with every guy from her time at Hogwarts, all four Marauders and Snape.

One intriguing possibility of someone Voldemort might have had something with, if ever so briefly, is Eileen Prince, Snape's mother. Maybe Voldemort dumped her and on the rebound she married the Muggle Tobias Snape.

One intriguing possibility of someone Voldemort might have had something with, if ever so briefly, is Eileen Prince, Snape's mother. Maybe Voldemort dumped her and on the rebound she married the Muggle Tobias Snape.


Honestly, this makes so much sense! Or what if Eileen left Voldemort for a muggle, how painful, how appropriate given his hatred towards muggles.

Interesting about Harry's glasses being the clue to his vulnerability, and I have heard that quote before, but never had considered it with another quote from JKR. She has also come out and said that there were things (unknowingly) put in the PoA movie that foreshadow what is to happen in future books.

In one scene of PoA the movie, when Harry and Hermione are struggling with the whomping willow, Harry loses his glasses and frantically searches for them on the ground because he cannot see. Before now, I always thought Harry's vulnerability related to his eyes had something to do with him having Lily's eyes (something to do with love/sacrifice), but could this temporary "blindness" have something to do with Harry's vulnerability/the foreshadowing JKR was referring to?

Lily had green eyes. We know green is recessive to brown, so Lily cannot have had any brown genes. We don't know if green is dominant or recessive to blue. If green is dominant to blue, then Lily could have had two green genes, or one green and one blue gene. If green is recessive to blue, then Lily must have had two green genes, because one of each would have given her blue eyes.

So Lily had at least one green gene and James had at least one green gene, they met and Harry has green eyes.

There are lots of people in Britain with dark hair and light eyes, particularly those of Irish origin. There was an influx of Spanish settlers in Ireland (I think there was a shipwreck) and that brought dark hair and eyes to the country. Many Scots and Irish have black hair and blue eyes with pale skin.

I believe that green eyes (the gene) is actually dominant to blue; however given the rarity of green eyes it is I believe the rarest of all the 'usual' eye colours.

Yep and I am a relic of the Spanish settlers in Ireland - brown hair and Hazel eyes daughter of a man of Spanish descent with black hair and dark green eyes. I have pale skin though (like my Mum) his is olive.

Starting to get extremely anxious to get book 7 in my hands and read it!!!