Who will fall in love with Whom? v12.0

[lanifiel]

the love thread guidelines

Firstly, the love thread is generally a very well debated thread with many good and challenging ideas posed by our members. The guidelines being imposed here for this thread are not designed to restrict debate in any way. They are here because the thread has become an exceptional case for staff to administer.

The problem with a thread of this type is that there is an obvious division forming between those who ship for Harry/Hermione and those who ship for Ron/Hermione, plus supporters of other ships wading in with their own ideas. Naturally, tensions within this thread have increased, forcing staff to keep an extra eye on what is being said. This has resulted in many participants of the love thread sending PMs to members of staff justifying their own cases and attempting to prove the other side is guilty of causing misbehaviour. This is not helping to resolve the issue.

What is necessary for this thread:

Shippers

- Whatever ship you support, please remember to respect and appreciate alternative ships.
- Some ideas may seem more far-fetched than others. Please remember to respond in a manner befitting of a civil community.
- JK Rowling in her usual masterful way is keeping us on our toes about who will end up with who and therefore we cannot truly know until we know. We should all note that whilst we can know a lot from what we read, we do not yet know everything. Please keep that in mind

There will be a zero tolerant approach undertaken by staff towards any form of misbehaviour from now on. Here is how it will work:

- Members caught arguing and lowering the tone of the thread will be PM’d an instant warning and banned from the love thread for 30 days.
- A second offense by the member in that thread will result in a three month suspension. If the user is in Hogsmeade, they will be demoted as well.
- A third offense by the member will result in them being banned from the forums.

Please note: If you decide to post in here before your suspension is up, you will be banned from the site.

The full support of the Administration of CoS Forums is given to all staff when warning members, but as has been the case many times with the love thread, if you wish to raise a point about a warning you have received, then please send an owl with your concerns to Morgoth (http://www.cosforums.com/private.php?do=newpm&u=3) or rotsiepots (http://www.cosforums.com/private.php?do=newpm&u=788) or lanifiel (http://www.cosforums.com/private.php?do=newpm&u=851).

The terms of use as laid out for this thread are non-negotiable and will be amended as and when is necessary. All new love threads created will have these guidelines posted in the opening post. At certain points during the thread, these guides maybe posted by a member of staff to defuse any potential situation.


Thank you

The CoS Forums Staff.

--------------------END--------------------

We're continuing to bar people from the love thread for periods of 30 days for bad behaviour. People on probation will be alerted to the fact. Please ensure that your behaviour is within these guidelines to avoid problems.

Furthermore, please note that we delete love threads once they've reached their limit of 1500 posts, so if you wish to save a particular debate, please do so before the thread closes.

Anyone exhibiting bad behaviour will either be put on a 30 day probationary period from the thread, demoted from Hogsmeade or banned. The choice is yours.

Have fun.

[Baron_G]

Who cares who ends up with who, so long as they always stay friends... ;)

[FlyingPhoenix]

mmm...now I am wondering about it... Hermi will be so close to Harry cause of the "fatal prophecy"...mm...it is an excellent point to take for disscussion...and it's different from all posted quotes and replies....congrats my friend...and I'm agree with you...H/Hermi keep going in the large travel together..

There are two things or even more what can lead to H/Hr. I did ask this a lot threads before maybe thread 5 or 4. No idea. But anyway people of other ships tend to say H/Hr will never happen, Harry will never be attracted to Hermione. Because he hadn't his hots for her with 11, 12, 13, 14 and maybe not with 15 that he won't have it with 16 till he dies. Thats for sure one of the blindest arguments I know. But did we ever argue what could happen, did we ever step in the wild speculation world? No, we didn't.

What could happen in book6 to lead straight to H/Hr? Hermione is a muggleborn witch and we saw already in COS (another possible key scene) that Harry wouldn't go anywhere if one of his friends is in danger. Being muggleborn can bring Hermione into very high danger, into very bad situations where people critic her as witch. Racism and hate will take a part of this story. Harry will face those hate just like Hermione both are known in the magical world. Ron however is not known.

The war. Voldemort hate's muggle's this say his victims will be muggle's and muggleborns.
The Prophecy. I doubt Harry will tell Hermione it by his own free will because we did see before he cares how she react. In PoA and GoF even in OotP Harry hadn't the heart to tell her something what might hurt her. And he knows sure like hell that Hermione would care. I don't want even imagine how she would indeed react to this. I tend to believe Ron will know it first and also handle it quiet well. Because we saw before in again COS (slowly you should get why its the key anyway) that he don't see the full impact of things. In GoF was it just the same. I doubt Ron might understand Harry's problem that he must become a murderer cause its Voldemort anyway someone who deserve to die. In short at the beginning of book6 we will have a situation where Harry does lie against Hermione and Ron does know it. Further more Hermione will be under some certain pressure a mix from book2 and book3 just this time more racism.
This and the full impact will let drift Harry and Hermione closer, in an unpleasent way this means tension. A kind of tension which will let Harry wonder what he feels for her.

[Loz]

I would like to present the case of my Kreacher/Winky ship.

My reasons;

They are both house-elves who have served dark masters.
They both still wish to serve their masters but are unable to because they're dead.
They are both outcasts from their society. Winky is a drunkard, Kreacher is insane. They could understand each other, and perhaps communicate in a way only a drunkard and insane creature could.
They're male and female, and house-elves have to come from somewhere. Plus, it was mentioned that Kreacher's mother was in the Black house. Albeit that was just her head.
Kreacher cannot be the last in a long line of subservient house-elves. The most noble and ancient house of Black has been demolished, the most noble and ancient house of servants of Black can't die too.
Winky could gain power and motive with Kreacher. Yes, it might mean she becomes evil, but who better could Kreacher latch onto but someone already over the edge and in Hogwarts? An ideal choice for him, and her, as no-one else would want her.
It just might improve their living conditions if they were to fall in love and have to take care of each other. They could raise an evil little family of goggly eyed weirdos. It'd be great.


As you can see, I have many different reasons for why this is my preferred ship. I hope you agree. I know some of you out there may be more Winky/Dobby, but I honestly think that Dobby would be incapable of understanding Winky the way she needs to be understood.

Some of you may have seen my ship before, and I hope you don't mind reading what I think once more.

[Hawk 92]

I would like to present the case of my Kreacher/Winky ship.

Nah. All Winky needs is some good snogging to get her off the butterbeer. For that its my man Dobby all the way.

Besides would you want to spend you life with an elf whose goal is to have his head cut off and nailed to a wall?

Cheers!

[Mirtilla]

New Thread, well welcome back everyone

Originally posted by V@sh(from LT part 11)
There are a lot of little scenes between Harry and Hermione that are romantic and it will be much easier to see on screen rather than a book for some, but that depends on the interpretation of book as well and if Kloves is continuing the script writing for GOF (which I think he is) then I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out more Harry/Hermione than Ron/Hermione. POA might change my mind though.

The movies must be focused on Harry, that's why I think there will be more scenes between Harry and Hermione at the Yule Ball, there will be not enough time to show all Ron's jealous because frankly there are more important things to show then his jealous(All the tournament, for instance) unless Kloves decided to turn the movie into a "romantic" movie something that personally I doubt.
However I would not take the movie as evidences, I only think that they will have an impact on the books, but I will never use them as evidence.

Originally posted by Loz
I know some of you out there may be more Winky/Dobby, but I honestly think that Dobby would be incapable of understanding Winky the way she needs to be understood.

I personally think that Dobby actually is the one that could help Winky. Dobby cares deeply of Winky and Winky needs someone that could help her to get out from her state of, well, "madness".
Then Dobby and Kreacher are not so different as it could seems, just like Harry and Voldemort they aren't so different, Dobby betrayed his master, Lucius Malfoy and , on the other hand Kreacher betrayed Sirius.

Nice post FP,

See you later

Mirtilla

[FlyingPhoenix]

* They are both house-elves who have served dark masters.

This isn't really correct. Mr Crouch sen. was not a dark in fact he was on the light side. His son however was dark.

* They both still wish to serve their masters but are unable to because they're dead.

Again this is not exact. Kreachers Master was Sirius and Kreacher did never wish to serve for him. He did even help to kill him. Something what would serve by Winky deepest disgust even more as to be a free elf.

* They are both outcasts from their society. Winky is a drunkard, Kreacher is insane. They could understand each other, and perhaps communicate in a way only a drunkard and insane creature could.

But Winky might not always drink but Kreacher always being insane. Winky is a free elve just like Dobby this say both are special and Winky might even get the needed support by Dobby. Clearly points to Dobby and Winky there.

* They're male and female, and house-elves have to come from somewhere. Plus, it was mentioned that Kreacher's mother was in the Black house. Albeit that was just her head.

Yes, true. But at hands of this I assume they should at least stay at one place this favours again Dobby and Winky both are at Hogwarts

* Kreacher cannot be the last in a long line of subservient house-elves. The most noble and ancient house of Black has been demolished, the most noble and ancient house of servants of Black can't die too.

Sure he can because with Sirius died the last direct Black line.


* Winky could gain power and motive with Kreacher. Yes, it might mean she becomes evil, but who better could Kreacher latch onto but someone already over the edge and in Hogwarts? An ideal choice for him, and her, as no-one else would want her.

Winky could in book4 perfectly decide which acting is bad and which one not. She decided that Crouch jr. acted bad and she were responsible for this. To become a honourable houselve again she needs the help of Dobby. Together they can be the key help for one of the most honorable, good wizards in this world: Harry Potter. Even the elves know about his greatness and now about his goodness too. This would give Winky peace and her honour back.

* It just might improve their living conditions if they were to fall in love and have to take care of each other. They could raise an evil little family of goggly eyed weirdos. It'd be great.

No, no its Winky and Dobby because I think there is more tension :rotfl:

[MagicianGirl]

Haven't been her in a while. We're in #12 already.

I would like to present the case of my Kreacher/Winky ship.
As you can see, I have many different reasons for why this is my preferred ship. I hope you agree. I know some of you out there may be more Winky/Dobby, but I honestly think that Dobby would be incapable of understanding Winky the way she needs to be understood.
I like this ship although I wan't to see a triangle between Kreacher/Winky/Dobby.It would be interesting to see how it develops. :cool:

[Perdita]

I will start this post by citing exactly what are the four great loves and in the words of C.S. Lewis, they are: Affection, Friendship, Eros and Charity. Filial love is not one of the great loves that C.S. Lewis wrote about. Since we are here to discuss and debate, I’ll entertain that line of argument.


Canon Proof for Harry with Ginny. (using JKR's favorite author)

I discussed somewhere about C.S. Lewis who has written 4 levels of love. http://www.christianadvice.net/the_four_loves.htm

A. Filial love (Harry gets love from finding a parent in Sirius, but people forget, that his filial love are getting fulfilled by Mr and Mrs. Weasley)

It stunned me when Molly saw Harry as one of her boggarts, I felt like, wow, She loves Harry as much as her own children. Thats'really a mothers love and care.
Filial love is not one of the great loves, according to C.S. Lewis. He does mention filial love on occasion, and he does use it as examples to illustrate his points. One example was the life and death of Mrs Fidget. Here is a woman who placed her family’s welfare on the altar, and it was for them that she made her sacrifices. To quote Lewis:
Mrs Fidget very often said that she lived for her family. And it was not untrue. Everyone in the neighbourhood knew it. ‘She lives for her family,’ they said; ‘what a wife and mother!’ She did all the washing; true, she did it badly, and they could have afforded to send it out to a laundry, and they frequently begged her not to do it. But she did. There was always a hot lunch for anyone who was at home and always a hot meal at night (even in midsummer). They imlored hernot to provide this. Theyprotested almost with tears in their eyes (and with truth) that theyliked cold meals. It made no difference. She was living for her family. Sh always sat up to ‘welcome’ you if you were out late at night; two or three in the morning, it made no odds; you would always find the frail, pale weary face awaiting you, like a silent accusation (The Four Loves: Affection, 46-7).
Note the irony with which Lewis presents the affection of this mother’s love. But that is not the affection that inspired Lewis to write this story. The truest affection lay in the behaviour of the children and the husband, who endured the food they didn’t like, who helped Mrs Fidget with work they did not want to have been done for them. Affection compels a person to endure unpleasant situations for the sake of a loved one because this person knows that it is all based on good intentions.


Hermione is like his sister, and Ron his brother. He doesnt feel that way about Ginny does he?? I've seen some say that but in truth, if we look carefully, his relationship to Hermione is very close, just the sister he never had. True, there's speculation as to future possible romantic interest but it's still speculation at this time. Same with Ginny.
Can you show examples of when Harry thought of Hermione as a sister? The friendly and affectionate behaviour between Harry and Hermione also pervades the relationship between sister-brother, friend-friend, lover-lover. What incidents in the series distinguishes Harry as having a distinctively brotherly affinity to Hermione?

Further, what did Lewis say, in The Four Loves, that supports your model of Hermione=sister and Ron=brother? I’m not saying that you’re wrong, GryffindorGr, I’d just like to know which passage you’re looking at, so that I may examine it as well.


B. Charity Love (this is the love that Harry has not achieved, but I feel that he will find this towards the end. Unless of course Charity love is equated to saving people, which could very well be the case)
I must, at this point, bring your attention back to my introductory paragraph. The manner in which I listed the four loves is from the least great to the most great, namely that Affection is the least great of the four loves, Friendship being the 3rd greatest, Eros the 2nd greatest and Charity the ultimate greatest of all loves. I need to emphasize this so that readers will not be confused by GryffindorGr’s order of listing.

Now I will continue with the discussion on Charity love. Specifically, saving people like Hermione and Ron is not an act that illustrates Charity. What does illustrates this love is when he saved Peter Pettigrew’s life. He showed compassion for Peter because he has a love of humanity and the goodness in people. Charity is a very complex love and it is impossible to discuss all of its merits in one post like this one.


C. Friendship love (This is something Harry learned the first book PS/SS with Ron and Hermione, and as steadfastly learned more friendships as he grew)
What you say is true, GryffindorGr, but how does that relate to what Lewis said? Lewis devoted a whole chapter to Friendship, yes, but there is a lot more that he said about it. Hawk 92 alluded to some of that in his post where he posted an excerpt from this chapter.


D. Eros Love (romantic love: this one is what Harry needs at the end..which he will finally achieve after his Voldemort challenge) And who is there?
Everything that the Weasleys have given him: Filial, Friendship, Charity,...and lastly Eros, with Ginny.
It is interesting that you place the order of the loves culminating with Eros, when Lewis felt that Charity was the greatest love of all. And how did you arrive at Ginny as the person to bring the experience of Eros into Harry’s life?


Give me proof that he treats Ginny like a sister compared to Hermione? I always thought his relationship with Hermione is more sisterlike than Ginny.
I think the key here is to acknowledge that Harry does NOT think of Ginny as his sister. In fact, Harry does not think of Ginny at all, or he rarely does.


Or are they both equally platonic? (edit: guess at this point they both are, eh?)
No, I’m afraid not, GryffindorGr. Platonic love is not simply the love that exists between two casual friends. It can characterize the Harry/Hermione friendship, but certainly not the Harry/Ginny one. And like Plato said, and Lewis agrees, Platonic love – as it is described in its nature and dynamic – does not exclude the possibility of growing into Eros, rather, it supports that growth.


Source:
Lewis, C.S. The Four Loves. London: Fount Harper Collins, 1998.

[xray]

H/Hr (HMS Harmony)
BabyMars
Buckbeak
Cheeseheads
canteurervan
dobydoo
Earendil
EricaM
Esicardi
Field
flucias1
FlyingPhoenix
FoxX Onward
Godrics Heiress
Grace Granger
Hawk 92
Hope1272
jordmundt6
Mad Eye Mike
Mirtilla
Miss Harmony
Nia
Oliveros
PallasAthena
Perdita
Polaris15
Potterific
Prancer
Sarmi
Sirius83
Tchen56
The_Boy_Who_
Turambar
v@sh
Warwizard

H/G (HMS Chocolate)
Abby Lupin
Ana Banana
Charmed Cheese
Chop
Deedlit
Discordia
Doxys
DumbledoreTheWise
FairyDust
foxy1770831
Freckled Apples
Gily Ann
Ginnythecat
GryffindorGr
Guardian Angel
Magician Girl
Pansy
Prongs, Sr.
Rowena Ravenclaw
rwc
Terrilein
WeasleyIsOurKing
Xray

R/Hr (HMS Heron)
Abby Lupin
Ana Banana
Charmed Cheese
Chop
Daveydee
Deedlit
Discordia
Doxys
Drker2000
DumbledoreTheWise
FairyDust
Freckled Apples
Ginnythecat
GrangerGal
Guardian Angel
JofpGallagher
Laufa
Lotusjewel
Mad-I Moody
Magician Girl
Maydeleat Greenly
Pansy
Prongs, Sr.
Robin
Rowena Ravenclaw
Rowlingfan1
rwc
Savoy Truffle
WeasleyIsOurKing
Xray

H/L (HMS Moonlight)
Drker2000
LunaGirl
Rowlingfan1

R/L (HMS Rooney)
Esicardi
GryffindorGr

H/C (HMS Take-Out)
Lotusjewel

D/Hr (HMS Leather and Lace)
GryffindorGr
Terrilein

R->Hr->H but not H->Hr and not Hr->R (HMS Firebolt)
AvadaKedavra

Neutral (HMS Plato)
Alci
Haycheng
Mierin42

[FlyingPhoenix]

This Four love thing seems to cover what I did thought in someways. I'm there not sure because I didn't read this book but how I understand it then we could actuelly argue if between Harry and Hermione don't exist all 4 kind of love.

love 1) Affection
How I understand it. This fit with all those quotes where Harry had been impressed by Hermione's ability just like by Hermione's admiring of Harry's DADA talents.


love 2) Friendship
Lovers are face to face but friends point in the same direction with common interests. One person can't bring out all anothers facets. We need others to do this. We need to share our friends to possess them more fully. Friendship is the least jealous of the loves - two friends delight in being joined by a third!

They are not jealousy at each other and they share the same interest or look in the same direction. (Interests are more as books or games)

love 3) Eros - being in love!
Eros invades and reorganises the institutions of ones personality one by one, obliterating the distinction between giving and receiving - both are a pleasure!

This one is involved with the affection one IMO. Because Harry dos recognise personality one by one by Hermione. Its more subtle but its there.

love 4) charity
Charity is the love that wants nothing in return (given freely) and its primal source is God. Paradoxically we are allowed to share in this divine love and give to the God that already has everything by withholding or giving ourselves to him.

This would be what Platon did understand under love. Anyway this we have, too. *shrugs*

[GryffindorGr]

Hello Perdita,
Good you noticed that. (The filial love and affection love could be dubbed as the same since we would have affection for our family)
affection
n : a positive feeling of liking; "he had trouble expressing the
affection he felt"; "the child won everyone's heart"
[syn: affectionateness, fondness, tenderness, heart,
warmheartedness]


I will start this post by citing exactly what are the four great loves and in the words of C.S. Lewis, they are: Affection, Friendship, Eros and Charity. Filial love is not one of the great loves that C.S. Lewis wrote about. Since we are here to discuss and debate, I’ll entertain that line of argument.

In the context I was presenting, Sirius and the Weasley family give Harry this “affection.” Essentially, in the sense of his mentors, or elders, since Harry has no parental love, the affection he would receive that would equate to filial love are from his godfather and Mr.and Mrs. Weasley.


Filial love is not one of the great loves, according to C.S. Lewis. He does mention filial love on occasion, and he does use it as examples to illustrate his points. One example was the life and death of Mrs Fidget. Here is a woman who placed her family’s welfare on the altar, and it was for them that she made her sacrifices. To quote Lewis:
Quote:
Originally Posted by C.S. Lewis
Mrs Fidget very often said that she lived for her family. And it was not untrue. Everyone in the neighbourhood knew it. ‘She lives for her family,’ they said; ‘what a wife and mother!’ She did all the washing; true, she did it badly, and they could have afforded to send it out to a laundry, and they frequently begged her not to do it. But she did. There was always a hot lunch for anyone who was at home and always a hot meal at night (even in midsummer). They imlored hernot to provide this. Theyprotested almost with tears in their eyes (and with truth) that theyliked cold meals. It made no difference. She was living for her family. Sh always sat up to ‘welcome’ you if you were out late at night; two or three in the morning, it made no odds; you would always find the frail, pale weary face awaiting you, like a silent accusation (The Four Loves: Affection, 46-7).
Note the irony with which Lewis presents the affection of this mother’s love. But that is not the affection that inspired Lewis to write this story. The truest affection lay in the behaviour of the children and the husband, who endured the food they didn’t like, who helped Mrs Fidget with work they did not want to have been done for them. Affection compels a person to endure unpleasant situations for the sake of a loved one because this person knows that it is all based on good intentions.

There are many definitions of affection, even affection for your pets, and can also be for friendship love. So it varies. Lewis also calls them “need-loves.” Storge (Rom 1:31, “natural affection”) is parental or family love,driven by the need to belong as well as the need to be loved. It so describes Harry’s need for all parental love/ affection is raw

Can you show examples of when Harry thought of Hermione as a sister? The friendly and affectionate behaviour between Harry and Hermione also pervades the relationship between sister-brother, friend-friend, lover-lover. What incidents in the series distinguishes Harry as having a distinctively brotherly affinity to Hermione?
I’d have to disagree about the lover-lover part for it hasn’t been confirmed yet as to any passion or budding romance between Harry and Hermione. (though pervading yes but read on as to why I disagree) I did ask earlier if there’s proof that Harry treats Ginny as a sister or essentially like Hermione. The continued concern that Hermione dotes on Harry, which I have seen on many of the quotes inserted throughout these posts, the worry, the hug, the kiss on the cheek, etc, these things I see as proof of sister-brother, friend-friend relationship thus far. There’s nothing proven yet of a romance. It’s merely speculation.


Further, what did Lewis say, in The Four Loves, that supports your model of Hermione=sister and Ron=brother? I’m not saying that you’re wrong, GryffindorGr, I’d just like to know which passage you’re looking at, so that I may examine it as well.

With Hermione, like I said above. I can copy paste all the quotes from the love thread in which most have presented as evidence to show Hermione’s care and affection. As for Ron, well, it’s notable to see that he does consider him as his best friend and as a brother he never had. There are jealousies between them (yes, even Harry has jealousies) and there are slight competitions, but in the end, they will always have their deep abiding friendship and affection to one another.


I think the key here is to acknowledge that Harry does NOT think of Ginny as his sister. In fact, Harry does not think of Ginny at all, or he rarely does.

Yes, you’re right, he does not think of Ginny the way he does of Hermione. But I disagree where you say he does not think of Ginny at all. He does have deep concern for her despite his self centeredness. He asks how she is in the beginning of OotP for one.


It is interesting that you place the order of the loves culminating with Eros, when Lewis felt that Charity was the greatest love of all. And how did you arrive at Ginny as the person to bring the experience of Eros into Harry’s life?

From what I said in my posts that the insertion of the Weasleys by JKR is huge reason enough that Harry fulfills many of these fine 4 great loves. Harry is coming of age and the great probability of his continued presence with the Weasleys affections will open his eyes to passion, realizing lastly, the girl who has always loved him. (I beg to disagree that everyone thinks Ginny’s love has diminished just because she dates. A girl does not go chasing after a boy this way, she keeps it inside of herself, just like a diary. Note too that Harry gives Ginny his Lockhart collection in CoS, which could be a foreshadowing of his heart in a lock until the key is opened.) By the way, Charity can be with all the 4 loves




Quote:
Or are they both equally platonic? (edit: guess at this point they both are, eh?)
Quote by Perdita:
No, I’m afraid not, GryffindorGr. Platonic love is not simply the love that exists between two casual friends. It can characterize the Harry/Hermione friendship, but certainly not the Harry/Ginny one. And like Plato said, and Lewis agrees, Platonic love – as it is described in its nature and dynamic – does not exclude the possibility of growing into Eros, rather, it supports that growth.

I agree with both Plato and Lewis yet I have read Plato’s works more than I have read Lewis. Does it? I mean about Plato? Growing into Eros? I disagree. Plato does not advocate the passion kind of love although he does acknowledge it but he does not use that in terms of his philosophy. Plato says that truth is knowable and universal ideology about the profound and impassioned nature of man can be known through rationale. Aristotle says that man is an animal, and that the real world is only knowable through your sense perceptions. Plato’s philosophy mainly is of a more Apollonian virtue. If you want to compare and contrast, Aristotle dwells more on the dramatics and passion, saying that without passion we would not be able to purge and grow our imagination. Plato’s ideas were to prevent that kind in order to have a systematic approach to society, which is good in a way but many disagree therefore that is where Aristotle comes in.

[brisa]

(The war. Voldemort hate's muggle's this say his victims will be muggle's and muggleborns.
The Prophecy. I doubt Harry will tell Hermione it by his own free will because we did see before he cares how she react. In PoA and GoF even in OotP Harry hadn't the heart to tell her something what might hurt her. And he knows sure like hell that Hermione would care. I don't want even imagine how she would indeed react to this. I tend to believe Ron will know it first and also handle it quiet well. Because we saw before in again COS (slowly you should get why its the key anyway) that he don't see the full impact of things. In GoF was it just the same. I doubt Ron might understand Harry's problem that he must become a murderer cause its Voldemort anyway someone who deserve to die. In short at the beginning of book6 we will have a situation where Harry does lie against Hermione and Ron does know it. Further more Hermione will be under some certain pressure a mix from book2 and book3 just this time more racism.
This and the full impact will let drift Harry and Hermione closer, in an unpleasent way this means tension. A kind of tension which will let Harry wonder what he feels for her).[/QUOTE]





Yep....this is the best and logical theory that I have read...yeah...they are now together cause their friendship...but we have the pureblood fact...Hermi isn't pureblood, and I think Harry isn't it too, remember Lily was a muggleborn, like Hermi...they are involved in high dangerous, so they will start to get closer...mmm...I'm completely agree with you :tu:


X RAY...can you consider me for H/Hermi group please...I saw your list and I'm not there...could you consider me plisss...thankius

[Loz]

This isn't really correct. Mr Crouch sen. was not a dark in fact he was on the light side. His son however was dark.

One of Winky's masters was Crouch jr. Crouch sr. was hardly a sweetheart. He was also cruel.


Again this is not exact. Kreachers Master was Sirius and Kreacher did never wish to serve for him. He did even help to kill him. Something what would serve by Winky deepest disgust even more as to be a free elf.

I am sorry but I disagree. Kreacher did not consider Sirius his master, therefore Sirius was not his master. His master and mistress were still Sirius's father and mother.


But Winky might not always drink but Kreacher always being insane. Winky is a free elve just like Dobby this say both are special and Winky might even get the needed support by Dobby. Clearly points to Dobby and Winky there.

I cannot imagine Winky giving up the bottle any time soon. Winky does not want to be free. Winky hates Dobby's "support".


Yes, true. But at hands of this I assume they should at least stay at one place this favours again Dobby and Winky both are at Hogwarts

I can see Kreacher sneaking into Hogwarts quite easily.


Sure he can because with Sirius died the last direct Black line.

This is my point. It seems unfair that with the death of the family comes the death of the servants.


Winky could in book4 perfectly decide which acting is bad and which one not. She decided that Crouch jr. acted bad and she were responsible for this. To become a honourable houselve again she needs the help of Dobby. Together they can be the key help for one of the most honorable, good wizards in this world: Harry Potter. Even the elves know about his greatness and now about his goodness too. This would give Winky peace and her honour back.

Winky could not see the wrong in drinking herself to a drunken stupor, however. She detested Dobby for trying to "help" her. She did not seem to respect Harry.


No, no its Winky and Dobby because I think there is more tension :rotfl:
More tension between Dobby and Winky than Kreacher and Winky? I cannot help but think this is not true. If it is, why would a relationship want tension? Surely it would be better with love and support. As insane as he is, Kreacher is capable of great love and devotion. This is something Winky desperately needs. Dobby only loves two people - himself and Harry Potter. Sad but true.

[AllanTheGreat]

Hermi isn't pureblood, and I think Harry isn't it too, remember Lily was a muggleborn, like Hermi...
The definition of a pureblood is the person whose both parents are or (in Harry's place) were wizards. Both Lily and James were wizards, therefore Harry is a pureblood.

I wanna be a part of the HMS Harmony, look at my siggy :)

[AllanTheGreat]

Dobby only loves two people - himself and Harry Potter. Sad but true. There's no proof that Dobby only loves himself and Harry. Look at the way in which he worried about Winky in GoF when she was getting drunk. And I believe that Dobby and Winky will end up together because they are both seen as the weirdos of the Hogwarts Kitchen. Dobby because he is paid, and Winky because she's always drunk. I think this will bring them together.

[Barbara Kennedy]

I wish to suggest the neutral ship be known as the HMS Plato for the few of us who believe they will all just remain friends and/or they will eventually find someone we don't know yet as their one true love.

Consider it as a possiblity. I won't be upset if the idea is rejected, just a suggestion.....
Cheers.

[Loz]

I must ask brisa and AllanTheGreat to stop double posting, please use the edit button if you discover you have more to say.

As for Barbara's suggestion - it seems fair enough. Why do the others get fancy names and Neutral just get known as Neutral? I am not sure why there are the categories that people fall into but I find myself distressed not to see the HMS Krinky.

[GryffindorGr]

I wish to suggest the neutral ship be known as the HMS Plato for the few of us who believe they will all just remain friends and/or they will eventually find someone we don't know yet as their one true love.

Consider it as a possiblity. I won't be upset if the idea is rejected, just a suggestion.....
Cheers.

Thats a good idea. :)

Flyingphoenix I agree with your 3 out of 4 loves with H/HR, it's a good analysis to hone in within the circle of only H/Hr yet at this point there's no romance and it's all speculation. There's nothing to note of romance/eros (passion) between them.
Just to re-cap, we can't discount the presence of Ron and the entire Weasley family just to close in alone on H/HR. It's really not fair to the Weasleys, since they too love Harry. His continued presence with them is evident and cannot be ignored.

[noddwyd]

I really believe that love is, if not the main theme of the septology, then it is one of the larger ones. Harry is constantly struggling with this. He spent 11 years in a cupboard being deprived of it. His vision in front of the mirror was one major way that JKR shows us his need to have love, and to be able to love. At that time it was his parents he wanted to recieve it from, but instead what he has is two friends, Ron and Hermione, who have stayed with him, even when they got more than their share of trouble. In fact, Ron has shown more than one time that he was willing to give up his life to protect his friend Harry. This is the prime example of friendship love. The Weasleys, Ron's family, also take Harry in, and really all but accept him as a member of their clan, and the hug he recieves from Molly, at the end of GoF, was the first motherly affection he had recieved since he was one year old. There is also Sirius, however. Harry rescues his father's old friend, and would have gone to live with him, had his name been cleared. Sirius was not the only fatherly figure Harry has, but he was probably the one closest to Harry. There is also, however, Remus, and Dumbledore as well, although at the moment he's probably not to happy with Dumbledore.
Harry has not reached completely what I would call a 'universal' love, just yet. He does understand social injustice, and fights against it, as well as being against mistreatment of others, even when it comes to Severus, someone he hates. But he has not reached the point where he can attempt to understand Tom Riddle, or perhaps Bellatrix. That is the true test of love on the universal level. Reaching understanding of your enemies, and actually having compassion for them.
The one other thing Harry has not yet realized, as far as love goes, is eros. Not only that, however, but a connection that is complete on all of these levels. From the soul, to the mind, to the spirit. And it is only through a connection of this kind that you can completely understand love.

hmm...I'll have to finish this later.

[Terrilein]

GryffindorGr: :welcome:-back! so good to see you here again, my D/Hr partner in crime. ;) :love:

[FlyingPhoenix]

One of Winky's masters was Crouch jr. Crouch sr. was hardly a sweetheart. He was also cruel.

She called him young master. This shows Crouch sr. had more authority and she did listen to Crouch sr and not to Crouch jr. Yeap cruel and cold hearted but still not a dark wizard.

I am sorry but I disagree. Kreacher did not consider Sirius his master, therefore Sirius was not his master. His master and mistress were still Sirius's father and mother.

Oh he did call him master and he did obey him. Remember this elf did "Get out" otherwise he could have never leave 12G because Sirius was very well his master.

I cannot imagine Winky giving up the bottle any time soon. Winky does not want to be free. Winky hates Dobby's "support".

Well, she isn't anymore really free, or? She is now DD's elf. So after two years and under the lovely hands of Dobby she'll give up to drink.

I can see Kreacher sneaking into Hogwarts quite easily.

Me wonders who is now his master? Malfoy...or Tonks...

This is my point. It seems unfair that with the death of the family comes the death of the servants.

Maybe he is already dead? Eaten by a hippogriff

Winky could not see the wrong in drinking herself to a drunken stupor, however. She detested Dobby for trying to "help" her. She did not seem to respect Harry.

To get drunk don't say you turn out to be a supporter of Voldemort. Well, she did respect Harry to a certain point by far more as Hermione, though.

More tension between Dobby and Winky than Kreacher and Winky? I cannot help but think this is not true. If it is, why would a relationship want tension? Surely it would be better with love and support. As insane as he is, Kreacher is capable of great love and devotion. This is something Winky desperately needs. Dobby only loves two people - himself and Harry Potter. Sad but true.

And Kreachrer loves Bellatrix and a potrait of a dead one. Dobby however did take care of her, helped her as she needed someone. As she needed a home Dobby was there and he worry about her. Really thats true love. In joy and sorrow...*sigh*

[Barbara Kennedy]

I'm sorry, but the only Kreacher love evidence I've really seen in the books is the snogging of old Master's pants and his devotion to Mrs. Black's portrait.
Kreacher/Trousers ship?

[GryffindorGr]

I would like to present the case of my Kreacher/Winky ship.
They are both outcasts from their society. Winky is a drunkard, Kreacher is insane. They could understand each other, and perhaps communicate in a way only a drunkard and insane creature could.


LOL!
I like this ship but what about poor Dobby? He'd be all alone.
Kreacher is used to being alone and he snogs the late Mr. Blacks trousers and talks to Mrs. Black's portrait.
With Winky being a drunk I dont think she'd understand Kreacher while he goes off mumbling and hiding things. Plus isnt Kreacher just a tad too old for her? I wonder if they have little elves and is that equivalent to when you own a slave and the children belong to the household too? I suppose it would.

Terri, thanks, but, for D/Hr, oh no, that's your job. I did my part. ;)
But you never know. lol. I might take up the cause again! (I have more about them..)


by Barbara
I'm sorry, but the only Kreacher love evidence I've really seen in the books is the snogging of old Master's pants.......
Kreacher/Trousers ship?

LOL! Just like what I said.

[AllanTheGreat]

Me wonders who is now his master? Malfoy...or Tonks...
Could someone tell me how are the Blacks and Tonks related?

And also, could someone give us who don't understand, a condensed version of what the Four Loves are?

Thanks :) Sorry for the double post, Loz, I won't do it again.

[Cish_hp92]

hey u guys are doing a great job!!
i'm a kinda lurker on this thread...this is probably my first post so i just wanted to ask how i can become a member of the r/hr ship (hms hermon)
anyway i think u guys are sooo good at all this analysis....
will be back to post later when i get the hang of this!!

[GryffindorGr]

Could someone tell me how are the Blacks and Tonks related?




Hi Allan, here is a good link to the Black family tree:
http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/black-family-tree.html
It's in OotP.

In short, (Nymphadora) Tonks is the daughter of Andromeda Black, who married a muggle born, so therefore Tonks is like Harry, yet some have a confusion of muggle born witch/wizard and muggle born like the Dursleys.

[Barbara Kennedy]

Tonks' mother is Andromeda Black, Narcissa and Bellatrix sister. She married Ted Tonks who most assume is a muggle. I don't remember if it was stated so in the books. I need to go read them again.

EDIT: Thanks GryffindorGr, you had more information than I did, good.

[sone]

Tonks' mother is Andromeda Black, Narcissa and Bellatrix sister. She married Ted Tonks who most assume is a muggle. I don't remember if it was stated so in the books. I need to go read them again.

Ted Tonks is actually a muggleborn wizard. Either way, he is not a "pureblood" so off the family tree they went. However Harry is a half blood because his mother was a muggleborn witch. In any case, he would never be considered a pureblood wizard by the likes of Malfoy or Lestrange anyway. Neither would Voldemort, but saying that to his face would make any of his death eaters regret it for the rest of their life......both seconds of it. Tonks is a half blood like Harry is. They may even be metamorphmaguses too. Tonks is of course but Harry may also be one.

[brisa]

Could someone tell me how are the Blacks and Tonks related?

And also, could someone give us who don't understand, a condensed version of what the Four Loves are?

Thanks :) Sorry for the double post, Loz, I won't do it again.

Yep...Tonks is Andromeda's daugther...and we know that she is or was (I don't know is she is dead), Sirius's fave cousin...Andromeda, Narcissa and Bellatrix are sisters...Androemeda get married with a muggle(Tonks's father) and Narcissa is married with Lucius Malfoy...and kreacher only attends to Black family...Sirius is a kind of uncle/cousin for Tonks....and Narcissa Malfoy is directly her aunt...you see the relation here :eyebrows:

And sorry for the double posting too... :blush:

[AllanTheGreat]

Thanks a lot, GryffindorGr!!!

Me wonders who is now his master? Malfoy...or Tonks...
Now that I've seen the Black Family Tree, I say the Malfoys will be Kreacher's masters because Andromeda Black (Sirius' first cousin) married Ted Tonks (Tonks' father), a muggle, and was wiped from the family tree. Narcissa (Sirius' first cousin, too) married Lucius, a pureblood, so she wasn't wiped off.

Edit: Thanks a lot to all the people who answered my question!! :tu:

[flucias1]

Ted Tonks is actually a muggleborn wizard. Either way, he is not a "pureblood" so off the family tree they went. However Harry is a half blood because his mother was a muggleborn witch. In any case, he would never be considered a pureblood wizard by the likes of Malfoy or Lestrange anyway. Neither would Voldemort, but saying that to his face would make any of his death eaters regret it for the rest of their life......both seconds of it. Tonks is a half blood like Harry is. They may even be metamorphmaguses too. Tonks is of course but Harry may also be one.
Good points, sone. I never thought before that Harry might be a metamorphmagus, but then I thought of that time in Book 1 when Aunt Petunia gave Harry a maliciously hideous haircut and Harry made his hair grow back overnight. I wonder if that's a first step.. hmm.. JKR doesn't write filler so I'm sure her mentioning that Tonks is a metamorphmagus will come into play somehow, in regards to Harry.

About Kreacher/Winky.. nah. I think it's Dobby/Winky. Kreacher is too self-absorbed and/or consumed by his dead masters - to the point that he contributed to the death of his living master. Cannot forsee him transfering that devotion to another creature.. besides, as someone said, his greatest wish is to have himself beheaded and nailed to the wall. Now Winky is kinda abnormal at the moment, but even she is not that insane.

Dobby, at least, takes care of poor Winky. I agree with Hawk - all Winky needs is some good snogging :lol:

[FlyingPhoenix]

Now that I've seen the Black Family Tree, I say the Malfoys will be Kreacher's masters because Andromeda Black (Sirius' first cousin) married Ted Tonks (Tonks' father), a muggle, and was wiped from the family tree. Narcissa (Sirius' first cousin, too) married Lucius, a pureblood, so she wasn't wiped off.

Lets look at it shall we? Bellatrix is discribe as something about 40, Narcissa have to be too so around 40. Now Andromeda's daughter is at least 22 or 23 this would say Andromeda was again so around 40. The question is who is the oldest. After the way its written then I tend to say Bellatrix. (left to right)
But after the fact that Andromeda has a daughter which is at least 8 years older as Draco I do think the chances are high its go to Tonks.
Tonks or Bellatrix now you can throw a coin. Which one wouldn't Sirus left the Blck stuff?

[AllanTheGreat]

For some reason I was thinking Bellatrix was dead. Then Kreacher would be left to either Bellatrix or Narcissa. Narcissa because she is a direct Black before Tonks.

Is Andromeda alive?

[brisa]

Ted Tonks is actually a muggleborn wizard. Either way, he is not a "pureblood" so off the family tree they went. However Harry is a half blood because his mother was a muggleborn witch. In any case, he would never be considered a pureblood wizard by the likes of Malfoy or Lestrange anyway. Neither would Voldemort, but saying that to his face would make any of his death eaters regret it for the rest of their life......both seconds of it. Tonks is a half blood like Harry is. They may even be metamorphmaguses too. Tonks is of course but Harry may also be one.

Yep...that what I was trying to say several post ago...Harry is not an entirely pureblood as Malfoys...and that is a good idea...Harry as a metamorphomagus...mmm...yep...it could be sooo possible :eyebrows:

And Bellatrix is still...still alive...but JK never told us if Andromeda is alive

[giantsquid28]

Tonks or Bellatrix now you can throw a coin. Which one wouldn't Sirus left the Blck stuff?

I still think that Harry will get the bulk of his estate. But if it is a toss up between his cousin (bella) and his cousin once removed (tonks), I'm gonna say Tonks. He actually likes her and she is a member of the order.

[lauradonaghy]

She never said Andromeda died, either - Sirius would've mentioned it when he was showing Harry the tapestry.
What exactly constitutes '-blood'? Is it the grandparents, as in:
Four Muggle Grandparents: Mudblood
Two Muggle Grandparents: Halfblood
All Wizard Grandparents: Pureblood
and everything else is shades of grey?

[Perdita]

Hi, GryffindorGr,

Hello Perdita,
Good you noticed that. (The filial love and affection love could be dubbed as the same since we would have affection for our family)
affection
n : a positive feeling of liking; "he had trouble expressing the
affection he felt"; "the child won everyone's heart"
[syn: affectionateness, fondness, tenderness, heart,
warmheartedness]
Thanks, but I already knew what the word affection means. What I’m concerned with is how Lewis’ description of it is used in this debate in the Harry Potter context. We are, after all, talking about the meaning – not definition – of “affection” according to The Four Loves, not just any generic description of the word.

In the context I was presenting, Sirius and the Weasley family give Harry this “affection.” Essentially, in the sense of his mentors, or elders, since Harry has no parental love, the affection he would receive that would equate to filial love are from his godfather and Mr.and Mrs. Weasley.

There are many definitions of affection, even affection for your pets, and can also be for friendship love. So it varies. Lewis also calls them “need-loves.” Storge (Rom 1:31, “natural affection”) is parental or family love,driven by the need to belong as well as the need to be loved. It so describes Harry’s need for all parental love/ affection is raw
It’s good to see that this time around, the fact that affection exists in many different types of relationships, whether between humans or humans and objects, is being acknowledged in your post. Previously, it appeared that, by your omissions, you were discussing affection as if it were synonymous with filial love exclusively, which it isn’t.

As to the Need-love, I agree that Harry does experience the need for love. When Lewis opened his chapter on affection, he did mention that storge is the Greek equivalent. Later on, he challenges that assumption by saying:
Lewis:
But I must at once correct myself. I am talking of Affection as it is when it exists apart form the other loves. It often does so exist; often not. As gin is not only a drink in itself but also a base for amny mixed drinks, so Affection, besides being a love itself, can enter into the other loves and colour them (33)[.]


I’d have to disagree about the lover-lover part for it hasn’t been confirmed yet as to any passion or budding romance between Harry and Hermione. (though pervading yes but read on as to why I disagree) I did ask earlier if there’s proof that Harry treats Ginny as a sister or essentially like Hermione. The continued concern that Hermione dotes on Harry, which I have seen on many of the quotes inserted throughout these posts, the worry, the hug, the kiss on the cheek, etc, these things I see as proof of sister-brother, friend-friend relationship thus far. There’s nothing proven yet of a romance. It’s merely speculation.
If you could, please, re-read my post. No where in my post did I say that Harry and Hermione share romantic love. I am in agreement with many other shippers here that what we have between Harry and Hermione is "Platonic," and that is the foundation for romantic love to “bud” later on.


With Hermione, like I said above. I can copy paste all the quotes from the love thread in which most have presented as evidence to show Hermione’s care and affection.
True. Hermione’s behaviour towards Harry does show a lot of affection, but that doesn’t automatically make her relationship with Harry equate to that of sisterly love. Affection permeates many different types of relationships.

As for Ron, well, it’s notable to see that he does consider him as his best friend and as a brother he never had. There are jealousies between them (yes, even Harry has jealousies) and there are slight competitions, but in the end, they will always have their deep abiding friendship and affection to one another.
This is agree with, on the most part.


Yes, you’re right, he does not think of Ginny the way he does of Hermione. But I disagree where you say he does not think of Ginny at all. He does have deep concern for her despite his self centeredness. He asks how she is in the beginning of OotP for one.
Right, Harry has thought of Ginny, on occasion, wondering about her welfare. When I said “at all,” I meant it as a hyperbole. The fact of the matter is that Harry does not think of her all that much, which is probably why he didn’t remember that she was also trapped in the Chamber of Secrets back in book 2. Furthermore, does not his concern with Hermione surface more frequently than it does with Ginny? Does not his concern with Hermione’s view of him and his accomplishments overtake his occassional and casual concern over Ginny’s welfare?

From what I said in my posts that the insertion of the Weasleys by JKR is huge reason enough that Harry fulfills many of these fine 4 great loves. Harry is coming of age and the great probability of his continued presence with the Weasleys affections will open his eyes to passion, realizing lastly, the girl who has always loved him. (I beg to disagree that everyone thinks Ginny’s love has diminished just because she dates. A girl does not go chasing after a boy this way, she keeps it inside of herself, just like a diary. Note too that Harry gives Ginny his Lockhart collection in CoS, which could be a foreshadowing of his heart in a lock until the key is opened.) By the way, Charity can be with all the 4 loves.
I think Sirius, Mr and Mrs Weasley, but she in particular, could have been created to fulfill the aspect of Harry’s life that involves the need of a parent’s love.

However, I doubt that JKR intends for Harry to receive all of the four types of love from the Weasley family alone. Would you contend with the possibility that Harry is supposed to find Eros with someone outside of the Weasley family – whether that be Cho, Hermione or Luna? Of the four girls, Hermione seems the most likely because she has shown a lot of affection with, as well as received a lot of affection from Harry. This is one aspect of Harry and Hermione’s relationship that is not present in his relationships with Luna or Ginny. With Cho, I’ll allow it since she was his crush and they did date.

As for the Lockhart books, let us remember that Harry never wanted those books in the first place. When Lockhart gave them to Harry, he did so to gain attention from the press, to make people think that he was a generous person. Throughout book 2, Harry did not grow to like and respect Lockhart the man. The fact that Harry was so eager to give away the books, regardless of the fact that he knew Lockhart would not be returning to Hogwarts to teach the following year, since his fraudulent exploits had been uncovered, is an indication that Harry does not care for the books. As such, does he care for the fact that Ginny now has them? They are objects that Harry did not want in the first place, objects that he did not grow to appreciate, and they would have been a reminder of the horrible time that he had spent in Lockhart’s company. Does this make a positive piece of evidence for the HMS Chocolate? I would hope not, but that’s just me.

I agree with both Plato and Lewis yet I have read Plato’s works more than I have read Lewis. Does it? I mean about Plato? Growing into Eros? I disagree. Plato does not advocate the passion kind of love although he does acknowledge it but he does not use that in terms of his philosophy. Plato says that truth is knowable and universal ideology about the profound and impassioned nature of man can be known through rationale. Aristotle says that man is an animal, and that the real world is only knowable through your sense perceptions. Plato’s philosophy mainly is of a more Apollonian virtue. If you want to compare and contrast, Aristotle dwells more on the dramatics and passion, saying that without passion we would not be able to purge and grow our imagination. Plato’s ideas were to prevent that kind in order to have a systematic approach to society, which is good in a way but many disagree therefore that is where Aristotle comes in.
When I mentioned Plato, I was referring to “platonic” love as it was examined in [u]The Symposium[/b]. Whether "platonic" love precludes romantic love, or results from it, the point I am trying to make is that it does not exclude romantic love.

[noddwyd]

to kind of continue my earlier post....

According to Dumbledore, a character whom JKR admits she uses at times as her voice in the story, Harry has a power that Voldemort can't understand. One that he hates, fears, and simultaneously underestimates. This of course is love, and the fact that it is this power of Harry's that can destroy Voldemort makes love an even more intregal part of the story. The description in the Lost Prophecy chapter is probably the best we've seen so far of this power:


"There is a room in the Department of Mysteries," interrupted Dumbledore, "that is kept locked at all times. It contains a force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death, than human intelligence, than the forces of nature. It is also, perhaps, the most mysterious of the many subjects for study that reside there. It is the power held within that room that you possess in such quantities and which Voldemort has not at all. That power took you to save Sirius tonight. That power also saved you from possession by Voldemort, because he could not bear to reside in a body so full of the force he detests. In the end, it mattered not that you could not close your mind. It was your heart that saved you."

Notice that JKR has Dumbledore state that this power is above the 'forces of nature', something which includes physical/chemical desire and attraction. Platonic indeed.

The room in the DoM is arguably the same door that they were unable to open when the six went to rescue Sirius, and that melted Sirius' knife. There is more than likely a symbollic nature to this scene:

(please note that this scene takes place directly after Hermione drags Harry away from the veil, reminding him that they were there to save Sirius)

Once more the wall spun and became still again. Harry approached a door at random and pushed. It did not move.
"What's wrong?" said Hermione.
"It's...locked..." said Harry, throwing his weight at the door, but it did not budge.
"This is it then, isn't it?" said Ron excitedly, joining Harry in the attempt to force the door open. "Bound to be!"
"Get out of the way!" said Hermione sharply. She pointed her wand at the place where a lock would have been on an ordinary door and said "Alohomora!"
Nothing happened.
"Sirius's knife!" said Harry, and he pulled it out from inside his robes and slid it into hte crack between the door and the wall. The others all watched eagerly as he ran it from top to bottom, withdrew it, and then flung his shoulder again at the door. It remained as firmly shut as ever. What was more, when Harry looked down at the knife, he saw that the blade had melted.
"Right, we're leaving that room," said Hermione decisively.
"But what if that's the one?" said Ron, staring at it with a mixture of apprehension and longing.
"It can't be, Harry could get through all the doors in his dream," said Hermione, marking the door with another fiery cross as Harry replaced the now-useless handle of Sirius's knife in his pocket.
"You know what could be in there?" said Luna eagerly, as the wall started to spin yet again.
"Something blibbering, no doubt," said Hermione under her breath, and Neville gave a nervous little laugh.

This mysterious door that won't open is quite interesting indeed. Notice how both Ron and Harry both try to get in by brute force, and both fail, even collectively. This, I find, reminds me of the Hippogriffs in a way. They will not be treated with anything but respect, and certainly wouldn't let you ride them if you tried to force them into submission.

Then we see Hermione step up to the plate, and also tries to force the door open, though not with physical strength, but through her knowledge of magic and her own individual power. This also fails.

This is when Harry pulls out his last resort. Sirius's knife. Yet another attempt to force the door open using a gift Sirius gave him this time. It fails. And what's more, the knife is destroyed. And in the very next chapter, Sirius meets the same fate.

So what does all this mean, other than the obvious? Well, if we are to believe that the door is the one that Dumbledore refers to, then this could be a direct paralell to Harry and his own quest for love and acceptance.

First we have Harry trying to make it alone, under his own power, which is usually all it takes for him. But in the case of love, he obviously fails.

Then we have Ron move to help Harry. A strong friendship. Stronger together than apart. Failure.

Then Hermione tells them sharply to get out of her way. She also attempts, like Harry, to make it on her own. And fails. I am reminded of her 'I never really liked horses much.' comment. This suggests she does not really want to be involved in any romantic relationship, and wants to believe in herself, if her runes mistake is to be accepted as symbollic.

This is when Harry takes out the big guns and attempts to, symbollically, use his relationship with Sirius to reach the room and the power, and what he is seeking. Not only does this fail, but Sirius dies as well. And him putting the ruined knife back in his robes would suggest that Harry is now carrying the weight of the dead.

What we don't see, is any of the other three trying to open it, although Luna has an idea of what may be behind the door. We also do not see Hr/R trying to open it together, or H/Hr trying to open it together. Ginny seems to have dissapeared in this scene, strangely.

There may be further attempts at 'opening the door' in the future, both figuratively, and maybe literally. But from what we have seen thus far, friendship love (H/R), that of the family (H/Sirius), and individual strength is not enough to open this door, or for Harry to reach his full potential in regards to his power. Strangely, Hermione is the only other person that attempts this on her own. :huh: Is this a suggestion that she may have some of the same power that Harry does? Ah well, anyways...

What it does show is that all three of them Harry, Ron, and Hermione still have a ways to go, and some growing up to do before any of them are ready to 'open the door', I guess. Hermione at least, and perhaps Harry now too, after losing Sirius, will have to get over their dislike of 'horses'. Which is actually more fear than dislike. Not to mention, Neville did not even attempt it, and was mentioned to be nervous. Luna didn't try either, but I think she knew it wouldn't work...And again, Ginny is not mentioned at all. So yeah, they're still 15. That changes though.

[Grace Granger]

He asks how she is in the beginning of OotP for one.

When was this? When he first arrived at 12GP? Because if this is when he asked how she was it would actually only make sense if he asked out of courtesy since the last time he saw her was on the last day of school.

And I agree with Perdita, what do you make of Harry's concern over Hermione?

As for the Lockhart books, let us remember that Harry never wanted those books in the first place. When Lockhart gave them to Harry, he did so to gain attention from the press, to make people think that he was a generous person. Throughout book 2, Harry did not grow to like and respect Lockhart the man. The fact that Harry was so eager to give away the books, regardless of the fact that he knew Lockhart would not be returning to Hogwarts to teach the following year, since his fraudulent exploits had been uncovered, is an indication that Harry does not care for the books. As such, does he care for the fact that Ginny now has them? They are objects that Harry did not want in the first place, objects that he did not grow to appreciate, and they would have been a reminder of the horrible time that he had spent in Lockhart’s company. Does this make a positive piece of evidence for the HMS Chocolate? I would hope not, but that’s just me.

WONDERFULLY written, Perdita. Not just this paragraph, but the whole post as well. :tu:

There may be further attempts at 'opening the door' in the future, both figuratively, and maybe literally. But from what we have seen thus far, friendship love (H/R), that of the family (H/Sirius), and individual strength is not enough to open this door, or for Harry to reach his full potential in regards to his power. Strangely, Hermione is the only other person that attempts this on her own. :huh: Is this a suggestion that she may have some of the same power that Harry does? Ah well, anyways...

Great symbolism and post noddwyd! ;)

[AllanTheGreat]

Again, can someone explain The Four Loves?

I loved your theory, noddwyd, but this brings me to another thought. The only ones who tried to open the 'love' door together were Ron and Harry. Of course this could mean friendship, but it may mean something else... I dare not venture in those grounds. I believe there's a thread about those kind of things somewhere... About some kind of insinuation that JK Rowling made about this subject.

Please, someone describe the Four Loves, I want to understand!!

[Prongs, Sr.]

Perdita

However, I doubt that JKR intends for Harry to receive all of the four types of love from the Weasley family alone. Would you contend with the possibility that Harry is supposed to find Eros with someone outside of the Weasley family – whether that be Cho, Hermione or Luna?

It is certainly likely that JKR intends Harry to receive all types of love from the Weasleys, imo. I think it is very telling that we have the Weasleys being developed in great detail (all of them), while we know next to nothing about Hermione's parents. Harry has not, in fact, been introduced to them, which is disappointing in my viewpoint, nor has he visited her home; and with the danger of Voldemort on the loose, it seems less likely that he will go there because of safety reasons.

Since Harry is an orphan and it is possible to conclude that his greatest desire is to become a part of the family; it is logical that JKR is developing the Weasleys in such detail that he will officially become part of the family by marrying into it. That would be an emotionally satisfying ending to the series, as we feel affection for and know all about them in detail - the Weasleys and Ginny.

Also, I think JKR writing H/Hr would certainly put a damper on Ron and Harry's friendship at this point. Ron has romantic feelings for Hermione, whether he realizes it fully right now or not. Just look at how he reacted to the possibility that H/Hr might have kissed; instant jealousy, which was calmed down when he realized that it wasn't true. It is hard to imagine JKR breaking up the Trio's friendship over a sordid love triangle. Anyway, imo, Ron cares for Hermione romantically and an H/Hr relationship could possibly cut off Harry and Hermione from the Weasleys. Does this make logical sense that JKR would write H/Hr from this viewpoint?

An H/Hr romantic relationship, imo, could possibly cut Harry off from the love that Harry receives from the Weasley family, which incidentally, Hermione would be included in if R/Hr happened.

Does this make a positive piece of evidence for the HMS Chocolate? I would hope not, but that’s just me.

Actually, I do think this is subtle evidence for H/G (surprise, surprise). Harry could have given the books to Ron, who is just as poor as Ginny. Harry has observed the poverity of the Weasley and knows that this is Ginny's first year. I think it was a nice act to give these to her, knowing it's her first year at school and it sets up the "Look Potter, "you've got yourself a girlfriend"" scene, which I do feel is foreshadowing for H/G.

[Mirtilla]

Originally posted by Prongs Sr
Since Harry is an orphan and it is possible to conclude that his greatest desire is to become a part of the family; it is logical that JKR is developing the Weasleys in such detail that he will officially become part of the family by marrying into it. That would be an emotionally satisfying ending to the series, as we feel affection for and know all about them in detail - the Weasleys and Ginny.

Harry wants is own family not a surrogate of the Weasleys, this was what he saw in the mirror, plus this ending remind me of the One Big Happy Weasley Family theory, OBHWF, for who is new to this thread the OBHWF theory means HR/r and H/g that's why the happy Weasley Family, that is focused on the Weasley rather then on Harry.

The name itself said that the theory is based on Weasley's happiness not Harry's happiness the focus is not any more on the protagonist, we haven't the Potter we have the Weasley, Prongs Sr you're wrong in say that Harry's greatest desire is to become a Weasley, in canon he wants his family the Potter and in ootp he doesn't consider himself a member of the Weasley, quite the contrary. With Hermione Harry could have his own family, the Potter, what he really wants.

an H/Hr relationship could possibly cut off Harry and Hermione from the Weasleys. Does this make logical sense that JKR would write H/Hr from this viewpoint?

It makes logical sense because this is Harry's story, she's writing the story from Harry's point of view not from the Weasley's one, you are focusing only on the Weasley, if Ron would mature he would understand, furthermore I don't believe that Ron is deeply in love, he has a crush that doesn't mean being in love.
In Rowling’s world things has never been easy and love has never been easy as well.

Mirtilla

PS nice posts Harmonias

[GryffindorGr]

by Perdita:
It’s good to see that this time around, the fact that affection exists in many different types of relationships, whether between humans or humans and objects, is being acknowledged in your post. Previously, it appeared that, by your omissions, you were discussing affection as if it were synonymous with filial love exclusively, which it isn’t.

Oh, no, my first post on the 4 loves was just to show the relationship to the Weasley family and their importance with Harry and note too I also included Hermione for she, as much as the Weasleys are very important in his life. I just basically simplified it without getting too detailed over it. Presenting a short one sentence explanation on each love level Harry has achieved with them.


the Need-love, I agree that Harry does experience the need for love. When Lewis opened his chapter on affection, he did mention that storge is the Greek equivalent. Later on, he challenges that assumption by saying:

Quote:
Lewis:
But I must at once correct myself. I am talking of Affection as it is when it exists apart form the other loves. It often does so exist; often not. As gin is not only a drink in itself but also a base for many mixed drinks, so Affection, besides being a love itself, can enter into the other loves and colour them (33)[.]


That confirms what I said earlier, affection can be inserted in all forms of the other loves.
Quote by me: There are many definitions of affection, even affection for your pets, and can also be for friendship love. So it varies. But in this context, as I said, I’m using the affection for parental need that Harry gets from Sirius, Mr. and Mrs. Weasley. They form a great need of mentor influence for him. DD does to a point I suppose but he’s been disappearing a lot in OotP, only to give information to Harry at the end. I suppose in Lewis’s explanation of the gin drink being a base for many mixed drinks would be this:
http://www.drinkstreet.com/category.cgi?category=8
so you have affection with parents, animals, inanimate objects and so forth. I could add in Harry’s affection with Hedwig, and his broom? (I really never thought about him being attached to anything materialistic)


Quote:
Originally Posted by GryffindorGr
I’d have to disagree about the lover-lover part for it hasn’t been confirmed yet as to any passion or budding romance between Harry and Hermione. (though pervading yes but read on as to why I disagree) I did ask earlier if there’s proof that Harry treats Ginny as a sister or essentially like Hermione. The continued concern that Hermione dotes on Harry, which I have seen on many of the quotes inserted throughout these posts, the worry, the hug, the kiss on the cheek, etc, these things I see as proof of sister-brother, friend-friend relationship thus far. There’s nothing proven yet of a romance. It’s merely speculation.
Quote by Perdita:
If you could, please, re-read my post. No where in my post did I say that Harry and Hermione share romantic love. I am in agreement with many other shippers here that what we have between Harry and Hermione is "Platonic," and that is the foundation for romantic love to “bud” later on.

Oh, don’t worry, I did read it; I was just inserting my disagreement anyway. I merely wanted to comment on the lover-lover, which doesn’t necessarily pervade from affection. In the context of what we’re discussing in that sentence, I’ll go back to my quote from above with Harry and Hermiones present relationship.

Quote:
With Hermione, like I said above. I can copy paste all the quotes from the love thread in which most have presented as evidence to show Hermione’s care and affection.
True. Hermione’s behaviour towards Harry does show a lot of affection, but that doesn’t automatically make her relationship with Harry equate to that of sisterly love. Affection permeates many different types of relationships.

In this context, I wanted to present that her concern and affection can be equated to a sisterly kind, even as far as a motherly manner.


Quote:
Yes, you’re right, he does not think of Ginny the way he does of Hermione. But I disagree where you say he does not think of Ginny at all. He does have deep concern for her despite his self centeredness. He asks how she is in the beginning of OotP for one.
Quote by Perdita:
Right, Harry has thought of Ginny, on occasion, wondering about her welfare. When I said “at all,” I meant it as a hyperbole. The fact of the matter is that Harry does not think of her all that much, which is probably why he didn’t remember that she was also trapped in the Chamber of Secrets back in book 2. Furthermore, does not his concern with Hermione surface more frequently than it does with Ginny? Does not his concern with Hermione’s view of him and his accomplishments overtake his occassional and casual concern over Ginny’s welfare?


He didn’t remember? How so? What really stood out was this, p.219, CoS. British Edition: Harry could see the sun sinking, blood red, below the skyline. This was the worst he had ever felt.
I thought that was so significant because JKR used imagery, deep colorful metaphors which explained the need and the horror he felt. Blood red, the image of life, like a pulsating life force, and the sinking sun, his sign is of the sun. The sinking into the horizon for instance, shows us even as a 12 year old how powerful this is.

I won’t disagree with you on how he feels about Hermione’s safety as well. I have read the concerns he has felt with Hermione as much as I have read those of his of Ron’s, the feeling of his breath not being able to come into his lungs type of imagery, yet it’s not the same as the blood red and the sun sinking below the skyline. Both are powerful, but in its individual way, different.



Quote:
From what I said in my posts that the insertion of the Weasleys by JKR is huge reason enough that Harry fulfills many of these fine 4 great loves. Harry is coming of age and the great probability of his continued presence with the Weasleys affections will open his eyes to passion, realizing lastly, the girl who has always loved him. (I beg to disagree that everyone thinks Ginny’s love has diminished just because she dates. A girl does not go chasing after a boy this way, she keeps it inside of herself, just like a diary. Note too that Harry gives Ginny his Lockhart collection in CoS, which could be a foreshadowing of his heart in a lock until the key is opened.) By the way, Charity can be with all the 4 loves.
QUOTE by Perdita:
I think Sirius, Mr and Mrs Weasley, but she in particular, could have been created to fulfill the aspect of Harry’s life that involves the need of a parent’s love.
However, I doubt that JKR intends for Harry to receive all of the four types of love from the Weasley family alone. Would you contend with the possibility that Harry is supposed to find Eros with someone outside of the Weasley family – whether that be Cho, Hermione or Luna? Of the four girls, Hermione seems the most likely because she has shown a lot of affection with, as well as received a lot of affection from Harry. This is one aspect of Harry and Hermione’s relationship that is not present in his relationships with Luna or Ginny. With Cho, I’ll allow it since she was his crush and they did date.

How so? His feelings for Sirius and Mr. and Mrs Weasley are different on a certain level/degree and to think that only Hermione can fulfill everything, including parental guidance is discounting the need for other types of love. It’s nearly selfish. No offense to your thinking, of course, but I just disagree. There is plenty of room for all kinds of love and that doesn’t have to be with one person, you can’t grow with that. A person needs affection from those around him, that take as much as receive. There’s always room for growth, and room to make others grow as well.

As for the eros love, I wanted to present my case that because Ginny too is the only girl in the Weasley family, JKR had her as a purpose and because many of you feel that having a “crush” is insignificant and shallow, JKR I believe wanted to present this as a way for young girls to have an association with Ginny. Yet, I don’t feel that she had a “crush”, I felt that Ginny’s love was deeper than that, and even deeper still because of the psychological trauma she had endured during CoS. The secrets that she alone had to keep, even between her and Harry, they kept a truce of great importance—the connection to Voldemort, Harry’s prime reason to eliminate in the end.


As for the Lockhart books, let us remember that Harry never wanted those books in the first place. When Lockhart gave them to Harry, he did so to gain attention from the press, to make people think that he was a generous person. Throughout book 2, Harry did not grow to like and respect Lockhart the man. The fact that Harry was so eager to give away the books, regardless of the fact that he knew Lockhart would not be returning to Hogwarts to teach the following year, since his fraudulent exploits had been uncovered, is an indication that Harry does not care for the books. As such, does he care for the fact that Ginny now has them? They are objects that Harry did not want in the first place, objects that he did not grow to appreciate, and they would have been a reminder of the horrible time that he had spent in Lockhart’s company. Does this make a positive piece of evidence for the HMS Chocolate? I would hope not, but that’s just me.


The foreshadowing of Lockhart was not to focus on the man who gave it to Harry, who in turn to you, never wanted it. I didn’t see it that he didn’t want it specifically, I believe he could probably use that in the future for reference. After all, Lockhart did not write them himself. He had professionals write them. I doubt if Harry would throw away good information like that.
My reasoning in this, is a perfect example of the use of Lockhart, and you know we have around the forums, threads, discovered that names are very important in JKR’s writing. Hermione for instance has been clearly speculated from Winters tale and Greek Mythology, and too, I have seen theories written on Hermione’s namesake. This is the same for Lily’s name coming from purity, etc.
And yes, it is a positive piece for the HMS chocolate. I haven’t seen anyone present it except for me yet so perhaps they have already thought of it?
I think it’s a perfect example of keeping Harry’s heart in a lock.
Basically saying, keep it safe until I am ready for you.


Quote:
I agree with both Plato and Lewis yet I have read Plato’s works more than I have read Lewis. Does it? I mean about Plato? Growing into Eros? I disagree. Plato does not advocate the passion kind of love although he does acknowledge it but he does not use that in terms of his philosophy. Plato says that truth is knowable and universal ideology about the profound and impassioned nature of man can be known through rationale. Aristotle says that man is an animal, and that the real world is only knowable through your sense perceptions. Plato’s philosophy mainly is of a more Apollonian virtue. If you want to compare and contrast, Aristotle dwells more on the dramatics and passion, saying that without passion we would not be able to purge and grow our imagination. Plato’s ideas were to prevent that kind in order to have a systematic approach to society, which is good in a way but many disagree therefore that is where Aristotle comes in.

QUOTE By Perdita:

When I mentioned Plato, I was referring to “platonic” love as it was examined in [u]The Symposium[/b]. Whether "platonic" love precludes romantic love, or results from it, the point I am trying to make is that it does not exclude romantic love.

Platonic love is a pure, spiritual affection, and does exclude romanticism. Because romance is fanciful, amorous, unrealistic, and extravagant.

[sone]

I never thought before that Harry might be a metamorphmagus, but then I thought of that time in Book 1 when Aunt Petunia gave Harry a maliciously hideous haircut and Harry made his hair grow back overnight. I wonder if that's a first step.. hmm.. JKR doesn't write filler so I'm sure her mentioning that Tonks is a metamorphmagus will come into play somehow, in regards to Harry.

Yep...that what I was trying to say several post ago...Harry is not an entirely pureblood as Malfoys...and that is a good idea...Harry as a metamorphomagus...mmm...yep...it could be sooo possible

Well, the interesting part to me concerning what Harry did in PS/SS is that when Tonks first shows herself to be a metamorphmagus, she manipulates her hair and not her nose or any other part of her body. To me, that is the first clue to the possibility that Harry may be one too. How Tonks changed her appearance also explains why Harry has not done it often. It takes a a bit of concentration and focus. Harry would have to do the same and other than that atrocious haircut had no reason to do so otherwise. I also remember that Harry actually liked the lighting bolt shaped scar on his forehead which is why he never tried to make it go away (though he may not be able to since it is not an ordinary scar). Anyway I feel Tonks' ability will definitely play a part in Harry's future and their relationship.

I still think that Harry will get the bulk of his estate.

I agree. Sirius did not sit in that house and do nothing. It would not be like him at all. He would go stir crazy. I think he made sure that in case anything happened to him, the estate would go to Harry. 12G is headquarters for the Order of the Phoenix. Imagine what would happen if the entire black estate ended up in Narcissa's or Bellatrix's hands. I'm sure Sirius found some way to keep it away from them. If anybody needs the estate, it is not them. I also feel that Harry himself will have to go back to Gringott's which I think is where Harry will run into Fleur Delacour again seeing as she works there. It will be most interesting to see her reaction to him.

ETA:

Great posts Perdita , noddwyd and Mirtilla :tu: :tu: :tu:

[lauradonaghy]

Perdita It is certainly likely that JKR intends Harry to receive all types of love from the Weasleys, imo. I think it is very telling that we have the Weasleys being developed in great detail (all of them), while we know next to nothing about Hermione's parents.
HAng on, so you think Hermione has no kind of love to offer him at all? I'm sorry but I find that more than a little hard to believe.

Since Harry is an orphan and it is possible to conclude that his greatest desire is to become a part of the family; it is logical that JKR is developing the Weasleys in such detail that he will officially become part of the family by marrying into it.
Logical, more like contrived. If Harry marries into the Weasley family, then where is Hermione? Out in the cold? And if (as many H/Gers think) she also becomes a Weasley, then... it all seems extremely "we're all one Big Happy Family" - sickening.

That would be an emotionally satisfying ending to the series, as we feel affection for and know all about them in detail - the Weasleys and Ginny.
I'm a hopeless romantic at the best of times but the idea of the trio all ending up related by marriage is just plain sappy, and completely out of style for JKR.

Also, I think JKR writing H/Hr would certainly put a damper on Ron and Harry's friendship at this point. Ron has romantic feelings for Hermione, whether he realizes it fully right now or not
I thought his anti-Krum rant was confirmation of his recognition of his feelings.

Just look at how he reacted to the possibility that H/Hr might have kissed; instant jealousy, which was calmed down when he realized that it wasn't true. It is hard to imagine JKR breaking up the Trio's friendship over a sordid love triangle. Anyway, imo, Ron cares for Hermione romantically and an H/Hr relationship could possibly cut off Harry and Hermione from the Weasleys.
Or Ron could wise up and learn to accept it. He was jealous, yes, but so would Harry be if Ron and Hermione got together. Wouldn't that break up the trio?

Does this make logical sense that JKR would write H/Hr from this viewpoint?
Yes. It would prove Ron's maturity and thereby strengthen Ron's friendship with Harry.

An H/Hr romantic relationship, imo, could possibly cut Harry off from the love that Harry receives from the Weasley family, which incidentally, Hermione would be included in if R/Hr happened.
Why would they alienate him just for dating Hermione? He would still be Ron's friend, and he is Ginny's even though she knows he's not interested.

Harry could have given the books to Ron, who is just as poor as Ginny. Harry has observed the poverity of the Weasley and knows that this is Ginny's first year. I think it was a nice act to give these to her, knowing it's her first year at school and it sets up the "Look Potter, "you've got yourself a girlfriend"" scene, which I do feel is foreshadowing for H/G.
The books had nothing to do with the Malfoy line - Lockhart set it up. He dumped them in Ginny cauldron because she was the only person carrying one - he could hardly shove them into Ron's arms... giving them to Ginny was most convenient.

[sone]

He dumped them in Ginny cauldron because she was the only person carrying one - he could hardly shove them into Ron's arms... giving them to Ginny was most convenient.

Not to mention Ginny needed the most materials out of the entire family. She might as well get the books from that narcissistic idiot Lockhart for free. But that who Harry is. He is very considerate of other people.

[GryffindorGr]

AllanTheGreat
To simplify it. Lol. :)

The four loves:

Eros (romantic) love: basically the love your parents should have.
When they go out on romantic dinners, moonlight walks, expressing it with flowers and silly notes on bathroom mirrors and refrigerator doors. lol.
Fanciful love. The kind of love we're talking about here on the love thread.

Affection(also could be parental, or affection for your pets,etc) love:
this love can be for your friends, family, your dog, cat, even your car.

Charity love: This one achieves all levels, and the highest and divine love: Usually an achievement when God touches you spiritually.

Friendship love: Basically, the love between you and your friends, just to break it down. I suppose each friend gives you something another friend doesnt, but there is love and understanding between you and them.It's basically brotherly/sisterly love. The way Harry/Ron/Hermione feel right now.

[Mirtilla]

Originally posted by GryffindorGr
Platonic love is a pure, spiritual affection, and does exclude romanticism. Because romance is fanciful, amorous, unrealistic, and extravagant.

Not exactly, Platonic love can't exist without corporeity and romanticism because everything start from them in order to transcend them and to know the true love and the ideal beauty, the true love from Plato is the desire of the beauty, of the good, of the knowledge, of the happiness.

Platonic love can't exclude romantic love because it's where it starts, it's like a stair, the romantic love it's only the first step to reach the ideal beauty of Plato's philosophy.



Thanks sone, good post yourself!

Mirtilla

[GryffindorGr]

Not exactly, Platonic love can't exist without corporeity and romanticism because everything start from them in order to transcend them and to know the true love, the true love from Plato is the desire of the beauty, of the good, of the knowledge, of the happiness.

Mirtilla

Okay, you must not know Plato very well. The romantic and beauty discussed in philosophy by Plato is a different matter. We can discuss Platos terminology of beauty and most importantly, beauty by other philosophers.
Do you realize, they have an entire semester course in University classes just discussing on beauty and the separation of beauty as an aesthetic form?
No, romantic love is different. Has always been. My goodness, I feel like i'm in philosophy class again. lol.
If I dont reply quickly its because I need a break from all this philosophical stuff but i'll be back :)

[Charmed Cheese]

Great posts everyone!

I'm not going to say anything regarding the current debate, however, because I've come to loath the word "platonic" and wish to avoid any discussion about it. :p It's that feeling you get when you eat too much of a particular food and an can no longer even smell it.

I'm still paying attention to the debate and will offer my input when I see something that strikes my interest. :)

[Mirtilla]

Originally posted by GryffindorGr
Okay, you must not know Plato very well. The beauty in philosophy by Plato is a different matter. We can discuss Platos terminology of beauty and most importantly, beauty by other philosophers.
Do you realize, they have an entire semester course in University classes just discussing on beauty and the separation of beauty as an aesthetic form?
No, romantic love is different. Has always been. My goodness, I feel like i'm in philosophy class again. lol.

I'm studying Plato during these months at school, I frequent what in USA it's called High school, anyway I can image that at University classes they discuss on beauty.
I started only to study philosophy this year so I know only the thoughts only from the philosophers before Plato.
Anyway the term Platonic Love as something that has nothing to do with corporeity it's only a misunderstanding of the original thoughts of Plato.
I could see why you're saying that romantic love is different, but isn't the romantic love as true love the greatest form of happiness?

Mirtilla

[Perdita]

AllantheGreat,
It's not possible to explain what the four loves are, according to Lewis. If you really want to learn about it, you could PM me, or better yet, get your hands on a copy of the book and read it yourself. It's very thin, and Lewis' writing is very easy to read.

Hi Prongs, Sr.,

Perdita
It is certainly likely that JKR intends Harry to receive all types of love from the Weasleys, imo. I think it is very telling that we have the Weasleys being developed in great detail (all of them), while we know next to nothing about Hermione's parents. Harry has not, in fact, been introduced to them, which is disappointing in my viewpoint, nor has he visited her home; and with the danger of Voldemort on the loose, it seems less likely that he will go there because of safety reasons.
Good point, Prongs, but I think that the fact that Harry goes to school with many of the Weasley children, that Mr and Mrs Weasley are both from the Wizarding World, and that large parts of the story take place in the Wizarding World, allowing the reader to get to know all members of the Weasley family is unavoidable. Fleshing out the Weasley family and showing us a lot of interaction between them and Harry is more of a plot device.

One reason why I don’t think that JKR intends for the Weasleys to be the all-encompassing structure in Harry’s life, both emotionally and socially, is because after 5 books, we still have yet to see it this relationship develop into anything more than friendly and familial. Not only has JKR not encouraged the H/G ship to develop in OOTP, she has, in fact, shown us that there is no interest amongst those two characters to form a ship.

Since Harry is an orphan and it is possible to conclude that his greatest desire is to become a part of the family; it is logical that JKR is developing the Weasleys in such detail that he will officially become part of the family by marrying into it. That would be an emotionally satisfying ending to the series, as we feel affection for and know all about them in detail - the Weasleys and Ginny.
Consider this:
after reading through five books where Hermione has been a major influence in Harry’s life, how will it be satisfying to all of a sudden watch her character being shunted aside and deserted in the background? How will it be satisfying to see Ginny, a character who has not played an important role in Harry’s life, to all of a sudden take over the role of being his ultimate partner? I can't see her with Ron either, for all the reasons that she gives us in the books. She doesn't like Ron, even though she knows that he likes her.

This scenario seems extremely contrived to me.

Also, I think JKR writing H/Hr would certainly put a damper on Ron and Harry's friendship at this point. Ron has romantic feelings for Hermione, whether he realizes it fully right now or not. Just look at how he reacted to the possibility that H/Hr might have kissed; instant jealousy, which was calmed down when he realized that it wasn't true. It is hard to imagine JKR breaking up the Trio's friendship over a sordid love triangle. Anyway, imo, Ron cares for Hermione romantically and an H/Hr relationship could possibly cut off Harry and Hermione from the Weasleys. Does this make logical sense that JKR would write H/Hr from this viewpoint?
If JKR does write H/Hr, would it not be possible for Ron to come to terms with it by the end of book 7, and accept the reality that Harry and Hermione bring out the best in each other as a couple, moreso than if they were separate or with other partners? By realizing the H/Hr ship, JKR might not necessarily destroy the Trio’s friendship. It could actually grow into something even stronger than anything they share before because of Ron’s acceptance of the H/Hr love, along with his security in knowing that he has two amazing people as his best friends.

ETA:
Noddwyd, I really like that post you made earlier. In particular, I like the link you made between the knife being destroyed, Sirius' death, and Harry carrying the guilt.

It's interesting that we saw H/R attempt to open it together, but not H/Hr or R/Hr, whether through physical or magical means. Even still, knowing that Harry and Hermione are both very skilled in magical ability, maybe if they tried together, they might find success.

And thanks, Grace Granger.

[FlyingPhoenix]

noddwyd as I did read your post you know I started to think some certain things. Just let look at it. Harry trys it as first to open the door. Reminds me at the beginning of the books as Harry was alone and tried to get affection but didn't get it from the Dusleys. Then Ron comes to aid. If you like Harry's first real friend. We are still in PS/SS as Ron and Harry are alone and yet again Harry can't open what he desire (mirror).
Hermione joins them this is exactly the mirror scene of PS/SS as she cried stand aside to open the door. Yet again she can't help Harry with her knowledge. Cause she did only offer her knowledge there. Now we make a jump to PoA as Harry got to know Sirius but yet again Harry did not get what he desired. Yet again he can't open the door. We are techniquel not at book4 nor book5. What Harry needed, something he dearly wanted through the book5 is Hermione's affection. That she feels for him, react like him. He don't expect this from Ron not once. But from Hermione. Should let you wonder why though.

It is certainly likely that JKR intends Harry to receive all types of love from the Weasleys, imo. I think it is very telling that we have the Weasleys being developed in great detail (all of them), while we know next to nothing about Hermione's parents.

Indeed very telling because Harry is not suppose to adopt a family, he is suppose to fall for that girl. Parents, background would just let drift apart this certain affection from the person who should get it. In that point Hermione. Its nearly clear that the Granger might not survive the war. The lack of knowing them let Harry only feel for Hermione. Its supposed to be like that because its about between Harry and Hermione not any family in the background.

Since Harry is an orphan and it is possible to conclude that his greatest desire is to become a part of the family; it is logical that JKR is developing the Weasleys in such detail that he will officially become part of the family by marrying into it. That would be an emotionally satisfying ending to the series, as we feel affection for and know all about them in detail - the Weasleys and Ginny.

Harry don't need Ginny anymore to be a part of the Weasleys cause he already is. No reason for H/g, not a single moment long JKR made this through Mrs Weasley very clear.

Also, I think JKR writing H/Hr would certainly put a damper on Ron and Harry's friendship at this point.

Remember the chapter "Parting ways" in GoF? Harry didn't mind to cry in front of all people who were there but Ron. Ron didn't seem to fit there. The chapters name is there a very telling name, indeed. The time Ron was a depending person for Harry might be over. It might be they ways do indeed part and they are no longer that close friends. Between Harry and Neville is right now growing a bound which might get stronger at the same time the one between Ron and Harry gos weaker. In OotP we have another sign for that the splitting up of the trio. Now instead of Ron, Neville is there.
I wouldn't rule out that JKR is changing the trio. If you believe it or not there are signs for that.
Still Ron will always remain Harrys friend but more at one level with Luna and Ginny.

Great post there Harmonias :clap:

[Grace Granger]

It is certainly likely that JKR intends Harry to receive all types of love from the Weasleys, imo. I think it is very telling that we have the Weasleys being developed in great detail (all of them), while we know next to nothing about Hermione's parents. Harry has not, in fact, been introduced to them, which is disappointing in my viewpoint, nor has he visited her home; and with the danger of Voldemort on the loose, it seems less likely that he will go there because of safety reasons.

So the Weasley's are the only people who have been developed in "great detail" (and not "all of them" because we don't know much about Charlie and Bill) who can love Harry? Then what is the purpose of having any other supporting characters who have developed as well and have shown Harry love.

In regards to Hermione's parents JKR has said:

1)They're boring which she 2) may have really meant or 3) is trying to deviate us from some plot that concerns them.


Since Harry is an orphan and it is possible to conclude that his greatest desire is to become a part of the family; it is logical that JKR is developing the Weasleys in such detail that he will officially become part of the family by marrying into it. That would be an emotionally satisfying ending to the series, as we feel affection for and know all about them in detail - the Weasleys and Ginny.

I honestly don't think that Harry needs to be officially part of the Weasley family by marrying Ginny when JKR has clearly shown us that he is already accept as one, even if he doesn't feel much apart of it. You obviously have a great love for the Weasleys, but they're not the only characters in the book that we feel affection towards. I don't think that having Harry becoming apart of the Weasley family would be emotionally satisfying at all.


Also, I think JKR writing H/Hr would certainly put a damper on Ron and Harry's friendship at this point. Ron has romantic feelings for Hermione, whether he realizes it fully right now or not. Just look at how he reacted to the possibility that H/Hr might have kissed; instant jealousy, which was calmed down when he realized that it wasn't true. It is hard to imagine JKR breaking up the Trio's friendship over a sordid love triangle. Anyway, imo, Ron cares for Hermione romantically and an H/Hr relationship could possibly cut off Harry and Hermione from the Weasleys. Does this make logical sense that JKR would write H/Hr from this viewpoint?

An H/Hr romantic relationship, imo, could possibly cut Harry off from the love that Harry receives from the Weasley family, which incidentally, Hermione would be included in if R/Hr happened.

Seriously, if Ron lets something like that get in between his friendship, then he deserves to be alone and miserable. He needs to grow up. He cannot have everything. And if the Weasley's don't accept Harry and Hermione because they broke Ronniekins heart, then H/Hr are better off without them. Who needs such a negative impact on a relationship?

And to the part that is in bold: Yes it would if JKR wants to make it as realistic as possible. Sometimes the love of one is all you need, than the love of many.

[Barbara Kennedy]

Hang on, so you think Hermione has no kind of love to offer him at all? I'm sorry but I find that more than a little hard to believe.

I agree on this point. Hermione shows love in many ways, primarily in her concern for BOTH Ron and Harry, as well as Neville and her other friends.


Logical, more like contrived. If Harry marries into the Weasley family, then where is Hermione? Out in the cold? And if (as many H/Gers think) she also becomes a Weasley, then... it all seems extremely "we're all one Big Happy Family" - sickening.

I'm a hopeless romantic at the best of times but the idea of the trio all ending up related by marriage is just plain sappy, and completely out of style for JKR.

How does simply disparaging this outcome make it unlikely? It seems like a wonderful outcome for all concerned, to me. Is this what makes it 'unlikely' to you, the fact that it a 'happy ending?' Your position would seem much stronger and more secure if you did not resort to insult to try to make your point. Keep an open mind. It is in the rules, after all.



I thought his anti-Krum rant was confirmation of his recognition of his feelings.


Or Ron could wise up and learn to accept it. He was jealous, yes, but so would Harry be if Ron and Hermione got together. Wouldn't that break up the trio?

Why do you assume Harry would be jealous if Hermione chose Ron?
It is just as likely that Harry would be delighted that they have each other. Why do you not grant that Harry is mature enough to see the possibility?



Why would they alienate him just for dating Hermione? He would still be Ron's friend, and he is Ginny's even though she knows he's not interested.

I do not believe the Weasleys would turn their backs on Harry, no matter who he chose to date. They would be delighted if he was happy. Do not sell their love for him short either.


The books had nothing to do with the Malfoy line - Lockhart set it up. He dumped them in Ginny cauldron because she was the only person carrying one - he could hardly shove them into Ron's arms... giving them to Ginny was most convenient.

Perhaps her cauldron was convenient, but several people were standing very close at the time too. He could have handed them off to any of them as easily. Give us alternates if his choice of giving them to Ginny was for no reason.

[FlyingPhoenix]

Why do you assume Harry would be jealous if Hermione chose Ron?

Its because in OotP Harry seemed as if he had a problem that Ron and Hermione where at 12G without him. Be aware it did never happen before that Hermione did spend 2 weeks alone with Ron. Its highly possible that Harry didn't like it that Hermione was with Ron alone. He was angry and probably jealousy but at what? Being at 12G, being not with his friends or because Hermione did spend those 2 weeks at 12G. I doubt Harry had ever react like that if Hermione did araive like Harry just one day earlier. He did feel left out. Something he is not used to be. Through all books Hermione seems more to worry about Harry. After a time I can promise you, you are that used to it its hard to let it again slip away. And those two weeks where just a taste what might happen.
If you don't get the kind of affection you was used to and in that case a lot affection by Hermione then you react jealousy and Harry did react already like that heaviely IMO. He did even dream how he is left out, It did bother Harry that Ron and Hermione share something together without Him (prefect). Though it should have been him.
Harry didn't know why he did suddenly care. The answer would be the fear to lose affection which he was used to since book1.
There exist a certain procent that this fears of loseing affection is the reason why Harry was more angry with Hermione. Suddenly Harry couldn't stand anymore if Ron and Hermione did bicker.
Do you know what bickering means? Hermione's attention is at Ron. This does it mean. Harry tirns out to be more argumentive, seems to search her closeness her advice. IMO someone who search Hermione's affection., someone who don't want lose any bit of this closeness. Yeah if Hr/r then this will cause more trouble as you might even imagine.

[Perdita]

Nice posts, all around!

I see that GryffindorGr made an attempt to explain the four loves. That was well done, but I would still urge anyone who is interested to read the book. What Lewis says is so complex and has so many levels.

Also, for the sake of this discussion, let's not go telling others how smart they are and whatnot. If I interpreted a text or a passage incorrectly, I'd like to be corrected, but not to be told that I don't know so and so. This can get us into trouble because it will only offend other people when they read it.

Plato's Symposium is very complex, even more than The Four Loves. An interpretation can be deemed right or not, depending on how deep one explores the topics that Socrates-Diotima discussed.

Romantic love cannot be excluded from "platonic" love because it is the model of love that can allow two people to experience the greatness and power of creating life, which is what the gods (God) did. It affords humans the luxury of being "immortal." If GryffindorGr or Mirtilla have the text on hand, check out section 207.

Ultimately, the message seemed to be that "platonic" love is the pursuit of the truth, and this is not just any truth, but spiritual truth. In the pursuit of truth, together, two people can become so close in spirit that physical desire will not have to be present to bond them. Note, it does not have to be present, not it must be absent.

And thanks, sone.

[noddwyd]

noddwyd as I did read your post you know I started to think some certain things. Just let look at it. Harry trys it as first to open the door. Reminds me at the beginning of the books as Harry was alone and tried to get affection but didn't get it from the Dusleys. Then Ron comes to aid. If you like Harry's first real friend. We are still in PS/SS as Ron and Harry are alone and yet again Harry can't open what he desire (mirror).
Hermione joins them this is exactly the mirror scene of PS/SS as she cried stand aside to open the door. Yet again she can't help Harry with her knowledge. Cause she did only offer her knowledge there. Now we make a jump to PoA as Harry got to know Sirius but yet again Harry did not get what he desired. Yet again he can't open the door. We are techniquel not at book4 nor book5. What Harry needed, something he dearly wanted through the book5 is Hermione's affection. That she feels for him, react like him. He don't expect this from Ron not once. But from Hermione. Should let you wonder why though.

Ah, you're right about that. Hermione telling them to move out of the way was very reminiscent of PS, and their episode with Fluffy. And that is true, he didn't feel comfortable with Ron in that situation. They're just not as close anymore, really, after GoF. And his using Sirius's penknife melting also marks Harry's loss of that connection with him through Sirius's death. But it wasn't enough to unlock this power of Harry's completely, either. Though it did keep him safe from Voldemort for now.

I am starting to get the feeling that Harry may start to lose his love for flying in the book six. At least at first. He's been hurt pretty badly by Sirius's death, and is now plagued by the prophecy as well. He has a lot to think about.

[Barbara Kennedy]

You could very well be right FlyingPhoenix, but it could be likely that Harry felt safe at lashing out at Hermione as a friend because he was feeling very isolated from ALL his friends, not just Ron and Hermione.

He just expected Hermione to understand this better than Ron would. Especially given the fact that Ron has never been isolated like that. He has people around him all the time. He comes from a large family.

Hermione, being an only child, might possibly understand the lonely and isolated feeling Harry was experiencing over the summer.

[xray]

As for Barbara's suggestion - it seems fair enough. Why do the others get fancy names and Neutral just get known as Neutral? I am not sure why there are the categories that people fall into but I find myself distressed not to see the HMS Krinky. Grin. HMS Plato it is. As for other ships, I'm trying to keep it restricted to the Trio. Harry/?, Hermione/?, and Ron/? (but within reason... no Harry/GiantSquid nonsense). There's just too many other ships out there :( Perhaps I should have a category for "other" :)

[sone]

.... but it could be likely that Harry felt safe at lashing out at Hermione as a friend because he was feeling very isolated from ALL his friends, not just Ron and Hermione.

I thought about that too except from what I remembered from GoF. Hermione was the only one who really supported him through that troubled time he had. Others here and there believed him, but Hermione was with him the whole way. That mattered to Harry more than I think even he knows. If we look at the past books, Hermione was always with him. In OoTP, he feared that he would not have that support. Like FP said, you get used to it after so many years. The useless letters, the isolation of not being prefect, etc. It was like he felt he failed her. It was more a lash out at Hermione because she never left Harry before. Harry feels if Hermione doesn't support him then who is going to?

[canteurervan]

As I can see all H/Hr shippers have done well...great post :clap:

Originally posted by noddwyd:
I am starting to get the feeling that Harry may start to lose his love for flying in the book six. At least at first. He's been hurt pretty badly by Sirius's death, and is now plagued by the prophecy as well. He has a lot to think about.
I very much doubt this...it's true that Harry was mourning Sirius' death, but I can assure you next time once the ban is lifted, Qidditch will be the only thing Harry can get to in order to avoid unpleasantness...

Origianlly posted by Perdita:
Ultimately, the message seemed to be that "platonic" love is the pursuit of the truth, and this is not just any truth, but spiritual truth. In the pursuit of truth, together, two people can become so close in spirit that physical desire will not have to be present to bond them. Note, it does not have to be present, not it must be absent.
Ok, I don't think if anyone of us ever guess right what Rowling means by 'platonic' relationship it's not because we can't interpret it, but rather it's because we HAVE NO IDEA what Rowling really means. She might as well make a general statement to indicate that right now H/Hr are on the friendship terms, and possibly later they might develop more...Or, they could just be at the level of friendships due to the obligations (you figure out what obligations : Ron, prophecy, Molly, ...). Could someone next time having the chance talking to Rowling, demands a better and clear explanation???!!! :huh: . However, I personally still keep my position as H/Hr shipper...

Originally posted by FlyingPhoenix:
Its because in OotP Harry seemed as if he had a problem that Ron and Hermione where at 12G without him. Be aware it did never happen before that Hermione did spend 2 weeks alone with Ron. Its highly possible that Harry didn't like it that Hermione was with Ron alone. He was angry and probably jealousy but at what? Being at 12G, being not with his friends or because Hermione did spend those 2 weeks at 12G. I doubt Harry had ever react like that if Hermione did araive like Harry just one day earlier. He did feel left out. Something he is not used to be. Through all books Hermione seems more to worry about Harry. After a time I can promise you, you are that used to it its hard to let it again slip away. And those two weeks where just a taste what might happen.
If you don't get the kind of affection you was used to and in that case a lot affection by Hermione then you react jealousy and Harry did react already like that heaviely IMO. He did even dream how he is left out, It did bother Harry that Ron and Hermione share something together without Him (prefect). Though it should have been him.
Harry didn't know why he did suddenly care. The answer would be the fear to lose affection which he was used to since book1.
I definitely agree...However, upto the certain level of recognition from Harry towards the situation, I even doubt Harry have any idea what's he's reacting. That is to say that SUBCONSCIOUSLY Harry just acts frustratedly out of the situation, his EGO might not even recognize it.

Originally posted by Grace Granger:
Seriously, if Ron lets something like that get in between his friendship, then he deserves to be alone and miserable. He needs to grow up. He cannot have everything. And if the Weasley's don't accept Harry and Hermione because they broke Ronniekins heart, then H/Hr are better off without them. Who needs such a negative impact on a relationship?
Ok, I very much doubted this, even though I have no idea which ship are you supporting. Harry very often feels GUILTY. Many of his actions, if out of rage, will go on without obligations at all. However, those actions with his own CONSCIENCE-attached, Harry will be obliged to feel guilty and hence might not even do it...unless Harry's personality started to change...I do support H/Hr ship, but I don't believe that Harry will turn his back on the Weasly's family as much as on his own guilt.

Originally posted by Perdita:
after reading through five books where Hermione has been a major influence in Harry’s life, how will it be satisfying to all of a sudden watch her character being shunted aside and deserted in the background? How will it be satisfying to see Ginny, a character who has not played an important role in Harry’s life, to all of a sudden take over the role of being his ultimate partner? I can't see her with Ron either, for all the reasons that she gives us in the books. She doesn't like Ron, even though she knows that he likes her.
I certainly agree. Hermione will play a very important role in Harry's battle, she's been the intelligence backbone for Harry's actions. As I mentioned above, Harry's actions are very constantly out of his CONSCIENCE's control, and the Hermione's character has always been there to guide him. Ron is more like a buddy figure so that Harry, as a growing boy, could be friends with. But doing things as serious as matter of life and death, Hermione's part is way too important to ignore...

***van.

[Daveydee]

I was interested in the discussion of the locked door in the DoM. I posted some of this on the last thread.

I think that we shippers are all agreed that opening the door symbolises 'opening your heart' (something Dumbledore referred to in GoF), which is why as a group the sextet, or indeed the trio, could not enter the room (Note, in comparison, how the text emphasises the relative ease with which the group were able to open and enter all the other doors). There is only one thing which will truly open a door and that is a key. And I think that what this scene is telling us is that each one of the group needs a different key to open that door; each one of the group needs to find their own way of opening their heart, and what works for one will not work for the others. It's a very individual and personal thing, which each has to find for himself or herself. And for Harry, Ron and Hermione, those keys are not knives, brute force or spells.

Ron needs to find his own “ways”, and to escape the need to emulate those of other people – his brothers, Viktor Krum and Harry. Harry was unable to force the door open with his shoulder, Ron should know that the same tactic that failed Harry will not work for him.

Hermione needs to know that not everything in life can be achieved by what is learned from a book. This is the first time a spell has failed her. Moreover, she must come to realise that she cannot merely be dismissive of this failure. She must confront it.

Harry – well that seems a little less certain. But perhaps the knife is symbolic of his connection to Sirius and by extension, to his father. It’s destruction perhaps symbolises the need for Harry to look to the future for his key, and the need for him to realise that he will not find it in the past.

Just my take on the scene, which, incidentally, I feel is symbolic in its entirety rather than literal. In other words, I don't personally think that the door in the DoM will be revisited and actually opened. But then I might be wrong.

[BlackKnight86]

GryffindorGr
Okay, you must not know Plato very well. The romantic and beauty discussed in philosophy by Plato is a different matter. We can discuss Platos terminology of beauty and most importantly, beauty by other philosophers.

GryffindorGr, I think Perdita and Mirtilla follow Plato just fine. Defining love in neat little blocks (platonic love, romantic love, etc.) which never overlap is far too simplistic, and does no justice to Plato or to those who have followed him. There is no clear, solid boundary or separation between what is known as "platonic love" and what you call "romantic love"; in fact, your definition of "romantic love", while a fine working one, is by no means complete. This is a complex topic to which I could never do justice with a short forum post. However, let me give you a short quote from the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, at the website for the University of Tennessee at Martin:

The Nature of Love: Romantic Love

Romantic love is deemed to be of a higher metaphysical and ethical status than sexual or physical attractiveness alone. The idea of romantic love initially stems from the Platonic tradition that love is a desire for beauty-a value that transcends the particularities of the physical body. For Plato, the love of beauty culminates in the love of philosophy, the subject that pursues the highest capacity of men's thinking. The romantic love of knights and damsels emerged in the early medieval ages (11th Century France, fine amour) a philosophical echo of both Platonic and Aristotelian love and literally a derivative of the Roman poet, Ovid and his Ars Amatoria. Romantic love theoretically was not to be consummated, for such love was transcendental motivated by a deep respect for the lady; however, it was to be actively pursued in chivalric deeds rather than contemplated-which is in contrast to Ovid's persistent sensual pursuit of conquests!

Modern romantic love returns to Aristotle's version of the special love two people find in each other's virtues-one soul and two bodies, as he poetically puts it. It is deemed to be of a higher status, ethically, aesthetically, and even metaphysically than the love that behaviourists or physicalists describe.

(You had mentioned Aristotle; this illustrates that he and Plato were not as opposed in viewpoint as you might think.)

As you can see, there's quite a bit of overlap here; in fact, romantic love (depending on how it's defined, of course) can be said to be a derivative of platonic love. In any case, there's a lot more to this than meets the eye.

I'd also like to remind you that "platonic love" was not coined by Plato; it was coined by Marsilio Ficino in his Renaissance commentary on Plato's "Symposium" called "De Amore" (On Love). It's a good commentary; I highly recommend it. And I would love to discuss philosophy with you, if you'd like. Just let me know if you want any of the Internet sources, and I'll be happy to send them to you.


Charmed Cheese [emphasis and brackets mine]
I've come to loath [?] the word "platonic" and wish to avoid any discussion about it.

I'm curious, Charmed Cheese, as to how an English major could come to loathe an English word. I was a math major, yet I still found time to appreciate the beauty and richness of language. I wonder if you tell your professors that you are "loath" to write papers about subjects you "loathe".

And speaking of English, I'd also like to point out that the word "loath", which you use as a verb, is actually an adjective. Perhaps you meant to use the word "loathe". It's been my experience that learning the correct uses of words can help to forestall any "loathing" for them that may occur - why don't you give it a try?

Have a great day!

BlackKnight86

[giantsquid28]

Harry/?, Hermione/?, and Ron/? (but within reason... no Harry/GiantSquid nonsense).

Personally, I think we'd make a great couple. ;)


(I'm a girl, so this isn't a "slasher" comment)

[AllanTheGreat]

Thanks Perdita, I'll include the Four Loves in my next amazon.com buy.

And, I agree with you, Barbara, I believe that Hermione definitely knows how Harry feels, because Harry's an orphan and Hermione is an only child.

[Charmed Cheese]

Remember the chapter "Parting ways" in GoF? Harry didn't mind to cry in front of all people who were there but Ron. Ron didn't seem to fit there. The chapters name is there a very telling name, indeed. The time Ron was a depending person for Harry might be over. It might be they ways do indeed part and they are no longer that close friends. Between Harry and Neville is right now growing a bound which might get stronger at the same time the one between Ron and Harry gos weaker. In OotP we have another sign for that the splitting up of the trio. Now instead of Ron, Neville is there.
I wouldn't rule out that JKR is changing the trio. If you believe it or not there are signs for that.
Still Ron will always remain Harrys friend but more at one level with Luna and Ginny.

Actually, I understood it as a being 14 year old male behaviour. He didn't want to cry infront of Ron because Ron was another guy. Like most 14 year olds, he wants to look tough.
It's not because Ron didn't fit in or that he feels less close to Ron.

ETA
I'm curious, Charmed Cheese, as to how an English major could come to loathe an English word. I was a math major, yet I still found time to appreciate the beauty and richness of language. I wonder if you tell your professors that you are "loath" to write papers about subjects you "loathe".

And speaking of English, I'd also like to point out that the word "loath", which you use as a verb, is actually an adjective. Perhaps you meant to use the word "loathe". It's been my experience that learning the correct uses of words can help to forestall any "loathing" for them that may occur - why don't you give it a try?

1)Sorry, that was a typo. I'm quite aware of the difference between the two words.

2) I was joking. Even though I'm an English major, I still find the time to maintain a sense of humour.

Basically, I was saying that I'm sick of discussing the word platonic. I don't actually "loathe" the word. Moreover, I probably should have said I "loathe" the discussion on it. I hope that is more clear.

I do appreciate the richeness of language, but I'm also passionate enough about to have my likes and dislikes in literature. As an English major, I'm not obliged to like and agree with every English word written or every debate about it

I hope that satisfies your curiousity

[sone]

Personally, I think we'd make a great couple. ;)


(I'm a girl, so this isn't a "slasher" comment)

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

That's priceless!

Anyhow, welcome back BlackKnight86.

And, I agree with you, Barbara, I believe that Hermione definitely knows how Harry feels, because Harry's an orphan and Hermione is an only child.

Harry seems to be able to relate with almost anyone due to his burdens and experiences. It is just part of his personality.

[Rowena Ravenclaw]

And, I agree with you, Barbara, I believe that Hermione definitely knows how Harry feels, because Harry's an orphan and Hermione is an only child.

The two are hardly equivalent, though. After all, Hermione's got her parents (and even if she were to lose them, she'd still have years of memories Harry lacks). And thanks to Dudley, Harry has some idea of what it's like to have a sibling, albeit a thoroughly repellent one.

[noddwyd]

Davydee, what you refer to deals with finding yourself, and growing up really. Love is not always a central part of that process. Although sometimes the 'keys' to our soul are held by someone else, or they hold at least half of it. But one thing that stood out to me, about that door, was that it had no keyhole at all. But I've always loved the concept of halved keys, or maybe a key with more than two peices. The things you mention are indeed things that the trio will have to overcome, eventually. And you are right. Harry will not find himself by looking to the past, or looking to role models such as Sirius, or his father, or Dumbledore. He has to look inside himself. And I think he'll be quite surprised by what, or even I dare say who, he will find there.

[Perdita]

Remember the chapter "Parting ways" in GoF? Harry didn't mind to cry in front of all people who were there but Ron. Ron didn't seem to fit there. The chapters name is there a very telling name, indeed. The time Ron was a depending person for Harry might be over. It might be they ways do indeed part and they are no longer that close friends.
That’s a great catch, FP! Could this be one of the indications that signal a change in their friendship, because really, the change occurred when they first had the argument at the beginning of the book. This scene near the end could be seen as a subtle indicator that, although Harry and Ron have “made up,” the trust and confidence in one another will never be the same as it used to. Ron’s tentativeness when approaching a touchy subject with Harry throughout OOTP certainly supports this notion.

Between Harry and Neville is right now growing a bound which might get stronger at the same time the one between Ron and Harry gos weaker. In OotP we have another sign for that the splitting up of the trio. Now instead of Ron, Neville is there.
Mhm! I agree.

Why do you assume Harry would be jealous if Hermione chose Ron?
It is just as likely that Harry would be delighted that they have each other. Why do you not grant that Harry is mature enough to see the possibility?
At the beginning of OOTP, we saw glimpses of this. Some interpret Harry’s remarks to be strictly about the fact that he was suffering alone, while Ron and Hermione had each other’s company. However, his repeated questioning of what they were doing during this time at 12GP, even after Ron had told him, can be seen as an indication that Harry doesn’t quite trust him. Harry doesn’t think that it’s as simple as “helping Mrs. Weasley,” and that idea angered him considerably. The important thing is, this scene is not as simple as it seems. It raises a few questions about what motivated Harry to react so strongly. There is room to develop a Jealous Harry plotline.

Like FP said, you get used to it after so many years. The useless letters, the isolation of not being prefect, etc. It was like he felt he failed her. It was more a lash out at Hermione because she never left Harry before. Harry feels if Hermione doesn't support him then who is going to?
Precisely, sone.

BlackKnight86, welcome back! :clap:

[canteurervan]

Let me say a fair word, though still to defend H/Hr ship anyway, that GoF has been the most confusing book Rowling has ever created so far. The complexity as well as the in-depth tanglement of events are ambiguous; hence, normally fans do not how deep are they supposed to analyse and critically think for the sake of their own arguements.

From the smooth surface of the storyline, specifically GoF, R/Hr claims that Rowling is "buying fish from the supermarket". That is, whatever is displayed out on the shelves are all what customers can put their hands on. It's a reality that fans should be concerned about, R/Hr shippers suggest. Pointers of naive and pickling arguments of the typical youth, as R/Hr, that display the emotional twinklings for later. The growing romance of R/Hr is symbolized as simple naive protests, first, of two independent friends, Ron & Hermione, over insignificant matters. The growing tension over dispatchs of insignificant disagreements is the theme for arugments all along.

However, should we all dig the Rowling's intentional sways of misleadings in her books a bit further?. Fascinating books they are, no doubt about it. Should we believe that at a deeper level of perception of Rowling's books we could actually reveal the true secrets that Rowling intentionally wanted to hide? No matter how complex an art work, there must be ways unlock the powerful embedded intention of the author, well relatively. HP isn't as ambiguous as Hamlet where as controversial as the spiritual theme sets up as many directions of interpertations as there are critics in the field. HP, fortunately, has been set up in such a clever and deceitful way that the so-called, clues, have been the focus of exciting analysis of amature critics - fans. There have been pieces of evidence, which as many of us have become accustomed to believing to be true, that Rowling has devised a very smart and tactful storyline where events are inter-related at high level of intelligence and complexity. Though, HP series were only intended for the youth reading group, the engagement of older folks in the series have been displayed in public to be no less significant. All these evidences have pointed back to the point of the extent of analysis of given clues of the books that fans should be engaged in. Therefore, I suggest that a deeper and wide range of analysis be taken into account to consider the possibilities of Rowling's intentions for the coming books. As a result, R/Hr ship is a mere deceit of writing tactics that might have been planted there in the first place, for the only fourth book - GoF. If we coud step back to all the events ever occurred and consider the current ones, promising for futher ones, we will more likely to be successful deriving a more precise and logical analysis of such interesting clues. Hints of interviews might be relevant, but to those who have already been confused about the interpretation of the books, those hints might not serve as the right antidote, but rather a more deeper confusion of misunderstandings. Those who prefer the hints from Rowling herself might be deluded from the universal interpretation which most likely to be the truth as ever happened in literature works; hence, their interpretations turn out to be only relative to specifics, not true to the entirety of the books. Most commonly, the entirely is the storyline intended by the author - Rowling, proceeding to the eventual outcomes whose possible predictions are based upon.

If you get my point...Hurah H/Hr shippers...(I made it... :rotfl: ).

***van.

[Prongs, Sr.]

Mirtilla,

The name itself said that the theory is based on Weasley's happiness not Harry's happiness the focus is not any more on the protagonist, we haven't the Potter we have the Weasley, Prongs Sr you're wrong in say that Harry's greatest desire is to become a Weasley, in canon he wants his family the Potter and in ootp he doesn't consider himself a member of the Weasley, quite the contrary. With Hermione Harry could have his own family, the Potter, what he really wants.

I think your assuming that the idea of OBHWF came for JKR's own head. This was coined in fandom.

I've seen JKR use many hints to foreshadow that the Weasleys will be Harry's future family; Bill and Molly acting as his family in book 4; Molly including Harry in the "weasley sweaters", etc. My point of view is not based on the Weasley's personal happiness, but rather looking at an overall viewpoint of what JKR is trying to write here.

I feel that the Mirror of Erised shows that Harry wants his family back, but the past is over and they can't come back; Sirius' death was the nail in the coffin, also. It makes sense, for Harry's storyline arc to be completely fulfilled, that he ends up having a family on his own. I believe JKR is writing H/G because she has developed the Weasleys since the beginning and we know them well.

Perdita

Good point, Prongs, but I think that the fact that Harry goes to school with many of the Weasley children, that Mr and Mrs Weasley are both from the Wizarding World, and that large parts of the story take place in the Wizarding World, allowing the reader to get to know all members of the Weasley family is unavoidable. Fleshing out the Weasley family and showing us a lot of interaction between them and Harry is more of a plot device.

I agree that the Weasleys are integral to the storyline and bring humor and colorful characters into it, but it would have been very easy to include Hermione's parents, especially in the early books before Voldemort's return into the storyline. We have not even seen so much as an introduction between Harry and Hermione's parents, which, I feel is really disappointing. Do we even know if Hermione is an only child or does she have siblings? Instead, whenever we see the Grangers, they are usually in discussion with Arthur and Molly.

One reason why I don’t think that JKR intends for the Weasleys to be the all-encompassing structure in Harry’s life, both emotionally and socially, is because after 5 books, we still have yet to see it this relationship develop into anything more than friendly and familial. Not only has JKR not encouraged the H/G ship to develop in OOTP, she has, in fact, shown us that there is no interest amongst those two characters to form a ship.

I don't see the Weasleys as "all-encompassing" either. There are many important characters who are not Weasleys that are important to Harry's story and his emotional happiness. As for H/G, I see loads of evidence for that pairing, based on literary structure, characterizations, Harry's positive regard and unresolved plot storylines.

after reading through five books where Hermione has been a major influence in Harry’s life, how will it be satisfying to all of a sudden watch her character being shunted aside and deserted in the background? How will it be satisfying to see Ginny, a character who has not played an important role in Harry’s life, to all of a sudden take over the role of being his ultimate partner? I can't see her with Ron either, for all the reasons that she gives us in the books. She doesn't like Ron, even though she knows that he likes her.

This is where I disagree, but I don't see Hermione shunted to the background at all. She and Ginny are best girl friends, which should eliminate conflicts between them. Regarding R/Hr, I think Hermione is very insecure about Ron's feelings toward her and, possibly thinks that Ron does not find her attractive.

Grace Granger

I honestly don't think that Harry needs to be officially part of the Weasley family by marrying Ginny when JKR has clearly shown us that he is already accept as one, even if he doesn't feel much apart of it. You obviously have a great love for the Weasleys, but they're not the only characters in the book that we feel affection towards. I don't think that having Harry becoming apart of the Weasley family would be emotionally satisfying at all.:

I don't have a great love for the Weasleys, except Ron and Ginny. I like them and I think they are fun characters, but my absolutely favorite characters are Harry and Remus Lupin, but I understand your dislike for OBHWF. My attachment to the idea is not emotional, but rather, I see evidence that JKR is writing this particular storyline and conclusion.

1)They're boring which she 2) may have really meant or 3) is trying to deviate us from some plot that concerns them.

In the past, when she's tried to distract us to something of plot importance, she says, "I can't tell you". However, if they are going to be important to future plots, which is possible, I really feel JKR could have given us a some development from them, such as in book 2, when they were all at Diagon Alley together. Instead, Harry is not even introduced to them. I've read the theories, where they are killed in book six by the deatheaters, but, while I would feel bad for Hermione, there really isn't the emotional attachment to them that the readers would have, nor would Harry, as we don't know them at all.

Centaurervan

Ok, I don't think if anyone of us ever guess right what Rowling means by 'platonic' relationship it's not because we can't interpret it, but rather it's because we HAVE NO IDEA what Rowling really means.

I disagree. She was asked "Do Harry and Hermione have a date". This question is clearly about romance. She answers "NO", then proceeds to give the "very platonic friends" explanation. Since the question was about romance, she gives a negative answer and uses the word platonic friends, which clearly means "Transcending physical desire and tending toward the purely spiritual or ideal: platonic love".

She also picked out this question herself. She clearly had no problem giving a "no" answer here. It is assumable that she is not hiding anything profound, since she picks this question out herself. Why would she choose this question, if she was writing H/Hr?

[Fairydust]

oh my goodness. miss a little. miss a lot. wow. great arguments. just for the record if anyone has forgotten. i'm an R/Hr and H/G shipper all the way. I'll also ship D/P and Snape with anyone.

[helf]

I don't have a great love for the Weasleys, except Ron and Ginny. I like them and I think they are fun characters, but my absolutely favorite characters are Harry and Remus Lupin, but I understand your dislike for OBHWF. My attachment to the idea is not emotional, but rather, I see evidence that JKR is writing this particular storyline and conclusion.
But what does what happened over Christmas in OOTP when Arthur is attacked tell us about OBHWF? What happens to Harry's support system when One Big Happy Weasley Family is not so happy?

Whatever the various characters motivations, when this "issue" arose between Harry and the Weasley's, Harry was uncomfortable going to any of the Weasley's and the Weasley's were uncomfortable going to Harry. I am not trying to lay blame at anyone's door, but the fact of the matter remains that Harry ended up isolated and alone.

The following is complete conjecture on my part, but it is why I am uncomfortable with the idea of OBHWF. The Weasley's are such an important part of Harry's support system. If Harry marries Ginny, he, in essence, puts all of his eggs in one basket. Would normal marital problems between Harry and Ginny drive a wedge between Harry and the rest of the Weasleys, his surrogate family, of which he is already a part of without the benefit of marriage.

[Nick]

You are all mistaken. Harry has the hots for Bellatrix Lestrange. My proof:

1. He's always looking at her photo. It drives him to distraction.
2. He gets a "jolt" in the stomach whenever he sees her. Just like he used to with Cho.
3. In the DoM, Harry chased her out of the Death Chamber. THIS IS A MANIFESTATION OF TRUE LOVE!!!
4. "Harry Potter loves Bellatrix Lestrage" actually unscrambles to form "congratulations u worked out my story i luv u from jkroling"

I suspect the feeling isn't mutual, and that's a good thing, because Bellatrix is mine and I'd have to kill Potter myself if he layed one grubby finger on her.

[Hawk 92]

Actually Nick, Umbridge gave him a jolt in the stomach and Tonks was staring quite avidly at his midriff. Guess Harry will be quite busy soon.

Been doing some thinking and the name of the Ron/Luna ship should be changed to the HMS Red Moon. I think it sounds better than Rooney.

Cheers!

[Nick]

OMG!! You're right!! Tonks is Bellatrix!

[Hawk 92]

OMG!! You're right!! Tonks is Bellatrix!

Yup. She doesn't even need the polyjuice. All the pieces are starting to fit together. We just have no idea what the picture will be at all. But its looking pretttyyyy scareyyyyyyy.

Cheers!

[Charmed Cheese]

You are all mistaken. Harry has the hots for Bellatrix Lestrange. My proof:

1. He's always looking at her photo. It drives him to distraction.
2. He gets a "jolt" in the stomach whenever he sees her. Just like he used to with Cho.
3. In the DoM, Harry chased her out of the Death Chamber. THIS IS A MANIFESTATION OF TRUE LOVE!!!
4. "Harry Potter loves Bellatrix Lestrage" actually unscrambles to form "congratulations u worked out my story i luv u from jkroling"

I suspect the feeling isn't mutual, and that's a good thing, because Bellatrix is mine and I'd have to kill Potter myself if he layed one grubby finger on her.

:rotfl:

Why don't you post more often? Your theories are brilliant. Especially # 4. I think you've cracked it.;) :lol:

[Perdita]

LOL, Centeurervan.

GryffindorGr,
Right, Harry has thought of Ginny, on occasion, wondering about her welfare. When I said “at all,” I meant it as a hyperbole. The fact of the matter is that Harry does not think of her all that much, which is probably why he didn’t remember that she was also trapped in the Chamber of Secrets back in book 2.
He didn’t remember? How so?
In the words of Harry Potter himself: “I forgot” (OOTP, 442).

I just basically simplified it without getting too detailed over it. Presenting a short one sentence explanation on each love level Harry has achieved with them… But in this context, as I said, I’m using the affection for parental need that Harry gets from Sirius, Mr. and Mrs. Weasley… In this context, I wanted to present that her concern and affection can be equated to a sisterly kind, even as far as a motherly manner.
Firstly, I think that is the danger with trying to simplify things. By simplification, a lot of details have to be left out. Using the discussion on parental love, for example, to mention it in that context exclusively means that the other aspects of Affection will have to be discarded. This will not work because the entire concept of Affection depends on the acknowledgement of parental love, as well as the love of your friends and your possessions.

I see that you’re attempting to apply the ideas of Lewis to the analysis of the H/G ship, but one must do so in inclusivity, not exclusivity. We must include all the nuances and the complexities of the relationships between the characters. Sometimes, Harry and Hermione’s behaviour can be seen as strictly friendly, sometimes sisterly-brotherly, and sometimes flirtatiously as well. All three of these aspects have surfaced numerous times in the series, and so it is important to include all of them in one’s analysis.

I think Sirius, Mr and Mrs Weasley, but she in particular, could have been created to fulfill the aspect of Harry’s life that involves the need of a parent’s love.
However, I doubt that JKR intends for Harry to receive all of the four types of love from the Weasley family alone. Would you contend with the possibility that Harry is supposed to find Eros with someone outside of the Weasley family – whether that be Cho, Hermione or Luna? Of the four girls, Hermione seems the most likely because she has shown a lot of affection with, as well as received a lot of affection from Harry. This is one aspect of Harry and Hermione’s relationship that is not present in his relationships with Luna or Ginny. With Cho, I’ll allow it since she was his crush and they did date.
How so? His feelings for Sirius and Mr. and Mrs Weasley are different on a certain level/degree and to think that only Hermione can fulfill everything, including parental guidance is discounting the need for other types of love. It’s nearly selfish. No offense to your thinking, of course, but I just disagree. There is plenty of room for all kinds of love and that doesn’t have to be with one person, you can’t grow with that. A person needs affection from those around him, that take as much as receive. There’s always room for growth, and room to make others grow as well.
Is it just me, or do we have a communication breakdown here? I challenged you to consider the notion that Harry might not experience all the various types of love with the Weasley family only, and you turn it back on me by saying that I made that assertion, except it’s with regard to Hermione?

I’m not offended, yet, but I am frustrated that my arguments are grossly misrepresented in your reply. Whether it was intentional or it was merely a mistake, I ask that you please refrain from doing that sort of thing. Thanks.

ETA:
:lol: @ Captain Nick and Hawk 92.

[noddwyd]

Guess Harry will be quite busy soon.
Man, is he ever!

Been doing some thinking and the name of the Ron/Luna ship should be changed to the HMS Red Moon. I think it sounds better than Rooney.
Yeah, that sounds more evil. I like it. Reminds me of Castlevania. Great game series btw, you should try it if you ever had the time.

And Nick, is your avatar eating a golden bell pepper whole? Just wondering....

[Hawk 92]

Plato and CS Lewis, why not.

The Platonic school of thought finds its basis in the belief that the physical world is both fallen and evil. Plato believed that true knowledge was to be sought for and could only be done apart from the flesh. Plato rejected empiricism, the claim that knowledge was derived from senses, in order to pursue the perfection that comes from knowledge only. Plato called the supreme Form, the Form of the Good, and believed it to be fixed, permanent, and unchanging, in essence Plato created a god out of knowledge. Thus for Plato you could only find reality by leaving the world of the flesh behind, because the world of the flesh is unfixed, temporal, and eternally changing. Marsilio Ficino, an Italian philosopher and theologian, applied the platonic school of thought to love and was the first to introduce the term platonic love. Love that goes beyond the realm of the flesh and finds its perfection as fixed, permanent, and unchanging. Greatly appealing to the concept of mortification of the flesh that prevailed in European theological thinking during the Middle Ages.

What does this have to do with JKR and CS Lewis? Little, I honestly think. Let us move on to CS Lewis, for most Christians have to reject the works of Plato, or seriously rethink them.

GryffindorGr

I think I confused you slightly. I was talking about your theory about Ginny fulfilling Harry’s eros based on the thinking of CS Lewis. I therefore submitted this quote sent to me by Perdita;

The co-existence of Friendship and Eros may also help some moderns to realise that Friendship is n reality a love, and even as great a love as Eros. Suppose you are fortunate enought to have 'fallen in love with' and married your Friend. And now suppose it is possible that you were offered the choice of two futures: 'Either you two will cease to be lovers but remain forever joint seekers of the same God, the same beauty, the same truth, or else, losing all that, you will retain as long as you live the raptures and ardours, all the wonder and the wild desire of Eros. Choose which you please.' Which should we choose? Which choice should we not regret after we had made it?

somehow we got on to Plato and that old argument. Let me redirect our discussion back to Lewis and your original theory. Now I wish to call you attention to this particular line;

Suppose you are fortunate enought to have 'fallen in love with' and married your Friend.

from this line we can derive a few things.
1) That friendship is in no way a hindrance to Eros in Lewis’s philosophy.
2) That Eros can come out of friendship.
3) That Eros from friendship is a fortunate occurrence.

Now we can see that Ginny is not the only one who can supply the Eros , nor am I sure how Hermione supplying the Eros should take away from the Weasleys supplying the other aspects of love from you own model. We can even see that Lewis thinks favorably on Eros coming from friendship therefore giving Hermione a advantage over Ginny, for Harry still thinks of Ginny as Ron’s little sister. This is the major obstacle to the H/G ship, not Ron’s approval (how anyone justifies that argument is far beyond me) or Hermione’s approval, or Molly’s, you get the idea. After this we find an even more confusing aspect, that Ginny needs to become more like Hermione (closer to Harry as a friend) in order to supplant Hermione.

While I can appreciate the OBHWF theory (I’m really indifferent to this particular theory) I don’t think it receives any better justification by being the OBHWF as seen by CS Lewis. As we’ve also seen, since Eros can grow out of friendship and is in no way a hindrance, Ginny is not the only person who fulfills these requirements, now we are back at where we began – Ginny or Hermione.

Another thing that amuses, amazes, and basically stuns me is how one can justify Harry losing the other aspects of love (by your model of course) if he finds Eros with Hermione. Just out of curiosity does this also extend to Harry perhaps finding love with Luna? I don’t think one is doing justice to JKR’s characters the Weasley family if Hermione and Harry will be cast out for not choosing Ron and Ginny. If you feel that you can justify the Weasleys casting off Hermione and Harry for following their hearts, please post that. I think it would be an interesting read. Still if one cannot justify the Weasleys removing the other aspects of love due to Harry’s finding of Eros outside of their clan, then once again Ginny is not the only person who fits the model. Therefore it does not prove that it must be Ginny.

If some choose to believe that Harry and Hermione will lose their friendship with the Weasleys for falling in love....well...Credat Judaeus Apella, non ego Horace's Satires, book 1, satire 5, lines 100-101

Cheers!

[~oSiRiS~]

My latin is pretty rough. does that mean "believe Jew Apella, Not I" or
"Let the Jew Apella believe it, I will not"

[Polaris15]

Prongs Sr.
I've seen JKR use many hints to foreshadow that the Weasleys will be Harry's future family; Bill and Molly acting as his family in book 4; Molly including Harry in the "weasley sweaters", etc. My point of view is not based on the Weasley's personal happiness, but rather looking at an overall viewpoint of what JKR is trying to write here.

If Molly herself already views Harry as her son, and based on the plethora of examples in your post, wouldn't you say that Harry is already a part of the Weasley clan? Therefore, following this logic, Harry doesn't need to marry anyone to become a part of the Weasleys does he. In fact, he seems to be very much a member of the Weasleys already.

I believe JKR is writing H/G because she has developed the Weasleys since the beginning and we know them well.

Eventually however, Harry will establish his very own family; whether Harry marries Ginny, Hermione, or any other woman, Harry and his wife will be living on their own. Therefore, the development of the Weasleys is irrelevant to shipping or romance.


This is where I disagree, but I don't see Hermione shunted to the background at all.

Although Hermione would maintain her status as a major character, the aspects of her relationship with Harry will have to change drastically. For one, Hermione's voice in Harry's mind will have to be replaced by Ginny's; two, Hermione wouldn't be the person Harry instinctively grab in DoM. Hermione wouldn't serve as Harry's emotional support; Hermione wouldn't be the person Harry goes to first whenever he has a problem.

She and Ginny are best girl friends, which should eliminate conflicts between them.

In OotP, the H/C relationship failed because Cho wasn't able to replace Hermione in these aspects. Cho couldn't communicate with Harry nor can she connect with Harry. Therefore, because of Cho's inability to do so, she became jealous. This contributed to the down fall of their relationship.

Yet you argued that since Hermione and Ginny are good friends, this would eliminate their conflict. However, let us think logically and realistically for one moment. Assuming that both characters maintain their level of importance in Harry's heart, it would be extremely far-fetched if Ginny wouldn't be jealous. After all, would any girl endure seeing her boyfriend save another girl from danger when she (herself) is standing directly behind her boyfriend? Would any girl stand seeing another girl grabbing her boyfriend's arm or clutching her boyfriend, shaking and whimpering, in times of crisis? Would any girl be willing to accept the fact that her boyfriend hears another girl's voice inside his mind? Logically any girl, no matter how generous or understanding she may be would not be able to endure the fact that another girl is indeed closer to her boyfriend than she, herself, is. Therefore, it would be entirely reasonable to infer that Ginny would most likely not be very tolerant of H/Hr's close friendship if Ginny should become Harry's LI.


Regarding R/Hr, I think Hermione is very insecure about Ron's feelings toward her and, possibly thinks that Ron does not find her attractive.

One question: Do you believe that Hermione knows of Ron's crush on her as of this moment?

Cheers!

Polaris

[~oSiRiS~]

Yet you argued that since Hermione and Ginny are good friends, this would eliminate their conflict. However, let us think logically and realistically for one moment. Assuming that both characters maintain their level of importance in Harry's heart, it would be extremely far-fetched if Ginny wouldn't be jealous. After all, would any girl endure seeing her boyfriend save another girl from danger when she (herself) is standing directly behind her boyfriend? Would any girl stand seeing another girl grabbing her boyfriend's arm or clutching her boyfriend, shaking and whimpering, in times of crisis? Would any girl be willing to accept the fact that her boyfriend hears another girl's voice inside his mind? Logically any girl, no matter how generous or understanding she may be would not be able to endure the fact that another girl is indeed closer to her boyfriend than she, herself, is. Therefore, it would be reasonable to infer that Ginny would most likely not be very tolerant of H/Hr's close friendship if Ginny should become Harry's LI.
Polaris

Yeah it doesn't work out too well. Causes many headaches. I have had two girls break up with me over a friend I grew up with.
As having personal exsperince in this field, Hell no!! they won't put up with it.
Her Boyfriends did not either. I got into a couple of fights over it.

[flucias1]

And Nick, is your avatar eating a golden bell pepper whole? Just wondering....I know that wasn't directed to me, but no, he wasn't going to.. he was about to take a big, overly-dramatic, bite out of it. That's the guy from "Iron Chef" on the Food Network, and I've started to think the whole thing is a sham. RARELY does the challenger win over the Iron Chef.. :rolleyes: I find myself always rooting for the challenger, just to be different.

[canteurervan]

Good post Polaris15

Originally posted by Polaris15:
In OotP, the H/C relationship failed because Cho wasn't able to replace Hermione in these aspects. Cho couldn't communicate with Harry nor can she connect with Harry. Therefore, because of Cho's inability to do so, she became jealous. This contributed to the down fall of their relationship.
I can't put it in any better way...excellent point.

Originally posted by Prongs.:
Centaurervan
Quote:
Ok, I don't think if anyone of us ever guess right what Rowling means by 'platonic' relationship it's not because we can't interpret it, but rather it's because we HAVE NO IDEA what Rowling really means.


I disagree. She was asked "Do Harry and Hermione have a date". This question is clearly about romance. She answers "NO", then proceeds to give the "very platonic friends" explanation. Since the question was about romance, she gives a negative answer and uses the word platonic friends, which clearly means "Transcending physical desire and tending toward the purely spiritual or ideal: platonic love".

She also picked out this question herself. She clearly had no problem giving a "no" answer here. It is assumable that she is not hiding anything profound, since she picks this question out herself. Why would she choose this question, if she was writing H/Hr?
I think you either didn't accept my last post, or misunderstand it. As we haven been debating the meaning of the concept of 'platonic love' of Rowling, there has not been a precisely definite and agreeable answer to the meaning of such phrase at all. I think you just took the initiative to assume that Rowling means 'NO', but she did not directly say that 'NO'...plz re-read the interview. As I mentioned in my last post, interview quotes only add more confusion to the already confused fans about such delicate matter:
Originally posted by me - canteurervan:
Hints of interviews might be relevant, but to those who have already been confused about the interpretation of the books, those hints might not serve as the right antidote, but rather a more deeper confusion of misunderstandings. Those who prefer the hints from Rowling herself might be deluded from the universal interpretation which most likely to be the truth as ever happened in literature works; hence, their interpretations turn out to be only relative to specifics, not true to the entirety of the books. Most commonly, the entirely is the storyline intended by the author - Rowling, proceeding to the eventual outcomes whose possible predictions are based upon.


***van.

[Rowena Ravenclaw]

Although Hermione would maintain her status as a major character, the aspects of her relationship with Harry will have to change drastically. For one, Hermione's voice in Harry's mind will have to be replaced by Ginny's...

Or Ginny will simply acquire her own voice in Harry's mind. She's not Hermione, after all; she's not always going to be offering the same advice. Nor is Hermione the only voice Harry hears now.

...two, Hermione wouldn't be the person Harry instinctively grab in DoM...

Probably not, since Ginny would most likely be the one standing closest.

...Hermione wouldn't serve as Harry's emotional support; Hermione wouldn't be the person Harry goes to first whenever he has a problem.

And she's not either of these things right now. As matters stand, Harry has no clear emotional support, nor anyone he consistently turns to with his problems. If anyone did fill that role, it was Sirius: see the beginning of GoF, when Harry rejects telling both Hermione and Ron about his scar pain in Sirius's favor. With him gone, Harry's more and more likely to rely on his usual modus operandi, which is simply not to confide in anyone until the situation becomes desperate or someone else raises the subject. His decision not to tell Hermione about the prophecy confirms this; it's a huge emotional burden which he has chosen to bear alone. Making someone other than Hermione the person Harry chooses to help him share that load (assuming he does so) does not drastically alter the current closeness (or lack thereof) between Harry and Hermione.

[Nick]

I know that wasn't directed to me, but no, he wasn't going to.. he was about to take a big, overly-dramatic, bite out of it. That's the guy from "Iron Chef" on the Food Network, and I've started to think the whole thing is a sham. RARELY does the challenger win over the Iron Chef.. :rolleyes: I find myself always rooting for the challenger, just to be different.

He is TAKESHI KAGA, my new idol.

Iron Chefs win about 80% of the battles. They're good.

This thread isn't meant to be about Iron Chef, though. PM me next time you want to ask me something about me.

[giantsquid28]

As matters stand, Harry has no clear emotional support, nor anyone he consistently turns to with his problems. If anyone did fill that role, it was Sirius: see the beginning of GoF, when Harry rejects telling both Hermione and Ron about his scar pain in Sirius's favor.

He didn't want to worry her. He knows how much she'd worry. She isn't a trained medi-wizard and there isn't anything that she could do to help him, so why needlessly upset her?




With him gone, Harry's more and more likely to rely on his usual modus operandi, which is simply not to confide in anyone until the situation becomes desperate or someone else raises the subject. His decision not to tell Hermione about the prophecy confirms this; it's a huge emotional burden which he has chosen to bear alone. Making someone other than Hermione the person Harry chooses to help him share that load (assuming he does so) does not drastically alter the current closeness (or lack thereof) between Harry and Hermione.

Again, why needlessly upset her? She can't change the prophecy. She can cry and/or totally freak out and spend hours in the library looking for something to help him. Why not spare her the pain as long as possible? Harry is still trying to come to terms with this, himself. I think he's going to do the same as DD and act as a "fool who loves too much" and try to shield her as long as possible.

[xray]

Been doing some thinking and the name of the Ron/Luna ship should be changed to the HMS Red Moon. I think it sounds better than Rooney.I agree; HMS Red Moon does sound better. Do those shippers who sail Ron/Luna agree?

[~oSiRiS~]

Again, why needlessly upset her? She can't change the prophecy. She can cry and/or totally freak out and spend hours in the library looking for something to help him. Why not spare her the pain as long as possible? Harry is still trying to come to terms with this, himself. I think he's going to do the same as DD and act as a "fool who loves too much" and try to shield her as long as possible.
I see him more letting it slip in an argument then accually sitting down and telling her.
This information is important and really is a danger to anyone who knows it.
If voldemort found out Her or Ron knew they would be a hugh target.

[Rowena Ravenclaw]

Again, why needlessly upset her? She can't change the prophecy. She can cry and/or totally freak out and spend hours in the library looking for something to help him. Why not spare her the pain as long as possible? Harry is still trying to come to terms with this, himself. I think he's going to do the same as DD and act as a "fool who loves too much" and try to shield her as long as possible.

I might accept that - if there was any indication he was trying to avoid causing her pain in particular. But there's not. Harry's not any more or less reluctant to talk to her about it than he is to talk to Ron. For the moment, at least, he's still keeping them at equal arms' length.

[sone]

I might accept that - if there was any indication he was trying to avoid causing her pain in particular. But there's not.

Nevertheless, giantsquid28 is right. Harry is still trying to come to terms of the prophecy himself and as long as he doing that, he has no intention of telling anyone, Hermione or otherwise. Furthermore, ~oSiRiS~ is also right. To tell them or anyone else other than Dumbledore about the prophecy is to put a target on their heads. Voldemort knows there is no chance in hell of him getting it from Dumbledore and the prophecy in the DoM was destroyed. For some reason, Harry did not feel anymore pain in his scar after he forced Voldemort out of his body so he may not be able to get from Harry either. But his friends and the order however, that may be different.

[Polaris15]

Or Ginny will simply acquire her own voice in Harry's mind. She's not Hermione, after all; she's not always going to be offering the same advice.

That is assuming that Ginny's voice will invade Harry's mind; after all, not everyone's voice appears in Harry's mind does it.


Nor is Hermione the only voice Harry hears now.

Yet JKR emphasizes that Harry hears Hermione's voice in his mind often, meaning more than once. Again, this doesn't apply to the other voices in Harry's mind does it, aside from Voldemort that is.

Probably not, since Ginny would most likely be the one standing closest.

It's not a matter of distance actually, but a matter of choice. Ginny was standing the closest to Harry in DoM; in fact, she was directly behind Harry. Nevertheless, Harry chose to save Hermione instead of Ginny showing a difference in Hermione's importance to Harry verses Ginny's. Assuming that both character's do maintain their level of importance, and Harry once again, chooses to save Hermione, Ginny certainly wouldn't be very happy would she.


And she's not either of these things right now. As matters stand, Harry has no clear emotional support, nor anyone he consistently turns to with his problems. If anyone did fill that role, it was Sirius: see the beginning of GoF, when Harry rejects telling both Hermione and Ron about his scar pain in Sirius's favor.

Throughout GoF, however, many incidents occurred that possibly will change Harry's choice of confidant. For one, Hermione stood by Harry's side despite being ridiculed and verbally abused by almost the entire school. She demonstated loyalty and solidarity to Harry, which was very laudable for a 14 year-old. Only towards the end of OotP was Harry truly able to discern those qualities Hermione had displayed. Therefore, it wouldn't be unreasonable to infer that in the future, Hermione will serve as Harry's main pillar of support as she currently is a part of the whole.

With him gone, Harry's more and more likely to rely on his usual modus operandi, which is simply not to confide in anyone until the situation becomes desperate or someone else raises the subject.

For a period of time, it is likely that Harry will do so.


His decision not to tell Hermione about the prophecy confirms this; it's a huge emotional burden which he has chosen to bear alone.

As of this moment, Harry decided to keep his knowledge of the prophecy to himself; that is, he didn't inform anyone of this matter. In the future however, Harry may explain the prophecy to another person whether by choice or by outside forces.

Making someone other than Hermione the person Harry chooses to help him share that load (assuming he does so) does not drastically alter the current closeness (or lack thereof) between Harry and Hermione.

It will certainly diminish Hermione's role considerably in Harry's life simply because as of this moment, she is Harry's closest friend, and possibly one of the most important people in his life. Hermione plays a part in supporting Harry both emotionally and intellectually. This has been demonstated in both GoF and OotP where Harry either sought out Hermione with his problems or Hermione went to Harry. Therefore, if Harry suddenly decides to confide his problems to another person, who is not as close to Harry as Hermione is, it would definitely have a negative impact on Harry and Hermione's friendship.

van
Good post Polaris15

Thank you. :)

Cheers!

Polaris

[GryffindorGr]

by blackknight
GryffindorGr, I think Perdita and Mirtilla follow Plato just fine. Defining love in neat little blocks (platonic love, romantic love, etc.) which never overlap is far too simplistic, and does no justice to Plato or to those who have followed him. There is no clear, solid boundary or separation between what is known as "platonic love" and what you call "romantic love"; in fact, your definition of "romantic love", while a fine working one, is by no means complete. This is a complex topic to which I could never do justice with a short forum post. However, let me give you a short quote from the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, at the website for the University of Tennessee at Martin:


Yes, I’ve read the quote. They are both the philosophical echo of both Platonic and Aristotelian love and to go further on, was not meant to be consummated (physically) transcending, respectful, and to be like the relationship between the knight and the lady. King Arthur’s Guinevere for instance, to make it easier for others to understand, is a good example, her presence with her knights present to us the great respect and honour of this kind of love. Meaning, there would be no contact in that sense that goes beyond impropriety. Women earned the right to love and to be loved as equals to men. Since formerly, the sociological setting of Platonism, which is described in the time of 5th century Athens, like Pericles’ celebrated love for Aspasia, men were married for reproductive ends, yet retained the term ‘love’ and the passionate activity of sexual love for homosexual relationships. And "Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This approach of Plato's was typical of the ancient world.
And your quote:
Quote: Modern romantic love returns to Aristotle's version of the special love two people find in each other's virtues-one soul and two bodies, as he poetically puts it. It is deemed to be of a higher status, ethically, aesthetically, and even metaphysically than the love that behaviourists or physicalists describe.
Lovely. Yes, it is Aristotle that gives us this notion of consummation, the soul as one, like a marriage with two bodies.

(You had mentioned Aristotle; this illustrates that he and Plato were not as opposed in viewpoint as you might think.)

Only when it came to the external and the internal. There is a difference between the two. Plato said (I paraphrase) to achieve one's highest philosophical goals one must abandon the external senses because they cannot be trusted.

Passionate love comes from the external whereas Platonic love is internal.
love purely on a intellectual level, no sexual desires or physical lust to taint the intellectual utopia of love.


As you can see, there's quite a bit of overlap here; in fact, romantic love (depending on how it's defined, of course) can be said to be a derivative of platonic love. In any case, there's a lot more to this than meets the eye.

I'd also like to remind you that "platonic love" was not coined by Plato; it was coined by Marsilio Ficino in his Renaissance commentary on Plato's "Symposium" called "De Amore" (On Love). It's a good commentary; I highly recommend it. And I would love to discuss philosophy with you, if you'd like. Just let me know if you want any of the Internet sources, and I'll be happy to send them to you.

I see what you mean. I do understand that Perdita and Mirtilla’s definition of platonic and romantic love understanding. The separation of the two can be inserted as one because, just like my short explanation above on the knightly and courtly gesture to her lady. (which means the lady in question does not have to be the one the knight pursues but rather his lieges lady in question, or to a matronly powerful figure, such as, for example, Queen Elizabeth who in her time demanded considerable respect and love)
My presentation was the romantic love in the sense of romanticism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romantic_love
Romantic love is a form of love that is often regarded as different from simply sexual love, or lust. Romantic love generally means both an emotional and sexual love, as opposed to Platonic love.

Thanks, Blackknight86 for your input. I always love to hear from you.


by Perdita
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGr
I just basically simplified it without getting too detailed over it. Presenting a short one sentence explanation on each love level Harry has achieved with them… But in this context, as I said, I’m using the affection for parental need that Harry gets from Sirius, Mr. and Mrs. Weasley… In this context, I wanted to present that her concern and affection can be equated to a sisterly kind, even as far as a motherly manner.
Firstly, I think that is the danger with trying to simplify things. By simplification, a lot of details have to be left out. Using the discussion on parental love, for example, to mention it in that context exclusively means that the other aspects of Affection will have to be discarded. This will not work because the entire concept of Affection depends on the acknowledgement of parental love, as well as the love of your friends and your possessions.

I understand but my simplification was meant for the exclusive use of the Weasleys, Hermione, and Sirius (and if I forget to use Harry’s love for his pet Hedwig and material things it was clarified in the next posts) I’m glad though that you pointed it out. It was refreshing to go into detail about affection. Reminding me of the things that I take for granted. Perhaps and possibly Harry may forget or take for granted the people that love him and he loves. I doubt it though.


I see that you’re attempting to apply the ideas of Lewis to the analysis of the H/G ship, but one must do so in inclusivity, not exclusivity. We must include all the nuances and the complexities of the relationships between the characters. Sometimes, Harry and Hermione’s behaviour can be seen as strictly friendly, sometimes sisterly-brotherly, and sometimes flirtatiously as well. All three of these aspects have surfaced numerous times in the series, and so it is important to include all of them in one’s analysis.

I’ve never seen flirtatious between Harry and Hermione. Unless I’m mistaken, could you give me a small preview? I’ve always seen their interaction as very platonic, in the respectable way. In Ginny, there were blushes that emitted from her when she caught his eye; suggestive from just something they both had an understanding with that concern with humour. When Ginny looked at Ron and stifled a giggle (in the scene about Luna’s obvious affection to Ron) she did not blush but shared a sister/brother contact understanding with him. Although of course not with words but with a light silent laughter.
When I apply to the H/G ship, I also include Hermione in there, with her in part of her continued presence, affectionately and respectively.


Is it just me, or do we have a communication breakdown here? I challenged you to consider the notion that Harry might not experience all the various types of love with the Weasley family only, and you turn it back on me by saying that I made that assertion, except it’s with regard to Hermione?

I’m not offended, yet, but I am frustrated that my arguments are grossly misrepresented in your reply. Whether it was intentional or it was merely a mistake, I ask that you please refrain from doing that sort of thing. Thanks.

Perdita, good that you are not offended because I did state that I meant no offense. I just believe that you can’t get love from just one person alone. You can get them from all sources. I did not misunderstand you. Perhaps because we just don’t agree and we don’t see eye to eye, could be where the frustration lies? That’s fine, really. I have read your arguments and said that Hermione gives to Harry affectionate love as well, in the form of friendship and in charity. Since charity is on a higher plane, Harry can receive that from the Weasleys and Hermione. (Sirius too even though he’s gone, and sure the love will always be there)
Since the Weasleys were deliberately and boldly inserted by JKR herself as a guide and support for Harry’s continued quest, the use of the four loves are so apparent, except for the last one, Eros. (because Harry is still very young and he has so many challenges to go through. Eros is something he cannot deal with yet. It’s a love that makes you blind to all things and makes you lose your way at times) And truly believe from reading the symbolisms and colorful imagery that is painted by JKR---Ginny’s plan in the fold will be very important to him as much as Hermione’s continued presence.



Plato and CS Lewis, why not.

The Platonic school of thought finds its basis in the belief that the physical world is both fallen and evil. Plato believed that true knowledge was to be sought for and could only be done apart from the flesh. Plato rejected empiricism, the claim that knowledge was derived from senses, in order to pursue the perfection that comes from knowledge only. Plato called the supreme Form, the Form of the Good, and believed it to be fixed, permanent, and unchanging, in essence Plato created a god out of knowledge. Thus for Plato you could only find reality by leaving the world of the flesh behind, because the world of the flesh is unfixed, temporal, and eternally changing. Marsilio Ficino, an Italian philosopher and theologian, applied the platonic school of thought to love and was the first to introduce the term platonic love. Love that goes beyond the realm of the flesh and finds its perfection as fixed, permanent, and unchanging. Greatly appealing to the concept of mortification of the flesh that prevailed in European theological thinking during the Middle Ages.


That was beautiful, Perdita. Yes, faithfully-- Plato’s absolute outline goes beyond the “flesh” and the “passions” that the realm of man’s irrational instinctual drives, deriving from the flesh and rejected by him (discarding empiricism: deriving from the senses and transcending to rationale and knowledge)

Well, I hope everyone else is getting an eyeful of Plato today. Lol. He’s a very interesting and influential philosopher.


by Hawk92
GryffindorGr

I think I confused you slightly. I was talking about your theory about Ginny fulfilling Harry’s eros based on the thinking of CS Lewis. I therefore submitted this quote sent to me by Perdita;

The co-existence of Friendship and Eros may also help some moderns to realise that Friendship is n reality a love, and even as great a love as Eros. Suppose you are fortunate enought to have 'fallen in love with' and married your Friend. And now suppose it is possible that you were offered the choice of two futures: 'Either you two will cease to be lovers but remain forever joint seekers of the same God, the same beauty, the same truth, or else, losing all that, you will retain as long as you live the raptures and ardours, all the wonder and the wild desire of Eros. Choose which you please.' Which should we choose? Which choice should we not regret after we had made it?

somehow we got on to Plato and that old argument. Let me redirect our discussion back to Lewis and your original theory. Now I wish to call you attention to this particular line;

Suppose you are fortunate enought to have 'fallen in love with' and married your Friend.

I never said that Harry could not fall in love with Hermione but I did say that Ginny does not seem to be sister like to him. More so, I see the interactions between Harry and Hermione as more sibling and even motherly on the part of Hermione.
Hm, it is true that many men love to fall in love with the notion of a woman who “nurtures” them in a way that a mother has. Then we can discuss Oedipus and even as far as Shakespeares Hamlet, for there have been small insinuations, no not small, I suppose great theories and discussions surrounding the relationship of mother and son.
I’m not suggesting that Hermione is his mother of course, but that the behaviour displayed by her caring, protection and love could be advocated as a motherly approach to a kind of love a boy like Harry would want. Although I doubt it because there are small instances in the book that he is annoyed with some of her so called “nagging”, but that’s probably part of the motherly aspect.
This kind of love though I would not deem likely for Harry because he appears more of the kind of boy who is hero-driven, powerful, take charge and prone to fall in love with the damsel whose love for him is enduring and compliments him in the ways he would like.

Now that I think about it, we can make some arguments between Oedipus and Hamlet with Harry’s character too.


from this line we can derive a few things.
1) That friendship is in no way a hindrance to Eros in Lewis’s philosophy.
2) That Eros can come out of friendship.
3) That Eros from friendship is a fortunate occurrence.

Now we can see that Ginny is not the only one who can supply the Eros , nor am I sure how Hermione supplying the Eros should take away from the Weasleys supplying the other aspects of love from you own model. We can even see that Lewis thinks favorably on Eros coming from friendship therefore giving Hermione a advantage over Ginny, for Harry still thinks of Ginny as Ron’s little sister. This is the major obstacle to the H/G ship, not Ron’s approval (how anyone justifies that argument is far beyond me) or Hermione’s approval, or Molly’s, you get the idea. After this we find an even more confusing aspect, that Ginny needs to become more like Hermione (closer to Harry as a friend) in order to supplant Hermione.


Romantic love does not always start off with friendship, it can be a glance, a sudden realization that one gets from such admiration, whether from their behavior, their commonalities, attraction, sudden bursts of moments, etc. these things are combinative in unexpected hearts that flutter. It’s silly yes, but it happens everyday and it’s something that is uncontrollable.
I am not disagreeing that love can come out of friendship, but as we’ve been discussing, the love that does come out of friendship are affection and charity, which transcends physical love. The physicality of love in terms of body and not of the mind is unreasonable and instinctual. That is the passion I’m talking about.

About finding love with Luna, I do believe he can find love with Luna as well. Affectionate love and understanding between the two on the level of spirituality. Oh, since I am an H/G shipper, I am not an R/Hr advocate. I don’t see the means of the “tension” described by JKR as the means of passionate love. I am in agreement with you, Hawk, about Hermione’s action towards Ron and vice versa. It is not the kind of “model” romantic notion that people should prescribe to. I would rather prescribe the type of love between Mr. and Mrs. Weasley. He does not fight back with her and she affectionately scolds him. It’s a silly warm and deep love I see between them that commands respect as well.

[Hawk 92]

I never said that Harry could not fall in love with Hermione but I did say that Ginny does not seem to be sister like to him.

Correct. Ginny is viewed by Harry as Ron's little sister, for he terms her so. As for the Hermione being more of a sister to him than Ginny, can you show me where Harry views Hermione as a sister? In the books please.

Rather GryffindorGr what we have done is label Harry/Hermione intereactions as brother/sister by our opinion of their interactions, we see them as brother and sister, not they see each other. Therefore we make a platonic error, for much like Plato we reject one aspect (for Plato the flesh, for us a possibility in the books) in order to favor what we feel in truth. One of the reasons christians have to seriously consider the thinking of Plato carefully before employing it in their own thought. And one of the reasons we need to carefully avoid labeling interactions before we apply them to the books.

My latin is pretty rough. does that mean "believe Jew Apella, Not I" or
"Let the Jew Apella believe it, I will not"

"Let the Jew Apella believe it, I will not"

To be honest I just got that particular line from the movie Tombstone. Still it did seem to fit just so much better in Latin. :)

Cheers!

[GryffindorGr]

by Hawk92
Correct. Ginny is viewed by Harry as Ron's little sister, for he terms her so. As for the Hermione being more of a sister to him than Ginny, can you show me where Harry views Hermione as a sister? In the books please.


Lol. You want me to get out all the quotes? You yourself have seen the quotes and even quoted them. The continued concern through out the series, the motherly and sisterly kind of affection displayed, also for Ron too, not just for Harry.

Quickly, in PS/SS she comes in and warns the two not to go off to meet Malfoy to the duel, and out of CoS she sends a letter, which looks suspiciously like a sister/motherly concern for Harry: (p.39)
Dear Ron, and Harry if you’re there,
I hope everything went all right and that Harryis OK and that you didn’t do anything illegal (this smacks similar to Mrs. Weasley’s affectionate anger to the twins and Ron) to get him out, Ron, because that would get Harry into trouble, too. I’ve been really worried. (Emphasis again on worry) and if Harry is all right, will you please let me know at once, but perhaps it would be better if you used a different owl, because I think another delivery might finish your one off.


Rather GryffindorGr what we have done is label Harry/Hermione intereactions as brother/sister by our opinion of their interactions, we see them as brother and sister, not they see each other. Therefore we make a platonic error, for much like Plato we reject one aspect (for Plato the flesh, for us a possibility in the books) in order to favor what we feel in truth. One of the reasons christians have to seriously consider the thinking of Plato carefully before employing it in their own thought. And one of the reasons we need to carefully avoid labeling interactions before we apply them to the books.


Right now, we can’t make claims for romantic notions between either H/HR and H/G, but my argument is, through JKR’s seemingly deliberate metaphors, I see Ginny’s potentiality for romance in the future, as much as you see Hermione’s deep friendship as a development for romance.

I stated my presentation on the above post. Agreeing in the same romantic love and platonic love of courtley love of respect and affection.

Metaphors in CoS, p. 37

She dived under the table to retrieve the bowl and emerged with her face glowing like the setting sun.
to describe the sun again, setting, like two souls who sit on a beach watching the horizon in a romantic setting. The setting sun, the vision of the sun with colorful images, visualizing beauty reflecting our soul. Love for the natural reproduction of the universe and the earth combined and of our “senses” that JKR uses. Senses from the intuition of what effects us romantically.
this was set up in the beginning of CoS, and towards the end, as previously mentioned, and shall repeat: p.219, CoS. British Edition: “Harry could see the sun sinking, blood red, below the skyline. This was the worst he had ever felt”.
Quote again: I thought that was so significant because JKR used imagery, deep colorful metaphors which explained the need and the horror he felt. Blood red, the image of life, like a pulsating life force, and the sinking sun, his sign is of the sun. The sinking into the horizon for instance, shows us even as a 12 year old how powerful this is.

I find it highly interesting how JKR uses Gilderoy Lockhart for the relationship between Ginny and Harry. Although,
Gilderoy was also the name of a famous highwayman of ballad fame
who was reputedly handsome but wanted to make note that it was Lockhart who had to come with them to pursue Ginny and the insertion of the diary appears like a complete lock and key. Just how I see it.

[Prongs, Sr.]

Centaurervan:

As I mentioned in my last post, interview quotes only add more confusion to the already confused fans about such delicate matter:

Quotes add confusion to you because they don't support H/Hr. Please don't assume that others are similarly confused. Let's use common sense to determine JKR's meaning in the "platonic" quote. She was asked if H/Hr have a date which implies romance. She says "no", which is a pretty definitive explanation, imo. Then she further comments on that by saying that they are very platonic friends. I fail to see how this particular quote can be confusing in any fashion.

Since that quote was given a few years back, then look at the most current quote from Jkr:

"Any snogging between Harry and Hermione? Harry and Hermione?...Ron and Hermione, there's more tension there." Again, pretty clear cut and obvious. JKR feels that there are more possibilities for romantic tension between Ron and Hermione and, as she is the author, it would be wise to take this opinion into account.

Hints of interviews might be relevant,

Of course interviews are relevant. JKR is the author of the books!

but to those who have already been confused about the interpretation of the books, those hints might not serve as the right antidote, but rather a more deeper confusion of misunderstandings.

Again, I'm sorry you are confused, but please don't assume that I am, because nothing could be further from the truth. You clearly see H/Hr in the novels and are confused by the lack of support from JKR herself via her quotes; While I see a gradually progression for the R/Hr storyline and JKR's continuing support of the idea in her interviews.

[canteurervan]

Originally posted by Progs:
Quotes add confusion to you because they don't support H/Hr. Please don't assume that others are similarly confused. Let's use common sense to determine JKR's meaning in the "platonic" quote. She was asked if H/Hr have a date which implies romance. She says "no", which is a pretty definitive explanation, imo. Then she further comments on that by saying that they are very platonic friends. I fail to see how this particular quote can be confusing in any fashion.

Progs, as much as I want to go on debating your idea, but I find it shallow...Rowling has been quite cryptic and playful with her clues and secrets, I would understand if you just look at her quotes from that "smooth surface" (quoted from me - canteurervan). If you could open up a bit and look beyond, you might see the quotes mean more than meet the eyes...I've been on R/Hr ship befor remember??!...

***van

[EricaM]

Lol. You want me to get out all the quotes? You yourself have seen the quotes and even quoted them. The continued concern through out the series, the motherly and sisterly kind of affection displayed, also for Ron too, not just for Harry.

Actually, this isn't evidence that Harry sees Hermione as a sister, only that Hermione demonstrates affection for Harry, which you term as sisterly/motherly.

Quickly, in PS/SS she comes in and warns the two not to go off to meet Malfoy to the duel, and out of CoS she sends a letter, which looks suspiciously like a sister/motherly concern for Harry: (p.39)
Dear Ron, and Harry if you’re there,
I hope everything went all right and that Harryis OK and that you didn’t do anything illegal (this smacks similar to Mrs. Weasley’s affectionate anger to the twins and Ron) to get him out, Ron, because that would get Harry into trouble, too. I’ve been really worried. (Emphasis again on worry) and if Harry is all right, will you please let me know at once, but perhaps it would be better if you used a different owl, because I think another delivery might finish your one off.

I've noticed, across many forums, that there seems to be a double standard with respect to Hermione and her demonstrativeness. If she is displaying concern or affection for Harry, it's termed 'sisterly/motherly' however, if she displays if for Ron, it's taken as a sign/symptom of her romantic feelings for him. You have, above, included Ron when talking about Hermione's sisterly/motherly affections, however, it doesn't seem to exclude R/Hr, why then, mutually exclusive for H/Hr?
Tell me, is Molly's fretting after Arthur 'motherly concern'? How, do you suppose, Hermione, given her Virgoean nature to be helpful/try to make things better, would demonstrate non-sisterly affection for Harry?

Right now, we can’t make claims for romantic notions between either H/HR and H/G, but my argument is, through JKR’s seemingly deliberate metaphors, I see Ginny’s potentiality for romance in the future, as much as you see Hermione’s deep friendship as a development for romance.

I stated my presentation on the above post. Agreeing in the same romantic love and platonic love of courtley love of respect and affection.

Metaphors in CoS, p. 37

She dived under the table to retrieve the bowl and emerged with her face glowing like the setting sun.
to describe the sun again, setting, like two souls who sit on a beach watching the horizon in a romantic setting. The setting sun, the vision of the sun with colorful images, visualizing beauty reflecting our soul.

Or, given that Harry never has acted/reacted remotely to Ginny and that as of OotP, Ginny has 'given up' and moved on. The setting sun could be a metaphore for the relationship 'setting' before it even starts. I must admit that this theory, flogged on many a thread, leaves me nonplussed. Why would JKR, repeatedly demonstrates that it's not physical/outer beauty that's important but what lies withen, use this tack to forshadow a relationship for Harry. Throughout canon there are many 'less than favourable' associations with 'physical beauty' (Gilderoy, Fleur, Cho) etc, why would JKR use this to introduce a 'real' romance for Harry?

Love for the natural reproduction of the universe and the earth combined and of our “senses” that JKR uses. Senses from the intuition of what effects us romantically.
this was set up in the beginning of CoS, and towards the end, as previously mentioned, and shall repeat: p.219, CoS. British Edition: “Harry could see the sun sinking, blood red, below the skyline. This was the worst he had ever felt”.
Quote again: I thought that was so significant because JKR used imagery, deep colorful metaphors which explained the need and the horror he felt. Blood red, the image of life, like a pulsating life force, and the sinking sun, his sign is of the sun. The sinking into the horizon for instance, shows us even as a 12 year old how powerful this is.

Again, why use 'pretty discriptors' as metaphors for romance? Why not introduce a real romance to Harry by having him realise the inner/nobler characteristics of a person and not there 'physical/sex' appeal first? IMHO, this is what JKR is doing with respect to Harry and Hermione. Harry's coming to realise Hermione's commitment to him/their friendship. He sees her loyalty and solidarity, etc. I think that's the foundation that JKR is using for romance, not Harry thinking that 'so and so' as pretty hair, or a lovely blush, etc.

I find it highly interesting how JKR uses Gilderoy Lockhart for the relationship between Ginny and Harry. Although,
Gilderoy was also the name of a famous highwayman of ballad fame
who was reputedly handsome but wanted to make note that it was Lockhart who had to come with them to pursue Ginny and the insertion of the diary appears like a complete lock and key. Just how I see it.


Come now, in no way shape or form can you suggest that Lockheart wanted to persue/go after/rescue Ginny. What I find highly interesting is that, through out all the books, Hermione provides the key to Harry's success with each of the books particular 'ordeal'. Whether or not she's physically with Harry, she arms him with wants needed for him to succeed. They make a great team, all three of them do (Harry, Ron and Hermione), however, JKR emphasises that Hermione is always there with him. Moreso than ever in OotP as now Harry hears her voice in his head.

Erica

[Perdita]

I understand but my simplification was meant for the exclusive use of the Weasleys, Hermione, and Sirius (and if I forget to use Harry’s love for his pet Hedwig and material things it was clarified in the next posts) I’m glad though that you pointed it out. It was refreshing to go into detail about affection. Reminding me of the things that I take for granted. Perhaps and possibly Harry may forget or take for granted the people that love him and he loves. I doubt it though.
Good, I’m glad we have an understanding. :)


I’ve never seen flirtatious between Harry and Hermione. Unless I’m mistaken, could you give me a small preview? I’ve always seen their interaction as very platonic, in the respectable way.
Sure, thing, GryffindorGr.

From one of my favourite HP books, POA, ch 10 The Marauder’s Map, 149.
POA:
Hermione bit her lip, looking extremely worried.
‘Are you going to report me?’ Harry asked her, grinning.
‘Oh – of course not – but honestly, Harry – ’
In this example, we see how Hermione is once again thinking off all the possible ways that Harry can get hurt, and she is being very protective. Instead of thinking that she’s smothering his freedom, Harry plays with her anxiety and this eases her up. He taunted her playfully with a grin as he said, “Are you going to report me?” Sensing his playfulness, she is all flustered and can’t even form a sentence properly. This is such a flirtatious scene.

Another point to emphasize in this scene is that Harry is aware of Hermione’s concerns for him, and it does not bother him at all. There is also this scene from GOF, ch 21 The House Elf Liberation Front, 319.
GOF:
‘He’s supposed to work out the clue on his own,’ Hermione said swiftly. ‘It’s in the Tournament rules…’
‘I was supposed to work out how to get past the dragon on my own, too,’ Harry muttered, so only Hermione could here him, and she grinned rather guiltly.
This was a very private moment between them because only Harry and Hermione alone have the knowledge that she helped him on the First Task. Harry taunts her again, and this time she is the one who grins, embarrassed. Now, note that a grin is shows more amusement and pleasure than a smile does. In a smile, the teeth do not necessarily show, but in a grin, the teeth do show. That is an indication of how amusing these two scenes are.

Both the POA and GOF examples show how Harry is rather appreciative of Hermione’s enthusiastic efforts to keep him out of trouble. Both times, he responds in a humourous way, teasing her.

In Ginny, there were blushes that emitted from her when she caught his eye; suggestive from just something they both had an understanding with that concern with humour. When Ginny looked at Ron and stifled a giggle (in the scene about Luna’s obvious affection to Ron) she did not blush but shared a sister/brother contact understanding with him. Although of course not with words but with a light silent laughter. <snipped for focus>
Hm…yes, they smile, but that’s not exactly flirting between Harry and Ginny. Like you said, it’s rather a friendly understanding between them. There are other times when Ginny blushed, simply at the sight of Harry. What other instances did Ginny blush? I remember her blushing a lot, but I don’t remember Harry playing an active role in making her blush. Sometimes, she sees him and that’s enough to make her blush.

Perdita, good that you are not offended because I did state that I meant no offense. I just believe that you can’t get love from just one person alone. You can get them from all sources. I did not misunderstand you. Perhaps because we just don’t agree and we don’t see eye to eye, could be where the frustration lies?
That’s all right, GryffindorGr.

I think we are in agreement that it will not depend entirely on the Weasleys to let Harry experience all four types of love. Initially, you proposed that Harry would experience all four types of love with the Weasley family alone, now that Sirius is gone. That’s why I asked you if it’s possible that he might experience Affection and Friendship with the Weasleys, and that he might experience Eros outside of the Weasley family.

GGr: That was beautiful, Perdita.
:blush: Thanks, GryffidorGr. I would love to take credit for that because it was so eloquent. However, I must return the credit to Hawk 92, as he was the author of it. :)

:clap: for Polaris, GryfffindorGr and Hawk 92.

[Grace Granger]

I don't have a great love for the Weasleys, except Ron and Ginny. I like them and I think they are fun characters, but my absolutely favorite characters are Harry and Remus Lupin, but I understand your dislike for OBHWF. My attachment to the idea is not emotional, but rather, I see evidence that JKR is writing this particular storyline and conclusion.

My dear, I didn't say that I disliked OBHWF.

[~oSiRiS~]

Hawk 92:

Ooooo!! My Latin teacher would of been proud :p

On a side note, I think I need a break from this thread for a bit.
I had a dream about it last night.

Hermione, Myself and Ron were standing at a counter in some shop. Harry was off alone looking at something across the shop.
Hermione made some comment on her possible love interest and Ron as usuall got jealous and started making comments about it. Hermione got angry and stormed off. Ron Then looked at me and I called him an idiot and asked him how can he not understand whats going on. When all of a sudden, a little clay figure that looked like the kid on the "Play-Dough" Logo jumped on the counter started reciting quotes from Plato.
At this point I woke up.

I layed there for like thirty minutes trying to figure out where the hell that dream came from. :huh:

[Perdita]

Quickly, in PS/SS she comes in and warns the two not to go off to meet Malfoy to the duel, and out of CoS she sends a letter, which looks suspiciously like a sister/motherly concern for Harry: (p.39)

Right now, we can’t make claims for romantic notions between either H/HR and H/G, but my argument is, through JKR’s seemingly deliberate metaphors, I see Ginny’s potentiality for romance in the future, as much as you see Hermione’s deep friendship as a development for romance.

Good attempt, GryffindorGr. In the past, whenever I asked other shippers for evidence that Harry thinks of Hermione as a sister, I always got the same answer: “Well, there aren’t any. It just looks that way to me.” At least this time around, we now have a quote to look at. And having looked at that quote, I think I’ll have to say that the notion of Harry thinking of Hermione as a sister is only made upon inference. One reader might interpret it as motherly. Another reader might interpret it as friendly. A third reader might interpret it as bordering on the concern a girlfriend would have. You know how it is. The boyfriend’s buddy wants to take him to a bar to celebrate his birthday, and the girlfriend freaks out on the buddy, worried that her sweetheart will become corrupted under the influence of alcohol and other distractions. In fact, that’s exactly what it looks like to me.

In the end, we’re back where we started. JKR’s writing is so complex and has so many layers of meaning that it’s hard to say for sure, sometimes. This is one of those examples, and we are still in wont of an clear and explicit example where Harry consciously thinks of Hermione as a sister.

Along that line of thinking, I could consider the behaviour of Ron and Hermione as brotherly-sisterly. They are always trying to one-up one another in the earlier books, vying for Harry’s trust. They sometimes fight out of spite, just to make the other person feel bad and to boost their own ego. This doesn’t lend them to any opportunities of understanding each other any more than they did before the fight. She doesn’t get the sense that he cares about her, and neither does he get that impression from her, after all of the fighting. It is perpetually a fight to gain dominance over the other person, with no regard to how that person feels. In OOTP, Hermione seems to have given up on the fighting and she would rather snap at him to shut him up. She has no interest in bickering with him anymore. Of course, she’s still his friend and she still cares about him when he feels unhappy. She is a nice person with a good heart, after all. However, their bickering relationship is no longer like the way it used to be. This appears like two siblings growing up and maturing rather than two young adults trying to get each other’s attention because of unresolved sexual tension. In my mind, there was never any such thing to begin with.

Why not introduce a real romance to Harry by having him realise the inner/nobler characteristics of a person and not there 'physical/sex' appeal first? IMHO, this is what JKR is doing with respect to Harry and Hermione. Harry's coming to realise Hermione's commitment to him/their friendship. He sees her loyalty and solidarity, etc. I think that's the foundation that JKR is using for romance, not Harry thinking that 'so and so' as pretty hair, or a lovely blush, etc.
I agree. Harry has already seen how beautiful Hermione can look if she would just put more effort into it. More importantly, her physical attractiveness holds no sway over his feelings for her. He is getting to know her as a person. Hm…sounds like what Socrates-Diotima were talking about in The Symposium.

[canteurervan]

Originally posted by Perdita:
Good attempt, GryffindorGr. In the past, whenever I asked other shippers for evidence that Harry thinks of Hermione as a sister, I always got the same answer: “Well, there aren’t any. It just looks that way to me.” At least this time around, we now have a quote to look at. And having looked at that quote, I think I’ll have to say that the notion of Harry thinking of Hermione as a sister is only made upon inference. One reader might interpret it as motherly. Another reader might interpret it as friendly. A third reader might interpret it as bordering on the concern a girlfriend would have. You know how it is. The boyfriend’s buddy wants to take him to a bar to celebrate his birthday, and the girlfriend freaks out on the buddy, worried that her sweetheart will become corrupted under the influence of alcohol and other distractions. In fact, that’s exactly what it looks like to me.

In the end, we’re back where we started. JKR’s writing is so complex and has so many layers of meaning that it’s hard to say for sure, sometimes. This is one of those examples, and we are still in wont of an clear and explicit example where Harry consciously thinks of Hermione as a sister.

It sounds quite right. Everyone seems to be biased their analysis on their own personal interest. As I suggest before somewhere in this thread, "universal interpretation" of Rowling's books and quotes are essential to relevation of the truth of the storyline...and universal evidence over the 5 books leads to the SINGLE logic that H/Hr ship will "dock" at Pearl Harbor :rotfl: , while R/Hr will sail to the EXILE... :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

***van.

[Mirtilla]

Good posts Harmony,
:welcome: back Blackknight86!

Originally posted by Prongs Sr
I think your assuming that the idea of OBHWF came for JKR's own head. This was coined in fandom.

I perfectly know that this idea was coined in fandom, I never suggest in my post the contrary.

Originally posted by me
Harry wants is own family not a surrogate of the Weasleys, this was what he saw in the mirror, plus this ending remind me of the One Big Happy Weasley Family theory, OBHWF, for who is new to this thread the OBHWF theory means HR/r and H/g that's why the happy Weasley Family, that is focused on the Weasley rather then on Harry.

Where in this post I suggest that OBHWF comes from Rowling's head? Would you please kindly point out the passage?

I've seen JKR use many hints to foreshadow that the Weasleys will be Harry's future family; Bill and Molly acting as his family in book 4; Molly including Harry in the "Weasley sweaters", etc. My point of view is not based on the Weasley's personal happiness, but rather looking at an overall viewpoint of what JKR is trying to write here.

Your point of view is based on the Weasley not on Harry. We should look from Harry's point of view and from what he feels for the Weasley.
Harry loves Weasley, no doubt about it, he appreciates that Molly consider him as his son however he doesn't feel to be a Weasley.

Harry doesn't feel to be a Weasley, after Arthur attack he felt as if he was an intruder upon the family's drama, if you look from Harry's point of view, you can see that he doesn't see him as a Weasley, he sees him as a Potter, not for nothing he was so proud to be like his father and it was quite traumatic for him find out that James wasn't the saint guy that he thought.

Rowling is writing Harry's story not the Weasley, her point of view has always been from Harry, her focus has been always on Harry, from your assertion it seems as if you think that Rowling is writing "The Weasley and..", as if what Rowling is trying to write is how the Weasley Family will lived happy after Voldemort.

Rowling is trying to write a journey of a young boy that discovers what living means, that is discovering all the aspects of life: in book 1 he discovers friendship, in book two he discovers racism, in books 3 he discovers a type of love that is very similar to a father/brother's kind of love, in book 4 he discovers how life could be not easy, how people could mislead us without feel sorry, in book 5 he discover what it means the lost of a loved one, Harry has a lot of things to learn and to know, this what definitely will happen for sure in next books.


I feel that the Mirror of Erised shows that Harry wants his family back, but the past is over and they can't come back; Sirius' death was the nail in the coffin, also. It makes sense, for Harry's storyline arc to be completely fulfilled, that he ends up having a family on his own. I believe JKR is writing H/G because she has developed the Weasleys since the beginning and we know them well.

Rowling developed the Weasley to give Harry an idea of what a family is, I agree that past is over but still Harry wants a family on his own not a surrogate, he wants the Potter which doesn't necessary mean having James and Lily back, it could also mean that he want to see the Potter, a independent Potter family that isn't a surrogate of the Weasley.

Rowling has developed the Weasley in general except from Ron; no Weasley has been developed as Hermione is. We have a general knowledge of every Weasley but we haven't enough evidence to make a depth analysis of all the Weasley, we know few things from each member, we have hard time to understand if Percy will return back to his family or not, we didn't know very well Charlie and Bill. As far for Ginny, in each every books except ootp she appear at least 10 times per book(except for PS where she appear well 3 times?) mostly in one-line. In ootp Ginny has been developed as much as Luna, that's also why I don't see the big deal, to Harry she's important as Luna is. On the other hand we have Hermione that has been developed much more then all the Weasley together and she has always been more important then the Weasley, for the plot Hermione has always been essential, and for Harry she's essential, more essential then Fred, George, Bill, Charlie, Molly, Arthur and Ginny. Molly and Arthur are good persons, they care of Harry however they aren't so close to Harry as Hermione is, they are distant compared to Hermione, and Ginny is far away from Harry she's not important as Hermione is in Harry's heart and mind.

A bunch of talk about Quidditch can't cover five years of deep friendship, trust and loyalty.

Originally posted by GryffindorGr
I’m not suggesting that Hermione is his mother of course, but that the behaviour displayed by her caring, protection and love could be advocated as a motherly approach to a kind of love a boy like Harry would want.

Displaying caring, protection and love doesn't necessary advocated as a motherly approach rather on a wife approach.
A wife always cares deeply for her husband and your LI is someone that usually should tell you when you're wrong. An husband or a wife gives protection to each other, just like Harry and Hermione, Harry protected Hermione both in a physically way and in not saying what, he knows, would hurt her or scared her, however I can't say he acts like a father towards Hermione. Hermione protects Harry from his irrationality and instinct.
I don't see Hermione acting like a mother towards Harry; she acts like a wife would act.
Harry has already found a motherly approach in Molly; I don't see the point of developed a motherly relationship between Harry and Hermione when Harry already has that one.

To better understand my point, you could also think of Emma by Jane Austen, judging from your post even Mr. Knightley has show a fatherly approach towards Emma but they end up together.

What is important is that both Harry and Emma don’t see respectively Hermione's behavior and Mr Knightley's behavior as motherly or fatherly.

Furthermore both Harry and Hermione has been placed in romantic imagery more then one time, the only problem is that often people missed this little things because they were too children, PoA it's full of examples and GoF idem.
In ootp we have a scaring number of these romantic imageries, let's think only about the Grawp chapter or at what has happened in MoM, definitely all that scenes sunk the idea of Hermione's motherly behavior.
The quite tremendous quarrel that Harry and Hermione have about Sirius and DoM show definitely passion between them, they're both passionate in defending their point and positions even with that they compromised.

On the other hand with Hermione and Ron we don't see such passion, they're bickering each other and that's all. Furthermore they don't keep steps at each other, quite the contrary while Hermione and Harry keeps steps at each other becoming more closer, Harry even thinks of shaking her but he didn't because he respects her, and the simply fact that Harry wanted to shake Hermione simply stated how Harry needs Hermione at his side, how he desperately needs her approval.

Mirtilla

[Cat]

I've been going through old interviews with J. K. Rowling and I've found one in which she flat-out says that Harry and Hermione won't date.

It is from Press Club Interview, October 20, 1999, and she is rifling through questions written down for her.

‘Oh, I like this one… do Harry and Hermione have a date? [laughter] No. They are – they’re very platonic friends. But I won’t answer for anyone else, nudge, nudge, wink, wink’

I'm sure that some people will weasel their way around this and say that it's not what I might think it means, but it seems quite clear to me.

In case anybody doesn't believe me, it's the last question on THIS (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/1999/1099-pressclubtransc.html) transcript.

[GryffindorGr]

Hey, EricaM,
by EricaM
I've noticed, across many forums, that there seems to be a double standard with respect to Hermione and her demonstrativeness. If she is displaying concern or affection for Harry, it's termed 'sisterly/motherly' however, if she displays if for Ron, it's taken as a sign/symptom of her romantic feelings for him. You have, above, included Ron when talking about Hermione's sisterly/motherly affections, however, it doesn't seem to exclude R/Hr, why then, mutually exclusive for H/Hr?

Oh believe me, I don’t agree on the R/HR (my apologies R/Hr shippers, I just have my personal opinions) and no, it’s not exclusive for H/HR, Hermione too displays the same equal amount of motherly/sisterly affection for Ron, and the arguments about “tension” between them, well, I do not particularly care for that kind of behaviour. In all honesty, there’s just no way, imo, (gut feeling) that JKR would use a R/HR romantic relationship to express that this is the model way for young people or even older adults as a means for the perfect romance, ying yang combination, soul mate,etc. I’ve read JKR’s biography and the bickering in an adult romantic relationship for instance is not the way to secure happiness. If there’s no common ground for understanding on an emotional level and there’s too much “bickering” tension, it’s not lasting and could even be volatile. This is truly unhealthy. I’m sure there are plenty of relationships like that but they aren’t a very happy one. If they say they are, well, there are also lots of relationships that are abusive but their partners are in denial. That’s for another issue.

On the above comment to Hawk92 earlier, I mentioned that a better relationship is one between Mr. and Mrs. Weasley. He does not bicker back to her and shows deep respect, although mischievously eggs his children on, and she in turn knows that he does this but affectionately scolds him. With the insertion of Luna, I know now that there is one girl in the series who would harmoniously be a good romantic piece for Ron. There is a need for temperance and understanding and Luna has them on a deeper level than Hermione in this respect, only exclusively for Ron.

I know many R/HR shippers will disagree and say that his maturity will grow and in all goodness and respect to them, I may have agreed, even considered it, but with Luna in the background and as a main character it’s not possible imo. It’s seeing her interaction with Ron that I clearly could see the grand possibility of love and temperance.
Of course I see Ron maturing but also know that his character needs a certain kind of love, that demands him to be the “hero” in his future love’s eyes. The only one I see doing that and even giving credit to his fame (since she is the brainy ravenclaw) is Luna. She would even sacrifice herself to make him look like he did all the work even though she probably has done the mechanisms herself. This is the kind of love I want Ron to have and Luna would be happy in return.

Wow, that was longer than I expected. Lol.


Tell me, is Molly's fretting after Arthur 'motherly concern'? How, do you suppose, Hermione, given her Virgoean nature to be helpful/try to make things better, would demonstrate non-sisterly affection for Harry?


Hm, so far in the series, I’ve seen a glimpse of her “romantic” character, and that was when she saw fireworks, the frizzing whizbees? I think? The little jokes that the Weasley Twins, Fred and George demonstrated. I don’t have the quotes with me but as I recall, she abandoned her homework and even to the surprise of Ron and Harry told them that a break would be much needed. She fancies laughter and needs to loosen up. Since there isn’t any romantic inclination in Hermione yet, perhaps with the promise of JKR’s words that future Hermione in later books will be less study driven and “lighter”, let’s keep our hopes up for it. The fireworks and things related to the joke shop are huge indication of her hidden nature.

Or, given that Harry never has acted/reacted remotely to Ginny and that as of OotP, Ginny has 'given up' and moved on. The setting sun could be a metaphore for the relationship 'setting' before it even starts. I must admit that this theory, flogged on many a thread, leaves me nonplussed. Why would JKR, repeatedly demonstrates that it's not physical/outer beauty that's important but what lies withen, use this tack to forshadow a relationship for Harry. Throughout canon there are many 'less than favourable' associations with 'physical beauty' (Gilderoy, Fleur, Cho) etc, why would JKR use this to introduce a 'real' romance for Harry?


I see what you mean. Physical beauty I’ve seen so far is contrived. JKR seems to set up that beauty isn’t on the surface but on the inside as well. But that doesn’t mean she cannot express this with Hermione’s crush on the late DADA professor. It was the first indication that Hermione can emit a crush and also what kind of looks in a guy she’s more prone to fall in love with, imo. I’ve seen arguments too where Ginny has been noted to fall in love with only dark haired males since she has a great love in Harry, dated Michael and now Dean? Which of course could benefit many of your shipping Ginny with Neville in the future but since I am prone to disagree, I still see her in love secretly with Harry.
Usually the setting sun is a symbol of life and death, a cycle, just like the phoenix.
Sun A setting sun recalls to us that borderland between life and death where we are brought when we visit a cemetery. A symbol of light and warmth, it stands for life itself.

English Christians play on the word "sun" and connect it with the Son of God. The sun has also been called "God's Eye", looking down on all of us. This spirit by its brightness absorbs all others (e.g. the stars), illuminates the world for us, and brings us understanding
Excerpts from:
http://www.alsirat.com/symbols/symbols1.html




Again, why use 'pretty discriptors' as metaphors for romance? Why not introduce a real romance to Harry by having him realise the inner/nobler characteristics of a person and not there 'physical/sex' appeal first? IMHO, this is what JKR is doing with respect to Harry and Hermione. Harry's coming to realise Hermione's commitment to him/their friendship. He sees her loyalty and solidarity, etc. I think that's the foundation that JKR is using for romance, not Harry thinking that 'so and so' as pretty hair, or a lovely blush, etc.


It is part of professional writing when you describe metaphors and symbolism. I’ve learned this through literature and art courses. It is very important as much as psychological and physical descriptions for the senses. We read with our eyes and take in with our mind, discover it and unfold it to expand with our imagination. I don’t disagree that the introduction of the characteristics of a person is beneficial. For instance in one of JKR’s favorite authors, Jane Austen. Her work for instance, she creates with clever appeal. Mostly hers are more on a pairing off bases, commonalities and complementing each other as a partner, not only in intellect, but too in physical descriptions:
In Pride and Prejudice we learn that Mr. Darcy has a "fine, tall person," while Mr. Bingley’s height is apparently not worth mentioning (10). Mr. Darcy’s superior height signals his superior birth and fortune, and his stronger personality. Although Mr. Bingley is indulging in irony when he claims that interactions between friends are determined to a great extent by "their comparative height and size," he is also accurately describing the influence of appearance, particularly the appearance of a "such a great tall fellow" as Mr. Darcy (50). Similarly, Emma Woodhouse is influenced by Mr. Knightley’s "tall, firm, upright figure," which contrasts to his advantage with "the bulky forms and stooping shoulders of the elderly men" in Emma (326). The community of Highbury by its deference to Mr. Knightley seems to agree with Emma that his "figure and look," as well as his "situation in life," justify his "downright, decided, commanding sort of manner" (34).
excerpts from:
http://www.jasna.org/pol01/graham.html



Quote:
I find it highly interesting how JKR uses Gilderoy Lockhart for the relationship between Ginny and Harry. Although,
Gilderoy was also the name of a famous highwayman of ballad fame
who was reputedly handsome but wanted to make note that it was Lockhart who had to come with them to pursue Ginny and the insertion of the diary appears like a complete lock and key. Just how I see it.
QUOTE by EricaM:
Come now, in no way shape or form can you suggest that Lockheart wanted to persue/go after/rescue Ginny. What I find highly interesting is that, through out all the books, Hermione provides the key to Harry's success with each of the books particular 'ordeal'. Whether or not she's physically with Harry, she arms him with wants needed for him to succeed. They make a great team, all three of them do (Harry, Ron and Hermione), however, JKR emphasises that Hermione is always there with him. Moreso than ever in OotP as now Harry hears her voice in his head.


Oh no, this has nothing to do with Lockhart himself, but the use of the “name” Lockhart, and like I said before in my previous posts, My reasoning in this, is a perfect example of the use of Lockhart, and you know we have around the forums, threads, discovered that names are very important in JKR’s writing. Hermione for instance has been clearly speculated from Winters tale and Greek Mythology, and too, I have seen theories written on Hermione’s namesake. This is the same for Lily’s name coming from purity, etc.

As for the insertion of Hermione being Harry’s voice of reason, well he also hears Sirius in his head and that could be that they are both equated on the same levels of love, affection and of charity. Yes, I’ve noted that the three are a great team and now with OotP, Neville, Ginny, and Luna help substantially. As much as Hermione has been there for Harry, Ron too has been there for Harry just not in OotP as much, but more in CoS and other books. It varies with the both of them but ultimately in the end, they are all three of them a great importance for one another.
Well thanks, Erica, that was great fun.


by Perdita
From one of my favourite HP books, POA, ch 10 The Marauder’s Map, 149.
Quote:
POA:
Hermione bit her lip, looking extremely worried.
‘Are you going to report me?’ Harry asked her, grinning.
‘Oh – of course not – but honestly, Harry – ’
In this example, we see how Hermione is once again thinking off all the possible ways that Harry can get hurt, and she is being very protective. Instead of thinking that she’s smothering his freedom, Harry plays with her anxiety and this eases her up. He taunted her playfully with a grin as he said, “Are you going to report me?” Sensing his playfulness, she is all flustered and can’t even form a sentence properly. This is such a flirtatious scene.

From my personal view point, Perdita, I saw it that Harry, like Ron understands that Hermione is very much the straight and narrow kind of girl who studies hard, does their homework, usually rule book ridden, rarely breaks any rules or gets into any sort of trouble, gets them focused in school. She would report them only because she feels that it is her duty to protect Harry. Hermione says in the previous page: Look, Harry still shouldn’t be coming into Hogsmeade, he hasn’t got a signed form! If anyone finds out, he’ll be in so much trouble! And it’s not nightfall yet—what if Sirius Black turns up today? Now?”
Now her avid concern is for Harry, yes, she’s deeply worried and Ron begs her not to report him and Harry knows that she really won’t, not really. So in his response with the grin, he challenges her and though Hermione wavers between, I find the situation still similar to more of love of friendship. I can see why you might find it playful, but the situation seemed to me as concern and worry—thus why she bites her lip, wavering between the decisions.


Originally Posted by GGr
In Ginny, there were blushes that emitted from her when she caught his eye; suggestive from just something they both had an understanding with that concern with humour. When Ginny looked at Ron and stifled a giggle (in the scene about Luna’s obvious affection to Ron) she did not blush but shared a sister/brother contact understanding with him. Although of course not with words but with a light silent laughter. <snipped for focus>
quote by Perdita:
Hm…yes, they smile, but that’s not exactly flirting between Harry and Ginny. Like you said, it’s rather a friendly understanding between them. There are other times when Ginny blushed, simply at the sight of Harry. What other instances did Ginny blush? I remember her blushing a lot, but I don’t remember Harry playing an active role in making her blush. Sometimes, she sees him and that’s enough to make her blush.

This part, I will have to let other H/G shippers give you quotes on because I don’t have all my books with me (unless I come back and quote them all later) but I’d have to say that since you regard their eye contact and Ginny’s blushes as a friendly understanding, then in retrospective is the same with Hermione and Harry’s regard for each other. As for Ginny blushing just because she comes in contact with Harry. Lol! I had to laugh there because you’re right, Ginny does seem to be flustered around Harry and that is enough evidence to make her blush without him saying anything.

Good attempt, GryffindorGr. In the past, whenever I asked other shippers for evidence that Harry thinks of Hermione as a sister, I always got the same answer: “Well, there aren’t any. It just looks that way to me.” At least this time around, we now have a quote to look at

There are plenty more I can present but after this post, I think I'm tired out. lol. Perhaps later.

In the end, we’re back where we started. JKR’s writing is so complex and has so many layers of meaning that it’s hard to say for sure, sometimes. This is one of those examples, and we are still in wont of an clear and explicit example where Harry consciously thinks of Hermione as a sister


Agreed. Definitely complex. Probably why we're all HP obsessed. lol!


GGr: That was beautiful, Perdita.
QUOTE by Perdita:
Thanks, GryffidorGr. I would love to take credit for that because it was so eloquent. However, I must return the credit to Hawk 92, as he was the author of it.


Ah. (nods to Hawk92)
Well, i always knew his writing(s) were good, although we dont see eye to eye on things. :)

If I dont reply to other's post, sorry, but I think I'm going to take a quickie break from this thread. I'll be back though.

by ~oSiRiS~

On a side note, I think I need a break from this thread for a bit.
I had a dream about it last night.


LOL! Yeah, a nice little break is good for everyone. Hey, where are the other posters? Did we scare them with Platonic love?

[EricaM]

I've been going through old interviews with J. K. Rowling and I've found one in which she flat-out says that Harry and Hermione won't date.

It is from Press Club Interview, October 20, 1999, and she is rifling through questions written down for her.

‘Oh, I like this one… do Harry and Hermione have a date? [laughter] No. They are – they’re very platonic friends. But I won’t answer for anyone else, nudge, nudge, wink, wink’

I'm sure that some people will weasel their way around this and say that it's not what I might think it means, but it seems quite clear to me.

In case anybody doesn't believe me, it's the last question on THIS (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/1999/1099-pressclubtransc.html) transcript.

Explain to me why, when in October of 1999 she, according to you, revealed that Harry and Hermione would never have a relationship, that their relationship is and forever will be, devoid of romance, does she in subsequent interviews equivocate?


Feb 2000:
going to fall in love with Ginny Weasley?
JKR: In Book IV Harry does decide he likes a girl, but it's not Hermione or Ginny. However, he's only 14, so there's plenty of time for him to change his mind. ;-)

May 2000:
UKMCLive: Goldhook is looking to the future... Ms. Rowling, can you discuss the possiblity of a central character dying? AND as Harry matures does a love interest develop between he and Hermione? Thank you.
JKR Live: Well, as I said, there will be deaths, but I am giving nothing away there, as for Harry & Hermione... do you really think they're suited?

Is it not obvious how stupid it is to, on the one hand reveal to all and sundry that these two characters do not have a romance, and then, on subsequent question on the same topic remain coy or equivocate? How do you reconcile a JKR who is keen on or doesn't much care about revealing the entire nature of the Harry/Hermione dynamic and then six months later, backtrack and try to keep it a myster?

Did she forget she already revealed that Harry and Hermione would never have a romance?

Or is it that she doesn't believe that she did reveal that Harry and Hermione are never to have a romance. JKR never has given us any important information that has already not been established in the books. She doesn't reveal whether or not Sirius will be cleared, she doesn't reveal whether or not the twins will open their joke shop, why then, would she reveal /come clean about the Harry and Hermione dynamic?

IMHO, JKR chose to answer this questions because she could take refuge in the fact that she could be literal and yet not give anything away. Harry and Hermione don't go on a date - however, that hasn't stopped them for being along together at times. They have both been on dates with other people 'nudge, nudge, wink, wink' - and yet these nascent relationships get nipped in the bud before they even bloom because of 'misconceptions' (? perhaps not) of Hermione and Harry's relationship.

Another thing that strikes me as odd, why did JKR choose the word platonic, to describe Harry and Hermione's relationship when her audience is made up, primarily of children (5th graders)?

Erica

[Mirtilla]

Originally posted by GryffindorGr
LOL! Yeah, a nice little break is good for everyone. Hey, where are the other posters? Did we scare them with Platonic love?

Oh well, I hope that we didn't scare them, they will return back soon, however it was nice the "Platonic argument",

See you later,

Mirtilla

[EricaM]

It is part of professional writing when you describe metaphors and symbolism. I’ve learned this through literature and art courses. It is very important as much as psychological and physical descriptions for the senses. We read with our eyes and take in with our mind, discover it and unfold it to expand with our imagination. I don’t disagree that the introduction of the characteristics of a person is beneficial. For instance in one of JKR’s favorite authors, Jane Austen. Her work for instance, she creates with clever appeal. Mostly hers are more on a pairing off bases, commonalities and complementing each other as a partner, not only in intellect, but too in physical descriptions:
In Pride and Prejudice we learn that Mr. Darcy has a "fine, tall person," while Mr. Bingley’s height is apparently not worth mentioning (10). Mr. Darcy’s superior height signals his superior birth and fortune, and his stronger personality. Although Mr. Bingley is indulging in irony when he claims that interactions between friends are determined to a great extent by "their comparative height and size," he is also accurately describing the influence of appearance, particularly the appearance of a "such a great tall fellow" as Mr. Darcy (50). Similarly, Emma Woodhouse is influenced by Mr. Knightley’s "tall, firm, upright figure," which contrasts to his advantage with "the bulky forms and stooping shoulders of the elderly men" in Emma (326). The community of Highbury by its deference to Mr. Knightley seems to agree with Emma that his "figure and look," as well as his "situation in life," justify his "downright, decided, commanding sort of manner" (34).
excerpts from:
http://www.jasna.org/pol01/graham.html

Much obliged for the lesson on writing, :) , however

a)Do you see Harry and Ginny as having the same stature (in terms of story and plot) as Darcy and Lizzy, or Emma and Mr. Knightly? Just curious?

b)JKR was taken by 'Little White Horse' precisely because
My favorite book when I was about 8 was THE LITTLE WHITE HORSE, and the heroine, Maria, because she was a very interesting heroine -- she wasn't beautiful, she was nosy, she had a temper. She was human, in a word, when a lot of girl characters tend not to be.

c)Do we not know a lot about Hermione? Both her physical appearance but also her personality, her character, her dreams (taking S.P.E.W. to greater heights)?

Why does Harry passively observing that Ginny's blush is the colour of the setting sun indicate romantic foreshadowing however Harry actively recognizing Hermione's loyalty and solidarity, actively appraising her appearance at the Yule Ball, actively moving to protect her the many times in OotP does not?

[Perdita]

I've been going through old interviews with J. K. Rowling and I've found one in which she flat-out says that Harry and Hermione won't date.

It is from Press Club Interview, October 20, 1999, and she is rifling through questions written down for her.

‘Oh, I like this one… do Harry and Hermione have a date? [laughter] No. They are – they’re very platonic friends. But I won’t answer for anyone else, nudge, nudge, wink, wink’

I'm sure that some people will weasel their way around this and say that it's not what I might think it means, but it seems quite clear to me.

In case anybody doesn't believe me, it's the last question on THIS (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/1999/1099-pressclubtransc.html) transcript.

Hello, Cat,

Haven’t seen you post in the LT before. Nice to see you here.

That “Platonic” quote has actually been dissected, analyized and discussed in this debate for a very long time. What struck me in your post was when you said: “I'm sure that some people will weasel their way around this <snipped>.”

In the words of Lanifiel:
- Whatever ship you support, please remember to respect and appreciate alternative ships.
- JK Rowling in her usual masterful way is keeping us on our toes about who will end up with who and therefore we cannot truly know until we know. We should all note that whilst we can know a lot from what we read, we do not yet know everything. Please keep that in mind.

Some H/Hr shippers might take offence to your comment about their debating attitude and not their debating points. I’m sure that some H/G and R/Hr shippers would be incensed if I were to tell them they were “weaselling” out of a difficult debate topic. Instead of focussing on debating behaviour, why not let us focus on our arguments and what we consider as evidence?

Some shippers consider the quotes as primary evidence against H/Hr, and as positive evidence for R/Hr. Back in 1999, when POA was released, this quote by JKR might have been very convincing. After reading GOF and OOTP, however, it seems like there is not evidence from the books themselves to conclusively sink the H/Hr ship, nor to push the sails of the R/Hr ship. Like Erica made very clear in her above post, which involved analysing early and recent quotes, that they are becoming increasingly self-contradictory over time, not only in relation to other quotes, but in relation to the novels themselves.

This is the reason, not an excuse, for why some of us don’t put a lot of faith in interview quotes.

On to GryffindorGr’s post:
Now her avid concern is for Harry, yes, she’s deeply worried and Ron begs her not to report him and Harry knows that she really won’t, not really. So in his response with the grin, he challenges her and though Hermione wavers between, I find the situation still similar to more of love of friendship. I can see why you might find it playful, but the situation seemed to me as concern and worry—thus why she bites her lip, wavering between the decisions.
That’s a perfectly valid interpretation, which only goes to reinforce my earlier point, that not everything is presented as black and white. But, you and I, we already agree on this, so it’s all cool! :D

LOL! Yeah, a nice little break is good for everyone. Hey, where are the other posters? Did we scare them with Platonic love?
I dunno…I hope not. It seems like everytime I want to get back into the debate, others are tired of it. :(

[lauradonaghy]

EricaM - great post! :tu:

Hello, Cat,

[QUOTE]After reading GOF and OOTP, however, it seems like there is not evidence from the books themselves to conclusively sink the H/Hr ship, nor to push the sails of the R/Hr ship.
In fact many fans shippers I've spoken to converted to H/Hr after OotP, saying that R/Hr has sailed to the middle of the ocean and run out of supplies, metaphorically speaking. Basically we converts think that if Ron hasn't made a move by now, he never will. Meanwhile, Harry and Hermione got closer and Ron would up as practically a third wheel.

It seems like everytime I want to get back into the debate, others are tired of it. :(
They're veterans, I'm a noob. On this forum, anyway. You need a change of scenery sometimes. :D

[Dedalus]

Actually, Cat wasn't disrespecting other people's "ships", because she herself doesn't have one. I should know, I'm her twin. Except perhaps that she and Mad-Eye Moody should get together, but that's a different story and one she's on medication for :lol: . So you needn't shout at her for breaking rules she has not.

I, too, don't have a ship. So this is an outsiders opinion, right ...

Cat has a point.

The question in that interview was "do Harry and Hermione have a date?" which doesn't mean have they or will they specifically in the next book ... it means will they, full stop. And when J.K. Rowling answers "no" I fail to see how this can be interpretated as an out of date quotation by her. Nor can I see how that doesn't tie in with her next comment, about "But I won't answer for anybody else" ... which means "no, but it'll happen with other people".

Again, this is a completely outsider couldn't-care-less about relationships unless it becomes important opinion ... I'm not dissing Harry and Hermione fans, I'm just saying that surely when J.K. Rowling says they won't have a date, that means they won't have a date? A comment that applies to the books in general surely can't not mean anything after the release of a few books.

[lauradonaghy]

Actually, Cat wasn't disrespecting other people's "ships", because she herself doesn't have one. I should know, I'm her twin.
Really? Cool!

Except perhaps that she and Mad-Eye Moody should get together, but that's a different story and one she's on medication for :lol: . So you needn't shout at her for breaking rules she has not.
But even if she doesn't have a ship, H/Hr shippers do (obviously :P) so it's a bit disrespectful to us even if Cat doesn't ship any particular pairing.

The question in that interview was "do Harry and Hermione have a date?" which doesn't mean have they or will they specifically in the next book ... it means will they, full stop. And when J.K. Rowling answers "no" I fail to see how this can be interpretated as an out of date quotation by her. Nor can I see how that doesn't tie in with her next comment, about "But I won't answer for anybody else" ... which means "no, but it'll happen with other people".
What constitutes a date in HP? Seemingly a visit to somewhere like the coffee shop - the better part of Hogwarts relationships develop in the castle. It's likely that Hogsmeade trips will be cancelled in light of the Second War, so H/Hr can still happen without dating.

[Cat]

Perdita, 'weasel' is not an offensive term. Or at least not as far as I'm aware. It refers to cunning, which is what you'd need to see a loophole in the statement I quoted. Frankly, I can't see one. She didn't say 'Maybe'. She didn't say 'Not yet'. She was asked if they would date and she said 'No'.

I don't 'ship' anybody myself - I think it's absurd to get so worked up about such an insignificant aspect of the books - so I'm just quoting what J. K. Rowling said.

You can't accuse J. K. Rowling of disrespecting your 'ship', surely? She said what she said.

EDIT: lauradonaghy, I see what you mean about the word 'date', but the 'platonic' bit and the nudges and wiks in the directons of other character add weight to the 'no'.

Does it really matter if Hermione and Harry don't get together?

[Grace Granger]

Perdita, 'weasel' is not an offensive term. Or at least not as far as I'm aware. It refers to cunning, which is what you'd need to see a loophole in the statement I quoted. Frankly, I can't see one. She didn't say 'Maybe'. She didn't say 'Not yet'. She was asked if they would date and she said 'No'.

I don't 'ship' anybody myself - I think it's absurd to get so worked up about such an insignificant aspect of the books - so I'm just quoting what J. K. Rowling said.

Pardon, but if you don't ship anybody, then why are you here quoting what J.K. Rowling said?

You can't accuse J. K. Rowling of disrespecting your 'ship', surely? She said what she said.

I belive that Perdita has not accused J.K. Rowling of disrespecting her ship. She simply views the question and answer differently than you and those who ship HR/r and H/g.


Does it really matter if Hermione and Harry don't get together?

Does it really matter if Hermione and Ron and Harry and Ginny don't get together?

[Cat]

Pardon, but if you don't ship anybody, then why are you here quoting what J.K. Rowling said?

Because what J. K. Rowling says is always relevent and I had just stumbled upon the old interview.

And, excuse me, but are you implying I shouldn't be here?


I belive that Perdita has not accused J.K. Rowling of disrespecting her ship. She simply views the question and answer differently than you and those who ship HR/r and H/g.

Yes, but she didn't answer how she saw it differently.



Does it really matter if Hermione and Ron and Harry and Ginny don't get together?

No. Of course it dosn't. That's my point - it doesn't matter either way! It's supposed to be a sweet bit of fun not 'Let's all attack people who make a statement contrary to own own like a vicious pack of hyenas'. No wonder this thread gets closed so much.

EDIT: I've just had a predction that somebody's going to say 'But you attacked our opinions first!'. But I didn't give my own opinion about who I think should end up with who and I never have.

[Perdita]

Actually, Cat wasn't disrespecting other people's "ships", because she herself doesn't have one. I should know, I'm her twin. Except perhaps that she and Mad-Eye Moody should get together, but that's a different story and one she's on medication for :lol: . So you needn't shout at her for breaking rules she has not.

Hello, Dedalus,

Read my post, I did not “shout” at her.

The fact remains that H/Hr shippers might take offence to her “weasel” comment, regardless of whether or not Cat is a shipper.

Again, this is a completely outsider couldn't-care-less about relationships unless it becomes important opinion ... I'm not dissing Harry and Hermione fans, I'm just saying that surely when J.K. Rowling says they won't have a date, that means they won't have a date? A comment that applies to the books in general surely can't not mean anything after the release of a few books.

Even when the books show events that are contrary to what JKR says in her quotes? Will you not contend with the possibility that JRK is deliberately going back and forth so as to not reveal the future plotlines of her novels?

You can't accuse J. K. Rowling of disrespecting your 'ship', surely? She said what she said.

I didn't before, and I don't intend to start now.

If anything, my point is that she is not being straight forward. The reason for that could be because she does not want to reveal the future plots of her series.

Perdita, 'weasel' is not an offensive term.

You're right, as a term on its own, it is not meant to cause offence. The expression "weasel around" or "weasel out" does have negative implications. The negative implication is that someone is avoiding the issue instead of addressing it.

[Boris_the_Bewilder]

I don't care who ends up with whom as long as it is not a sappy Hollywood ending with the six paired off and walking into the sunset hand in hand. I hope JKR can something more interesting than that.

(Oh, and as of OOTP, I don't think Hermione has the slightest romantic interest in Ron.)

[Cat]

You're right, as a term on its own, it is not meant to cause offence. The expression "weasel around" or "weasel out" does have negative implications. The negative implication is that someone is avoiding the issue instead of addressing it.

I was thinking more o the lines of 'Weasling up your trouser leg' (possibly my own made up expression) and hadn't intended on connotations of 'weasel out'.

But I still think it's unreasonable to scold me for quoting J. K. Rowling. In any other thread it would be a valid contribution. Here, if you suggest anything contrary to somebody's opinion, you're branded offensive. Is this debate or a brawl?

Personally, I think the answer 'No.' is not mysterious in any way. If you want to say why you think it is alluding to anything other than what it appears, say so and why. Reasonably. Logically. Don't just bristle against it.

[noddwyd]

Actually Dedalus, the question really is not 'will they', it's 'do they.' And of course the answer to that is no. They do not. Will they is a completely different question, which has not been answered by JKR yet, in her books, or in her interviews. But people did go on dates to the Yule Ball in GoF, which is the book the question is referring to, as it was about to come out at that time. Hence the 'but I won't answer for anyone else..' I thought it was quite obvious she was referring to the Yule Ball, and teasing the fans, but everyone interprets these things however the heck they want to, I guess, and there's nothing wrong with that. But there is another quote of JKR's where she stated that she sweat blood to create all her red herrings and lay all her clues and she was not about to give anything away at this point. If someone could find a link to this interview I'm talking about, and I believe it's the Paxman one, where he asks about Draco/Hermione, I would be grateful.

By the way, does anyone besides myself ever wonder exactly why GoF had to be largely rewritten? Surely it has nothing to do with shipping....right?

[Grace Granger]

Because what J. K. Rowling says is always relevent and I had just stumbled upon the old interview.

And, excuse me, but are you implying I shouldn't be here?

No I wasn't implying that you shouldn't.




Yes, but she didn't answer how she saw it differently.

Then perhaps you should have asked her instead of assuming.



No. Of course it dosn't. That's my point - it doesn't matter either way! It's supposed to be a sweet bit of fun not 'Let's all attack people who make a statement contrary to own own like a vicious pack of hyenas'. No wonder this thread gets closed so much.

EDIT: I've just had a predction that somebody's going to say 'But you attacked our opinions first!'. But I didn't give my own opinion about who I think should end up with who and I never have.

Am I attacking you? I'm sorry if you feel that way. It was not my intention. Rather I just wanted to add that so that everyone is included, not just those who ship H/Hr.

[canteurervan]

It's quite true that OotP hasn't shown any "tension" on R/Hr at all. All happened were the process to the revelation of the prophecy and Harry's destiny. I take this as a sign for H/Hr more than anything. The road ahead for Harry is way too much. He just got out of a very bad date with Cho, and even got disappointed in Cho...It's not very likely that Harry will date again easily unless...there's someone he can totally trust, which is the role of Hermione. And plz do not attempt to bring Ginny into this since if you check the record of OotP, I believe Ginny made it clear that she's given up on Harry, not to mention if Harry ever has any romantic interest in her at all.

***van.

[EricaM]

Cat has a point.

The question in that interview was "do Harry and Hermione have a date?" which doesn't mean have they or will they specifically in the next book ... it means will they, full stop. And when J.K. Rowling answers "no" I fail to see how this can be interpretated as an out of date quotation by her. Nor can I see how that doesn't tie in with her next comment, about "But I won't answer for anybody else" ... which means "no, but it'll happen with other people".

You fail to take into account her subsequent interviews. You're suggesting that because JKR said Hermione and Harry don't have a date, that they won't have a romance, however, JKR didn't say that. We know that JKR doesn't intend that because when she is asked about their having a romance, or their 'falling in love' she does not respond with, 'No, they don't fall in love' or 'No, they don't have a romance', she does not repeat the earlier definitive No - she equivocates.

Right there, the big flashing lights should be going off. If the presumption is that JKR considers Harry and Hermione's relationship to be of little importance (plotwise) that she feels comfortable in revealing the extent of it (ie. that it remains platonic, that it doesn't grow to romantic love) with her platonic quote in October of 1999, so too, she should have felt comfortable reiterating this in her subsequent responses in Feb and May of 2000. The fact that she didn't reiterate it indicates, IMHO, that it remains a possibility.

Again, this is a completely outsider couldn't-care-less about relationships unless it becomes important opinion ... I'm not dissing Harry and Hermione fans, I'm just saying that surely when J.K. Rowling says they won't have a date, that means they won't have a date? A comment that applies to the books in general surely can't not mean anything after the release of a few books.

I don't really care about relationships in the sense that I won't die if H/Hr doesn't happen (I don't realy care about who Hermione ends up with - though I will grumble if it's R/Hr). My all time favourite fanfics to date are SS/HG (go figure) due to the talents of KazVL and Textualsphinx. I ship H/Hr because I like puzzles, I like trying to solve them, and I think that the answer to the 'Who will be Harry's ultimate LI' puzzle is Hermione.

Cheers,
Erica

[Rowena Ravenclaw]

a)Do you see Harry and Ginny as having the same stature (in terms of story and plot) as Darcy and Lizzy, or Emma and Mr. Knightly?

Perhaps not, but then, romance in general doesn't have the same stature in Harry Potter which it enjoys in Austen.

This is at least partially why I'm staying out of the whole Plato/Lewis debate. At least Rowling's admitted to being influenced by Austen. But I'll be surprised if it turns out she's made any extensive study of either Plato or Lewis, let alone made their views a major component in planning out the relationships.

[noddwyd]

by the way. It is very possible that Harry/Hermione could happen and we still never see them actually go on a 'date' in the books. Has that not occurred to anyone here?

Anyway, I have to say it saddens me to see what is more than likely one of the main themes of the septology, love, to be viewed as just a side show in the series. This is just my opinion, maybe, but I believe it has already become a very important issue. Mainly because of what Dumbledore tells Harry about the powers he has that Voldemort does not. I already made a post about this earlier in the thread. I can give you the post # if anyone wants to know it.

[EricaM]

Perhaps not, but then, romance in general doesn't have the same stature in Harry Potter which it enjoys in Austen.

This is at least partially why I'm staying out of the whole Plato/Lewis debate. At least Rowling's admitted to being influenced by Austen. But I'll be surprised if it turns out she's made any extensive study of either Plato or Lewis, let alone made their views a major component in planning out the relationships.

I may be wrong but I was under the impression that JKR studied (did a degree in) Classics at university.

E

[Cat]

Then perhaps you should have asked her instead of assuming.


Assuming what? That people would find loopholes? They did! Assumption correct! The assumption was posed as a challenge. If fuel isn't added (and a quote from She Who Knows All is genuine fuel enough), the thread couldn't possibly result in debate.

So what exactly am I in the stocks for now?

On an enlightened note, I think I've remembered why I usually avoid this thread.

EricaM, personally, I believe one 'no' and several none-answers leans more to the negative side than the positive. More of a 'maybe not' than a 'maybe', so to speak. But you would be plausible in saying that a 'maybe not' is not a definite 'no'. Except for 'Will they date?', whatever that question might mean to you.

[FlyingPhoenix]

You know as more often I read this platonic quote as more I wonder about this laughing by JKR. Hmmm no you shouldn't start to think I think H/Hr won't happen anymore. Its as closer we got to PoA movie, as more I find myself looking back at this book at all. See this was the book which came out before that interview. Right, Hermione appears in PoA very worried, nearly like in OotP. As many children or Teenager movies I have seen it was always that if a girl was worried in that way like Hermione in PoA for a boy then this one was more as just a friend to her. It was even that in the end they got together or the heart of the girl was broken.
My point with this quote is that saying or answering this with: (laughing) No they're very platonic friends.

Sounds to me more and more like: Nope, they are anyway already "platonic" friends.

This describs in someways exactly what happened in book5. Harry asked Cho out because he wanted to spend time with her, learn to know her.
But by Hermione he don't need that. Its rather stupid if you think about it why should Harry spend even more time with Hermione though he has her already everyday around him. Why should he need to learn her to know. If he already do and that for 5 years now.
A classical date is something to get to know each other and to spend time with each other. But by a "couple" who is nearlly close like a "married-couple" there exist not such a reason.
Sure they might go out, have fun but heck thats not a classical date. Its laughable that people who are that close have "date" anyway.

Just view it from JKR's POV. You are going to write H/Hr (something what I do in fanfiction) and someone ask do they have a date. My answer would be No, too. As fanfic author because I don't write for sure a date with them. Why should I? Its pointless. How should such a scene look like if you plan H/Hr in book7 so at the end? Sure like hell you don't write an extra scene just for them. By Harry and Cho there did something happen the Quibbler article. If JKR hadn't this one too she hadn't write the scene. Simple as that.
Maybe write somewhat about holding hands, about Harry's deep feelings heck even a kiss what the reader will actuelly read. Yes this but not a date.

By a question R/Hr have a date I'm sure the answer would have been the same. Thats funny though that people think Ron and Hermione needs to learn each other to know.

[sone]

Assuming what? That people would find loopholes? They did!

They did not find holes in the quote but rather your interpretation. Nevertheless, if you wanted to know how she saw it differently, you should ask, not assume.

[EricaM]

EricaM, personally, I believe one 'no' and several none-answers leans more to the negative side than the positive. More of a 'maybe not' than a 'maybe', so to speak. But you would be plausible in saying that a 'maybe not' is not a definite 'no'. Except for 'Will they date?', whatever that question might mean to you.


The point is that those who'd champion the 'JKR has definitively said that Harry and Hermione will not have a romance' are basing it on a faulty assumption.
They assume that JKR has revealed her hand wrt H/Hr, when in actual fact, she hasn't.

I do, however, appreciate that people bring their own bias into the interpretation of JKR's quotes, resulting in various expectations for future canon. H/G shippers who when it was revealed by JKR that Ginny 'would play more of a role' began hoping/imagining that there would be a 'quickening' of H/G, that Harry would develop some sort of affinity for Ginny, that the connection the share with Voldemort would be brought to bear. Alas, OotP comes out and yet, true Ginny had more of a role (JKR didn't lie), it wasn't anymore pronounced than say Nevilles or Luna's. However 'more of a role' Ginny played, Hermione's role, by far and away, was more pivotal. Even with Ginny's Voldie connection with Harry, JKR chose to showcase a new Hermione/Harry connection with Voldemort, their both being able to say his name as well as Hermione being able to advise/warn Harry regarding Voldemort's tricks eventhough Harry did not head them. R/H shippers where all a tizzy at the prospect of Ron and Hermione having their first real kiss in OotP, thanks to JKR's reponse to Kuric's snogging question. However, not only do Hermione and Ron not engage in any snogging, there was a definite 'dissipation' of the frenetic so called 'sexual tension' between the two, and a distinct, IMHO, theme of Hermione being 'not interested' in Ron in that way.

Cheers,
Erica

[Mirtilla]

I've already asked this question to H/g shippers but, for some reasons, I never got an answer.
We know from canon that Ginny has given up on Harry however some H/g shipper are arguing that actually Ginny is still in love with Harry.
Well, first off I don't see how Ginny was in love in the first place since she has basically a crush on an image.
She's the one that as she saw at the age of 10 years old Harry at King Cross pointed Harry as if he was a zoo-animal and start yelling "Oh mom, there's Harry Potter" or something along these lines. To me this is not love, everything but love, it's just a plain and simple crush on a celebrity. No other girls as show a similar reaction at the sight of Harry for the first time, Hermione doesn't suddenly get excited and she has only one year more then Ginny, there's no a big difference and it shows the different level of maturity between Ginny and Hermione, anyway FP has already explained this whole issue in her excellent essay, my point is another one.
Like I said above some H/g shippers actually said that Ginny still has feelings for Harry in ootp. Now I would like to know where is the evidence to make this assumption. In canon we see a Ginny that, to be honest, doesn't care so much about Harry and furthermore actually pursed Harry/Cho relationship telling him to talk to Cho, something that Hermione has never done, she has never said to Harry "talk to Cho".
Plus why Ginny should have still feelings for Harry?
From a Ginny's point of view, Harry has never been kind towards her, he has always show a lack of interest in Ginny's feelings and emotions, on the contrary he has show interest in Hermione's feeling, in PoA he was the only one that notice that Hermione wasn't participating to the party after the Quidditch match, with Ginny we have never seen something like that. Plus Harry still sees her as Ron's sister, as canon evidence clearly show us. Ginny in ootp has shown interest in other boys and she has also shown respect towards Neville, if you want with can compare Ginny’s behavior towards Neville and Ginny’s behavior towards Harry you’ll see that there’s a difference, with Neville Ginny is nice while on Harry, except from the library scene, she hasn’t been properly nice. In ootp we have see enough of Ginny’s personality to safely said that she’s not the type of girl that gives second chances, she didn’t give Michael a second chance, she said goodbye as he went to cheer up another girl, Cho Chang who seems to have the special gift of stealing “Ginny’s boys” from Ginny. So why she would give Harry a second chance? when Harry has never shown any sign of caring and friendship towards her? So why Ginny should have a crush on a boy, Harry, that has never show interest in her?

Mirtilla

[~oSiRiS~]

I have a question for the R/L shippers.

I noticed a few different people state that Ron is afraid to take an offensive approachon things(Hr ect). After reading thier examples I can see where they are comming from with that assumption. This got me thinking about R/L.
At the end of OotP(pg 862-863 US) when Harry and Luna are talking about the Veil. She says people took her stuff. When Harry ask if she needs help finding it she says "Oh no, They'll come back, they always do in the end".
This gives me the impression that she has a similar personality, being that she doesn' take the offensive approach.
If this is true how are Ron and Luna going to get togather if they are both sitting back waiting for the other to ask the other out?

[sone]

This gives me the impression that she has a similar personality, being that she doesn't take the offensive approach. If this is true how are Ron and Luna going to get together if they are both sitting back waiting for the other to ask the other out?

Considering if this relationship does happen; they're not going to be sitting back waiting for the other. One, Luna is not that shy about Ronald. Two, Ron, I believe is going to have alot more confidence in himself due to being a prefect and being a Quidditch hero.

[Fairydust]

I've already asked this question to H/g shippers but, for some reasons, I never got an answer.
We know from canon that Ginny has given up on Harry however some H/g shipper are arguing that actually Ginny is still in love with Harry.

I've said this many threads before. Just because a person has given up on someone does not mean that they are over that person. Ginny can give up on trying to get Harry, that doesn't mean she's over him. I or you can give up on someone, but that doesn't mean you're totally over that person. Thus, I'll say again that Ginny's not over Harry. She gave up on him, but she's not over him.

Well, first off I don't see how Ginny was in love in the first place since she has basically a crush on an image.

Hmm... wasn't it JK that said Ginny was languishing in love for Harry? That and the "Leave him alone. He didn't want all that!" she yelled at Draco. If she was in love with an image then, darn, how did she know that he didn't want any of the attention he got. I mean, she's only been inthe room with the guy a few times yet she can tell what he feels and everything. I think you gotta look way past the image to see all that. She ain't in love with his image.

She's the one that as she saw at the age of 10 years old Harry at King Cross pointed Harry as if he was a zoo-animal and start yelling "Oh mom, there's Harry Potter" or something along these lines.

She was ten! She saw her hero! Give her a break. At least she didn't come right up to him and say "I read all about you...blah blah blah...!" Her reaction to him was pretty much like everyone elses. Are you going to hate on them, too?

To me this is not love, everything but love, it's just a plain and simple crush on a celebrity.

You know, I'll agree with you on some point. I think it did start on a mere crush. But it evolved. You can see that it evolved during the fourth book even.

No other girls as show a similar reaction at the sight of Harry for the first time, Hermione doesn't suddenly get excited and she has only one year more then Ginny, there's no a big difference and it shows the different level of maturity between Ginny and Hermione

Right, instead Hermione just presumed that she knew everything about him because she read it. She made him uncomfortable and started prattling off about everything she's read about him. And if you're going to compare maturity then there's no contest. Hermione is a lot more mature than Ginny. Hell, Hermione's a McGonagall in training. You cannot compare them because Hermione is way too mature for her age.

Like I said above some H/g shippers actually said that Ginny still has feelings for Harry in ootp. Now I would like to know where is the evidence to make this assumption.

Where's the evidence that Harry's in love with Hermione? Like I said above. You can't be in love with someone for four years and just throw it all away at once. She gave up. That does not mean that she's over him. Subtle differences.


In canon we see a Ginny that, to be honest, doesn't care so much about Harry and furthermore actually pursed Harry/Cho relationship telling him to talk to Cho, something that Hermione has never done, she has never said to Harry "talk to Cho".

Are you friggin kidding me? She doesn't care about Harry? We are definitely not reading the same book because in OotP we see Ginny as the only one that's really able to talk to him. She helped him with his Sirius problem. She tried to help him with his Cho problem. She listened to him, unlike some other characters. She doesn't care? Right. :huh:

Plus why Ginny should have still feelings for Harry?

Why does a person care for the person they care for? Come on.

From a Ginny's point of view, Harry has never been kind towards her, he has always show a lack of interest in Ginny's feelings and emotions, on the contrary he has show interest in Hermione's feeling

Maybe it's because Ginny's not there much. I mean, I do have to admit that she was definitely not in his immediate circle until probably OotP. And Hermione is one of his best friends, do you expect him to treat her like chopped liver or something? :huh:

in PoA he was the only one that notice that Hermione wasn't participating to the party after the Quidditch match, with Ginny we have never seen something like that.

Best friend who got into a fight with another best friend as is feeling bad. You don't think he'd notice? :huh:

Plus Harry still sees her as Ron's sister, as canon evidence clearly show us.

Yes, but he also sees her as a girl with "bright brown eyes that he could see the firelight reflecting from." n :elaugh:

Ginny in ootp has shown interest in other boys and she has also shown respect towards Neville, if you want with can compare Ginny’s behavior towards Neville and Ginny’s behavior towards Harry you’ll see that there’s a difference, with Neville Ginny is nice while on Harry, except from the library scene, she hasn’t been properly nice.

:rotfl: I'm amazed. I really, really am.


In ootp we have see enough of Ginny’s personality to safely said that she’s not the type of girl that gives second chances, she didn’t give Michael a second chance, she said goodbye as he went to cheer up another girl, Cho Chang who seems to have the special gift of stealing “Ginny’s boys” from Ginny.

Why did she say goodbye to Michael? Um, he was being all sulky about Gryffindor kicking butt. Maybe that's why?

So why she would give Harry a second chance? when Harry has never shown any sign of caring and friendship towards her? So why Ginny should have a crush on a boy, Harry, that has never show interest in her?

Harry has never shown any sign of caring or friendship? Are you kidding? Please tell me you're kidding. He didn't risk his life for her for nothing. He had to care for her a bit. Why should she give him a second chance? He didn't make good of his first one. Why should she have a crush? Why shouldn't she.


wow. it feels great to be back. :p

[pasalita]

The "are you kidding" statements aren't necessary. In truth, we are all to respect each other's opinions here since they are all opinions and not fact. JKR will reveal the truth about who will fall in love with whom at the time she chooses so, please, remember, no one is right or wrong here.

Enjoy the speculation! Revel in shared ships! But, stop the teasing of others who don't share your ship.

[Fairydust]

i don't mean any disrespect if that's what you're thinking. don't get offended. :p

[MagicianGirl]

Well, first off I don't see how Ginny was in love in the first place since she has basically a crush on an image.
Right from the author herself "she was languishing in love with Harry" so who am I to contradict the creator :p .Also, with regards to that hero-worship this has been discussed ad nasuem all people who lived in the wizarding world reacted that way. So she wanted to see the hero who made the world that they're living in safe why is that made out against her. No one was commplaining when the lady in the bar continuously shakes Harry's hand and she's a grown-up while Ginny was 10!

She's the one that as she saw at the age of 10 years old Harry at King Cross pointed Harry as if he was a zoo-animal and start yelling "Oh mom, there's Harry Potter" or something along these lines. To me this is not love, everything but love, it's just a plain and simple crush on a celebrity.
Oh please! Her feelings doesn't started until book 2.

No other girls as show a similar reaction at the sight of Harry for the first time, Hermione doesn't suddenly get excited and she has only one year more then Ginny, there's no a big difference and it shows the different level of maturity between Ginny and Hermione,
First off why would Hermione be excited? She never grows up in the wizarding world, she learned about Harry and Voldemort through books. She doesn't really grasp the significance and the importance of Harry Potter in the wizarding world until she came to Hogwarts. Besides, why would you compare the maturity of the two. Hermione has always been mature and uptight. When does Hermione really let go of herself?

In canon we see a Ginny that, to be honest, doesn't care so much about Harry
Sure, especially when Harry was feeling down about wanting to talk to Sirius she helped him make it come true. When Harry wasbeing pessimistic that he will not be able to play Quidditch again because he's banned, Ginny assured him that he will play again as soon as Umbridge is gone. When Harry was feeling a sense of loss on the train to Hogwarts, Ginny made sure that he won't be alone. You're right Ginny doesn't care about Harry:rolleyes:


and furthermore actually pursed Harry/Cho relationship telling him to talk to Cho, something that Hermione has never done, she has never said to Harry "talk to Cho".
Hermione only told him to asked Cho out.:rolleyes:

Harry has never been kind towards her, he has always show a lack of interest in Ginny's feelings and emotions
Are you saying that Harry was cruel to Ginny? He may have shown a lack of interest on her feelings but he's very much aware of how she felt. He knows that she has a crush on him and never for one moment that Harry was never kind to Ginny.

on the contrary he has show interest in Hermione's feeling, in PoA he was the only one that notice that Hermione wasn't participating to the party after the Quidditch match
But he doesn't show interest on Hermione's feelings when he won't talk to her & chose a broom over her.

Ginny in ootp has shown interest in other boys and she has also shown respect towards Neville, if you want with can compare Ginny’s behavior towards Neville and Ginny’s behavior towards Harry you’ll see that there’s a difference, with Neville Ginny is nice while on Harry, except from the library scene, she hasn’t been properly nice.
Are you implying when Ginny snapped at him which he totally deserved. At least someone has the guts to tell him off when Harry was in a rage.


In ootp we have see enough of Ginny’s personality to safely said that she’s not the type of girl that gives second chances, she didn’t give Michael a second chance, she said goodbye as he went to cheer up another girl, Cho Chang who seems to have the special gift of stealing “Ginny’s boys” from Ginny. So why she would give Harry a second chance?
You're right Ginny may not give Harry a second chance unless he proves that he deserves a second chance. Hope he Languish in love himself :p

when Harry has never shown any sign of caring and friendship towards her?
When he learns that she's going to Hogwarts too and he asked her. When he gave her the books that he got from Lockheart, when he doesn't laugh when she put her elbow in the butterdish I can list some more but I'm tired. So why

[LumosSoleil]

Sorry if this is extremely short compared to everyone's beautifully detailed
analysis, but did it feel like the moment between Harry and Luna towards the end of the book seem sort of unresolved? Or the start of something?

[Hope1272]

Quote by:~oSiRiS~

I have a question for the R/L shippers.

I noticed a few different people state that Ron is afraid to take an offensive approachon things(Hr ect). After reading thier examples I can see where they are comming from with that assumption. This got me thinking about R/L.
At the end of OotP(pg 862-863 US) when Harry and Luna are talking about the Veil. She says people took her stuff. When Harry ask if she needs help finding it she says "Oh no, They'll come back, they always do in the end".
This gives me the impression that she has a similar personality, being that she doesn' take the offensive approach.
If this is true how are Ron and Luna going to get togather if they are both sitting back waiting for the other to ask the other out?


Luna has an inner confidence that Ron sorely lacks. She has no problem approaching Ron and is not daunted by his tendency to react emotionally. She also has no problem showing her support(yes, I think the hats are Luna's way of cheering Ron and Gryffindor on) and her manner isn't one that leaves him threatened, which I think is one of the biggest hurdles for R/Hr. With Luna, it's far from it actually. I guess I like the fact that Luna sees Ronald when everyone else sees just plain old Ron. I could be wrong, but I think that will go a long way in solving any inaction that might get in their way. All Ron has to do is just see it.

What I like about the possibility of R/L is how they react to each other. Ron has a tendency to react emotionally and is prone to feeling threatened by feelings of inadequacy. Luna doesn't threaten him, but instead takes him off guard. I rememeber reading the book and finding that I liked the way they related to each other. When she laughs too hard at his joke on the train and he asks her if she's taking the mickey, his question lacked the usual reddening that Ron normally experiences when he feels he's being slighted. When she remarks on Pig as she hands him his cage, instead of reacting to remarks about Pig in his normal, hostile way concerning the bird, his reaction is subdued, polite. And then we see him include her with he and Harry as they find the coach taking them to the castle. I thought that was something to notice because Ron usually tends to be wary of people he doesn't know and one would think someone as odd as Luna would spark at least some trepidation in poor old Ron. Lastly, I guess, is the way he automatically answers her question about Grawp as the sextet convene in the Forbidden Forrest after their escape from Umbridge and the Slytherins. Again, here is a situation where I would expect Ron to be closed lipped, and yet he tells her without a second thought. Precious little to go on I know, but I found their encounters to be promising enough to believe that a Red Moon is possible.

[BlackKnight86]

That was a great post on philosophy, GryffindorGr, thanks! I have a couple of points to bring up, but I'll provide a better response to you later. Right now, I have to mount my soapbox over something.


Prongs, Sr.
Quotes add confusion to you because they don't support H/Hr. Please don't assume that others are similarly confused. Let's use common sense to determine JKR's meaning in the "platonic" quote.

Words matter, Prongs. I don't know if you realize this or not, but your assertion that your opinion on JKR's platonic quote is (or should be) common sense is disrespectful and insulting - whether you intend it to be or not. Are you implying that those who do not agree with your take on that matter do not have common sense? Sir W. Hamilton defined common sense as (among other things) "Such ordinary complement of intelligence, that, if a person be deficient therein, he is accounted mad or foolish.'' Do you feel that those who disagree with you are mad or foolish?

I thought Centaurervan did a fine job of assessing the problem with quotes. He certainly is not afraid to tackle the subject. However, you seemed to imply that the only reason that he is confused is that he ships H/Hr. Did I understand that correctly? Are you actually maintaining that he's confused only because he doesn't agree with you?

First of all, I would not have used the word "confusion"; I would have used the word "uncertainty". There is some overlap to the two words; but "uncertainty" has a purer connotation than "confusion", and makes more allowances for the author in the event that there is intent involved. In other words, JKR can deliberately avoid certainty in her answers without being guilty of lying or deceiving her readers; consequently, (and more importantly in this forum), the listener can reasonably allow for that uncertainty without being accused of saying that JKR is guilty of lying or deceiving her readers.

(The reasoning behind that uncertainty will be discussed later in my post.)

Now, let's take a look at your post:

Prongs, Sr.
She was asked if H/Hr have a date which implies romance.

By the word "imply" you automatically insert into the equation the uncertainty that comes with any kind of indirect expression. A date does not necessarily imply (or involve, for that matter) romance; hence the expression "Many first dates, few subsequent". However, the question that was asked did not specify anything other than "do H/Hr have a date?". Very specific question; ergo, very easy to answer without giving away any real information about her books. That may well be why she chose it.

Prongs, Sr.
She says "no", which is a pretty definitive explanation, imo.

"No" is a "pretty definitive" answer, not an explanation. Here is an example to assist you in understanding the difference:

Answer:
"Did you take out the trash?" "No." (That begs the question, "Why not?")

Explanation:
"Did you take out the trash?" "No, I was posting on cosforums and forgot that you asked me."

What you should have said was that her platonic comment was an explanation for her "No" answer...except that that has problems of it's own.

Prongs, Sr.
Then she further comments on that by saying that they are very platonic friends. I fail to see how this particular quote can be confusing in any fashion.

I do not know how you "fail to see how this particular quote can be confusing in any fashion." JKR used the word, as EricaM stated, to an audience comprised mostly of children. Why? Why use that word? Fifth-graders would have understood much better the phrases "just friends", or "only friends". Yet she used "platonic friends", and after an ever-so-slight cesura....as if she deliberately thought about it.

Let me ask you directly, and this is a question, not an accusation: Do you feel disdain for people who recognize that in the lexicon, there are several definitions for "platonic"? I didn't write the dictionary, I just read it. I didn't make up what I researched, I just quoted it. I didn't say that "Platonic love...is a lot more than you probably think it means"; Dr. Marguerite Connor (Department of English Language and Literature, Fu Jen Catholic University, Taiwan) did. I just quoted her in my essay. Do you not see that other people might have a different understanding of what it means to be "platonic friends" than you do? If you want to put the ongoing "platonic debate" to rest, why don't you stop demanding that it only means what you think it means?

That's neither here nor there, though; because even assuming your definition, here are two problems right off the bat:

1. Being platonic friends does not preclude "a date"; it would be a more logically definitive explanation to the question "Do Harry and Hermione date?" ("If you don't ask the right question, you'll have no guarantee of the answer.")

2. Being platonic friends is not infinitely limiting; with two books left, that quote does nothing to confirm or deny any ship.


Prongs, Sr.
"Any snogging between Harry and Hermione? Harry and Hermione?...Ron and Hermione, there's more tension there." Again, pretty clear cut and obvious. JKR feels that there are more possibilities for romantic tension between Ron and Hermione and, as she is the author, it would be wise to take this opinion into account.

There are only two things that are "clear cut" and "obvious" in this quote:
1. JKR did not directly answer the question.
2. You have added things that were not present in the original wording, i.e., you assumed things that are not necessarily there. Assuming adds the element of uncertainty of which I spoke earlier, once again rendering your use of the words "clear" and "obvious" erroneous. Specifically, you added "romantic" to "tension" to create "romantic tension", and you stated - stated, not implied - how JKR feels, when she did not say any such thing. To top it off, you then state that "it would be wise to take this opinion into account"...are you implying that those who disagree with you are not wise?


Prongs, Sr.
Of course interviews are relevant. JKR is the author of the books!

I have already addressed this; I'll try to make it clearer. JKR is the author of a work in progress. Interviews and things like that are a part of the marketing process, arranged by the publisher with the approval of the author and accepted by the interviewing agency. It is a symbiotic relationship; the book (and by extension, the publisher and author) get publicity and exposure, and the interviewing agency get a guaranteed (for a popular author) draw on their show. However, there is a protocol behind this arrangement. An interviewer is not going to just sit there and give an author publicity, only to hear her repeatedly say "I can't answer that." Both the interviewer and the author have an audience to hold onto. Therefore it is considered a wise move for both to "throw your audience a bone". There are consequences in both the market and the industry for those who violate that adage.

On the other hand, no author wants to reveal too much of her story line, nor does she want to be put on the spot, especially where it concerns the story. Can you imaging how an interview would have gone if JKR was treated like a politician?

Hypothetical Interview with JKR
BlackKnight86: So, any romance between Harry and Hermione?
JKR: Harry and Hermione? Do you really think so?
BlackKnight86: Well, I wouldn't have asked if I didn't think so....and based on what I've read, a lot of other people think so, too. Why did you make that face? Are you saying you don't like that idea?
JKR: Well, Ron and Hermione....there's more tension there.
BlackKnight86: Tension? What does that mean? Do you mean fighting, or what? Are you saying that there will be a Ron and Hermione romance? What are you saying? Is that a yes or a no to my original question?
JKR: ________________________

Obviously, I cannot say how JKR would have reacted to that. Perhaps she would have given a definitive answer, perhaps not. Maybe she would have stormed out of there, never to return...and never to give an interview again, at least to me (I probably would have been fired). But the point is, only one person has ever followed up on one of these ubiquitous quotes; and when called on her dissembling, JKR didn't say, "but I did answer it!" She didn't say, "that would be revealing too much." She said "Yeah, well, you know, you’ve got to sometimes dodge these things." Now that's about the only definitive statement that we've gotten from an interview quote.

A book author is a private citizen, and does not have to agree to subject herself to an interrogation. If the interviewer asks too many provoking questions, he/she runs the risk of gaining the reputation in the industry as someone to avoid. Keep in mind that there are plenty of interviewers who would be happy to have a best-selling author appear on their show; so the ones who get the interviews are going to abide by the protocol.

That leaves us with the remaining possibility that R/Hr's are correct, that JKR has, in fact, intentionally revealed a detail about her story that she has not published yet. To respond to that, let's take a look at another scenario:

I'm going to take you back into time, the morning after Book 5, "Order of the Phoenix" is released. Let's say that I bought the book right when it went on sale at midnight at Barnes and Noble, stayed up all night and read it, and posted the following on cosforums the next morning:

Hypothetical Past Quote from BlackKnight86
Wow, what a great book! I was so sad with the death in the end....I'm not going to say who it was, but let's just say that he won't be around to "dog" Snape anymore, wink wink, nudge nudge!

Be honest - would that constitute a spoiler? Would you all be upset if you hadn't read the book first, and I didn't give you a warning? Would the moderators ban me? If so, then why on Earth do you feel that the author herself would do something like that?

Now, Prongs, Sr., even though I don't agree with them, let me reiterate that your conclusions may well turn out to be correct. However, I'm not the one who says that my position is "clear", "obvious", or "common sense". I do not maintain any specific meaning behind any JKR quotes, in keeping, of course, with the rules of the Love Thread to respect other ships.

You are certainly free to maintain that your opinion is the only correct one; however, you cannot then be surprised or shocked when it is vigorously challenged.

Words matter, Prongs.

Cat and Dedelus
Speaking of words, please take an opportunity to look up the words "do" and "will". "Do" is far more restrictive in scope; and, when paired with the very specific action "have a date", is reasonably interpreted as restricted in time frame as well.

Centaurervan and other Harmonians, wonderful job! You guys are awesome!
Have a great day!

BlackKnight86

[Dedalus]

To nobody in specific, I think people really need to chill down a little. All I said was that I think that J.K. Rowling was saying they weren't getting together, that I believed her comment did interpret that way, and everybody jumped on me and ripped what I said to pieces basically saying that I'm stupid and wrong. And with Cat, here, people are jumping on her even worse and all she did was post the comment and give her opinion on it, too. If someone's opinions differ to your own, that doesn't mean that they're wrong or they're not reading the quote properly and that they should see it the way you do, because that's the only right way.

I wasn't even saying I disagreed, because I don't ship for anybody or even make many theories, I was just saying how I personally would interpret the quote. Rather than attacking me for it, shrugging aside what I said as being absurd and wrong, wouldn't it be better to stick up for your theories by good debate rather than telling me I'm just reading it wrong, and leaving it at that? All anyone says is speculation, neither is more right or wrong.

Though, since this is the love thread, may I present my wish for Hedwig and Pigwidgeon to get together? Perhaps people might be a little less touchy on that subject :)

EDIT> I forgot to add, that 'do' can imply future tense, and be used instead of "will". For instance, "do the Weasley twins leave Hogwarts?" means "will they leave Hogwarts", it isn't asking if they do so on a regular basis. Or "Does Sirius Black die?". So "do they date" can mean "will they date", though I agree it can also mean "do they presently date", though I'd think the usual way to ask that would be "are they dating?". So that is still open for intepretation, though I'm still not wrong ;)

[Prongs, Sr.]

Mirtilla:

On the other hand we have Hermione that has been developed much more then all the Weasley together and she has always been more important then the Weasley,

Hermione has not been developed more than "all the Weasley's together". We still don't even know her parents name, what town she is from, if she is an only child; while we've met all of the Weasleys and have heard about a second cousin who is a muggle accountant and that Ron's grandfather gave him the chess set. There is no comparison, here, with the lack of Hermione's family background and the detailed background of the Weasleys. Why, we even learn that Arthur and Sirius were distantly related. I think you need to put Hermione's development in perspective. We know a lot about her, because she and Harry are friends, but we've learned much, much more about Ron and his family background.

EricaM

Another thing that strikes me as odd, why did JKR choose the word platonic, to describe Harry and Hermione's relationship when her audience is made up, primarily of children (5th graders)?

To provide emphasis that their relationship is "non-sexual" and "passionless", which is the common meaning and usage of this word in today's modern society. I'm sure, while many of the school children probably don't know the meaning of "platonic", but they understand what "no, date, very, friends" are.

As far as JKR's quotes on romance go,JKR is not ambiguous in the following quotes:

Is it just me, or was something going on between Ron and Hermione during the last half of GOF? yes, something's 'going on'... but Ron doesn't realise it yet...

JKR answers "yes" that something is going on between Ron and Hermione, but Ron doesn't realize it yet. So, if something is going on between (indicated both ways) the two of them that hasn't been resolved, it is apparent that JKR will resolve this storyline. What exactly was "going on" between R/Hr during the last half of GOF: Yule Ball and Fleur kissing Ron.

Noddwyd

by the way. It is very possible that Harry/Hermione could happen and we still never see them actually go on a 'date' in the books. Has that not occurred to anyone here?

Using JKR's interviews as a gauge to answer this question: She states, "I want them to be truly seventeen, have boyfriends and girlfriends and experience sexual feelings, nothing too gritty."

It is assumable that we could see some dating and we will clearly see "sexual feelings", which, if Harry's lukewarm reaction to Hermione's appearance is any indication, the likelyhood of H/Hr happening is severely declining.

Perdita

Even when the books show events that are contrary to what JKR says in her quotes? Will you not contend with the possibility that JRK is deliberately going back and forth so as to not reveal the future plotlines of her novels?

This is where I disagree, because I don't think JKR has changed the plot of R/Hr or H/G at all. I do feel she left R/Hr rather stagnant in Ootp, but I think there are indications in text to support foreshadowing for those pairings. There are two books left and plenty of time to develop both of these romantic relationship, imo. I also think that the corresponding interview to book 5 release, the Katie Couric interview was the death knell for H/Hr.

[xray]

:welcome: to all of the newcommers! It's good to see new faces here adding to the debate!

:welcome: back, Fairydust!
The point is that those who'd champion the 'JKR has definitively said that Harry and Hermione will not have a romance' are basing it on a faulty assumption.
They assume that JKR has revealed her hand wrt H/Hr, when in actual fact, she hasn't.I disagree. I think she has simply because romance is not a major aspect of the Harry Potter novels. Most people who read the books see the romance as very trivial; it doesn't matter to the story one way or the other. We're just focused on it so we put emphasis on it. You can go by the assumption that whoever Harry Potter ends up with will affect the outcome, i.e. if he doesn't pick Hermione he will die and Voldemort will succeed, but I choose not to. Romance has no relation to the primary plotlines.

Sorry if this is extremely short compared to everyone's beautifully detailed analysis, but did it feel like the moment between Harry and Luna towards the end of the book seem sort of unresolved? Or the start of something?Hi LumosSoleil! I don't really see the conversation between Harry and Luna unresolved. I think Harry needed to converse with someone who had been through the same experience he just had gone through. Luna saw her mum die in a tragic accident; Harry felt a little better after talking to Luna because he realized he wasn't alone in the world in experiencing the loss of a loved one. I don't see much else in that passage that needed to be resolved. Did you notice anything in particular that made you feel like there should be more to it?

Words matter, Prongs. I don't know if you realize this or not, but your assertion that your opinion on JKR's platonic quote is (or should be) common sense is disrespectful and insulting - whether you intend it to be or not. Are you implying that those who do not agree with your take on that matter do not have common sense? Sir W. Hamilton defined common sense as (among other things) "Such ordinary complement of intelligence, that, if a person be deficient therein, he is accounted mad or foolish.'' Do you feel that those who disagree with you are mad or foolish?Common sense is sense that is common, is it not? If you said, "Hey, where's my book?" and I said "over there on the floor," common sense tells you that it's on the floor in the direction I pointed. However you could philosiphize that the carpet is on the floor and assume that since I said the book is on the floor then it must be under the carpet, but this isn't common sense. Hence, if someone says they're very platonic friends, then common sense tells you that they are just friends with no romantical feelings. Prongs, Sr.'s remark was clearly not an insult.

Though, since this is the love thread, may I present my wish for Hedwig and Pigwidgeon to get together?WHAT?!? I would think that since Hedwig spends so much more time with the school owls that he fancies the large brown owl. Pigwidgeon is too young for Hedwig! Hedwig and Pigwidgeon?!? Preposterous!

[sone]

Sorry if this is extremely short compared to everyone's beautifully detailed analysis, but did it feel like the moment between Harry and Luna towards the end of the book seem sort of unresolved? Or the start of something?

Both LumosSoleil. One thing I feel about Harry and Luna is that knowing Harry regardless of how he is going to be in his sixth year is going to do something about people taking Luna's things and hiding them until the end of the year. He has a strong sense of justice, like his mother (from what we have seen so far of course). Plus there is some things Luna knows about the DoM that Harry needs to find out. It may be key to his powers.

I forgot to add, that 'do' can imply future tense

I imagine it can if Rowling was talking about GoF, which had not come out yet when this interview was given.

[Dedalus]

WHAT?!? I would think that since Hedwig spends so much more time with the school owls that he fancies the large brown owl. Pigwidgeon is too young for Hedwig! Hedwig and Pigwidgeon?!? Preposterous!
I would hardly think age matters, when it comes to true love. And Hedwig is just being stubborn and playing hard to get.

[Cat]

Though, since this is the love thread, may I present my wish for Hedwig and Pigwidgeon to get together?


No, I definitely can't see that working out. Hedwig needs a more stable and experienced owl, somebody a little less flighty.

How's about McGonagall and Mad Eye Moody? She, the stern and sensible professor and he, the irrational and a little more than slightly barmy ex-Auror? It would be a match made in tartan and wobbly-eyed heaven.

[xray]

I would hardly think age matters, when it comes to true love. And Hedwig is just being stubborn and playing hard to get. But we already know that Pigwidgeon has eyes for Crookshanks!
(PoA, Chapter 22: Owl Post Again, p434)
Ron's eyes widened. The minute owl was still hooting excitedly. "Keep him?" he said uncertainly. He looked closely at the owl for a moment; then, to Harry's and Hermione's great surprise, he held him out for Crookshanks to sniff. "What do you reckon?" Ron asked the cat. "Definitely an owl?" Crookshanks purred. See! Love at first sight!

[~oSiRiS~]

I think Hermes will be the perfect mate for Hedwig.

[WeasleyIsOurKing]

You're forgetting the eagle owl the Malfoys always use to send Draco treats.

Now who in their right mind could turn down something as dee-licious as that? :eyebrows:

[~oSiRiS~]

Is Crookshanks male or female?

[WeasleyIsOurKing]

Is Crookshanks male or female?

He's male.

[Polaris15]

Thank you Perdita, you as well :)

FairyDust

Just because a person has given up on someone does not mean that they are over that person. Ginny can give up on trying to get Harry, that doesn't mean she's over him.

Do you have solid canon proof that Ginny isn't completely over Harry or is this merely your speculation?



"I read all about you...blah blah blah...!" Her reaction to him was pretty much like everyone elses.

Actually, her reaction is quite different from everyone else's. Firstly, she didn't enquire to see Harry's scar like Ron. She didn't seem slightly fazed that the boy standing in front of her is indeed the famous Harry Potter. Furthermore, she didn't question him regarding his defeat of Voldemort, but merely introduced herself and treated Harry like another ordinary eleven-year old boy. Her actions and reactions in that scene is quite different compared to Ron's, Fred's, George's, and Ginny's.

You know, I'll agree with you on some point. I think it did start on a mere crush. But it evolved. You can see that it evolved during the fourth book even.

Perhaps you could be so kind as to direct us to canon when this evolution occurred and how it manifested in the text.

MagicianGirl
Oh please! Her feelings doesn't started until book 2.

May I ask how is it possible that Ginny can have such deep rooted feelings for Harry without having ever interacted with him.

Cheers!

Polaris

[Barbara Kennedy]

It sounds quite right. Everyone seems to be biased their analysis on their own personal interest. As I suggest before somewhere in this thread, "universal interpretation" of Rowling's books and quotes are essential to relevation of the truth of the storyline...and universal evidence over the 5 books leads to the SINGLE logic that H/Hr ship will "dock" at Pearl Harbor :rotfl: , while R/Hr will sail to the EXILE... :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

***van.
How does this 'bias' exclude you and your opinion?

[Dedalus]

But we already know that Pigwidgeon has eyes for Crookshanks!
(PoA, Chapter 22: Owl Post Again, p434)
Ron's eyes widened. The minute owl was still hooting excitedly. "Keep him?" he said uncertainly. He looked closely at the owl for a moment; then, to Harry's and Hermione's great surprise, he held him out for Crookshanks to sniff. "What do you reckon?" Ron asked the cat. "Definitely an owl?" Crookshanks purred. See! Love at first sight!
Ah, well, you've got me there.

Crookshanks and Pigwidgeon are two star crossed lovers, a love of a forbidden kind due to their differences of species and their similarity of sex. Hedwig, I believe, shall be gutted. That is ... upset. Not have her guts removed, though you never know that Crookshanks when he's jealous.

Cat, nah I think Mad-Eye has a following of young and beautiful women, attracted to his old Auror status. He could be considered a very ugly and very weird James Bond by some!

Seriously, now, does anybody actually ponder whether some of the older people will find love and not just the young sprogs? I wouldn't know, but I'm sure someone has theories about the older characters getting together. Is there someone out there for Moody, perhaps? :huh:

[LumosSoleil]

Both LumosSoleil. One thing I feel about Harry and Luna is that knowing Harry regardless of how he is going to be in his sixth year is going to do something about people taking Luna's things and hiding them until the end of the year. He has a strong sense of justice, like his mother (from what we have seen so far of course). Plus there is some things Luna knows about the DoM that Harry needs to find out. It may be key to his powers.


Thanks. I guess this can be the start of a real friendship between them instead of Harry dreading to include her in anything. He needs a friend he can relate to, and also learn more about the "locked room" in DoM. There's probably nothing going to happen between them, but true, she may be the key that unlocks his "greatest power LV knows not."

O, and xray I felt that moment was unresolved I guess because of Luna mentioning the DoM. Another is Harry actually trying to help her and feeling sympathy for her. That just made me thought their conversation would go deeper and we can learn more about Luna, Harry's greatest power, and more of DoM.

Thanks :p :p

[Mad Eye Mike]

Are you friggin kidding me? <snip>

The "are you kidding" statements aren't necessary. In truth, we are all to respect each other's opinions here since they are all opinions and not fact. <snip> please, remember, no one is right or wrong here.

i don't mean any disrespect if that's what you're thinking. don't get offended. :p

Whether you meant it in a disrespectful manner or not isn't what's in question, Pasalita is telling you not to say it at all.

[BlackKnight86]

xray
Common sense is sense that is common, is it not?

No, it is not.

Dictionary.com
Common sense
Sound judgment not based on specialized knowledge; native good judgment.

xray
If you said, "Hey, where's my book?" and I said "over there on the floor," common sense tells you that it's on the floor in the direction I pointed.

No.....the direction that you pointed and the fact that you said it's "over there on the floor" tells me "that it's on the floor in the direction [you] pointed."


xray
However you could philosiphize that the carpet is on the floor [huh?] and assume that since I said the book is on the floor then it must be under the carpet, but this isn't common sense.

Ah...the zebra puzzle! That's a good one. Are you familiar with it, xray? It's a logic puzzle; basically, it goes like this:

If you hear the sound of many thundering hooves, what would you think was approaching? Logically, the first thing one might say is "a herd of horses." The twist to this puzzle is that a herd of zebra would make the same sound, right? So, which would be more logical to answer?

It's a puzzle often used to teach context, as well as to illustrate the different expectations that different people might have. A herd of horses would be logical in, say, the Western United States. However, a herd of zebra would be more logical in, say, Africa....unless you were in an farming or ranching area where there were lots of horses. Context is key, as are the meanings of words (and the proper knowledge of those meanings). The same holds true with your next point:

xray
Hence, if someone says they're very platonic friends, then common sense tells you that they are just friends with no romantical excursions.

"Common sense" is the wrong descriptor to use when referring to words. The correct descriptor is "by definition", since words are not a matter of sense; they are defined. Here's an example, using the book on the floor:

(I'm assuming that I cannot see the book, since I'm asking you "where's my book?"). You say that my book is on the floor, and you point toward it. Is the book on the floor in the room in which we are standing? If not, are there other rooms? If so, then "common sense" would tell you that I need further information in order to correctly interpret your answer; i.e., you need to tell me in which room my book is. Have I already searched the house and didn't see it? If so, and you tell me that my book is on the floor, then "common sense" would say that something must be covering it; ergo, I would need more information in order to process your answer. Etc., etc.

Back to the platonic example: The proper way to say the last clause in your sentence would be "then by definition, they are just friends with no romantical excursions" (I, uh, have never heard it put quite that way, but I get what you're saying). That would only hold true if "platonic friends" was defined solely as "just friends with no romantical excursions".

I'll tell you what, I won't bother talking about the context of the statement; I've discussed that before. Let's cut to the chase. I say, with the support of dictionaries, encyclopedias, classical literature, etc., that there are at least two definitions of "platonic" and multiple understandings of the nuances of the word. If I understand you correctly, you are maintaining that there is one and only one definition of "platonic" - "just friends with no romantical excursions," and that it is not possible for anyone at all to apply any other type of definition at all, because they simply don't exist. Is my understanding correct? Is that what you're saying?

Have a great day!

BlackKnight86

[Prongs, Sr.]

Thanks, Xray and welcome back, Fairydust!

Words matter, Prongs. I don't know if you realize this or not, but your assertion that your opinion on JKR's platonic quote is (or should be) common sense is disrespectful and insulting - whether you intend it to be or not.

I was absolutely not intending to be disrespectful to Canteurervan or another shipper on this forum and I have unintentionally offended anyone, then I'm sorry.

Are you implying that those who do not agree with your take on that matter do not have common sense? Do you feel that those who disagree with you are mad or foolish?

No, I have a healthy respect for others’ opinions, ideas and theories and fully believe that everyone is entitled to their own opinions and ship preferences.

I thought Centaurervan did a fine job of assessing the problem with quotes. He certainly is not afraid to tackle the subject. However, you seemed to imply that the only reason that he is confused is that he ships H/Hr. Did I understand that correctly? Are you actually maintaining that he's confused only because he doesn't agree with you?

He states this which implies that he is confused between actual text of the series and JKR’s quotes:

Hints of interviews might be relevant, but to those who have already been confused about the interpretation of the books, those hints might not serve as the right antidote, but rather a more deeper confusion of misunderstandings.

First of all, I would not have used the word "confusion"; I would have used the word "uncertainty". There is some overlap to the two words; but "uncertainty" has a purer connotation than "confusion", and makes more allowances for the author in the event that there is intent involved. In other words, .

I agree that “uncertainty” is a much better choice of words to use in that situation. However, he used “confusing” and that is what I had to go by, when responding to his post.

A date does not necessarily imply (or involve, for that matter) romance;

It doesn't? A "date" does imply romance by all stretches of the imagination, imo. A date implies a potential couple who may or may not want to take their relationship to a romantic level. What exactly do you think the questioner was implying here? "Do Harry and Hermione have a "date" to see when their test scores will be posted?" or "on what date does such and such occur". Those are both examples of others usages for the word date. Do you believe that there is an alternative meaning to the word, "date" in that question?

No" is a "pretty definitive" answer, not an explanation. Here is an example to assist you in understanding the difference:

Answer:
"Did you take out the trash?" "No." (That begs the question, "Why not?")

Explanation:
"Did you take out the trash?" "No, I was posting on cosforums and forgot that you asked me."

JKR was specifically asked, "do Harry and Hermione have a date?" That was the only question that was asked. How is she supposed to read the mind of the questioner and interpret another meaning that would require a more indepth answer or an explanation? I'm not understanding why you are giving me these above examples; sorry.

I do not know how you "fail to see how this particular quote can be confusing in any fashion." JKR used the word, as EricaM stated, to an audience comprised mostly of children. Why? Why use that word? Fifth-graders would have understood much better the phrases "just friends", or "only friends". Yet she used "platonic friends", and after an ever-so-slight cesura....as if she deliberately thought about it.

I’ve already responding that question to EricaM. However, for the sake of clarification, I agree that not all (if most) fifth-graders would not understand the meaning of platonic. However, the question is about a date. Whether you agree or not, dating usually implies “romance”, and this is simple enough for the younger fans to understand. She says “no” and suggests that they are very platonic friends. I think most kids could understand that they will not have a date. As for the usage of platonic, I feel that she is merely emphasizing the status of their relationship: non-sexual and passionless, which, incidentally, I feel is backed up in text.

Let me ask you directly, and this is a question, not an accusation: Do you feel disdain for people who recognize that in the lexicon, there are several definitions for "platonic"? Do you not see that other people might have a different understanding of what it means to be "platonic friends" than you do? If you want to put the ongoing "platonic debate" to rest, why don't you stop demanding that it only means what you think it means?

I absolutely understand the idea of the classical definition of the word platonic and I think it is a beautiful concept. I do not feel disdain or contempt for others who accept this viewpoint and see this in a potential H/Hr pairing. I simply do not see H/Hr potential for this type of love. This is based on part on their current relationship, as it stands at the end of book 5; JKR’s interviews that hint toward a “more sexually orientated relationship, but nothing too gritty and the understanding that these books are not romance novels; and the foreshadowing H/G and R/Hr.

There are only two things that are "clear cut" and "obvious" in this quote:
1. JKR did not directly answer the question.
2. You have added things that were not present in the original wording, i.e., you assumed things that are not necessarily there.

I saw this originally interview on television and this is what she said:

Katie Couric: “Any snogging between Harry and Hermione?”
JKR: “Harry and Hermione”
Katie Couric: “just kidding”
JKR: “Ron and Hermione…I would think…there’s more tension there.”

I’m not adding words to the quote. JKR was asked about “snogging”. How can this be interpreted as not being about romantic tension? What kind of tension do you think JKR is suggesting?

Also, to clarify my feelings on JKR interviews, she has said that she will answer questions honestly unless it is important to the plot, as with the question on whether or not Sirius will have his name cleared, for example. In all of JKR's interviews, I feel, (and I've read mounds of them) that her overall message is one of consistency in what she reveals, her explanations of character motivations are very consistent and her quotes are similarly consistent, as well in that she will say "no" to H/Hr, openly point to R/Hr and lead us that way, and leave the options for H/G wide open.

[WeasleyIsOurKing]

Actually, her reaction is quite different from everyone else's. Firstly, she didn't enquire to see Harry's scar like Ron. She didn't seem slightly fazed that the boy standing in front of her is indeed the famous Harry Potter. Furthermore, she didn't question him regarding his defeat of Voldemort, but merely introduced herself and treated Harry like another ordinary eleven-year old boy. Her actions and reactions in that scene is quite different compared to Ron's, Fred's, George's, and Ginny's.


Emphasis mine.

So telling Harry every book he's been mentioned in is treating him like another ordinary eleven-year old boy?

Yes, her reactions were different from the Weasleys', but the manner in which she introduced herself was no better than theirs.

[Rowena Ravenclaw]

Seriously, now, does anybody actually ponder whether some of the older people will find love and not just the young sprogs? I wouldn't know, but I'm sure someone has theories about the older characters getting together. Is there someone out there for Moody, perhaps? :huh:

Moody? I doubt it. A key component in any relationship is trust, and Moody's notorious for his lack of it. No sweetheart of his would be able to leave his side without having to endure a third-degree interrogation and a thorough identity check before and after she left (or at the very least, a long lecture punctuated by shouts of "Constant vigilance!" every fifth word).

That, and we've never fully established all the things that eye can see through. Just too creepy.

[Hawk 92]

Continuing:

I never said that Harry could not fall in love with Hermione but I did say that Ginny does not seem to be sister like to him. More so, I see the interactions between Harry and Hermione as more sibling and even motherly on the part of Hermione.

To which I pointed out that Harry viewed Ginny still only as Ron’s little sister. You then replied;

Lol. You want me to get out all the quotes? You yourself have seen the quotes and even quoted them. The continued concern through out the series, the motherly and sisterly kind of affection displayed, also for Ron too, not just for Harry.

the labeling of interactions is exactly what I am not looking for. I pointed out that Harry, as we are privy to his thoughts, called Ginny Ron’s little sister in OotP. Therefore I concluded that Harry sees Ginny as Ron’s little sister. I then asked you to show me where Harry thought of Hermione as his sister. I’m not sure how your answer applies but I shall try my hardest to understand.

As shippers, you and I do have the common tendency to label interactions between the characters. In this case I’m submitting a time when Harry himself refers to Ginny as Ron’s little sister. Now if you could submit the quote from the text in which Harry labels Hermione as a mother to him, I would be happy to consider this. Now we know that Harry views Hermione as a friend but by the Lewis model, the subject and criteria of our debate, this does not hinder Eros. Therefore we return to our original problem of the theory not proving Ginny for Ginny does not fulfill the criteria exclusively. But now we have to consider if by your theory, Harry views Ron as a brother, and Ginny as his sister, that Harry can also fulfill the sibling aspect of love with Ginny and does not exclusively need Hermione for that. So Hermione and Ginny could both fill two respective gaps and we return to the beginning Hermione or Ginny. A second look will also tell us that with two books left many different girls could fill this same loves for Harry. In the end the model gives no answers and leaves more questions.

Now I can sum this up rather simply Can you show me in the books where Harry views Hermione as a sister or mother?

Then we can discuss Oedipus and even as far as Shakespeares Hamlet, for there have been small insinuations, no not small, I suppose great theories and discussions surrounding the relationship of mother and son.

No not small indeed. I would suggest you stick to Hamlet as the closer model. Oedipus didn’t know until after he had married her that she was his mother. Both also have the similar themes in other aspects, trapped by fate into choices they did not want or have no control over. Although I’m not sure that this could apply to the HP series, for as Dumbledore said, Its our choices. While Hamlet had choices, Oedipus really didn’t.

I’m not suggesting that Hermione is his mother of course, but that the behaviour displayed by her caring, protection and love could be advocated as a motherly approach to a kind of love a boy like Harry would want

Could is a word that is a thousand letters long. But nagging, protection, or showing affection are not traits reserved only for mothers, especially in the literary world. So now we are back to what we discussed above, the labeling of Hermione and Harry’s interactions in order to justify what we think should happen. But let us take a look at this while we are here. Now by the Lewis definition we saw that Lewis believed that Eros could grow from friendship. If Hermione’s nagging is not a deterrent to the love of friendship (by Lewis) it is therefore not a deterrent to Eros (by Lewis). As such Hermione’s interactions with Harry (protecting, supporting, nagging) are to be seen as how Hermione cares (romantic or not). Some will at this point quote this and say that Harry doesn’t like to be nagged, and that Harry wouldn’t want a wife that nagged. Before they do this I will remind them that GryffindorGr and I are speaking about Eros as defined by CS Lewis. To Lewis friendship and Eros could combine in the same person.

This kind of love though I would not deem likely for Harry because he appears more of the kind of boy who is hero-driven, powerful, take charge and prone to fall in love with the damsel whose love for him is enduring and compliments him in the ways he would like.

Do you really think so? Yet, Harry was fed up with his fame and does not seem to hunger after glory. His heroic acts seem to come more from selflessness than a need to see his picture in the paper. And he seems to be truly humble. If Harry does not seek the compliments and attention that his fame and achievements entitle him to, why would he seek that in a wife? I’m not standing here advocating that Harry would not like compliments from his LI, yet I don’t think that he will actively seek this either. As for why Hermione could not have enduring love for Harry, I have no idea why you’d think that.

Romantic love does not always start off with friendship, it can be a glance, a sudden realization that one gets from such admiration, whether from their behavior, their commonalities, attraction, sudden bursts of moments, etc. these things are combinative in unexpected hearts that flutter. It’s silly yes, but it happens everyday and it’s something that is uncontrollable.

Any form of love is a multi layered and complex. Still I’m not sure how this once again excludes Hermione, or really qualifies Ginny as the most likely. To say that love is totally uncontrollable and ruled solely by our passions is to step into the same fallacy that Plato embarked on. While love contains many elements one cannot separate love entirely from our reasoning either. After all we are multilayered elements ourselves. For an excellent example of this I would suggest reading Emma. Emma, also takes time to look at the potential romances in her life and think them over, so Austen does not feel the need to separate the rational from love. This leads me to give strength to Ginny’s statement to Hermione about giving up on Harry. Ginny, has examined how she really feels, as a more mature person, and decided that it was not meant to be. Ginny has made an active choice regarding her feelings for Harry.

I am not disagreeing that love can come out of friendship, but as we’ve been discussing, the love that does come out of friendship are affection and charity, which transcends physical love. The physicality of love in terms of body and not of the mind is unreasonable and instinctual. That is the passion I’m talking about.

Man is the ultimate rational animal. I love this line of philosophy, totally disagree with it, but love it none the less. A attempt to justify the fact that man should act on impulse only, prevalent primarily in Neanderthals, and satisfy the urge as it appears.

Yet once again GryffindorGr we are straying away from Lewis and entering the realm of Plato. That certain loves transcend physical desires and others are mired in the filth of desires. A poor analysis of marriage can only come from this. For by your definition the higher loves are reserved for those who choose to not mire themselves down in the filth of Eros, or one has to separate Eros from marriage in order to attain this virtues. I see marriage as the ability to combine these. There is no need for separation. Affection, charity, and the higher loves clearly have their place in Eros. Now I feel that these loves need not be separate from each other and Lewis sees no hindrance to Eros coming from friendship (remember that he called it fortunate) so we are not talking about Eros. You are limiting certain aspects of Eros to suit the H/G ship.

Metaphors in CoS, p. 37

She dived under the table to retrieve the bowl and emerged with her face glowing like the setting sun.
to describe the sun again, setting, like two souls who sit on a beach watching the horizon in a romantic setting. The setting sun, the vision of the sun with colorful images, visualizing beauty reflecting our soul. Love for the natural reproduction of the universe and the earth combined and of our “senses” that JKR uses. Senses from the intuition of what effects us romantically.
this was set up in the beginning of CoS, and towards the end, as previously mentioned, and shall repeat: p.219, CoS. British Edition: “Harry could see the sun sinking, blood red, below the skyline. This was the worst he had ever felt”.
Quote again: I thought that was so significant because JKR used imagery, deep colorful metaphors which explained the need and the horror he felt. Blood red, the image of life, like a pulsating life force, and the sinking sun, his sign is of the sun. The sinking into the horizon for instance, shows us even as a 12 year old how powerful this is.

Metaphors and allegories are dangerous to use. We tend to read them as we wish and then correct ourselves later. To use your example I could read this as the setting sun signifying death and the coming of the night that does not end. The setting sun does not always convey romance and to be totally honest you completely lost me on the second part. All in all I’ve never been a fan of using descriptions for evidence, it would be a poor writer indeed who did not try to paint visual images.

I find it highly interesting how JKR uses Gilderoy Lockhart for the relationship between Ginny and Harry. Although,
Gilderoy was also the name of a famous highwayman of ballad famewho was reputedly handsome but wanted to make note that it was Lockhart who had to come with them to pursue Ginny and the insertion of the diary appears like a complete lock and key. Just how I see it.

Sorry GryffindorGr, here you completely lost me.

The OBHWF is still hard on the palate, even with seasoning by the great CS Lewis.

Cheers!

[Dedalus]

Moody? I doubt it. A key component in any relationship is trust, and Moody's notorious for his lack of it. No sweetheart of his would be able to leave his side without having to endure a third-degree interrogation and a thorough identity check before and after she left (or at the very least, a long lecture punctuated by shouts of "Constant vigilance!" every fifth word).

That, and we've never fully established all the things that eye can see through. Just too creepy.
Well ... you never know. Like I said, he's got the whole Auror thing going for him, and could be like a very ugly and very odd James Bond to some ladies. And chicks dig scars, apparently. I bet he's beating young ladies off with a stick :eyebrows:

[Cat]

Crookshanks and Pigwidgeon are two star crossed lovers, a love of a forbidden kind due to their differences of species and their similarity of sex. Hedwig, I believe, shall be gutted. That is ... upset. Not have her guts removed, though you never know that Crookshanks when he's jealous.

Cat, nah I think Mad-Eye has a following of young and beautiful women, attracted to his old Auror status. He could be considered a very ugly and very weird James Bond by some!

Seriously, now, does anybody actually ponder whether some of the older people will find love and not just the young sprogs? I wouldn't know, but I'm sure someone has theories about the older characters getting together. Is there someone out there for Moody, perhaps?

A following of young girls for Mad Eye would make sense. Chicks are supposed to dig scars. He has a lot of scars - logically, therefore, there must be a lot of chicks.

I can imagine older characters finding love, as a matter of fact. I can't imagine the young ones doing so. 'Love' is such a heavy word for a teenager. They might fancy somebody, they might go out with them for a while, but is it love?

Now, may I take this moment to point you to the obvious compatibility between Harry and Trevor the toad? Why, there are numerous indications of it in the book! Anybody in doubt needs to re-read the passages because they'e clearly missing the blatant here.

(Well, this thread is already a bit of a joke).

[Polaris15]

So telling Harry every book he's been mentioned in is treating him like another ordinary eleven-year old boy?

Yet Harry is in many books Hermione has read, nevertheless, her treatment of Harry was not to regard him as a superior being nor did she place him on a pedestal like most people did. Her treatment of him, compared with many others, was quite normal. Indeed she mentioned that she read about Harry, but was it Harry's fault that he was cited in many books? No it was not. Was it Hermione's fault for reading any of those books. Again, it was not. Therefore, Hermione was only being brutally honest when she claimed she read about Harry, which in fact she did. Would Hermione react the same way to any other eleven year old who has been in her reading material? Well we would never find out, would we.

Yes, her reactions were different from the Weasleys', but the manner in which she introduced herself was no better than theirs.

That is in fact your opinion, and I respectfully disagree.

Cheers!

Polaris

[Hawk 92]

I guess one last word on the quotes is in order. Earlier I submitted that I believed that JKR did not disqualify H/Hr for the whole series based on a chronological analysis of the quotes. Simply put after the platonic quote she did say that there was time for Harry to decide that he liked Hermione. I have several times asked the same question If JKR says that there is time for Harry to decide that he likes Hermione who is anyone to say that there is not? and received equal silence each time.

Still carry on with the quotes, but someone should tell Couric, Paxman, Kloves, and a host of others that by certain definitions JKR has disqualified H/Hr for the whole series. Kind of interesting that those who make a living asking questions are not satisfied by this platonic answer.

Cheers!

[Rowena Ravenclaw]

I bet he's beating young ladies off with a stick :eyebrows:

Thinks they're Death Eaters in disguise, no doubt. :p

[Charmed Cheese]

I think Hermes will be the perfect mate for Hedwig.

Agreed. They are the true H/Hr ship! :p

[noddwyd]

I would like to assert my opinion that Ginny's cat like descriptions are proof of her being a polymagus (with felines being the preferred form) and of her secret relationship with Crookshanks, who has helped her to get over Harry, and see that there is so much more to the world than being a fangirl.

[Charmed Cheese]

I would like to assert my opinion that Ginny's cat like descriptions are proof of her being a polymagus (with felines being the preferred form) and of her secret relationship with Crookshanks, who has helped her to get over Harry, and see that there is so much more to the world than being a fangirl.

:lol: Well she was hanging around him a lot. And, by placing the blame on him for the dung bombs, Ginny deomonstrates they have a typical relationship; it's always the guy's fault. Not to mention their flirting in batting the butter beer cork around...

I just may have to jump ships on this one. I'm not sure Harry can compete with that. :p

[flucias1]

I would like to assert my opinion that Ginny's cat like descriptions are proof of her being a polymagus (with felines being the preferred form) and of her secret relationship with Crookshanks, who has helped her to get over Harry, and see that there is so much more to the world than being a fangirl. :rotfl: Heck, they're even ginger-haired! What'll we call the ship?

[Cat]

I guess one last word on the quotes is in order. Earlier I submitted that I believed that JKR did not disqualify H/Hr for the whole series based on a chronological analysis of the quotes. Simply put after the platonic quote she did say that there was time for Harry to decide that he liked Hermione. I have several times asked the same question If JKR says that there is time for Harry to decide that he likes Hermione who is anyone to say that there is not? and received equal silence each time.

Has anybody said that your own JKR quote is untrue or discountable?

Here's my last word on the quotes thing -
People take different meanings from different quotes. Then they think or state what they understand from it. If somebody thought one quote meant there was no possibility for a certain pairing, they have every right to say so. It's not rude to disagree with somebody's 'ship' and it's not rude to say something that goes against that person's own theory. Theories are meant to be disputed. Somebody who argues evidence contrary to yours isn't just saying that you're stupid or that there's no logical reason for you to think what you think.

So you don't have to agree to their interpretations to their favoured quotes and they don't have to agree to yours. However it turns out in the end, the interpretation for one little quote could have always gone either way.

And I used to think 'shipping' was cute.

Anyway... anybody for Moaning Myrtle and Lord Voldemort? Myrtle's ghost and permanent youth thing would be a downside, but where there's a will there's a way...

[noddwyd]

There is also overwhelming evidence that Virginia only became close friends with Hermione so she could get closer to Crookshanks! Can we say HMS Flaming Kittens!!! I sure can. It has a nice ring to it.

[Perdita]

Considering if this relationship does happen; they're not going to be sitting back waiting for the other. One, Luna is not that shy about Ronald. Two, Ron, I believe is going to have alot more confidence in himself due to being a prefect and being a Quidditch hero.
I agree with sone. Ron is already starting to become more confident with himself at the end of OOTP. I think JKR will only build on this in the future.

And, I want to add my support for the new name, HMS Red Moon.

Even when the books show events that are contrary to what JKR says in her quotes? Will you not contend with the possibility that JRK is deliberately going back and forth so as to not reveal the future plotlines of her novels?
This is where I disagree, because I don't think JKR has changed the plot of R/Hr or H/G at all. I do feel she left R/Hr rather stagnant in Ootp, but I think there are indications in text to support foreshadowing for those pairings. There are two books left and plenty of time to develop both of these romantic relationship, imo. I also think that the corresponding interview to book 5 release, the Katie Couric interview was the death knell for H/Hr.
Okay, I can accept the possibility that you are able to interpret parts of the book to mean that R/Hr and H/G are still receiving encouragement.

However, don’t you think that there’s quite a discrepancy between the statement she made about Ron and Hermione snogging and the events that actually took place in the book? Namely, the events that took place in the book do not support JKR’s statement at all. The tension in their relationship in this book was not at all conducive to developing into something romantic. You even say that R/Hr have gotten rather stagnant in this book.

In light of this irony, do you still trust the quotes and interviews with so much faith? Is there no doubt at all? I honestly can’t understand how anyone could not have some doubts.

Contrary to what JKR said in the interview, what took place in OOTP was anything BUT a death knell for H/Hr.

:tu: :tu: for EricaM and BlackKnight86

and :rotfl: @ Nodwydd

[Charmed Cheese]

There is also overwhelming evidence that Virginia only became close friends with Hermione so she could get closer to Crookshanks! Can we say HMS Flaming Kittens!!! I sure can. It has a nice ring to it.

I like it!

[Rowena Ravenclaw]

I just may have to jump ships on this one. I'm not sure Harry can compete with that.

:rotfl: I'm forced to agree. Flaming Kittens it is!

Anyway... anybody for Moaning Myrtle and Lord Voldemort? Myrtle's ghost and permanent youth thing would be a downside, but where there's a will there's a way...

Could work. After all, she's dead, and he oughta be. And once she finds out he used to look a little like Harry, it'll be all he can do to keep her ectoplasmic little paws off him.

Of course, they'll also have to get past the whole him kinda being responsible for her death thing, but like you said....

[noddwyd]

I have a question. If we are all supposedly on 'ships' then why are there no pirates? Not to mention, we should probably have and admiral of some kind, with all these different ships... I feel that the addition of an HP version of say...The Black Pearl would make for a much nicer thread, where there is less arguing and more plundering and pillaging, and not to mention rum drinking. So, any ideas on this? I have several nice ideas...it's not against any forum rules to ship threesomes, or moresomes, is it? As long as they don't include slash, that is...

[Cat]

Perhaps it could be a schoolyard crush that has withstood the test of time and... er... the event of dying.

'Oh, Myrtle, you look as lovely as you did all those years ago!'.

Hmm...

noddwyd, the rum drinking would definitely contribute. Imagine the flow of ideas! Anyway, I think we might already have boarded the ship and pillaged the booty with this trend of odd partnerships. See, Dedalus, I told you that if enough people did it...

[Rowena Ravenclaw]

Perhaps it could be a schoolyard crush that has withstood the test of time and... er... the event of dying.

I think I know what happened. Tom was going to bring her down to the Chamber of Secrets for a romantic assignation, but the basilisk got out of hand, and, well...He was so heartbroken he decided that if he couldn't have his Muggleborn sweetheart, then no one else would get to enjoy theirs.

And yeah, I think you, Dedalus, and noddwyd have the pirate thing pretty well in hand. Not that I'm arguing this thread couldn't use an infusion of rum and mayhem from time to time.

[Charmed Cheese]

I have a question. If we are all supposedly on 'ships' then why are there no pirates? Not to mention, we should probably have and admiral of some kind, with all these different ships... I feel that the addition of an HP version of say...The Black Pearl would make for a much nicer thread, where there is less arguing and more plundering and pillaging, and not to mention rum drinking. So, any ideas on this? I have several nice ideas...it's not against any forum rules to ship threesomes, or moresomes, is it? As long as they don't include slash, that is...

:rotfl:
That's a great idea!

I think CaptainNick should lead it considering he's already a Captain and he's had experience in pillaging and plundering :p

[Prongs, Sr.]

Perdita

However, don’t you think that there’s quite a discrepancy between the statement she made about Ron and Hermione snogging and the events that actually took place in the book?

No, because even though there was no snogging between R/Hr, JKR still denies the romantic possibilities of H/Hr and she corrects K.C. by emphasizing Ron and Hermione, as having the "tension". JKR does not have to bring R/Hr into this interview, she does anyway, without any encouragement from Katie Couric. Even Katie knew she had made a mistake by assuming that H/Hr would kiss, because she abruptly changed face immediately and said that she was"just kidding". I'm sorry, Perdita, but in my personal opinion, JKR's own face spoke volumes as to her dislike of H/Hr pairing and I feel that this is supported in text, as well.

Namely, the events that took place in the book do not support JKR’s statement at all. The tension in their relationship in this book was not at all conducive to developing into something romantic. You even say that R/Hr have gotten rather stagnant in this book.

GoF was a very "romantic tension" filled book for R/Hr, imo, and Ootp dropped down a tone from that book. However, there were many hints to support R/Hr, both from Ron and Hermione's actions and from Harry, himself, who compares Ron and Hermione's interactions to Arthur and Molly's (a married couple).

Also, I'm personally looking at the series from a seven book viewpoint, and I can see the hints and foreshadowing that JKR has put in for H/G and R/Hr since book one, (starting with Harry's initial impression of Ginny), and I still see her on that projected path after book five.

[BlackKnight86]

Prongs, Sr.
I was absolutely not intending to be disrespectful to Canteurervan or another shipper on this forum and I have unintentionally offended anyone, then I'm sorry.

I'm not offended, Prongs. I was just trying to point out that using words like "clear", "obvious", and "common sense" can lead others to think that you're implying that if they do not agree with you they lack "common sense" or are not intelligent enough to see something. When I was teaching, I tried never to use words like that, because invariably some of the students did not or could not follow the argument. And that was with a topic that was well-defined. These books are not finished - the ending is not definitized. For example, you see affection where other people don't, and that's fine. But when you say that the affection is "clearly" there, that implies that everyone should see it...which is not the case.


Prongs, Sr.
He states this which implies that he is confused between actual text of the series and JKR’s quotes:

Canteurervan
Hints of interviews might be relevant, but to those who have already been confused about the interpretation of the books, those hints might not serve as the right antidote, but rather a more deeper confusion of misunderstandings.

I understand what you're saying, Prongs, but I don't read it that way. Why didn't you just ask him what he meant?

Canteurervan, may I paraphrase? I think you're saying that people who have already interpreted the books a particular way will not have their interpretations clarified by the quotes; they'll simply continue to interpret the quotes the same way they interpreted the books. If they interpret wrong, the quotes will probably make them more wrong. Is that correct?

Prongs, Sr.
I agree that “uncertainty” is a much better choice of words to use in that situation. However, he used “confusing” and that is what I had to go by, when responding to his post.

Yes...I'm sorry. I wasn't clear on that. That wasn't a criticism of you; it was actually a thinking out loud - kind of a "hmmm....I would have used a different word". I probably should have made it an aside to Canteurervan.

Prongs, Sr.
It doesn't? A "date" does imply romance by all stretches of the imagination, imo. A date implies a potential couple who may or may not want to take their relationship to a romantic level.

Prongs, that's exactly what I'm talking about. "All stretches of the imagination" - that's a bit all-encompassing, don't you think? Are you including my imagination in that statement? I'm sorry, but I did not give my consent to that.

First of all, look the word "date" up in the dictionary. Think about lunch "dates" during the work day. Think about two "just friends" going out on a movie date. A date only implies a potential couple when that is the mutual intent of the potential couple. I go on "potential couple" dates to meet women, to get to know them; but romance doesn't come into the picture until I've gotten a fairly good idea of what kind of person they are. To me, romance is more than the "sum of its parts" (to put it obliquely); and it would be a bit capricious for me to assume that every single date had romantic overtones (especially the early ones). You may disagree, and that's fine; but that doesn't mean I'm wrong.

Prongs, Sr.
What exactly do you think the questioner was implying here? "Do Harry and Hermione have a "date" to see when their test scores will be posted?" or "on what date does such and such occur". Those are both examples of others usages for the word date. Do you believe that there is an alternative meaning to the word, "date" in that question? JKR was specifically asked, "do Harry and Hermione have a date?" That was the only question that was asked. How is she supposed to read the mind of the questioner and interpret another meaning that would require a more indepth answer or an explanation? I'm not understanding why you are giving me these above examples; sorry.

For the record, I'm not challenging the meaning of the word "date"; I'm calling it irrelevant. The question was "do they have a date". I'm saying that whether they have a date or not has no significant impact on their relationship, whatever it's status. I've given you plenty of examples of "dates" above; as a personal example, I've gone on one-on-one dates with women in whom I had no romantic interest. If someone asked me, "did you go on a date with So-and-so?", I'd say, "Yes, I did". Without further information, ascertaining my relationship status with So-and-so would be guesswork, at best. My examples were an attempt to show that the only definitive answer that JKR gave was that Hermione and Harry do not have a date. The only "explanation" that she gave was her "platonic" modifier; and I tried to use those examples to show that since "platonic" is not definitive, more information would be necessary. Allow me to clarify: Let's say that I was the one asking the question. First of all, I have an intent - to find out whether or not Harry and Hermione fall in love and become a couple. Was that the original questioner's intent?....I have no idea; but if it was, his question was poorly worded. I would have worded it like this: "Do Harry and Hermione fall in love and become a couple?" Do you see that that is a much more involved, more detailed question? An answer of "No" to that would be far more definitive on its own. Now, let's say that I had the same intent, but I was not the questioner; and the original question was asked. I would not accept that answer, as it is far too specific, and would ask clarification questions in order to get more information; because my intent was not satisfied. That did not happen; so the matter has not been put to rest. A fair question would be, "how would JKR have answered any requests for clarification?" That has never been tested. All we have now is the "platonic" modifier; hence the ongoing debate.

Prongs, Sr.
I’ve already responding that question to EricaM. However, for the sake of clarification, I agree that not all (if most) fifth-graders would not understand the meaning of platonic. However, the question is about a date. Whether you agree or not, dating usually implies “romance”, and this is simple enough for the younger fans to understand. She says “no” and suggests that they are very platonic friends. I think most kids could understand that they will not have a date. As for the usage of platonic, I feel that she is merely emphasizing the status of their relationship: non-sexual and passionless, which, incidentally, I feel is backed up in text.

But I was not asking whether or not the kids could understand the question or the answer; I was asking why JKR used the word "platonic". If any of those kids wouldn't understand the meaning of "platonic", why would it be necessary to use it to emphasize the status of H/Hr? Why not say "just friends" or "only friends"? Whether the kids understand "platonic" or not, they certainly would understand either of those phrases better. Is that how she usually talks? Is that how she would usually talk to children? If she were talking to a friend at work who asked her if two other co-workers were romantically involved, would she say "Oh, no, they're platonic friends", or would she say, "Oh, no, they're just friends." If her daughter saw her giving a male friend a kiss on the cheek and said, "Mommy, are you in love with him, would JKR say, "No, honey, we're platonic"? Was her use of the word "platonic" deliberate? These are all fair questions; they are also rhetorical. Unless and until JKR explains herself, we are just speculating. And it is fair speculation...on both sides.

Prongs, Sr.
I absolutely understand the idea of the classical definition of the word platonic and I think it is a beautiful concept. I do not feel disdain or contempt for others who accept this viewpoint and see this in a potential H/Hr pairing. I simply do not see H/Hr potential for this type of love. This is based on part on their current relationship, as it stands at the end of book 5; JKR’s interviews that hint toward a “more sexually orientated relationship, but nothing too gritty and the understanding that these books are not romance novels; and the foreshadowing H/G and R/Hr.

Hmmmmm......above, you made the statement "As for the usage of platonic, I feel that she is merely emphasizing the status of their relationship: non-sexual and passionless". I may be wrong, but I still get the impression that you and I may still differ, even on the classical definition. Now, that's fine, but it would be important to know that, so we could reconcile our two frames of reference. In any case, I respect your opinion - I see it differently, but I understand where you derive your view. I maintain, however, that neither of our opinions is "clear" or "obvious".

Prongs, Sr.
I saw this originally interview on television and this is what she said:

Katie Couric: “Any snogging between Harry and Hermione?”
JKR: “Harry and Hermione”
Katie Couric: “just kidding”
JKR: “Ron and Hermione…I would think…there’s more tension there.”

I’m not adding words to the quote. JKR was asked about “snogging”. How can this not be interpreted as a topic about romance? What kind of tension do you think JKR is suggesting?

I do not know what JKR is suggesting; that's my point. I only deal in what I know. Your interpretation is just as plausible as mine is...I am not disputing that. However, it is neither "clear cut" nor "obvious", which was my primary objection. As to the interpretation of "snogging"....well, I'll put it this way: "Snogging" is slang, and as such has a richer variety of connotation than "kissing". Moreover, I'll be honest with you: adolescent sexual misadventures are not my idea of "romance", and I do not consider the term "snogging" to be a particularly attractive descriptor. I know for a fact that I am not alone in feeling this way. You may feel differently, and that's fine. I don't know how JKR feels. I can tell you that, after reading five of her books, I am taking it as an article of faith that she is not writing what I regard as a typical adolescent romance. If I knew that she were, I probably wouldn't read them; that is not my taste. As to the tension...that's an easy one. Ron and Hermione argue. That's tension. OJ and Nicole Simpson argued, too. That was also tension. JKR said tension, not romantic tension. When you insert romantic, you are, in fact, adding. That's fine, and you may be correct; but it is still, in fact, adding. Personally, I don't feel that tension in any relationship is attractive, desireable, or healthy. If you do, that's fine.


Prongs, Sr.
If I were an H/Hr shipper, I certainly wouldn't challenge the meaning of the word "date" and "platonic", but would challenge the "time" issue of the quote, as others have. Even though she does not give a time frame or book number reference, I feel that the time qualifier would be a more appropriate means to debate than to quibble over the meanings of "date" and "platonic", but that is just my humble opinion. It brings back bad memories of former President Clinton's, "what is is". That is a joke, by the way!

Also, to clarify my feelings on JKR interviews, she has said that she will answer questions honestly unless it is important to the plot, as with the question on whether or not Sirius will have his name cleared, for example. In all of JKR's interviews, I feel, (and I've read mounds of them) that her overall message is one of consistency in what she reveals, her explanations of character motivations are very consistent and her quotes are similarly consistent, as well in that she will say "no" to H/Hr, openly point to R/Hr and lead us that way, and leave the options for H/G wide open.

Now that consistency analysis of her interviews is a good topic for an essay. That is an excellent way to examine the issue, and I applaud you for that. However, I have also provided an interview analysis, the "work-in-progress" one that I mentioned in my previous post. That is an equally fair way of examining the issue. As such, it is not quibbling to dispute authorial intent on word usage; I maintain that JKR and any other author in her position will actively take advantage of wording to avoid being backed into a corner. To clarify my feelings on JKR's interviews, I feel that she has been very honest when answering questions. I also feel that she has not had to answer too many tough questions - and intentionally so. As to the "unless it is important to the plot" statement that she made, I have two things to point out:

1. "I can't answer that question" is in and of itself an answer. JKR's no dummy; knowing what's important to the plot and what's not important to the plot is almost as important as knowing the plot itself (and they thought I was asleep through all those military intelligence briefings!)

2. "I'll answer all questions honestly" has an integral assumption at its core: the question has to be asked first. Believe me, it's not as hard to dodge questions as you might think!

Well, I've pontificated enough. But this thread sort of lends itself to that. As Daveydee said in his very excellent introductory post way back when I first started (Part four, I think? Sorry, Daveydee! I know I have it somewhere...!), this thread is not just on who's going to fall in love in the series. It is as much a discussion on how we define love and romance, our personal and cultural experience, and all the stuff that goes with it, as it is a book discussion.

And on that note, I'll get off my soapbox! Prongs, Sr, you have an excellent day!

BlackKnight86

[la_ginny]

I have a question. If we are all supposedly on 'ships' then why are there no pirates? Not to mention, we should probably have and admiral of some kind, with all these different ships... I feel that the addition of an HP version of say...The Black Pearl would make for a much nicer thread, where there is less arguing and more plundering and pillaging, and not to mention rum drinking. So, any ideas on this? I have several nice ideas...it's not against any forum rules to ship threesomes, or moresomes, is it? As long as they don't include slash, that is...
:rotfl: This is perhaps the best idea I've heard in a while! (Sorry, I'm a long time lurker... generally too intimidated to post much in here). In fact, I'm in favor of a rousing chorus of "Drink up, me hearties" and a stiff rum on the rocks for all present in the love thread. And how exactly would people pillage and plunder? Steal others ideas? Wreck other people's posts? Oooooh, you could "quote" somebody and insert random pirate sayings in the middle, like this:
The use of quotes in debating ships has long been, well, debated and I think ... YOU SCURVY CUR!...as I have said JKR can and cannot be trusted to reveal the truthful deciet in her works. BLAST YOU MANGY DOGS! So it is quite clear that these ships, and others, have sunk to the bottom of Davy Jones Locker, ha! And if you come back I'll make you walk the plank.

That is incredibly off topic, but it's fun.

In all seriousness, let me say that, though I ship R/Hr, I am overall impressed with the care and time put into every post. I respect H/Hr shippers very much, and your research impresses me. (won't change my mind, though!)

-la_ginny

[noddwyd]

hmm...well, that just leaves the admiral thing. Who should we name as Grand Admiral of the cosforums fleet? I mean, we are going into battle against Voldemort, right?

[Barbara Kennedy]

I'd say Lanifiel, being neutral, I think, would be a good choice to command the fleet.
Especially since he can make the whole crew of us walk the plank, if he so choses, anyway.
Either him, or Morgoth, though I have no idea how he would react to the nomination.

Thanks, xray for naming the neutral Ship 'HMS Plato' on my suggestion. It just seemed fair that that ship have a name too.

[lanifiel]

Personally I think the thread should stay on topic and not wander, but I guess my opinion doesnt count... Oh wait IT DOES.

[Hawk 92]

Has anybody said that your own JKR quote is untrue or discountable?

Yes. They mostly claim that if you combine JKR quotes you eliminate Hermione and then the quote speaks the real truth. But I've already talked to them about this over and over again. So what do you think Cat? Heres the exact quote:

Is Harry Potter ever going to fall in love with Hermione or is he going to fall in love with Ginny Weasley?
A. In Book IV Harry does decide he likes a girl, but it's not Hermione or Ginny. However, he's only 14, so there's plenty of time for him to change his mind. ;-)
Scholastic.com February 2000 Online Chat

now what do you think in answer to my question: If JKR says that there is time for Harry to like Hermione, who are any of us to say that there is not?

Cheers!

[FlyingPhoenix]

An exellent post there BlackKnight 86 between your name reminds me of one of my childhood hero's. *sigh*

Anyway you raise the very point why JKR's quotes are that difficult. At first I personal don't know her. This say I have no idea what JKR understand if she say: date, platonic, languish in love, poor Ginny and on and on.

We see already here at this thread people understand under "platonic" different meanings, "date" different meanings.
But this isn't all. There are the questions too. Like I stated before and I say it again I do not think that those questions are that uncontrolled by JKR's managment. I rather think this questions are very well chosen by JKR herself. Its usually that before an interview happens JKR get a view at the questions. Something like a list. Then she agree's or she want that some questions have to change or even cut out completely.
This say its even more interesting that there don't exist straight question's like: Will they fall in love?

No, this questions are alone open for interpreting. What does this questioner want to know if he ask "Do H/Hr have a date?" Why even ask this like that? "Date" what does the one who asked understand under this?
Then the answer: No, they're very platonic friends.
What did JKR understand under "date", why explain this answer with "platonic"? And overall what does she understand under "platonic"?

You see by one single question regarding H/Hr we simple have in all true no idea. But what is interesting JKR chose to answer H/Hr question difficult much more difficult and open to wild speculation as HR/r questions.
Why should she do that if H/Hr won't ever happen? Why don't exist straight questions like by HR/r?

This is highley suspicious IMO that there exist such a different. This shows to me that one ship is going to happen and its IMO H/Hr

[Dedalus]

What do people make of Dobby and Winky? A lot of people assume they'll get together, but perhaps they may not? Is it possible their closeness is just friendship, or perhaps even because they're relatives? Do people think they'll get together later in the books (if you think they haven't already)?

I am actually interested in that, I'm not trying to pirate the ship. There's no reason why relationships between characters aside the students can't be considered :)


Hawk 92, I think that statement is ambiguous. It's impossible to know what she means when she says "I'm not telling", basically, so I'm not sure whether or not that can be interpreted directly as "he'll get with Hermione"

[Hawk 92]

Hawk 92, I think that statement is ambiguous. It's impossible to know what she means when she says "I'm not telling", basically, so I'm not sure whether or not that can be interpreted directly as "he'll get with Hermione"

I would agree. I think that all quotes are ambiguous and I stick with that. I'm not trying to establish or sink ships by the quotes. JKR said that there is time, therefore there is time. No one can change her mind at that point. And as I pointed out, if the platonic quote is the end all be all answer to the question, as suggested in the quote thread, then someone needs to tell Kloves, Couric, and the others who apparently keep asking this question. Hey guys you are wasting your time, JKR already said it won't happen. So why do people who make a living getting answers to questions not satisified with the platonic quote? Especially if it is the infalliable answer to all shipping questions?

Dedalus, I don't believe that JKR would give away anything about her future books in a interview. I believe that the answer lies in the books.

Cheers!

[Dedalus]

I would agree. I think that all quotes are ambiguous and I stick with that. I'm not trying to establish or sink ships by the quotes. JKR said that there is time, therefore there is time. No one can change her mind at that point. And as I pointed out, if the platonic quote is the end all be all answer to the question, as suggested in the quote thread, then someone needs to tell Kloves, Couric, and the others who apparently keep asking this question. Hey guys you are wasting your time, JKR already said it won't happen. So why do people who make a living getting answers to questions not satisified with the platonic quote? Especially if it is the infalliable answer to all shipping questions?
Cheers!
I'm afraid I wouldn't know either, because I neither support any particular ships or attempt to sink any. I can't really tell how people would interpret something, only how I would. I just like playing Devil's Advocate, Hawk 92 :)

I agree with your last comment, at least I agree with it to an extent. Not everything is big and important, so often she will say things in interviews that don't spoil much. She has answered many questions - it's just down to people for deciphering what's important and what isn't.

[MagicianGirl]

Actually, her reaction is quite different from everyone else's. Firstly, she didn't enquire to see Harry's scar like Ron. She didn't seem slightly fazed that the boy standing in front of her is indeed the famous Harry Potter.
She asked him "Are you really,?". Then proceeded to tell him that she know all about him from the books. That if it was her, she would want to learn everything about it.

Furthermore, she didn't question him regarding his defeat of Voldemort, but merely introduced herself and treated Harry like another ordinary eleven-year old boy. Her actions and reactions in that scene is quite different compared to Ron's, Fred's, George's, and Ginny's.
Why would she question Harry about Voldemort's defeat she read all about it already from the books and Hermione firmly believes that if it's in the book then it is true.


May I ask how is it possible that Ginny can have such deep rooted feelings for Harry without having ever interacted with him.
Well it was JKR who said "she was languishing in love" and from the canon she's been described as always been very taken with Harry. Add that with the fact that he risked his life for her and that will leave an impression on her. As for not having ever interacted with Harry, it was her who was hindered with that, not Harry. In fact in the Burrow it was Harry who will strike up the conversation first like when he asked her if "she is going to Hogwarts too" but her shyness with him hinder that. It was Harry who initiated conversation not the other way around. Here I would thought being a fan-girl that she was would take up those opportunity to talked and be in Harry's company but *gasp* she never did.

[EricaM]

She asked him "Are you really,?". Then proceeded to tell him that she know all about him from the books. That if it was her, she would want to learn everything about it.


Why would she question Harry about Voldemort's defeat she read all about it already from the books and Hermione firmly believes that if it's in the book then it is true.

It's my guess that this is where JKR introduces Hermione's bookishness - it's the first time the readership meets her and it presents a major characteristic of hers. It does seem, however, that she wasn't 'star struck' by Harry. Her interest in him seems purely academic as she does not demonstrate a 'preference' for Harry. She is just as interested in Ron's demonstration of magic as she is about meeting Harry.

Well it was JKR who said "she was languishing in love" and from the canon she's been described as always been very taken with Harry.

IMHO, that's exactly the case. JKR does not reveal any new information. Her answers come only from the well of existing canon. Existing canon does indeed show a languishing in love Ginny, and JKR perpetuates this idea with her response. However, as the author she new that that was not the case. Far from languishing in love, Ginny met someone else at the Yule Ball, by the end of the year they where dating. They were still together for most of the following year, however, Ginny's initial attraction to him seemed to be waning (why else would she refer to him as 'the fool'). By the end of OotP she 'ditches' him and as far as we know, has set her sights on Dean. Definitely not languishing, IMHO.

Add that with the fact that he risked his life for her and that will leave an impression on her.

What about Harry risking his life for Hermione. What about all the times that Harry moved to protect Hermione in OotP? What about the fact that he's tackled a DE to protect her, what kind of impression would that make on Hermione? As for Ginny, what kind of impression is Harry making on her when he barely notices her. When he forgets about her ordeal with TR. When he barely bats an eye when he finds out she's been dating Michael. What kind of impression is that going to make on Ginny?

As for not having ever interacted with Harry, it was her who was hindered with that, not Harry. In fact in the Burrow it was Harry who will strike up the conversation first like when he asked her if "she is going to Hogwarts too" but her shyness with him hinder that. It was Harry who initiated conversation not the other way around. Here I would thought being a fan-girl that she was would take up those opportunity to talked and be in Harry's company but *gasp* she never did.

Are you suggesting that Harry was romantically interested in Ginny and that's why he was talking to her? I myself think that Harry was being polite, but that's just me. In any case, Harry met the new improved Ginny at the beginning of OotP and yet she hadn't made any impact on him in, in the sense that we do not observe Harry contemplating Ginny, about the change in her. Yes, when she's around he makes observations about how she resembles her brothers, and he is appreciative of her Quidditch abilities (but they don't really make a dent - he's quickly thinking about the fact that he would have been able to win the game for them). Compare that to the presense that Hermione has in his thoughts throughout OotP.

Erica

[star22]

Hermione was interested in Harry at first because she had read about him. However, she never saw him as just a celebrity as Ginny did. It was simply an academic thing, not an obsession/crush the way that it was with Ginny.

[Prongs, Sr.]

BlackKnight

Thanks for your response. I think we've covered the subject of that particular quote and I've received an understanding of your point of view, so I see no point in dragging this on regarding that particular quote.

Moreover, I'll be honest with you: adolescent sexual misadventures are not my idea of "romance", and I do not consider the term "snogging" to be a particularly attractive descriptor. I know for a fact that I am not alone in feeling this way. You may feel differently, and that's fine. I don't know how JKR feels. I can tell you that, after reading five of her books, I am taking it as an article of faith that she is not writing what I regard as a typical adolescent romance. If I knew that she were, I probably wouldn't read them; that is not my taste. As to the tension...that's an easy one. Ron and Hermione argue. That's tension. OJ and Nicole Simpson argued, too. That was also tension. JKR said tension, not romantic tension. When you insert romantic, you are, in fact, adding. That's fine, and you may be correct; but it is still, in fact, adding. Personally, I don't feel that tension in any relationship is attractive, desireable, or healthy. If you do, that's fine.

Thank you for sharing your personal viewpoint, as I find it interesting the various preferences that we all share for that aspect of the story. From my personal perspective, I agree that in real life, a couple that argues like Ron and Hermione and also Arthur and Molly probably would not have a successful relationship, as this is not conducive to a healthy, loving relationship based on mutual respect and, of course, communication.

However, I've based my perceptions on JKR's base level age group (nine and up); and the fact that these books were initially marketed for children; development of R/Hr from book one, as more humorous in tone than serious and JKR seems to like this type of couple, as indicated by Arthur and Molly and Lily and James. I feel, with R/Hr she is writing a typical teenage romance. They are sidekicks and we will not see any love story between them "up front". However, Harry is the hero and main character, and I feel his love story will be paramount, which is why the "lead in" hint regarding H/G is important, imo. I see a combination of potential comedy for H/G and emotional depth, as they both share possession by Voldemort, which hasn't been resolved in a satisfactory manner.

Is that how she usually talks? Is that how she would usually talk to children?

This is my personal opinion, but I feel you need to talk to children (especially school-age) at a higher level to introduce them to larger vocabulary, and I'm not a teacher, but a mom, and I actually do this all the time. This is also one of the reasons reading to your children is so important.

Now that consistency analysis of her interviews is a good topic for an essay. That is an excellent way to examine the issue, and I applaud you for that.

I agree, as I'm actually working on such an essay, which is why I'm so keen on believing in the consistency of her interviews.

this thread is not just on who's going to fall in love in the series. It is as much a discussion on how we define love and romance, our personal and cultural experience, and all the stuff that goes with it, as it is a book discussion

I actually agree with you on this. I hope you have a nice day.

[Mirtilla]

Good post Harmonias!!! :tu: Blackknight86 excellent posts! :tu:

Originally posted by Fairydust
I've said this many threads before. Just because a person has given up on someone does not mean that they are over that person. Ginny can give up on trying to get Harry, that doesn't mean she's over him. I or you can give up on someone, but that doesn't mean you're totally over that person. Thus, I'll say again that Ginny's not over Harry. She gave up on him, but she's not over him.

I've read this on many threads before but I ask in my previous post for textual evidence and canon evidence that suggest that Ginny is not over Harry.
With this statement you only show your opinion which I respect but I would also like to see your opinion with supporting evidence,

Hmm... wasn't it JK that said Ginny was languishing in love for Harry? That and the "Leave him alone. He didn't want all that!" she yelled at Draco.

I'm sure that you've also noticed that Rowling said that after GoF, then in ootp we know that in the last half part of GoF Ginny wasn't languishing in love for Harry, maybe Rowling was ironic.

"Leave him alone. He didn't want all that!"

This shows how Ginny is in love with Harry?

This is a double standard since even Hermione in ootp defended Harry from Malfoy so if for H/g shippers "shut up Malfoy" is a sings of love then we can assume that Hermione is in love with Harry, right?

If she was in love with an image then, darn, how did she know that he didn't want any of the attention he got. I mean, she's only been in the room with the guy a few times yet she can tell what he feels and everything. I think you gotta look way past the image to see all that. She ain't in love with his image.

Ginny was in love with the image of Harry, like Tom Riddle said:

" - how she didn't think famous, good, great Harry Potter would ever like her..."

We know that Ginny told Riddle everything to her famous hero Harry Potter and I don't see why Riddle would have lied.
Furthermore Ginny's behavior is the typical behavior of Girl with a fun crush, even Ron make fun of her saying she would have another rival in Moaning Myrtle, that's sounds as if Ron himself thought that Ginny's crush was just a little silly.
Not to mention the Valentine's card on CoS:

"His eyes are as green as a fresh pickled toad
his hair as dark as a blackboard,
I wish he was mine, he's really divine,
The hero who conquered the dark lord."
-Ginny

Using our logic we can safely assume that this Valentine's cards was sent by Ginny to Harry since Ginny has a crush on Harry.
Furthermore we haven't any canon evidence that suggest that Malfoy or Fred and George has sent this nice Valentine's card, on the other hand we have canon evidence that Ginny has sent the Valentine's since she have a crush.

She was ten! She saw her hero! Give her a break

the big contradiction:

this was what you've posted:

She ain't in love with his image

Then

She saw her hero

Actually being in love with your hero is being in love with an image since usually you don't know your hero except from his image, so we can safely say this was Ginny's case.

Plus Hermione was 11, only one year older then Ginny and she didn't act like she have seen Hugh Grant with magical power when she saw Harry for the first time even if she had read a lot of stuff of him.

Are you going to hate on them, too?

I never say "I hate Ginny" I'm only saying that I think she was a bit shallow.
Can you please tell me why you are assuming things that I've never written?

You can see that it evolved during the fourth book even.

I can see that from PoA her crush has slowly become indifference and don't forget that during fourth book her crush hasn't evolved since at the Yule Ball she met Michael Corner that actually has been her boyfriend in ootp, in canon Ginny's crush hasn't developed during GoF

Right, instead Hermione just presumed that she knew everything about him because she read it. She made him uncomfortable and started prattling off about everything she's read about him.

Right, Rowling chose to give Harry Hermione instead of Ginny. Interesting isn't it?

You cannot compare them because Hermione is way too mature for her age.

I never saw in the Love Thread guidelines a rule that stated I can't compare Hermione's maturity with Ginny's maturity, maybe I'm missing something if you can quote me a rule that stated



Shippers
-Remember you can't compare Ginny's maturity with Hermione's maturity



I will kindly follow that rule, till that day I will compare Hermione's maturity with Ginny's maturity all the way because I think it's very telling that Rowling chose Hermione as Harry's best friend, a girl that is too mature for her age as Harry is.


Where's the evidence that Harry's in love with Hermione?

Harry choose Hermione over Cho always even in GoF.
Harry think of Hermione more then before
Harry dreams of Hermione
Harry is anger towards Hermione almost only when she disagrees with him and doesn't approve is actions
Harry interested in what Hermione is thinking
Harry being jealous of the thought that Ron and Hermione were without him at 12Grimmaul Place
Harry has developed a Hermione-saving-thing
Harry has always show that he cares of Hermione
Harry buys her what he knew she would have liked
Harry almost flirts with Hermione sometimes since PoA
Harry hasn't the heart to tell Hermione something that he knew it would have hurt her
Harry trusts in her
Shall I go on?

With Ginny, Harry has never show all the things that I've mentioned above.

Are you friggin kidding me?

No I'm not friggin kidding you, I'm serious.

We are definitely not reading the same book because in OotP we see Ginny as the only one that's really able to talk to him

Can you please show canon evidence?

If I remember correctly actually it was with Hermione that Harry wanted to talk at 12 Grimmauld Place and he was rather surprised to see Ron and Ginny.
Ginny isn't able to talk to Harry unless you're mentioned the Library scenes where she actually suggest Harry to talk with Cho.


"They do, do they?" said Harry, glaring at Ron and Ginny. Ron looked down at his feet but Ginny seemed quite unabashed.
"Well, you have!" she said. "And you won't look at any of us!"
"It's you lot who won't look at me!" said Harry angrily."


"We wanted to talk to you, Harry," said Ginny, "but as you've been hiding ever since we got back - "
"I didn't want anyone to talk to me," said Harry, who was feeling more and more nettled.
"Well, that was a bit stupid of you," said Ginny angrily."

"We recognised Harry's voice. "What are you yelling about?"
"Never you mind," said Harry roughly.
Ginny raised her eyebrows.
"There's no need to take that tone with me," she said cooly. "I was only wondering whether I could help."
"Well, you can't," said Harry shortly."


Ginny in this scene couldn't talk to Harry and Harry couldn't care less of her.

She helped him with his Sirius problem

And Harry didn't want her help.

She tried to help him with his Cho problem

That show Ginny is really over Harry since she couldn't care less if Harry was dating other girls.

She listened to him

In one scene.
Hermione also listen to Harry when he told her about the scar, Hermione listen to Harry when Harry was frustrated by Ron jealousy, Hermione listen to Harry when Harry told her about his patronus, Hermione listen to Harry when he was frustrated about his isolation at 12 Grimmauld place, shall I go on?

Why does a person care for the person they care for? Come on.

You still doesn't answer my question.

why Ginny should have still feelings for Harry?

And Hermione is one of his best friends, do you expect him to treat her like chopped liver or something?

Of course not, and here there's the big difference between Ginny and Hermione, Hermione has always been the girl that comes first to Harry, in ootp Hermione came first to Harry even compared to Cho Chang the girl with whom Harry had a huge crush. Ginny has never been important has Hermione have been and Ginny would have really hard time to become more important then Hermione in Harry's heart and mind.

Best friend who got into a fight with another best friend as is feeling bad. You don't think he'd notice?

And you have also noticed that in that scene Ron couldn't care less of Hermione feelings even if it's supposed that they're best friend.
Harry show that he cares for Hermione, he hasn't show that with Ginny, I wonder why.

Yes, but he also sees her as a girl with "bright brown eyes that he could see the firelight reflecting from."

Yes and don't forget that Harry also notices a girl with a strict resemblance
Of Fred and George who are boys

Plus Ginny has never been described pretty while Hermione has been described as pretty.
At the Yule Ball no other girl has been described in this way, not to mention how romantic is a Ball:

The Ball has been always in the literature a romantic place, a ball it's were people flirting, exchanges looks, and of course dance. A Ball it's a "place" were people meet each other.
In a Ball always happened something important, if you have read jane Austen you could understand what I'm saying.
Let's see the Yule Ball:
-Harry's reaction to Hermione
-Hermione could be very very pretty
-Ron and his jealousy, not to mention his behavior
-Ginny and Neville are danced as a couple even if Ginny was a second choice.
-Hagrid and Madame Maxime.
-Ginny met Michael Corner, her crush on Harry die.

So you can see that a ball it's a romantic scenario, interesting that Ginny and Neville went together to the Ball even if Neville wanted to go with Hermione and Ginny with Harry. you can see a parallel:
Harry -----Neville
Hermione------Ginny


The Ball is like a "topos", "topos" it's a Greek word that literally means "place" however in the literature "topos" means a pattern that often happen in the literature, a ball it's something like that, in Jane Austen a ball has been always an important event where happen important things, a romantic scenario, so to speak the best place to put some shippy stuff as Rowling done in her books because the purpose of the Yule Ball was to put some shippy stuff and a bit of romance.


:rotfl: I'm amazed. I really, really am.

I would suggest you to read rules of this thread.


Why did she say goodbye to Michael? Um, he was being all sulky about Gryffindor kicking butt. Maybe that's why?

Or maybe is because like Ron said he went to cheer up little Cho Chang.

Harry has never shown any sign of caring or friendship?

I was asking a question:

Originally posted by Mirtilla who is me
when Harry has never shown any sign of caring and friendship towards her[Ginny]?

Are you kidding? Please tell me you're kidding

Again I would suggest you to read the rules of this thread and remember that there are actually members that have been sent on probation for their behavior, to me "Are you kidding?" it's not a nice comment.
I'm not kidding, I'm serious if you disagree with my opinion instead of saying if I'm kidding I would suggest you to show your evidence to support your opinion in order to create a debate that could be interesting and with more points.

Why should she have a crush?

It was for a plot reason, it was for Ginny's crush that Harry went into the chamber and it was for Ginny's crush that a lot of people have been petrified in fact she refused to give her diary to any adult person because she has too fear that Harry and other people might have read about her crush

Magician girl I think that my post above cover some of your rebuttal so I'll reply only to the rebuttal that hasn't been covered:

Hermione only told him to asked Cho out

Wrong.
Hermione has never said that, she only ask if Harry would have meet her again, there's a difference, an essential difference.

But he doesn't show interest on Hermione's feelings when he won't talk to her & chose a broom over her.

Actually it was Ron who chooses a flight on broom rather then make peace to Hermione.
Harry knew that she meant well while Ron didn't.

When he learns that she's going to Hogwarts too and he asked her. When he gave her the books that he got from Lockhart, when he doesn't laugh when she put her elbow in the butterdish

The first one is the only one when Harry show a slight interest, in the second one he makes only a donation it doesn't mean "interest in a person" last one doesn't mean "interest in a person" it simply show that Harry isn't such a tactless person after all.

Prongs.Sr
Hermione has not been developed more than "all the Weasley's together". We still don't even know her parents name, what town she is from, if she is an only child;

We need to make an essential difference:

Hermione has been developed more as a character then the Weasley together
Hermione's family hasn't been developed as the Weasley.

Can you see the difference?

Speaking of character development Hermione has been more developed then Bill, Charlie, Arthur, Molly, Fred, George and Ginny all together.
If we're talking about Grangers and Weasley, then of course Weasley are more developed then Grangers but I was speaking about the development of the personality of a character that doesn't imply the development of a the family of the character.


Mirtilla

PS:
Originally posted by noddwyd
I would like to assert my opinion that Ginny's cat like descriptions are proof of her being a polymagus (with felines being the preferred form) and of her secret relationship with Crookshanks, who has helped her to get over Harry, and see that there is so much more to the world than being a fangirl.

I agree with you and I'm serious, if Ginny is a cat animagus I think that her with Crookshanks would be a perfect couple.

Mirtilla

PS2

Originally post by Flucias1
What'll we call the ship?

There's already a name, I'll send you PM with the name

Mirtilla