Book Mistakes v2

[Machiavelli]

Okay so my question is this ... why does Ron say something about Harry not losing his head... isnt Ron the one who figures it out? Not sure if this is a mistake in the story line?.. a typo-type mistake that was later fixed? (have had it in both copies I've seen.. paperback and hardback if that matters any) ... or if its not really a Mistake at all and I am just reading it wrong?That one rings wrong to me too. The only thing I can imagine is that he's referring to Harry saying 'so light a fire' - coming up with a reasonable solution... but it still seems a bit odd!

[HP_ROCKS]

Thank you Machiavelli, I was hoping it wasnt just me. And I could see it referring to the fire thing as well.. but like you said.."odd"

[Alastor D]

I'm afraid I fail to see the oddness in this. Hermione was the one who knew what it was but, in Ron's opinion, lost her head not thinking of lighting a fire nor how to do it without firewood. And, as it was Harry who suggested lighting a fire, Ron thought he had not lost his head.

[illbethere4u]

Yea ron only said about the "no wood" comment - harry and hermione kinda worked out the rese :-)

[asrivathsan]

Maybe this one is a stupid one, but is it arthur weasley or arnold weasley. Book 4 in rita's articles it is always arnold(in bloomesberry) but usually it is arthur

[HP_ROCKS]

I guess you could be right.. but I felt it was odd that it was really Ron who told her what to do:

"HAVE YOU GONE MAD?" Ron bellowed. "ARE YOU A WITCH OR NOT?

...

"Yeah," said Ron, "and lucky Harry doesn't lose his head in a crisis--'theres no wood,' honestly

To me it always sounded as if Ron was referring to Harry replying to Hermione's 'there's no wood.'

(not sure if anyone else will be able to understand that)

As for Rita Skeeter in GOF.. it was just her mistake. His name is Arthur Weasley.

[Machiavelli]

Maybe this one is a stupid one, but is it arthur weasley or arnold weasley. Book 4 in rita's articles it is always arnold(in bloomesberry) but usually it is arthurIt is Arthur - but this isn't a book mistake, it's another example of Rita concentrating on the dirt and ignoring the facts. She gets Krum's name wrong too I believe (or is it Cedric?).

[HP_ROCKS]

Doesnt she leave Cedric out... by saying that Harry is the Hogwarts Champ?

I dont have my GOF right now.. so might be wrong.. :)

[Machiavelli]

Doesnt she leave Cedric out... by saying that Harry is the Hogwarts Champ?

I dont have my GOF right now.. so might be wrong.. :)I think that's right - it caused some issues as I remember (I'm bookless also so your guess is as good as mine!).

[PotionsPunk]

Nope - it's British slang! It means about the same thing but it's ruder.
OH! Thanks then :)

[Mama Rana]

There was some great discussion about whether or not Harry's patronus was a corporeal one at the Quidditch match in the All About Remus Lupin thread. I'm trying to locate the post where the discussion started as there's a lot of free flowing Lupin love in there to dig through otherwise. It does seem like there is a lot of evidence that it was in fact the stag patronus at the game, but for reasons known only to JKR, she didn't want to introduce the 'stag' as the form of Harry's patronus just yet. A great discussion really.

Discussion about Harry's patronus in the Lupin thread (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=32530&page=27&pp=30)
(Starting on the last post of the linked page (*post #810 but then REALLY continued with Elf's post # 829 and thereafter. It's definitely worth a peek. It convinced me that Harry did in fact conjure a corporeal patronus at that game).


Hi all. First post, I tend to lurk as I am absolutely overwhelmed with the knowledge ya'll show of the books, but this bugged all through OOTP, so I wanted to get back to it. It seems to me, especially after looking at the discussion mentioned above in the Lupin thread, that Harry's Patronus was corporeal at the Quidditch match, so why why why is everyone so amazed by it in OOTP? Then again if is was such an impressive thing why wasn't it made a bigger deal in POA? It's almost like JKR decided that she hadn't made a big enough deal of it in POA so she decided to talk it up in OOTP. Any thoughts?

[devonforever]

nobody think that maybe the one of the weasleys might have left school early?

[Machiavelli]

Hi all. First post, I tend to lurk as I am absolutely overwhelmed with the knowledge ya'll show of the books, but this bugged all through OOTP, so I wanted to get back to it. It seems to me, especially after looking at the discussion mentioned above in the Lupin thread, that Harry's Patronus was corporeal at the Quidditch match, so why why why is everyone so amazed by it in OOTP? Then again if is was such an impressive thing why wasn't it made a bigger deal in POA? It's almost like JKR decided that she hadn't made a big enough deal of it in POA so she decided to talk it up in OOTP. Any thoughts?I'm quite sure it was a corporeal patronus, I'm just not convinced that the majority knew what they were looking at. The game is going on, loads of excitement and noise - suddenly 'dementors' appear at the side and Harry sends a silver stag at them. If you don't know what the Patronus charm is would you recognize it as something special? That's one point. The second is that the people I remember being amazed by the Patronus were not associated with the school - members of the Wizengamot and the board of examiners. They would, however, know how difficult it is to master the charm so naturally they'd be impressed. Were you concerned about a contradiction with the Patronus somewhere? Maybe if you quote exactly what was bothering you we could figure it out...

[devonforever]

nothing was mentioned as it being corporeal but Dumbledore does make it reference to it as ..."unusual form...." writers prerogative!

[Muggical Me]

As far as the prefect's docking house points, I was under the impression that only teachers could dock points. That's what Ernie says in OotP, and the trio seems to agree.
In SS I just assumed that Percy reported Harry's use of magic in the corridors to McGonagall, his head of house, so that she could do the actual docking.

[ArtemisiaDax]

On the previous page, there's a post that claims that the whole prefect/point matter is misunderstood. But they misquote the book (or their edition doesn't match mine):

This is from the previous post:
Chap. 10, OoP, "..we can give out punishments if people are misbehaving. I can't wait to get Crabbe or Goyle for something." (said Ron)--"I'll make Goyle do lines, it'll kill him, he hates writing."
"Manners, Potter, or I'll have to give you a detention," drawled Malfoy....

This seems to indicate to me that prefects can give punishments that don't involve docking points from Houses (detentions don't result in a deduction of points.)

Chap. 28, OoP, "Afraid I'm going to have to dock a few points from Gryffindor and Hufflepuff," he drawled (Malfoy).
"You can't take points from fellow prefects, Malfoy," said Ernie at once.
"I know that prefects can't dock points from each other," sneered Malfoy; Crabbe and Goyle sniggered. "But members of the Inquisitorial Squad---"....."members of the Inquisitorial Squad do have the power to dock points...."

In my copy, Ernie says, "It's only teachers that can dock points from Houses, Malfoy," and Malfoy replies that "I know that prefects can't dock points..." Nothing about prefects taking from other prefects. Ernie goes on to say that prefects being able to dock points (not just from each other, but from anyone) would "completely undermind the prefect system," which it would - you'd get a situation like you do with the Inquisitorial Squad, where different Houses take points from each other to try to win the House Cup (and out of sheer vindictiveness.) So I think that JKR's response is a mistake and that prefects can't take points.


One mistake that's always bothered me is when Hermione comments (after getting hit with the densaugeo curse accidentally and getting her teeth magically shrunk by Madam Pomfrey) is that her parents won't approve, because they want her to keep on with braces...but braces don't actually make teeth any smaller, just straighten them. In fact, if her parents wanted to make her teeth slightly smaller (not insanely so, but to perhaps cut down slightly on their size), there's a procedure that they could do that takes about five minutes in the office. I had it done to minimize the ridges on my own oversized front teeth (every dentist I'd ever seen asked me if I'd chipped them, and they bugged my orthodontist so badly that he did it one day for free.) I don't really know what it was, just that it made the standard noise that a lot of dental tools make (that high-pitched mechanical sound) and that it didn't hurt or anything (although it rather felt as if my teeth were going to wind up a lot shorter than they did.) But the point of this is that if Hermione's parents did want her to do something about the size of her front teeth, braces aren't the way to go, and they could have done something about them in five minutes if they'd wanted to.

[poppy rebecca]

lots of mistakes *sigh***

[Inruin]

I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned this one already:

In GoF, when Crouch Jr. is under the influence of Veritaserum and being questioned by Dumbledore, at some point JKR calls him Moody instead of Crouch or Barty (chapter 35: Veritaserum, pg. 594 Cdn version):

'How did your father subdue you?' said Dumbledore.
'The Imperius curse,' Moody said.

Now, I don't know about you, but I highly doubt that the real Moody would have woken up and said that...but you never know...

[paloma]

Also Harry might not have known how much space they'd need when he got to the room - remember it just adapts to his needs at the time. I don't know if it can change dimensions after the fact.. although it can certainly provide the odd accessory - didn't Harry find a whistle after he thought of the need?
Yep, you're right about the whistle...
Both Harry and the RoR were aware of how much space was needed for everyone to practice Stunning Spells, however, because the DA group had practiced the spells there before. (The lesson I referred to in my previous post was the one right before Christmas, the one that began with Harry announcing, "I thought this evening we should just go over the things we've done so far, because it's the last meeting before the holidays and there's no point in starting anything new right before a three-week break--").
So maybe kingwidget is right: maybe the room was as big as it could get...although in my imagination, something called a Room of Requirement should be able to achieve the size of a ballroom if necessary!

[Mama Rana]

I'm quite sure it was a corporeal patronus, I'm just not convinced that the majority knew what they were looking at. The game is going on, loads of excitement and noise - suddenly 'dementors' appear at the side and Harry sends a silver stag at them. If you don't know what the Patronus charm is would you recognize it as something special? That's one point. The second is that the people I remember being amazed by the Patronus were not associated with the school - members of the Wizengamot and the board of examiners. They would, however, know how difficult it is to master the charm so naturally they'd be impressed. Were you concerned about a contradiction with the Patronus somewhere? Maybe if you quote exactly what was bothering you we could figure it out...
hmmm, didn't know what they were looking at. that's an interesting thought, esp. since it seems there are rarely if ever outsiders at the matches. but it wasn't just outsiders who were impressed: at the hogs head meeting the students, particularly the Bones girl, were asking about it. If they hadn't realized what they were looking at at the time, then you'd think when it came up at the meeting that someone would say, Oh that's what you did at that match when Draco et al dressed as dementors. or something. it just really seems inconsistant to me but it seems I'm in the minority :scared:

[ArtemisiaDax]

I'm pretty sure that the patronus at the Quidditch match was corporeal, because at the end of PoA, Dumbledore says, "And then I remembered the most unusual form your Patronus took, when it charged Mr. Malfoy down at your Quidditch match against Ravenclaw." (p. 428, PoA American paperback edition.) (On the other hand, Lupin in the resignation scene doesn't seem to know this, asking Harry to "tell me about your Patronus" on p. 424, and he was at the Quidditch match as well. This is especially confusing because the weather is clear (p. 258) and there shouldn't be any reason why Lupin can't see him. Harry's not looking at the Patronus when he casts it (he's focused on the Snitch), so there's no help there. But, given that there weren't actually dementors, my guess is that the Patronus would be corporeal.

[kingwidgit]

ArtemisiaDax, good catch, RE: What Ernie said in Chap. 28. It really bothered me when I read your post, because I thought I'd read the same thing, about only teachers being able to dock points from houses. So I double checked, and guess what I found? The sentence was completely changed from the Hard-back edition to the first paper-back edition of Oop. [AM Ed.]
What you quoted is from the Hard-back, what I quoted was from the paper-back. I just happen to have both book forms. Wonder why it was changed? And is there anything else that was changed? Gotta go read both editions again, I guess. What a wonderful excuse to read HP!!

[ArtemisiaDax]

Maybe it was done to try to resolve the whole prefects-docking-points thing. I think that JKR has a pretty large problem with this error, given all of the contradicting parts, and that she may be trying to rein it in by saying that prefects can't take points from each other.
I still think that it would make more sense if prefects couldn't take points...but it's not my universe. *sighs*

[kingwidgit]

Yeah, but ya know, JKR did say that Ron was wrong about prefects not taking points--somewhere on her site, can't remember where, tho.

[JaDoRe_HP]

I can't remember what page it is on, but in book 3, she says seeker instead of keeper, or the other way around... it was something like: slytherin tried to score, but the gryffindor seeker blocked it... I think it was a mistake, but it could have just been the seeker making the block when the keeper couldn't (is that even legal?)

[ArtemisiaDax]

One thing that bothers me in PoA is that during one of the Quidditch matches Madam Hooch says "YOU DO NOT ATTACK THE KEEPER UNLESS THE QUAFFLE IS IN THE SCORING AREA!" p. 309-310, paperback American edition, because it seems to imply that you can attack the Keeper if the Quaffle is in the scoring area.
Not so much a mistake as bad wording, but it kinda bugged me.

[kingwidgit]

One thing that bothers me in PoA is that during one of the Quidditch matches Madam Hooch says "YOU DO NOT ATTACK THE KEEPER UNLESS THE QUAFFLE IS IN THE SCORING AREA!" p. 309-310, paperback American edition, because it seems to imply that you can attack the Keeper if the Quaffle is in the scoring area.
Not so much a mistake as bad wording, but it kinda bugged me.
What gets me is this may be a contradiction of the penalty known as stooging, JKR tells about it in Quidditch through the Ages. If only one player can be in the scoring area at a time, and you are attempting to score a goal--then how can the beaters attack the keeper? Only chasers are supposed to be scoring....I think, anyway.

[Diamondring35]

I am not sure if this is a mistake or not, but it confused me just the same. Was Fudge ever told about the time reversal at the end of Prisoner of Azkaban? I don't think he was, but after reading Order of the Phoenix, I am not so sure.
Page 614~ American Version Paperback
"Oho!" said Fudge, bouncing up and down on the balls of his feet again. "Yes, do let's hear the latest cock-and-bull story designed to pull Potter out of trouble! Go on, then, Dumbledore, go on-- Willy Widdershins was lying, was he?
Or was it Potter's identical twin in the Hog Head's that day? Or is there the usual simple explanation involving a reversal of time, a dead man coming back to life, and a couple of invisible dementors?"
The quote was from Chapter 27~The Centaur & The Sneak

Fudge was probably told about Peter Pettigrew not being dead, but I don't think he was told about the reversal of time, Sirius and Buckbeak escaping. I probably am wrong, but I think that is a mistake. If anyone can shed any light on this, I would appreciate it, it has been driving me nuts.
Thanks. :blush: :cool:

[kingwidgit]

Perhaps, Dumbledore tried to speak with Fudge sometime between the summer holidays, to try and convince Fudge that Sirius was innocent. I think, though, it more likely that he put two and two together, hmmm, Hermione had a time turner, Hagrid is a friend of Harry and Hermione's, they all liked Buckbeak, and they all say Pettigrew's back from the dead and Sirius is innocent....Not that Fudge could figure this out on his own...but I'm sure with Percy and Umbridge to help, ya know...

[godrics hollow]

As far as the prefect's docking house points, I was under the impression that only teachers could dock points. That's what Ernie says in OotP, and the trio seems to agree.
In SS I just assumed that Percy reported Harry's use of magic in the corridors to McGonagall, his head of house, so that she could do the actual docking.

it was in an interview somewhere cant remember which it was known mistake thats been discussed lots and prefect --can-- dock points (trust percy to know what hes doing)

[Diamondring35]

Why was Dennis Creevey allowed to go to Hogsmead if only third years and above are allowed to go? We were first introduced to him in Goblet of Fire, making him a first year.

[Reverie]

Why was Dennis Creevey allowed to go to Hogsmead if only third years and above are allowed to go? We were first introduced to him in Goblet of Fire, making him a first year.
I don't remember if this was adressed by JKR or not, but my guess is that this was just a mistake or something that could easily be explained by saying that he snuck in and miraculously no one saw him.

[Alastor D]

Maybe Fred and George had showed him the secret passage Harry used in PoA.

[Lindy]

To bring up a mistake I posted a page ago, Alastor D I am quite right.

'"This dog will be remaining for a while," said Dumbledore simply. "I assure you, he is extremely well trained. Harry - I will wait while you get into bed."

Harry felt and inexpressable sense of gratitude to Dumbledore for asking the others not to question him. It wasn't as though he didn't want them there; but the thought of explaining it all over again, the idea of reliving it one more time, was more than he could stand.

"I will be back to see you as soon as I have met with Fudge, Harry," said Dumbledore. "I would like you to remain here tomorrow until I have spoken to the school." He left.

As Madam Pomfrey led Harry to a nearby bed,.... ' emphasis mine


Dumbledore never saw Harry to bed as he said he would.

[Alastor D]

You are right Lindy. I beg you pardon.

[padfoot1128]

Mistake in book 5

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Days after harry has seen Mr. Weasly attacked by the snake, he talkes to
ron about about going there. He said, "I just dont know how he got me to London and
back in a space of about 5 minutes though" (not exact words), but at that point Harry didn't know that the hallway or where Mr. Weasly was was in London. So how could he say, "to london"?

Any other mistakes?

[zoeydsngwrtr]

The amount of students attending Hogwarts continues to irk me. JKR herself said there were about 1,000 students attending hogwarts, but in the books, it seems there are only around 280 students (further discussed in 280 students?) but this is the mistake that confuses me the most

[bigboss]

It's hard too keep track of 1000 students in a book so what she did was just shorten it down in order to be able to keep track of them all.

[jenny_d_b]

In PS, they call Angelina Johnson Angelica. Am I the only one noticing this, or wasn't it so in the British version? Also, I've noticed that they always start their year on a monday. How is it possible? And did Umbrigde get out of the forest in Ootp? Did Snape help her when he went to check what had happened to Harry & co?

[Diamondring35]

And did Umbrigde get out of the forest in Ootp?

Dumbledore strode into the forest and got her. From Chapter
Thirty~Eight, page 848 (American version, paperback):

All six of them looked around. Professor Umbridge was lying in a bed opposite them, gazing up at the ceiling. Dumbledore had strode alone in the forest to rescue her from the centaurs. How he had done it -- how he had emerged from the trees supporting Professor Umbridge without so much as a scratch on him -- nobody knew, and Umbridge was certainly not telling.

Maybe Fred and George had showed him the secret passage Harry used in PoA.

Somehow I don't see that happening. I doubt Fred and George would show Dennis the secret passageway through the witch's hump.

[bigboss]

One big mistake is, when Dumbledore says that Nicolas Flamel has enough Elexir left to set their affairs in order but if you have extra elexir then you will be immortal forever.

[kingwidgit]

The immortality lasts only as long as the source that gives immortality lasts. Meaning once Flamel and wife take the last of their stored elixer, and it's effects finally wear off--I'm imagining something akin to a daily vitamin, don't know why--then the Flamels will succumb to mortality.

[Diamondring35]

Dumbledore was having trouble finding a Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher.

Page 161, Chapter 9 (paperback, American version):

"Not surprising, is it, when you look at what's happened to the last four?" said George. " One sacked, one dead, one's memory removed, and one locked in a trunk for nine months," said Harry, counting them off on his fingers.

Quirrel is the dead one.
Lockhart is the memory modified one.
Moody is the one who was locked in a trunk for 9 months.

Lupin wasn't sacked, he quit, or a better word, resigned.. :huh:

[K12]

Well, if Lupin didnt resign... you think he'd still be around? I am pretty sure being forced to resign is equivalent as being sacked.

[SiertKarzeni]

Hey! new to the board! ^_^

I'm not sure if this was said or brought up or if maybe this idea is just totally off base
but in PS/SS at the end when Harry and Hermione are doing the potion thing i was wondering how come they couldn't just tell from looking which one was the right potion i mean if Quirrel was there before wouldn't the bottle have been jarred or moved or something? I might just be crazy but either way I was just wondering ^-^

[Alastor D]

Depends on what forces you to resign. Both initiative and decision were Lupin's own. If Dumbledore had told him it would be better to resign it would have been equivalent, but we have no evidence for anything of that kind.

[rotsiepots]

Lupin may have been sacked by the Ministry, but resigned to Dumbledore before Fudge had the chance to officially get rid of him.

[PaulSSC]

Sorry if this has been posted before - I couldn't find it.
On page 323 of the American paperback ( that's a few pages from the back of "The Heir of Slytherin", when Ginny first wakes up for those with diff eds.)
Ginny gives the following speech:

"I'm going to be expelled!" ... "I've looked foward to coming to Hogwarts ever since B-Bill came and n-now I'll have to leave and - what'll Mum and Dad say?"

Italics are Ginny's (or JKR's, whichever you prefer).

In the book portion of the FAQ on JKR's site, she says "Bill is two years older than Charlie, who is three years older than Percy, who is two years older than Fred and George, who are two years older than Ron, who is a year older than Ginny."
You can find this at http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=63 .

So we can conclude that Bill is (2+3+2+2+1) = 10 years older than Ginny. Since you come to Hogwarts in your 11th year, Ginny would have been only a year old when Bill first came, and quite unable to look forward to attending herself. (The phrasing implies that Ginny is referring to Bill's first year.) In fact, it would've been unlikely that she would've known what was going on until at least Bill and Charlie were both attending, when she was 3.

[hpfan_08]

Sorry if this has been posted before - I couldn't find it.
On page 323 of the American paperback ( that's a few pages from the back of "The Heir of Slytherin", when Ginny first wakes up for those with diff eds.)
Ginny gives the following speech:

"I'm going to be expelled!" ... "I've looked foward to coming to Hogwarts ever since B-Bill came and n-now I'll have to leave and - what'll Mum and Dad say?"

Italics are Ginny's (or JKR's, whichever you prefer).

In the book portion of the FAQ on JKR's site, she says "Bill is two years older than Charlie, who is three years older than Percy, who is two years older than Fred and George, who are two years older than Ron, who is a year older than Ginny."
You can find this at http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=63 .

So we can conclude that Bill is (2+3+2+2+1) = 10 years older than Ginny. Since you come to Hogwarts in your 11th year, Ginny would have been only a year old when Bill first came, and quite unable to look forward to attending herself. (The phrasing implies that Ginny is referring to Bill's first year.) In fact, it would've been unlikely that she would've known what was going on until at least Bill and Charlie were both attending, when she was 3.

You might want to check out
Book Mistakes v2 (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=31468&highlight=mistake%2A)

Also I know there is a thread about the age question, but I am to tired to find it for you at the moment, maybe someone could help me out.

[filius]

I fail to see why such minutes mistakes matter. Give her a break!

[ComicBookWorm]

JKR isn't the best with math. But this should go in the link hpfan08 provided. Even Ginny could have been exaggerating. People are inexact in their statements all day long.

[Snout]

Even Ginny could have been exaggerating. People are inexact in their statements all day long.

Yes, she could have been exaggerating as she was upset about the idea of being expelled.

[Kopannie]

Personally, I think Ginny knew what she was saying. Maybe babys here or understand more before they are born. Either that or by saying she wanted to come for more than her life span could be another way of saying "I have waited for this day all of my life." As the baby of the family, it was probably really important and exciting for her to go to Hogwarts.

[ravenclaw02]

In POA when Sirius is describing how he sent Harry the firebolt, he was talking about how he used the money from his own vault to pay for the broom - surely the ministry would either have closed his account or placed some sort of tracing measures on it, surely they would not turn a blind eye to money being withdrawn out of an escaped convict's bank account... :huh:

Maybe it was a family vault? Don't the Weasleys and the Potters have 'family vaults', rather than individual ones, or am I making this up? At any rate, it is a mystery how Sirius got the money, though if it is a family vault, I suppose he wouldn't have had to specify which member of the Black family was withdrawing money, since some of them (Bellatrix, Andromeda) are still alive.

But then again ... wasn't Sirius disowned? I would assume that that also means that he was disinherited from the Black fortune ... so where on earth did he get enough money to buy a Firebolt in the first place? :huh:

As for Ginny wanting to come to Hogwarts since Bill came, I'd bet that it's just an exaggeration. She's pretty upset at this point, to put it lightly.

[twiggles]

Who knows, it is possible that the goblins don't allow the ministry to interfer with bank business thus would not allow them to put a lock on the account. Also possible is that Gringotts does not go by name but by number, similar to Swiss Accounts, so it would be impossible for the ministry to know which account was his.
I have a hard time imagining the goblins allowing the ministry any control over gold if they can help it.

[ravenclaw02]

Who knows, it is possible that the goblins don't allow the ministry to interfer with bank business thus would not allow them to put a lock on the account. Also possible is that Gringotts does not go by name but by number, similar to Swiss Accounts, so it would be impossible for the ministry to know which account was his.
I have a hard time imagining the goblins allowing the ministry any control over gold if they can help it.

That does make sense ... though now I'm wondering where he got the gold in the first place. It's highly unlikely that his parents left him any money after disowning him, and he wouldn't have had much time between leaving school and getting arrested to amass a fortune of his own ....

[twiggles]

I believe it is mentioned in OOTP that Sirius great uncle left him an inheritance. It was spoken about when Sirius was discussing the tapestry

[Ettins_Masta]

quote: I forget who
Maybe I'm the only one to have noticed it (I searched for other mentions of it here, though my search skills could be lacking) or the library copy I read was a rare misprint, but in the last chapter's picture (Rita Skeeter in beetle form) she's shown with 8 legs. What kind of insect has 8 legs? For some reason that error bugs me more than the errors in the text.

the bug that has a bug see:
http://www.cbttape.org/funny/bug3.jpg

I think I just thunk.
HOLE IN THE PLOT
couldn't the ministry of magic use time turners to prefent voldermort from ever rising to power?

couldn't Harry use the room of requirement to get a time turner that does years and prefent voldermort from ever rising to power the second time?

couldn't a shap shifter person change into a single celled orginizm multiply themselves millions of times, chang back and use all their clones to defeat voldermort by sheer numbers?
...
...
...
Is anyone here a member of the Creatures-Community?

[Kaitie]

Ettins Masta: I so don't understand your post. Can you clarify?

[Alastor D]

It's true that beetles, being insects, have six legs not eight. But if the Scholastic version has a picture of an eight-legged beetle, the mistake is Mary Grandpre's not Jo's.

[Ettins_Masta]

It's true that beetles, being insects, have six legs not eight. But if the Scholastic version has a picture of an eight-legged beetle, the mistake is Mary Grandpre's not Jo's.

yes but the image is a lesson in life :evil: (the difference between a bug and a feature), and Katie wich part don't you understand?

sorry if I don't make sense ,but I have a short attention span and my ideas are kinda jumbled, I dont know if those two things are realated or if I'm just confused, probably I'm just confused, but- Hey peanut butter

[Machiavelli]

I think I just thunk.
HOLE IN THE PLOT
couldn't the ministry of magic use time turners to prefent voldermort from ever rising to power?

couldn't Harry use the room of requirement to get a time turner that does years and prefent voldermort from ever rising to power the second time?Possibly... but the fact that time turners are so strictly regulated is I think part of JKR's point that time travel is dangerous, and that messing with the past will have massive consequences that one cannot anticipate. It's not in canon, but I would imagine the answer is that past experience has shown that using time-travel in this way often caused greater catastrophes than it solves.
couldn't a shap shifter person change into a single celled orginizm multiply themselves millions of times, chang back and use all their clones to defeat voldermort by sheer numbers?You mean animagi? You can't choose the form you end up with - you learn the discipline and then find out you're a rat, or dog or stag or whatever (this from a quote by JKR that it would be horrible to find out you're a cockroach or something). Also, so far it appears that the animagus form has to be a higher animal of some sort - having a nervous system etc etc. Not saying that a cat brain is analogous to a human brain, but at least it's a brain! Now, there are some amphibians that clone themselves under certain circumstances (at least I think that's right...) so you could have a plague of anti-Voldemort frogs I suppose! But the reproduction time isn't as quick as a paramecium so you would have maybe dozens but not millions of clones to do your anti-evil bidding...

[Fleur1]

i definetly agree..i mean, if they can give a 13 year old girl a timeturner to get to all of her classes, i'm sure that the MOM would be okay with using the time turner to kill/stop an evil man, who is feared by everybody, and prevent him of putting the whole world's life at stake!!!!! I would have to say that the whole wizarding and muggle world is much more important than one rule.... it just doesn't make sense that the MOM would not agree with using the time tuner to save many lives, and get ride of the Dark Lord!

[devonforever]

perhaps the time turner is limited in "time"? Anybody think of that?

[ArtemisiaDax]

One thing that's always bothered me is that Ron says "Doctors...those Muggle nutters who cut people up?" and then goes on to take Dr. Ubbly's Oblivious Unction after the brain attack in the DoM.

[Ettins_Masta]

I think I may have just figured out the time tunner thing, if harry did go back and defeat voldemort, he would never know about him and therefore have no reson to defeat him, so he would never die, so he would be alive again triggering the defeat, this infinate loop could in theory break the space-time continum, the only reason that it worked in book 3 is because they never saw the affects of the time tunner, so they had a reason to go back. does that make sense?

[acidoz]

Yeah, even though it's simple to say, "go back and deafeat Voldemort before he ever came to power" it's a lot harder to execute. Time travel is a complex and terrible thing. You can't go around messing with time in case you inadvertantly cause the deaths of thousands or end up doing the opposite of what's happened. You also have to remember that all time travel is composed of closed loops. IE, anything that has already happened is irreversible. Just look at the time turner scenario in POA. They would never have known to save buckbeak if they'd been allowed to find out that he was OK after all. Besideswhich the moment that they come out of the Whomping Willow, their future selves have ALREADY gone back. It's confusing, but time, in essence, is immutable, and events you precipitate while in the past have happened already, only you don't know about them.

[rshipers]

I did a search and nothing came up that dealt with this question.

If Ron missed 14 goals in the second quidditch match in OOTP then how did Gryffindor lose if Ginny caught the snitch. They should have won by 10 points. :huh:

EDIT:
Mugglelvr pointed out that the book says that the score was 240 to 230 (thanks I didn't realize that was in there). That score doesn't add up though. If Ron only missed 14 goals thats only 140 points how did they get 100 more?

[Mugglelvr]

I did a search and nothing came up that dealt with this question.

If Ron missed 14 goals in the second quidditch match in OOTP then how did Gryffindor lose if Ginny caught the snitch. They should have won by 10 points. :huh:

Gryffindor did lose by 10 points. They lost to Hufflepuff - the score was 240 to 230. It doesn't matter who catches the snitch, but who has the most points when the snitch is caught.

Just like in the World Cup when Krum caught the snitch but still lost the match because they were so far behind.

[rshipers]

Where did you find the scores? I don't remeber seeing them.

[Mugglelvr]

Where did you find the scores? I don't remeber seeing them.

Pg 575 OoTP American Hardback

[rshipers]

thanks mugglelvr

[wakowrnr]

Mugglelvr pointed out that the book says that the score was 240 to 230 (thanks I didn't realize that was in there). That score doesn't add up though. If Ron only missed 14 goals thats only 140 points how did they get 100 more?

They don't say that Ron only missed 14, but are pointing out that the 14th missed save was, apparently, spectacularly bad. That is when Harry and the twins say they pretty much lost heart (at least as far as I recall... no book in front of me....)

[Ryanve]

yeah it says something like after the 14th goal missed... so it doesnt mean they got 14 goals it just means the game was lost.

[Schames]

besides, it was perhaps 14 clear misses, the other goals were excellent play by opponents - and not Rons faults, therefore not counted as "misses".

[GambitsSpade]

i just read the passage in OP and it says "It was hard to say what the worst thing was: Harry thought it was a close-run contest between Ron's fourteenth failed save..."

Nowhere does it say that Ron's 14th failed save was the last failed save he made, he could have made an additional 10 misses. The way it is written leads me to believe that Ron's 14th blown save was extremely bad.

Also, it could be that Ron made 14 attempts to save the quaffle and failed and there were another 10 clean shots on goal that made it in that Ron did not attempt to save.

Such as in soccer, when a forward's coming down the field with the ball and the goalie goes out to stop him and the forward crosses the ball to the wing and the wing scores. This does not count as a missed save for the goalie because the goalie made no attempt to save the ball when the wing took a shot on goal.

(Anyone ever hear that old Italian song "Angelina Zooma Zooma"? Well I'm working on quidditch lyrics to it... haha... lemme know if you wanna hear em.)

[PaulSSC]

About Voldemort and the time-turner conundrum:
If you'll recall, once awoken by Harry and Ron, Hermione could not even go back and fix her time-turner mistake that caused her to miss Cheering Charms. She couldn't do this because Harry and Ron had already noticed her missing, and going back and changing the time stream might've caused a causality loop.

A causality loop is a cycle in time; the easiest way to understand it for non-sci-fi types is this:
You, at time B, go back to time A to prevent an event from happening. You succeed, but in doing so, change yourself at point B. Since the event at point A now never happened, how are you supposed to know, at point B, that you need to go back and change it, and even if you were to leave yourself messages, you, as the sum of your experiences, would no longer be the same person at point B, so how do you know you'd succeed again?

More clearly, in book terms, say Harry's truly the only one who could defeat Voldemort. (call if fate, whatever). Once Harry is a fully-qualified wizard, they (MoM) send him back in time, and he kills Voldemort. Now what? Harry's ability to kill Voldemort might be based on Voldemort marking him as an equal, which, now never happened. Certainly, his personality is formed by making him stay with the Dursleys, which, because his parents are alive, also never happened. Had he lived with his parents, his personality probably would have been even more like his father; brilliant, but unable to take things seriously. And his DADA proficiency is almost certainly partly due to his experiences with Voldemort and the dementors, which never would have happened either. Even if the ministry left a record so that he could be trained, he could easily become fascinated by the Dark Arts he had to study, and go over to the "dark side" himself.

Of course, all this is moot. Because a person is a certain combo of chromosomes from their parents, and because no Voldemort would have drastically changed his parents lives at the time of his conception, Harry almost certainly wouldn't exist.

No one knows what the effects ofa causality loop might be, but the chance of making things even worse is always there. In short, tampering with time = bad.

[Volare]

That means MoM is stupid.

[Machiavelli]

One thing that's always bothered me is that Ron says "Doctors...those Muggle nutters who cut people up?" and then goes on to take Dr. Ubbly's Oblivious Unction after the brain attack in the DoM.
Dr for Ubbly is used either because he has the wizarding equiv of a PhD, or because he has taken it on as a title for himself (like the many 'doctors' selling snake oil). Alternatively you could throw it down to Ron's lack of information again, but I think 1 or 2 is more likely.

[Aidan_Mclaren]

I don't know if anyone's noticed, i apologise if this is already been said.

If Harry was indeed 11 in 1991, why did Dudley have a playstation? which came to countries like england in the later 90's?

[PaulSSC]

I don't know if anyone's noticed, i apologise if this is already been said.

If Harry was indeed 11 in 1991, why did Dudley have a playstation? which came to countries like england in the later 90's?

Does it say "Playstation" specifically? All I can find are references to computer games, which have definitely existed that long. And so have general gaming consoles, like the Atari console and the first Nintendo. Elsewhere JKR seems to be rather careful about omitting real-world proper nouns.

[kingwidgit]

Actually, I believe Dudley threw his Playstation out the window in the beginning of GoF, US Ed.--when the Dursleys threatened to cut his pocket money if he kept sneaking food. Harry was relating this to Sirius [about Dudley's diet], when telling about the pain in his scar following his dream of Voldemort, via owl post. That would make it before the start of school year 4, summer 1994. So what year did the Playstation come out in? I don't remember.

[PaulSSC]

American paperback, GoF, page 25, near the end of "the Scar", in Harry's letter to Sirius:

"Things are the same as usual here. Dudley's diet isn't going too well. My aunt found him smuggling doughnuts into his room yesterday. They told him they'd have to cut his pocket money if he keeps doing it, so he got really angry and chucked his Playstation out of the window. That's a sort of computer thing you can play games on. Bit stupid really, now he hasn't even got Mega Mutilation Part Three to take his mind off things."

So JKR (or some editor) DID say Playstation. Nice catch. Still don't know exactly when it was released though.

[Aidan_Mclaren]

It came out in Japan 1994. Europe got it around 1995 september. So there is no possible way he could have gotten IMHO.

[PaulSSC]

It came out in Japan 1994. Europe got it around 1995 september. So there is no possible way he could have gotten IMHO.

You don't think the Dursleys would've imported it for him, especially after having to put him on a diet?

[kenmarekestrel]

You don't think the Dursleys would've imported it for him, especially after having to put him on a diet?

Why not. Dudley is extremely spoiled so depriving him of food would have prompted them to spoil him in other ways. Importing a games console that nobody else around him has got yet would have seemed like a great way for them to shut him up and get him to co-operate, only it backfired and he threw his "welcome home for the summer" present out the window.

[ChiChi]

Harry probably stoped counting at fourteen. He was probably very discouraged.

[Wimsey]

Haven't we known for a long time that JKR does not do math?

[GambitsSpade]

isn't there anything more important/worthwhile to the series to talk about?

[cutiebaby]

Yes there's probbaly much more important things.... oh well:). Well, Ron probably missed more than 14 goals.... you know how sometimes you just throw out an estemate to someone when you're telling tem a story? You're not sure if it was 50 of 30, so you just say 46 (for example)? Well that's probably what happened.... or someone was trying to spare Ron's feels, cuz saying 14 missed goals hurts less than 24, don't ya think?

[Kill_Kupid]

I don't know if this has been discussed in another thread but I looked & I couldn't find it.
Start of term at Hogwarts is always on 1 September. Has anyone noticed that it's always a Monday???
They always get on the Express on Sunday (11am sharp!) & always start lessons the next day with a full week ahead of them. It is a full week because they're always looking forward to the first weekend.