Little Questions Answered v.20

[MCDahB]

Originally Posted by tuxedocat

Its an editing mistake, 'murder' only shows up in the early US editions, its 'one more curse' in the UK editions & in later US editions.

Originally Posted by Ravenclaw797

Ooh that's interesting. But there are two lines: "Come, Wormtail, one more death and our path to Harry Potter is clear" and "One more murder...my faithful servant at Hogwarts...Harry Potter is as good as mine, Wormtail" in the American edition. In the British edition does it say curse for both?

Here's the quotes:

"Come, Wormtail, one more obstacle removed and our path to Harry Potter is clear." (UK)

"Come, Wormtail, one more death and our path to Harry Potter is clear." (US)

"one more curse ... my faithful servant at Hogwarts ... Harry Potter is as
good as mine, Wormtail." (UK)

"One more murder...my faithful servant at Hogwarts...Harry Potter is as good as mine, Wormtail." (US)

I was unaware of a new US version that changes it back, but good for the editors if it does. It's not an insignificant edit though, which might indicated that, even in the "curse"/"obstacle" text, Voldemort might have been alluding to a murder.

But if we can go with the orginal wording, I'd put my money on them talking about Barty Sr. It makes since that in the joint freeing of Jr. and cursing Sr. Voldemort might need Pettigrew to cast the imperio. Out of the three (Barty Jr., Voldemort, and Peter) it would make the most sense for him to do it since they were likely to be in a hurry. Voldemort had serious mobility issues and would set off a few alarms from his appearance. Barty Jr. might not yet be in a capable state or be armed to do so quickly. Certainly too, walking into the home of a powerful wizard and important official would have been enough to make Wormtail so frightened.

You can stretch this senario to fit the "death"/"murder" version, given that they could have been sure to eventually try to kill Barty Sr., though it's not so as it would be if they were talking about Moody who they surely intended to kill. Plus with Moody you have several plausible reasons why he might have lived longer that Voldemort wanted him to (Wormtail chickens out, Barty decides he's valuable for a his muse at Hogwarts, etc.). But while Moody makes sense in a lot of ways, the thing I can't make sense of is why Wormtail would be so directly involved in trying to curse or kill him when you've got Barty Jr. around?

So I'm hesitating a bit but...Barty Crouch Sr., final answer.

Addendum:

Originally Posted by ignisia

I always took it to mean the death of Crouch Sr., but if later versions use "curse," it may be a correction. In that case, I'm thinking it refers to the capture of Moody. Voldemort says that by the time that step comes into play, his faithful servant (who I take to be Crouch Jr.) will have rejoined him. Barty later admits to being part of Moody's capture.

Ah, but Barty Jr. was with them at the Crouch home when they freed him and imperio'd his father. Also, if Barty Jr. is headed to break into Moody's house and take him out, I don't see Voldemort sending Wortail along.

[Alastor]

Kindly note that the question has been answered already. There never was another murder to be committed. It was an editing mistake. Also no such murder ever happened in the book. Barty Crouch sr was killed because he became a risk when fighting the imperius curse. It wasn't planned beforehand.

The obstacle to be removed was Alastor Moody and that removal would make it possible to place the faithful servant (Crouch jr) at Hogwarts.

The purpose of this thread is to provide answers where possible, not to dwell on what if speculations. The question what murder Voldy would have had in mind if it really had been about one more murder is precisely that. We have a thread for such things. Here: General 'What If...?' Thread

Next question, please.

[Dobby138]

After Snape killed Dumbledore, how was he still able to convoy information to Voldemort and the Death Eaters (as seen in DH Chapter 1) when the Order believed him to have murdered Dumbledore on Voldemort's orders? If that makes sense.

[bellatrix93]

Snape could no longer get them new information about the Order; as you said he was no longer trusted by the Order and was actually considered an enemy. I think Snape's value to Voldemort after Dumbledore's death went beyond whatever information about the Order he could offer Voldemort, it was more about what Snape was willing to do to please Voldemort. To Voldemort, if Snape had killed Dumbledore on his orders, then he has finally proved his complete loyalty to Voldemort.

The information Snape gave Voldemort in that chapter came from Dumbledore's portriat. Dumbledore came up with the plan of moving Harry and had Snape tell it to Mundungus Fletcher who was confunded, as we see in The Prince Tale. It didn't come from any interaction between Snape and the Order.

[Dobby138]

Originally Posted by bellatrix93

Snape could no longer get them new information about the Order; as you said he was no longer trusted by the Order and was actually considered an enemy. I think Snape's value to Voldemort after Dumbledore's death went beyond whatever information about the Order he could offer Voldemort, it was more about what Snape was willing to do to please Voldemort. To Voldemort, if Snape had killed Dumbledore on his orders, then he has finally proved his complete loyalty to Voldemort.

The information Snape gave Voldemort in that chapter came from Dumbledore's portriat. Dumbledore came up with the plan of moving Harry and had Snape tell it to Mundungus Fletcher who was confunded, as we see in The Prince Tale. It didn't come from any interaction between Snape and the Order.

Ah, I see now. So Voldemort knew Snape was getting the information from Dumbledore's portrait?

[willfitz]

Originally Posted by Dobby138

Ah, I see now. So Voldemort knew Snape was getting the information from Dumbledore's portrait?

Perhaps. He could have told Voldemort that he had another source, all we know is that Snape had told Voldemort that he had a concrete source, and that in all actuality it was a case of Dumbledore giving Snape the info to give to the order, not Dumbledore giving Snape the Order's info.

Frankly, I don't think that Snape would have told Voldemort that it was Dumbledore who was his source. There was no reason for Snape to trust Dumbledore- at the time, Voldemort believed Snape to have murdered him and so it wouldn't make sense for Dumbledore to be helping him posthumously.

[Miss_Gaunt]

Originally Posted by willfitz

Frankly, I don't think that Snape would have told Voldemort that it was Dumbledore who was his source. There was no reason for Snape to trust Dumbledore- at the time, Voldemort believed Snape to have murdered him and so it wouldn't make sense for Dumbledore to be helping him posthumously.

I agree. He did tell Voldemort he had a source though and it must have been convincing if Voldemort didn't question it. I think he might have pretended it was either Mundungus or Dawlish. Of the two, I would probably say Mundungus is more likely, considering they could meet up in an 'unfamiliar tavern' and we know he was in the Order.

[ProfessorWooton]

Okay. This has been confusing me for a long time, but I think I finally have it straight.
A wizard or witch's Animagus form reflects what they themselves, or their personalities, are like.
A Patronus form represents something that has affected the wizard or witch emotionally in the past.
Am I right? ...Or am I wrong? Or what? Answers are muchly appreciated.

[blknight7]

Originally Posted by Miss_Gaunt

I agree. He did tell Voldemort he had a source though and it must have been convincing if Voldemort didn't question it. I think he might have pretended it was either Mundungus or Dawlish. Of the two, I would probably say Mundungus is more likely, considering they could meet up in an 'unfamiliar tavern' and we know he was in the Order.

Mundungus would be more likely to turncoat than others, given his reputation and vocation. Not sure if Voldemort ever knew that Mundungus was apparently very loyal to Dumbledore, so he could have seen Mundungus to be a bit like Peter, I guess.

[Nnylarak]

Originally Posted by ProfessorWooton

Okay. This has been confusing me for a long time, but I think I finally have it straight.
A wizard or witch's Animagus form reflects what they themselves, or their personalities, are like.
A Patronus form represents something that has affected the wizard or witch emotionally in the past.
Am I right? ...Or am I wrong? Or what? Answers are muchly appreciated.

I would agree with you about the Animagus. For patronuses, the way I've heard it best explained, is that your patronus represents what you feel is protecting you, or what you feel is always there for you. For Harry, it's his dad. For Snape, it's Lily's memory.

[MerryLore]

Originally Posted by Manjorkir

So does anyone know how many Professors there are per subject,......... Is every subject a department with lots of Professors and the head of the departments are for example Flitwick , Snape, Binns etc.

I think the school is small, so they each teach only one subject, and that professor is the only teacher. The only exception I found was Divination, when Umbridge fired Trewlaney, Firenze was brought in, and Dumbledore kept both the following year, since neither had a place to go.

[Ravenclaw797]

Originally Posted by MerryLore

I think the school is small, so they each teach only one subject, and that professor is the only teacher. The only exception I found was Divination, when Umbridge fired Trewlaney, Firenze was brought in, and Dumbledore kept both the following year, since neither had a place to go.

I agree. The details of the Hogwarts schedule are MAJORLY confusing, but all evidence points to one teacher per subject, with the exception of Divination.

[SopophorousBean]

Originally Posted by Ravenclaw797

I agree. The details of the Hogwarts schedule are MAJORLY confusing, but all evidence points to one teacher per subject, with the exception of Divination.

The only thing that would lead me to suspect there were more teachers was just the fact that there are occasions where a subject is referred to as a "department" which suggests more than one teacher to me, also calling it the "charms corridor" etc might suggest there's more than one classroom, and I've always wondered if there was more than one teacher because of that. I would presume they would have been mentioned though, and the fact that the trio had the same teachers throughout the school seems to indicate there isn't a choice of teachers.

[ILuvDarkMarks]

With the "Charms Corridor" I think of there being a classroom set up for each year. This way, it would be easier for teachers to be prepared for their lessons with whatever "props" were needed.

Or, it could simply mean that the Charms classroom was down that hallway, though I can't think of why there would be extra classrooms if they weren't being used.

[willfitz]

Originally Posted by ILuvDarkMarks

With the "Charms Corridor" I think of there being a classroom set up for each year. This way, it would be easier for teachers to be prepared for their lessons with whatever "props" were needed.

Or, it could simply mean that the Charms classroom was down that hallway, though I can't think of why there would be extra classrooms if they weren't being used.

It's definitely a possibility that there are classroom's set up for different years, but I think the latter is more likely. It does seem that there are disproportionately many classrooms in the school, but I always felt that they were used for things like "Charms Club" and for extra practice like Harry and Hermione with the summoning charm in GoF. I think that the only subject in which different years are mentioned as going to a different setting explicitly is Herbology, but that doesn't rule it out as a possibility.

[BrianTung]

Originally Posted by Nnylarak

I would agree with you about the Animagus. For patronuses, the way I've heard it best explained, is that your patronus represents what you feel is protecting you, or what you feel is always there for you. For Harry, it's his dad. For Snape, it's Lily's memory.

That's essentially what Rowling suggested, indirectly, when she said that when one falls in love, one's Patronus often changes to that of one's love, for he or she becomes that happy thought that energizes the Patronus.

[Ravenclaw797]

Originally Posted by SopophorousBean

The only thing that would lead me to suspect there were more teachers was just the fact that there are occasions where a subject is referred to as a "department" which suggests more than one teacher to me, also calling it the "charms corridor" etc might suggest there's more than one classroom, and I've always wondered if there was more than one teacher because of that. I would presume they would have been mentioned though, and the fact that the trio had the same teachers throughout the school seems to indicate there isn't a choice of teachers.

I think "charms corridor" just meant the corridor where the one charms classroom is.

Your reasoning definitely makes sense, and it's not out of the question, but not only does the Trio have the same teachers, but we hear mention of the same teachers by people in different grades (i.e. Fred & George), plus we see classes with the same teachers but different grades (CoS...when Harry walks by a Transfiguration class and someone has badger stripes in their hair, or something.)

And in OotP when Umbridge is assessing teachers, doesn't either Fred or George say something like "Flitwick's not a problem, he gets everything through their Charms OWLs fine" implying Flitwick is the only Charms teacher.

[horcrux4]

The Lexicon reckons there are only about 14 teachers at Hogwarts (excluding Madam Hooch) which means that they are very overworked and possibly explains why some houses share classes. Certainly there is only one teacher mentioned for each subject (except Divination) apart from when Professor Grubbly-Plank substitutes for Hagrid, and she always retires when Hagrid comes back to work.

[willfitz]

Originally Posted by horcrux4

The Lexicon reckons there are only about 14 teachers at Hogwarts (excluding Madam Hooch) which means that they are very overworked and possibly explains why some houses share classes. Certainly there is only one teacher mentioned for each subject (except Divination) apart from when Professor Grubbly-Plank substitutes for Hagrid, and she always retires when Hagrid comes back to work.

I don't know if they would be that much overworked. They have at most 7 classes each, true, but these are not each taught every day. It seems like there are no more than 4 of each subject per week per year, which means no more than 28 hours of teaching time (assuming a reasonable 1 hour lesson), and possibly less.

[Severus4everus]

I've been reading The Chamber of Secrets book again..and there's this one strange part that I don't understand... about what Percy said that GInny saw him do... on page 212

" well, er, if you must know, Ginny, er, walked in on me the other day when i was - well, never mind - the point is, she spotted me doing something and i, um, i asked her not to mention it to anyone. "

what do you think he meant??