Little HP Questions Answered v2

[runitsandrew]

This thread is designed for the asking and answered of the smaller questions from the Harry Potter series with help from other members that may just be bugging you.

Last few posts from the the previous thread:

Originally Posted by haha

I see what you're saying and I've often thought of that myself. Here's some of my thoughts that I've come up with:
1. The point was that they weren't meant to come after Hermione, they were meant to go straight to their dorms.
2. It showed that she was willing to get into trouble so that they didn't have to take any of the heat, however little.
3. It also made them look like heroes and helped form a bond between the three.

Originally Posted by Aurelen

Also, one person getting in trouble (Hermione) is better than two people getting in trouble (Harry and Ron).

Originally Posted by haha

In Hermione's story, she did the wrong thing first.

Go ahead and continue.

[MadamJaedyn23]

It would've been awkward trying to explain the real story anyway. For example:

Ron: Well, see, we came into the girl's bathroom to tell Hermione the troll was in the dungeons.

(awkward silence)

Harry: Yeah, and then we accidentally locked the troll in the bathroom with her.
Ron: That was a major whoops, wasn't it?
Minerva: (Doesn't laugh)
Ron: (Nervous laughter)
Minerva: How were you aware that Miss Granger was in the girl's bathroom?
Harry: Well, see, Ron here said that she was miserable and it wasn't a wonder that she didn't have any friends.
Ron: (Nervous laughter) I'm such a stupid git, sometimes!
Harry: And she's been crying in the bathroom all day. Yeah.
Ron: And, yeah, she's been in here and we didn't want her to get eaten or beaten up.
Minerva: Well how did you know she had been crying in the bathroom all day?
Harry: Oh, someone told us at the table. She didn't go to any classes this afternoon.
Hermione: (mumbles about them just getting everyone in more trouble)
Minerva: You two are stupid.

Okay, maybe it wouldn't happen just like that, but you get the idea. The idea of Harry and Ron coming after her because she thought she could handle the troll herself is a little easier to explain and raises a lot less questions. Though "what were you thinking?" still comes to mind...

[haha]

I think the main point was still that Hermione was willing to take the fall for them, hence helping forge a bond between the three.

[MadamJaedyn23]

Yeah, that's definately one of the things it did. Miss Perfect taking the fall? What? I think it really showed her true character to Ron and Harry and let them know that she really was worth knowing and it WAS a wonder that she didn't have any friends.

[Dementoids]

But it could have gone even simpler without the story:

McGonagall: Explain yourselves!

Harry or Ron: We noticed Hermione wasn't at dinner and someone told us she was in the bathroom. When we heard about the troll, we ran to tell her about it but then we saw the troll go into the bathroom and ran in to save her.


In Hermione's story, Harry and Ron disobey Dumbledore ANYWAY and come to save her, and from her story Hermione gets in trouble. It just doesn't make sense.

[haha]

But it wouldn't have helped form a bond between the three then. And you could tell that Harry and Ron did the wrong thing from Professor Mcgonagall's tone but their act of heroism won out I think in the end when compared to disobeying the rule to help a friend.

[SeveraS]

Originally Posted by Silve

Hmmm...
Actually, the term "philosopher's stone" sould not be interpreted as the "stone that belongs to the philosopher".. It is a greek term and would be much better as a "philosophical stone" (that is what the actual greek term means, translated into english). The word philosophy means the love for wisdom (philo-likeness,love , sophia-wisdom). The stone is named that way to point out its unpredictable nature and the fact that it is completely hypothetical..

So, you should not actually think of the word "philosopher" as a possible synonim of "alchemist"..

Well, the definition I gave comes from my dictionary. But it's writen in french, so I probably not have explained things in a right way.
“philosopher” is not a synonim of "alchemist” in common language. But, in french, "la pierre philosophale” (translated in “Philosopher's stone”) is an ancient expression used to describe the thing all alchemists were purchasing : a stone able to change matter in gold, and able to bring immortality... That alchemist's quest is a part of european histry. Nicolas Flamel is an historic person, a french writer who lived between 1330 and 1418. The legend tells he has discover the secret of the alchemists, the secret of the philosopher stone...
So the "philosopher's stone” is clearly related to medievals alchemists !

About Hermione : maybe another reason is that she didn't want to tell why she was there, crying and so on... perhaps she was ashamed?

[Erroll]

In Hermione's story, Harry and Ron came swooping in a la Batman & Robin and saved her. She took all the blame for coming in and trying to kill the troll by herself without at least asking Quirrell or McGonagall.

[TonyJoe]

Originally Posted by Dementoids

But it could have gone even simpler without the story:

McGonagall: Explain yourselves!

Harry or Ron: We noticed Hermione wasn't at dinner and someone told us she was in the bathroom. When we heard about the troll, we ran to tell her about it but then we saw the troll go into the bathroom and ran in to save her.


In Hermione's story, Harry and Ron disobey Dumbledore ANYWAY and come to save her, and from her story Hermione gets in trouble. It just doesn't make sense.

Your right, in some sense, telling a lie instead of the truth may not make sense when you look at the lie in terms of just this one scene. Hermione lies and says she's hunting the troll and Ron and Harry came looking for me. If she tells the truth she doesnt loose the five house points, and HP and RW still gain the ten. Again, correct, the lie makes no sense if we look at it in terms of just this scene.

But in the larger sense, when you look at everything that had happened before halloween: the flying lesson in which Harry disobeyed Hooch and Hermione lectured, Harry and Ron were going to duel malfoy, Hermione lectured, all of the "know it all" stuff that annoyed ron. Hermione has basically been a slave to the rules and her telling an out right lie to the professors shattered the opinions that Ron and Harry had of hermione. Without the destruction of those opinions it would have never been possible for them to be friends. The lie (and troll) basically gave Hermione the clean slate that she needed with Harry and Ron to be her friends.

[Desraelda]

Looking at the scene itself:

"Professor McGonagall was looking at Ron and Harry. Harry had never seen her look so angry. Her lips were white. Hopes of winning fifty points for Gryffindor faded quidkly from Harry's mind."

At this point, MM is pinning the whole incident on Harry and Ron. She probably can't imagine that Hermy was in any way to blame. She might have even thought that that the boys dragged Hermy into danger.

"What on earth were you thinking of?" said Professor McGonagall, with cold fury in her voice. Harry looked at Ron, who was still standing with his wand in the air. "You're lucky you weren't killed. Why aren't you in your dormitory?"
***
"Then a small voice came out of the shadows.
"Please, Professor McGonagall -- they were looking for me."
"Miss Granger!"
***
"I went looking for the troll because I -- I thought I could deal with it on my own -- you know, because I've read all about them."
***
If they hadn't found me, I'd be dead now. ... They didn't have time to come and fetch anyone. It was about to finish me off when they arrived."
***
Well -- in that case ..." said Professor McGonagall, staring at the three of them, "Miss Granger, you foolish girl, how could you think of tackling a mountain troll on your own?"

Hermy could tell that MM was going to blame the boys for the whole incident and she didn't want that to happen because they had rescued her in the end. That's why she made up that story.

Pretty flimsy, of course, but I really don't think that MM fell for it. Given the fact that Hermy is a model student and would be believed, MM didn't have much choice.

[WoodenCoyote]

Originally Posted by Desraelda

Hermy could tell that MM was going to blame the boys for the whole incident and she didn't want that to happen because they had rescued her in the end. That's why she made up that story.

Pretty flimsy, of course, but I really don't think that MM fell for it. Given the fact that Hermy is a model student and would be believed, MM didn't have much choice.

I think you're right. But she didn't have any proof otherwise so she let it lay.

[eldenk]

Here's the deal with this situation. They are 11 years old...instinctively Hermoine told a lie trying to save her new friends from trouble...it doesn't make sense for it to be logical.

[WeasleyIsOurKing]

You also have to remember that this was a key oppurtunity to end any negative feelings between the three of them. JKR had to do something that would start a friendship with Hermione, and also prove that Hermione is willing to break the rules or lie for the better good.

[Ken45]

Originally Posted by MadamJaedyn23

Yeah, that's definately one of the things it did. Miss Perfect taking the fall? What? I think it really showed her true character to Ron and Harry and let them know that she really was worth knowing and it WAS a wonder that she didn't have any friends.

That's why she's a Gryffindor, not a Ravenclaw!

[Desraelda]

Originally Posted by Ken45

That's why she's a Gryffindor, not a Ravenclaw!

Good insight. A lot of people wonder why Hermione wasn't sorted into Gryffindor, and I think you just answered that question.

[amberthehun]

Originally Posted by SeveraS

Well, the definition I gave comes from my dictionary. But it's writen in french, so I probably not have explained things in a right way.
“philosopher” is not a synonim of "alchemist” in common language. But, in french, "la pierre philosophale” (translated in “Philosopher's stone”) is an ancient expression used to describe the thing all alchemists were purchasing : a stone able to change matter in gold, and able to bring immortality... That alchemist's quest is a part of european histry. Nicolas Flamel is an historic person, a french writer who lived between 1330 and 1418. The legend tells he has discover the secret of the alchemists, the secret of the philosopher stone...
So the "philosopher's stone” is clearly related to medievals alchemists !

I totally get what you are saying, so no worries about your explanation!

I've actually read some books and seen a few medieval fantasy-related shows/movies that have mentioned philosopher's stones in the past. And, yes... it's supposed to be the ultimate payoff of the study of alchemy.


I don't know how many people are familiar with (god, here comes my super geek confession) the old-ish anime Slayers, which is basically supposed to be a satire of the whole fantasy/D&D/LotR culture, but I was watching my (and here comes the dating of myself) old tapes of the series the other day, and they even mentioned a philosopher's stone in that!


I LOLed =/

[The LionHeart]

Question:

If Voldemort no longer has his own blood, that is, the 'noble blood of Salazar Slytherin', is he still technically Slytherin's heir??

[PLIMPY]

Originally Posted by The LionHeart

Question:

If Voldemort no longer has his own blood, that is, the 'noble blood of Salazar Slytherin', is he still technically Slytherin's heir??

I think that he would probably still be technically considered the heir of Slytherin. He is the son of a woman who was heir of Slytherin, so even if he doesn't have his the blood in his veins he was born with (which I am not so sure of, I'm not exaclty sure what blood now flows through his veins), wouldn't he still be an heir by birth right?

[mattimusprime]

I believe that the ritual Voldemort used to bring himself back at the end of GoF gave him back the same exact body he had before his defeat, with the same blood in his veins. I'm not really sure how to explain it, but I believe using Harry's blood for the ritual and the protection Voldemort gained from it was kind of a side effect. They could have used any wizard who was an enemy of Voldemort's, but it wouldnt have given him the protection that Harry's did.

[Tela]

Originally Posted by The LionHeart

Question:

If Voldemort no longer has his own blood, that is, the 'noble blood of Salazar Slytherin', is he still technically Slytherin's heir??

I believe that he still has Salazar Slytherin's blood in his veins, but he also now has some of Harry's too. The reason he had to use Harry's blood is because Harry's blood had protective properties in it (from his mother). Now he not only has his original, but some of Harry's which makes him stronger than before.