A Correction

In seeing Pauli's original post on Johno's theory of Snape being good I remembered that there was something else I wanted to post just fyi. I'm pretty sure there is an error in the original Johno post. He states that Sirius brother's name is Romulus (which would make more sense for a brother of Remus Lupin, Remus and Romulus being the twins connected with the founding of Rome in Latin myth). In podcast the priest who does Catholic Insider gave Sirius brother's name as Regulus, noting the fittingness since both sirius and Regulus are constellations. I have not looked and found the mention of Regulus in the books, but it seems to make more sense. Just a clerical thing for the anal-retentive such as myself.

Beating the Snape Thing to Death

At the risk of sounding obsessive on the "Snape - good or evil?" thing, I was just looking back over some of Pauli's old posts and noticed the original one Snape being good, and just wanted to make one clarification on my position. I do not believe that trusting Snape was "wrong" on DD's part. I do not believe it was even "incorrect." I think DD knew the risk of Snape being affected by Voldy and was willing to take that risk, even at peril to his own life (although this would raise the question of whether he unwisely put the lives of the students and other faculty at risk). I predict (on my theory that he was not "good" while killing DD ... and I realize that Pauli has a theory that Snape may have been saying something else in his head, and I'm not sure what I think of this mainly because I don't think enough has been given one way or another in the books to say one way or the other whether this is even logistically possible ... it might be, but my guess at this point is that it is not) that Snape will come to realize that DD took this risk and that this realization will affect Snape for a final turn to do something decisive for the good side. I think in one conversation Pauli said to me he didn't like the idea that DD got screwed because he "goofed up." I may have been guilty at one point of thinking that DD goofed, but I now am not of that opinion. I think he was well aware of the possibility of things going the way they did and he chose to take that risk for Snape's sake, ie willingly to make himself vulnerable.

New trailer out for "Goblet of Fire" movie

Just checked out the trailer for the movie version of HP: GoF, looks alright - lots of great effects. I'm always picturing the Harry of the books as being a little skinnier than the actor playing him. Moody looks OK; I imagined the 'mad-eye' to be a little bigger. [To see the trailer, click on the ad for it on this page. If it's not showing, then click here.]

a New Voice

Hello to any and all in the wayfaring state who make occasion to stop by Pauli's station for thought and musings with any regularity (or irregularity, for that matter) I am Merlin (for short, Merlinus Ambrettus in the longer form and Merle Brett Kendall on the plane of day-to-day life ... when I read the "Merlinus Ambrosius" form of the Arthurian Merlin's name in CS Lewis' "That Hideous Strength" ... I just couldn't resist the adaptation) Pauli asked me to stop by sometimes and comment and throw in my 0.02. I am currently attempting to study for the GRE general test for the purpose of applying to PHD progams in Biblical studies and gaining acceptance and matriculation into one of them, so blog entries may be sporadic. but I promise to check the blog site and throw my hat in the proverbial ring more regularly than I have kept up on my own blog site. For now, so long and thanks for all the fish

Dumbledore's Sacrifice - Part I

After having vacillated a great degree over whether Snape is bad or good and whether Dumbledore is finished or whether he will "rise again", I've decided regardless that Dumbledore has willingly undergone a sacrificial death of sorts. From the very beginning of the series there has been an insistence that death is not the worst thing that can happen to someone. Furthermore there is a precedent in myth (Norse, Arthurian, Biblical-New Testament) and literature (Tolkien, Lewis, etc.) that death is shown to be a transformation that the good do not fear but the evil do and subsequently misunderstand. In that sense, Voldemort (lit. "flight from death") is merely the latest on this infamous list. The following, I believe, at the very least clarify the difference between the way Dumbledore and Voldemort view life and death. It will be interesting to see if these clues play into a resurrection scenario: - Snape's first lesson in "Sorceror's Stone" finds him speaking of his ability to "stop a death" and he mentions the "draft of living death". Harry produces this potion in Slughorn's first class. Could this repetition be a clue to a "trick" on Dumbledore's part? - Non-verbal spells are emphasized over and over again in HBP and Snape appears to be a master of them. Could Snape have said "Avada Kedavra" and meant something else?? - If Dumbledore isn't "finished" then part of his sacrifice is an admission of defeat of which he is not afraid. Voldemort is inflamed by jealous anger by anyone who gets the better of him, particularly Dumbledore and Harry, but also his father and Amelia Bones among others. What I mean is that even if Dumbledore comes back, his action of losing face is unthinkable for the Dark Lord. - Dumbledore's comment to Draco: "No one can kill you if you are already dead." Hmmm...right before he is (supposedly) killed. -

Merlin's take on the question "Is Harry a Horcrux?"

Well, Merlin did not blog/muse on this subject, he just sent me an email, so I have to publish it on my blog (sigh) and get 0% of the royalties. Good stuff, Merlin! Q: Is Harry a Horcrux?? A: No ... but they are on to something. I think it is true, those who say that Harry actually being a horcrux is a silly thing. BUT I do think Voldemort tried. It fits several models. 1. Heir against Heir John Granger in "The Hidden Key To Harry Potter" predicts that Harry will be found to be the true heir of Godric Griffyndor. I think he is right (note the import at the end of book 6 of Harry going back to Godric's Hollow, where it all started ... I think he will here find out he is the true heir, as well as the particulars of that night) ... I think Harry is Griffyndor's heir as Voldemort is Slytherin's - and I think Voldemort knew it. Think about it, it kills 2 birds with 1 VERY IRONIC stone Bird 1: What more appropriate horcrux could the heir of Slytherin have from Griffyndor than his not only living (think of Slughorn's dismay at Riddle's question about making a living being a horcrux) but HUMAN (a person) heir ... what more ironic than to make the personal heir of Griffyndor, who opposed Slytherin's mentality most of all, into a horcrux, a mechanical cog in the evil machinations of the heir of Slytherin. Bird 2: The Prophecy - Very tricksy ... It is known that Voldy knew of the prophecy and of the fact that both Harry and Neville fit the dates ... and thus far the only explanation for his choice of Harry is that, ironic to all his prejudice, he fears the child of the muggle-born more because he is muggleborn. BUT what if there is another reason yet to be revealed? What if Voldy combed the jedi and sith archives and found out that Harry is the heir of Griffyndor through James? That would take care of Harry Potter would it not? how can the heir of Griffyndor make himself into the fulfiller of the prophecy and undo the heir of Slytherin, when he himself is a horcrux preserving the existence of Voldy. (maybe, after taking care of the heir of Griffyndor as a possible prophecy fulfiller in a way that really floated his "thick with irony" boat, he was gonna head over and do in Neville Longbottom but mainly just to be safe. OR Keep in mind that mother and father are very important with Voldy ... maybe in Voldy's mind he never intended to kill either Harry or Neville ... maybe killing would be too easy and not demonstrate Voldy's power clearly enough, not like control would ... bringing Neville to the dark side through the despair of Bella torturing his parents into insanity, through fear like Wormtail. And the heir of Griffyndor, realizing the utter futility of trying to outwit Voldy's superior trickiness in using his own heritage against him and making him horcrux by murdering his parents, would despair ... both despair through the fall of their parents. Think about the nature of prophecy as a means to getting at what is true ... Do you think Voldy would like this? Don't you think he would hate it? Don't you think it would feel to him like the ultimate triumph to prove the prophecy UTTERLY wrong? ... to say "see! I did not even have to kill them ... I can live even while they live because I rule them through fear and pain." To someone like Voldy, I would imagine, there is quite a difference between killing to demonstrate your own power and killing in defense because some prophecy said you might die if you don't get rid of this person ... that would show forth the authority of the prophecy. 2. Literary Precedent: Merlin In some of the Arthurian legends Merlin is said to be the "backfired" plans of an incubus. Incubi were devils/demons who took human form and copulated with human women so that the devil might inhabit the offspring as a perverse mockery of the Incarnation. The Devil slept with a woman, but it backfired ... he could not inhabit the offspring but rather the offspring was a powerful magician who fought on the good side, against the forces of evil such as Mordred - the offspring was Merlin. 3. Other Predictions Just a thought, and my prediction. And for the record here are my other 2 predictions. 1. When Snape killed Dumbledore he was NOT being "good" in the same sense as Arthur and Molly Weasley or Tonks, Lupin, Black, Harry, Ron or Hermione. This is just my prediction and I could be proven wrong in book 7 (ie if she uses the "secret plan between DD and SV" theory). But thus far I have not heard any arguments that strongly persuade me and the closest (the question of DD and SV's convo overheard by Hagrid) seems inconclusive (don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to dismiss it ... it puzzles the daylights out of me and I'm dying to know what is was about and how it fit in) I don't think this means Snape will remain evil, I predict he will be redeemed (maybe at the cost of his own life) Some have proposed that Snape had good intentions in the "not until you learn to keep your mouth shut and your mind closed" ... and I stick by my reading of it as INTENDED as a taunt rather than a "lesson" ... but that doesn't keep it from becoming a lesson, and not just a lesson "in the abstract" but also a lesson from Snape himself ... I think Snape's drive is to be a teacher, a drive that was corrupted by Voldy BUT not corrupted all the way to what Voldy's own "once upon a time" good inclinations had been perverted into. In an odd way Snape has as much trouble NOT teaching (even when he's doing it with vindictive intentions and thoroughly meaning it only as a taunt) as he has not hating DD on the rooftop ... and one of the keys to being a good teacher is being a good student, and this may be be Snape's redemption ... that he will finally pay attention to DD's charity, he will be unable to resist his inclination to be a good student. 2. Harry will be the 7th and final dark arts teacher. Of the 7 potions that began the DADA riddle (the 7 potions Snape put as his trap to guard the stone [Sorcerer's Stone 286]... greatly talked about on Potter discussion boards) ... 3 were poison (Quirrel, Barty Crouch Jr and Snape), 2 were Nettle wines (fruits ... Lockhart and Umbridge wind up in the booby hatch) and 2 there were that aided in passing through the flames: Lupin and Harry. The position has been cursed since DD refused it to Voldy. Who better to assume the post once the curse is undone than the one who will undo that curse? What better way to truly fight the dark arts than to instill and nurture understanding ? C'mon, Rowling was a teacher ... do you really think that her protagonist will end up as anything other than a teacher when it is THE central teaching position at Hogwarts with regards to the story? Has any other post at the school been so in need of settling and definition? One of the central questions to the series is the question of how to defend against the dark arts (think of the contrast with the philosophy of the Durmstrang school in Bulgaria in book 4)