Harry Potter Speculation

[MysticCat]

A friend sent me this link: Harry Potter and the Inklings: The Christian Meaning of The Chamber of Secrets.

I should note in advance that this is an essay by John Granger, who wrote Looking for God in Harry Potter and The Hidden Key to Harry Potter. As the name of the essay suggests, Granger argues extensively that Rowling is following in footsteps of earlier Christian fiction writers, notably CS Lewis. (For those who don't know, "The Inklings" was the name of a group of Oxford writers, including Lewis and Tolkien, who would meet regularly at a pub to discuss what they were writing.) Just thought I should give that heads up so readers have an idea what to expect.

Really worth a read when you have some time; it's got a lot of food for thought. (But it's a long essay.) The analysis of Chamber of Secrets, the book that supposedly has clues to the half-bllod prince and the ultimate ending in it, is particularly interesting.

As a bonus, the essay contains Granger's guess as to the person on whom Guilderoy Lockhart was modeled. (Rowling has said that Lockhart is the one character based on someone she knew/had met.)

FWIW.

[DWAlphaGam]

Originally posted by MysticCat81

As a bonus, the essay contains Granger's guess as to the person on whom Guilderoy Lockhart was modeled. (Rowling has said that Lockhart is the one character based on someone she knew/had met.)

FWIW. [/B]

I've heard that Lockhart is modeled after JKR's ex-husband.

[MysticCat]

Originally posted by DWAlphaGam
I've heard that Lockhart is modeled after JKR's ex-husband.

Not according to Granger, although he admits he is speculating. All I know for sure is that Rowling has said Lockhart is the one character modeled after someone she knows or has meet yet. According to Granger, Rowling "is said to have met her Lockhart model" at a book event. And he does lay out an interesting basis for his speculation that fits into his overall thesis.

[MysticCat]

Sorry. Another post from me.

Just came across this AP story on MSNBC.com:

Harry Potter to survive to book No. 7: But author Rowling won't say if wizard survives to adulthood.

Not that it is a big surprise that Harry will live to Book 7. I doubt she would have named the last book Harry Potter's Survivors and the Triumph of the Dark Lord. But this part of the story is worth noting:

She encouraged the fans to try to piece together future plots for themselves, and urged them to focus on why Harry’s nemesis, the evil warlock Voldemort, had not been killed.

“There are two questions I don’t think I’ve ever been asked and that I should have been asked, if you know what I mean,” Rowling said.

She told the gathering they should be asking themselves “not ‘why did Harry live’ but ‘why didn’t Voldemort die?”’

The second question they should think about is: “Why didn’t Dumbledore kill, or try to kill, Voldemort?” she added, referring to the headmaster of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.

ETA: Here's the link to the BBC story on the same reading: Rowling's magical morning

[Lindz928]

Originally posted by MysticCat81
She told the gathering they should be asking themselves “not ‘why did Harry live’ but ‘why didn’t Voldemort die?”’

It says in book 4 that he had tried all kinds of spells and magic to make himself immortal, and that when he didn't die from trying to kill Harry, he knew that they had at least worked a little bit. Do ya'll think this is the kind of thing she means by that?

[MysticCat]

In the full Q&A, she definitely hints at that. She says that people should be asking what Voldemort did to ensure immortality. She adds that she doesn't know whether anyone could guess the answer, but that's what should be asked.

The full Q&A can be found at JK Rowling's site (http://www.jkrowling.com/en) in the "News" section. In this interview, she states, among other things, that Dudley is just Dudley -- nothing more to him. Aunt Petunia is not a squib, but there is a little more to her, which we shall learn in time.

Speaking of Rowling's site, the "Do Not Distrub" sign is gone, but there is only darkness behind the door. Anyone been able to find more?

[DWAlphaGam]

Originally posted by MysticCat81
Speaking of Rowling's site, the "Do Not Distrub" sign is gone, but there is only darkness behind the door. Anyone been able to find more?

There is one sentence from HBP behind the door. Instructions for viewing are posted on The Leaky Cauldron. (Yay for TLC, because I'm too impatient to try to work out the puzzle by myself!)

The sentence isn't terribly interesting out of context, BTW. I'm sure it will make much more sense within the book.

[MysticCat]

Thanks, DWAlphaGam.

[breathesgelatin]

Wow--I've been off the net for a few days due to a wedding and driving back home, and a lot has gone down! I'm off to JKR's site.

By the way, are any of you registered on various HP boards? I frequent Fiction Alley as breathesgelatin.

[chideltjen]

Originally posted by DWAlphaGam
There is one sentence from HBP behind the door. Instructions for viewing are posted on The Leaky Cauldron. (Yay for TLC, because I'm too impatient to try to work out the puzzle by myself!)

The sentence isn't terribly interesting out of context, BTW. I'm sure it will make much more sense within the book.

Mugglenet has the answer as well. I don't know how you would have figured it out any other way though. I'm not a logic person I guess.

And I had the hardest time finding the freakin' lightswitch... so you know I never would have figured out that puzzle on my own.

[Lady Pi Phi]

So I figured out the sequence (actually I cheated and went to mugglenet...I'm no good at logic) and I read the sentence from HBP.
I have this feeling that it's about Crookshanks. I know he's a Kneazle, but what do we really know about them? Can they transform into people?
It's a long shot, I know, but that's what I think.

[MysticCat]

Crookshanks, I think is part-kneazle, part cat. And I've never heard anything about kneazles being able to turn into humans.

But maybe it's not that much of a long-shot -- here's a link to a Mugglenet essay that speculates that Crookshanks may be the half-blood prince: http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/.../hope01.shtml. Crookshanks is described once or twice as being lion-like, as is the newly-descrbed character.

Here's my long-shot: The newly-described character, perhaps the new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher, is somehow related to Godric Gryffindor -- much like Voldemort, the "heir of Slytherin," has snake eyes now, this new person (the "heir of Gryffindor"?), has some lion-like characteristics.

Maybe we're both right?

[breathesgelatin]

I think that the sentence is describing one of the following:

--Aberforth, Dumbledore's brother
--The "Half Blood Prince"
--Godric Gryffindor
--The new DADA teacher

Of course, some of these people could be combined. ie, Aberforth could be the new DADA teacher. Things like that.

[Rio_Kohitsuji]

The passage states this, "He looked rather like an old lion. There were streaks of grey in his mane of tawny hair and his bushy eyebrows. He had keen yellowish eyes behind a pair of wire rimmed spectacles ad a certain rangy, lopy grace even though he walked with a slight limp."

When I first read this, I totally thought of Crookshanks. C'mon, the lion reference, the color, the eyes....

[DWAlphaGam]

I thought of Aberforth first. I don't think Crookshanks can turn into a person (although could they transfigure him into a person?).