Clues to the End of the Series found in SS (SPOILERS POSSIBLE)

[Nadine]

I have moved my response to Wrighty's post from Cabbages and Smoke because I think it might be worth building a knowledge base of facts of unresolved issues in SS. I'm not suggesting speculation here since that should be in the other group. So if you want to run with the topic, you might want to set it up in that group.
=============================================
Wrighty wrote:

Something else I noticed in the passage about Gringott's was a comment on page 76 in the PB edition of SS -

(After Griphook the goblin opened the vault door)
"If anyone but a Gringott's goblin tried that, they'd be sucked through the door and trapped in there," said Griphook.
"How often do you check to see if anyone's inside?" Harry asked.
"About once every ten years," said Griphook with a rather nasty grin.

I don't recall if this came up in later books. If it didn't, could someone trapped inside have caused the green smoke? Will someone get sucked through the door later? I just thought that was an interesting segment.
---------------------------------
----------------------------------


This particular section caught my attention for a different reason. I might add to Wrighty's statement that this particular vault had no keyhole. It was opened by a goblin stroking the door. Then Griphook made his comment above.

OK, now let me add another quote from page 291 but this is from Quirrell:

"He does not forgive mistakes easily. When I failed to steal the stone from Gringotts, he was most displeased."
-------------------------------

Some facts:

1. The door has no key and can only be opened by a Goblin. So Quirrell needed the help of a goblin.
2. It had to be a Gingott's goblin. If not, the goblin would have been sucked inside. Note: Wrighty's observation above. Maybe it was but it would have to have been rescued by a Gringott's goblin.
3. There was a big article in the Daily Prophet about the vault being opened and found empty.
4. The goblin could not have been Griphook or the one in the lobby because they already knew that the vault had been emptied prior to the break-in.
5. Voldemort was exceptionally angry at this failure. We would assume because of the failure to get the stone but it could be for other reasons.

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

This bothered me because it was a loose end when Quirrell brought us up-to-date on all he things he had been responsible for. Now for those us who are "it is in Book 1" theorist this is a definite flag to something. I don't recall if the goblins come up again but I don't think JKR put all this explanation in here for nothing.

Nadine

[LizzieAnn]

It just hit me - Scabbers!!!

Ron reached inside his jacket and pulled out a fat gray rat, which was asleep.

"His name's Scabbers and he's useless, he hardly ever wakes up. Percy got an owl from my dad for being made a prefect, but they coudn't aff--I mean I got Scabbers instead. [page 100 HC - Chapter 6]

Such a clue thrown at us and yet, who knew that Scabbers was who he was and what an important role he played?

Considering who Scabbers is, I would also like to know how Scabbers ended up with the Weasleys.

Message Edited by LizzieAnn on 01-18-200704:02 PM

[Nadine]

Good point! Let's keep this on the list until we get to POA in March. I would have to do some close rereading.

Nadine

---

LizzieAnn wrote:
It just hit me - Scabbers!!!

Ron reached inside his jacket and pulled out a fat gray rat, which was asleep.

"His name's Scabbers and he's useless, he hardly ever wakes up. Percy got an owl from my dad for being made a prefect, but they coudn't aff--I mean I got Scabbers instead. [page 100 HC - Chapter 6]

Such a clue thrown at us and yet, who knew that Scabbers was who he was and what an important role he played?

Considering who Scabbers is, I would also like to know how Scabbers ended up with the Weasleys.

Message Edited by LizzieAnn on 01-18-200704:02 PM

---

[LizzieAnn]

We don't learn about Legilimency or Snape's proficiency with it until later books. Yet, when HRH learn about the SS & Nicholas Flamel & before the Quidditch match that Snape's to referee, Harry makes this observation:

"Could Snape possibly know they'd found out about the Sorcerer's Stone? Harry didn't see how he could - yet he sometimes had the horrible feeling that Snape could read minds." [page 221 HC - Chapter 13]

Message Edited by LizzieAnn on 01-18-200704:23 PM

[Nadine]

---

Nadine wrote:
Good point! Let's keep this on the list until we get to POA in March. I would have to do some close rereading.

Nadine

---

LizzieAnn wrote:
It just hit me - Scabbers!!!

Ron reached inside his jacket and pulled out a fat gray rat, which was asleep.

"His name's Scabbers and he's useless, he hardly ever wakes up. Percy got an owl from my dad for being made a prefect, but they coudn't aff--I mean I got Scabbers instead. [page 100 HC - Chapter 6]

Such a clue thrown at us and yet, who knew that Scabbers was who he was and what an important role he played?

Considering who Scabbers is, I would also like to know how Scabbers ended up with the Weasleys.

Message Edited by LizzieAnn on 01-18-200704:02 PM

---

---

I just remembered Scabbers bit Goyle when Goyle went to grab some candy. I think you are really on to something here, Lizzie. this situation and behavior doesn't fit with what learn about Scabbers later on. However, it could have great significance on the role Scabber's plays in the last book (and he will) and what actually happened at Godric's Hollow that fateful Halloween.

Also, pay close attention to the sequence of operations in Chapter 1.

Pg 12

"What they're saying," she pressed on, "is that last night Voldemort turned up in Godric's Hollow. He went to find the Potters. The rumor is that Lily and James Potter are--are--that they're--dead."

Note: That event took place 24 hours earlier, then what is happening in Chapter 1.

Then Hagrid arrives on the motorcycle and when asked where he got the bike he says "Young Sirius Black lent it to me." So Sirius was involved and still in good graces and also Pettigrew was still around."

Hagrid continues: "I've got him, sir."

"No problems, were there?"

"No, sir--house was almost destroyed, but I got him out all right before the Muggles started swarmin' around. He fell asleep as we was flyin' over Bristol."

Why the 24 hour lag between the time the event took place and the Wizarding world moved in and the Muggles found out about it? I don't think it took 24 hours for Hagrid to fly from Godric Hollow to Privet Drive unless it was very far away. And I don't think it was very far away--after all he is carrying a sleeping baby. But they did know it took place the night before and Harry had not been removed immediately.

These are all significant clues that are easily overlooked--especially on the first reading. You almost have to dissect and analyze every sentence in this book!

Nadine

[Cahill42]

Nadine wrote:
"Why the 24 hour lag between the time the event took place and the Wizarding world moved in and the Muggles found out about it? I don't think it took 24 hours for Hagrid to fly from Godric Hollow to Privet Drive unless it was very far away. And I don't think it was very far away--after all he is carrying a sleeping baby. But they did know it took place the night before and Harry had not been removed immediately."

It is interesting about the time lag. But do we know exactly the time when Voldemort attacked to Potters? Was it dinner time, bed time, middle of the night? Plus, I'm sure that it took time for Dumbledore to discover what Voldemort attempt, summon Hagrid and send him to Godric Hollow to retrieve Harry, and then for Hagrid to first find Harry in the rubble and then bring him to Privet Drive. (Whew!) It all takes time, even in the wizarding world, especially considering that Hagrid can't Apparate, at least, I'm pretty sure he can't.

My point here is that it takes time for the events in question to happen. Twenty-four hours isn't all that much time really.

[Wrighty]

I have another small section I wanted to ask about. I don't recall if this has come up in the other books. If it hasn't I wondered if anyone thinks it's important to the future or if it's just part of the past.

In SS (PB edition) pg 83
Harry and Hagrid are in Ollivander's shopping for a wand. Mr. Ollivander recognizes Hagrid.

"Rubeus! Rubeus Hagrid! How nice to see you again...Oak, sixteen inches, rather bendy, wasn't it?"
"It was, sir, yes." said Hagrid.
"Good wand, that one. But I suppose they snapped it in half when you got expelled?" said Mr. Ollivander, suddenly stern.
"Er - yes, they did, yes," said Hagrid, shuffling his feet. "I've still got the pieces, though," he added brightly.
"But you don't use them?" said Mr. Ollivander sharply.
"Oh, no, sir," said Hagrid quickly. Harry noticed he gripped his pink umbrella very tightly as he spoke.
"Hmmm," said Mr. Ollivander, giving Hagrid a piercing look.

So? Did it come up again someplace I don't remember? Is it important?

[karenannewithe]

Do you mean the wand..in the umbrella...because he had just used it on his journey with Harry, he shook it in warning at vernon...p.46 and then used it for the piggy on p.48

[Nadine]

I wondered about the "pink umbrella" and the fact that Hagrid can do magic. I don't think things are introduced for no reason and Hagrid has not used any magic that I can remember throughout the rest of the series. Yet the fact that he can has been clearly introduced.

There are some other things about Hagrid that I have wondered about (one for the next book). We are continually reminded that Dumbledore would trust Hagrid with his life and that Hagrid is trusted with all the most important jobs (repetition). JKR also makes very careful choices of chapter titles and we are never really told what it means to be "Keeper of the Keys." Also, something that I will bring up in another post, Hagrid is most often right about the information he provides us in the book. He may be right for the wrong reasons, he seem pretty naive, he may consider some things not important, but his statements are pretty reliable. I think Hagrid does know a lot more and JKR uses him to provide reliable information that we are apt to overlook or dismiss because it is just Hagrid. I would pay close attention to what Hagrid says.

Nadine

---

Wrighty wrote:
I have another small section I wanted to ask about. I don't recall if this has come up in the other books. If it hasn't I wondered if anyone thinks it's important to the future or if it's just part of the past.

In SS (PB edition) pg 83
Harry and Hagrid are in Ollivander's shopping for a wand. Mr. Ollivander recognizes Hagrid.

"Rubeus! Rubeus Hagrid! How nice to see you again...Oak, sixteen inches, rather bendy, wasn't it?"
"It was, sir, yes." said Hagrid.
"Good wand, that one. But I suppose they snapped it in half when you got expelled?" said Mr. Ollivander, suddenly stern.
"Er - yes, they did, yes," said Hagrid, shuffling his feet. "I've still got the pieces, though," he added brightly.
"But you don't use them?" said Mr. Ollivander sharply.
"Oh, no, sir," said Hagrid quickly. Harry noticed he gripped his pink umbrella very tightly as he spoke.
"Hmmm," said Mr. Ollivander, giving Hagrid a piercing look.

So? Did it come up again someplace I don't remember? Is it important?

---

[DebsScott]

Hagrid's wand pieces are in his umbrella. There are places throughout the series where magic happens around Hagrid and his pink umbrella is always noticed lying somewhere nearby. Since we're talking SS here, I won't quote any passages from future books so not to spoil it for others (despite the "spoiler warning" alert in the thread title). If you've read the series before and are re-reading again, pay particular attention to Hagrid sections where magic occurs. That pink umbrella will be there.

I agree with Nadine that Hagrid is such an important part of the books. I think he'll have a big role in HBP.

[Wrighty]

---

karenannewithe wrote:
Do you mean the wand..in the umbrella...because he had just used it on his journey with Harry, he shook it in warning at vernon...p.46 and then used it for the piggy on p.48

---

I didn't even catch that until you brought it up! Good one! I see that Hagrid is also holding the umbrella in the drawing at the beginning of chapter 4.

[Wrighty]

---

DebsScott wrote:
Hagrid's wand pieces are in his umbrella. There are places throughout the series where magic happens around Hagrid and his pink umbrella is always noticed lying somewhere nearby. Since we're talking SS here, I won't quote any passages from future books so not to spoil it for others (despite the "spoiler warning" alert in the thread title). If you've read the series before and are re-reading again, pay particular attention to Hagrid sections where magic occurs. That pink umbrella will be there.

I agree with Nadine that Hagrid is such an important part of the books. I think he'll have a big role in HBP.

---

I also agree with you and Nadine. I know that we get bits and pieces about Hagrid throughout the series but it feels like there is still a lot to tell about the giant. I never paid any real attention to the pink umbrella. I definitely will this time through. Thanks for the heads up. That's a good one!

Hagrid does mention on page 59 in SS that he was allowed to do a bit of magic to follow Harry and to get the letters to him. That is one of the reasons he took the job.

[dedaviswright]

I think you are on to something about the time lapse in chapter 1. I thought it was just me...but if Voldermort killed Harrys Parents the night before he was delivered at privet Drive, we are talking about a whole day. Hagrid says he got Harry out just before the Muggles began to swarm the place. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but Godrics Hallow is where Muggles live (remember Lilly and James were hiding out), so after the big explosion, wouldn't the Muggles already be out to see what happened? And if this is true, how did Hagrid get to Lilly and James' house so quickly. Where was Sirius? He had to be home at his place, because Hagrid had to get Harry and then get the Motorcycle. Or did Hagrid know to get the Motorcycle before the explosion? I find this very confusing. Does any one else?

[Aearrinn]

There are so many references to things later on in the series that we already know about, such as when Harry gets the feeling that Snape can read minds... One thing that stuck out to me as I reread SS was when Dumbledore, when asked by Harry in the hospital wing why Quirrell couldn't touch him, he replied:

"Your mother died to save you. If there is one thing Voldemort cannot understand,
it is love. He didn't realize that love as powerful as your mother's for you
leaves it's own mark. Not a scar, no visible sign... to have been loved so
deeply, even though the person who loved us is gone, will give us some protection
FOREVER."(emphasis added).

So while we know that Voldemort now has Harry's blood and can now touch him, I don't think that she would have used the word 'forever' unless she meant it. This leads me to believe that in the end Harry will NOT die but rather have complete triumph over LV. In the prophesy it also says that neither can live while the other survives (I'm going to post more on this in the "waiting for Harry" section). There is also the constant reiteration of Harry having his mother's eyes which JKR said would come into play in the final installment.

[Nadine]

"to have been loved so
deeply, even though the person who loved us is gone, will give us some protection
FOREVER."(emphasis added).
--------------------------------

Good catch, Aearrinn! There is some discussion on the other board abut this protection ending on his 17th birthday but the debate includes what is protecting Harry--his mother, Dumbledore or both. This "forever," however, is significant. Now it did say "some protection" so maybe not the full protection. But you are right. He has some protection that will always be with him. I think you are rght and we can take JKR's words literally.

Nadine

[Nadine]

SS is is very tightly written book and I don't think JKR wasted much ink or paper on characters or situations that were just fillers. I think most, if not all, people, creatures or items mentioned in the SS will turn up later and in many cases have already. But there are two creatures that had a prominent place in SS that have not shown up.

The snake from chapter 2 is one but this snake could possible be Nagani. However, this snake owes Harry one because he set it free. So it may be significant in Book 7.

The other is Norbert the dragon. Quite a bit of space was devoted to Norbert. He has got to play an important part in Book 7. And he may still know his "mommy." Also, I think the "twelve uses of dragon blood" might be important. It was mentioned at least twice: once on page 103 (on the chocolate frog card) and again on page 229 (Hermione will probably remember them and find a use for them in Book 7). So far we don't know what those uses are.

I also think everything on that Chocolate Frog card was important. We never have found out about how Dumbledore defeated the dark wizard Grindelwald in 1945 but then no one has been listening to Professor Binns in the History of Magic class. However there may be a relationship between that event and how Harry is going to defeat Voldemort. Keep in mind that their wands are ineffective against one another (GoF) so Harry can't defeat him in any traditional way.

I also wonder if the photo album that Hagrid gave Harry might be more than just a memento and might aid him in finding Godric Hollow.

Has anyone else found some "loose ends" that might come up again in Book 7? JRK spent six years working and reworking this first book, the shortest of the lot, and had already planned out the basics of her story and ending. Every word has got to be relevant.

Nadine

[Ineen]

I'm not so sure about every part of Sorcerer's Stone the book being relevant. I think I remember her giving an interview on tv or maybe it's in the extras disc of one of the dvds... But I'm sure I remember her saying that she oversaw the screenwriting process telling the writers, well, you need that bit because it's going to be important later on in the series. I've assumed that was why in the movie version an insignificant character, namely Susan Bones, is included in the Sorting Hat ceremony and all the parts on Norbert were left out!?!

[Nadine]

---

Ineen wrote:
I'm not so sure about every part of Sorcerer's Stone the book being relevant. I think I remember her giving an interview on tv or maybe it's in the extras disc of one of the dvds... But I'm sure I remember her saying that she oversaw the screenwriting process telling the writers, well, you need that bit because it's going to be important later on in the series. I've assumed that was why in the movie version an insignificant character, namely Susan Bones, is included in the Sorting Hat ceremony and all the parts on Norbert were left out!?!

---

Norbert was not left out of the movie. Just the details about sending him off to Romania. This long episode in the book was just shorten to Hagrid saying that Dumbledore sent him to Romania.

[dedaviswright]

Good point, but why in the movies does Harry have blue eyes but in the book he has green. I do believe it is important.

[Nadine]

---

dedaviswright wrote:
Good point, but why in the movies does Harry have blue eyes but in the book he has green. I do believe it is important.

---

That is an excellent point. I agree, the fact that his eyes are green is very important. Even his mother's eyes were not green in the movie.

I actually look at the movies as similar but different stories. They can't possibly have all the details that are in the book or even the crucial ones that are necessary to solving the mysteries. Nor could JKR "let them in" on anything because it would have revealed the ending of her book. I think each film is a standalone effort by individual directors using the known books as guides but reflecting their own vision. Certainly the third move, PoA, is very different than the first two and does put a different "spin" on some aspects that are the director's personal interpretation of the book. Even the first film, though the closest of the movies to the book, leaves out a lot of crucial details. For example we don't get the conflicts among the centaurs or their attitudes towards humans and we now know it was important to OotP. I think it is important that we don't let the movies influence our interpretation of the books. They are just a side entertainment.

Nadine