Since 1997, you’ve been coming to BarnesandNoble.com to discuss everything from Stephen King to writing to Harry Potter. You’ve made our site more than a place to discover your next book: you’ve made it a community. But like all things internet, BN.com is growing and changing. We've said goodbye to our community message boards—but that doesn’t mean we won’t still be a place for adventurous readers to connect and discover.

Now, you can explore the most exciting new titles (and remember the classics) at the Barnes & Noble Book Blog. Check out conversations with authors like Jeff VanderMeer and Gary Shteyngart at the B&N Review, and browse write-ups of the best in literary fiction. Come to our Facebook page to weigh in on what it means to be a book nerd. Browse digital deals on the NOOK blog, tweet about books with us,or self-publish your latest novella with NOOK Press. And for those of you looking for support for your NOOK, the NOOK Support Forums will still be here.

We will continue to provide you with books that make you turn pages well past midnight, discover new worlds, and reunite with old friends. And we hope that you’ll continue to tell us how you’re doing, what you’re reading, and what books mean to you.

Reply
Inspired Bibliophile
Psychee
Posts: 7,307
Registered: ‎04-17-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



dcsbelle wrote:


Psychee wroteYour other question was about Harry's blood protecting Voldy -- Harry's blood never protected Voldy --Harry's blood inside of Voldy protected Harry FROM Voldy.




Then how come Voldy didn't die from the rebound of the first AK?





Are you talking about the AK in the Dark Forest in DH? I don't think that AK backfired completely -- it did, after all, kill the chunk of soul in Harry. What might have returned to Voldemort would be just the energy that failed to kill Harry. Enough energy, perhaps, to just knock Voldemort unconscious.

I don't see how Harry's blood in Voldemort could protect Voldemort at all -- as it was still in Voldemort at the final duel at which time he died. Also, it doesn't make sense for that blood to protect Voldemort -- Lily's sacrifice was a specific one which protected Harry and only Harry FROM Voldemort. Right?
Inspired Bibliophile
Psychee
Posts: 7,307
Registered: ‎04-17-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



dcsbelle wrote:
Actually, Psychee, I think the scarred baby thingy was the remainder of Voldy's soul, not the horcrux. Hermione read (in the beginning of the book) and DD told Harry (in that between world place) that horcruxes are destroyed so there is nothing to move on to an afterlife.





I had another thought on this... It seems to me that if that scabby-demon-baby thing had been Voldemort's remaining soul that he would have overheard everything that Dumbledore said and he obviously didn't, judging by what little he knew at the final duel.
Frequent Contributor
dcsbelle
Posts: 1,041
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36

My theory is that the "in between" place appears differently to everyone so where Harry saw King's Cross and DD, the maximally self-centered Voldy would only see himself. Having rejected help and advice all his life there would still be no room in him now to allow anyone in. So when they both woke up and resumed the duel Harry prevailed; Voldy had learned nothing from his experience.

Psychee wrote:
I had another thought on this... It seems to me that if that scabby-demon-baby thing had been Voldemort's remaining soul that he would have overheard everything that Dumbledore said and he obviously didn't, judging by what little he knew at the final duel.


Debbie

Hedwig is not really dead; it was all just a big misunderstanding
Contributor
Phebemarie
Posts: 14
Registered: ‎07-09-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36

When the past headmasters acknowledged Harry, Ron and Hermoine, why is Severus absent? In addition to the weeping DD, I would have enjoyed seeing a brief moment between Harry and Snape. Perhaps it's because Snape's sacrifice was more about his love for Lily rather than compassion for Harry.
Frequent Contributor
APenForYourThoughts
Posts: 394
Registered: ‎06-22-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36

First of all, you have to love Mrs. Weasley. :smileyhappy:
And Voldemort's dead!!! Harry lives!!! I was going to be fine whether Harry lived or died, and while I am slightly disappointed in JKR for conforming to the happily ever after ending, I'm still happy that Harry's alive.
I only have the epilogue left...And then Harry Potter is over forever...Luckily, I can always reread.
"A book must be the axe for the frozen sea inside us." --Kafka
Contributor
yoyoally2
Posts: 12
Registered: ‎07-30-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36

GO MRS. WEASLEY!!!

"NOT MY DAUGHTER YOU BITCH!"
Mrs. Weasley 736

they BETTER put that in the movie!!!
Contributor
yoyoally2
Posts: 12
Registered: ‎07-30-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36

I love how harry calls Voldemort Tom, he's sooo daarriingg lol
Contributor
mastkudi25
Posts: 24
Registered: ‎06-14-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



Psychee wrote:
Bently, please don't misunderstand my opinion of the Floo network. Mugglenet, Accio!Quote and the Lexicon are extremely well done, and I have relied on their work for a long time. They deserve the commendation they received from JKR.

And I do believe that their editorials are well thought out and that they try, as much as they can, to base their theories on canon. But those theories are not canon in and of themselves; those theories often include speculative guesses. Take a look at the list of editorials written in the past now and you will see that many of the conclusions they reached prior to the publication of DH turned out to be wrong. The beauty of their work is that they are very careful to distinguish between personal opinion (editorial) and canonical fact (Lexicon), and I don't think they would be very happy about anyone claiming that something is true just because someone stated that as an opinion or guess or hypothesis in an editorial.

Going back to the wand, it is my understanding that you believe that Grindelwald was never the Master of the Elder Wand because he just stole it from Gregorovitch, and had not in any other way, insofar as we know, "defeated" him. You base your belief that he was not the Master of the wand on a further belief that "stealing" is not the same as "defeat". You then suggest that Dumbledore must have defeated the real last Master (Gregorovitch or someone before him) in a duel outside of what we were given as canon and that is how he became Master of the wand. (If I have misunderstood your position, please correct me...)

But I then say that canon tells us (through the story of the Three Brothers) that the first brother lost the Mastery of the wand in this manner: "That very night another wizard crept upon the oldest brother as he lay, wine-sodden, upon his bed. The thief took the wand and, for good measure, slit the oldest brother's throat."(p.408) First he stole it as a thief and then "just for good measure" killed him.

Lovegood then says that Masters of the Wand can be easily traced through history by the fact that "the possessor of the wand must capture it from its previous owner, if he is to be truly the Master of it."(p.412) He does not use the word "defeat"; he uses the word "capture".

He then says that one of the owners, Godelot, died in his cellar after his son Hereward took the wand from him. Again, this is an example of the wand being stolen or captured by another and the Wand then giving its allegiance to the man who captured it.

Then, we have the canon evidence that Harry never fought Draco to get his wand; he simply took it (and two others he was holding) out of his hand. In other words, he "captured" it.

We also have numerous instances in the book of wizards feeling powerless and impotent when their wands are taken from them or broken. Once a wizard loses his wand he feels "defeated".

Finally, the whole idea of "unbeatable wand" is only given to us as part of a Children's Fairy Tale -- " a wand that must always win duels for its owner". (p.407) Lovegood later tells us, though, that we can't take everything written by Beedle as actual truth; that it is, after all, a story for children.

On the basis of that canonical evidence, I believe that we can take the story at face value -- that even though he just stole the wand, Grindelwald was a true Master of the Elder Wand, and when Dumbledore somehow captured it from him, in a duel, Dumbledore became the Master of it.

I don't think I've strayed one iota from canon here, have I? Have I imagined duels that were not in the text, or third party people who were defeated who were not in the text?

But I do agree with you about one very important thing -- it really would have been nice to have had this "unbeatable wand beaten" thing (and several other logic puzzles she left us with) clarified more in the text of the last book. On the other hand, if you like puzzles, then her lack of clarification about these things was a Dumbledoresque gift. I happen to like puzzles, so this was an unexpected gift to me -- a logic puzzle that I was still thinking about a week after I had completed reading the book...

Let me just add that I am "persisting" in this debate only because it is a fun mental exercise for me and you are a fun person to debate things with... thanks for that! :smileyhappy:




BRAVO Psychee! :-)
Contributor
mastkudi25
Posts: 24
Registered: ‎06-14-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



bentley wrote:


agnijay wrote:
I don't think Snape is dead. This is because there was no mention of his portrait in the headmaster's office.




Didn't he say Look at Me as his final words to Harry and then die and then Harry filled up a vial (also coming from Snape). I really thought Snape died based upon the scene in the book where he did just that.

What mention of a portrait are you referring to? Curious?




I think the "Look at me" from Snape right before he died was a way for Snape to look into Lily Potter's eyes, the love of his life's eyes, one last time before he died. Didn't JK Rowling say in every book how much Harry's eyes were exactly like his mother's? So I htink that last "look at me" was a way for Snape to look into Lily's eyes (via Harry's).
Contributor
mastkudi25
Posts: 24
Registered: ‎06-14-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



Phebemarie wrote:
When the past headmasters acknowledged Harry, Ron and Hermoine, why is Severus absent? In addition to the weeping DD, I would have enjoyed seeing a brief moment between Harry and Snape. Perhaps it's because Snape's sacrifice was more about his love for Lily rather than compassion for Harry.




Also, when Umbridge was the Headmistress appointed by the Ministry earlier, the Head's Office had "sealed" itself and refused Umbridge entry into the room. So when Snape is appointed the Headmaster by the Ministry here, why did the Head's office allow him entry? So if Snape was allowed to enter the office, then that means that the gargoyle at the entrance of the Head's room recognized Snape as the Headmaster (when it had refused to do so for Umbridge). If this is the case, then Snape's portrait SHOULD be amongst those of the previous heads in the office. What happened? Was this just such a minute detail in Rowling's eyes that she ignored to comment/write on this? Doesn't seem like her....
Inspired Bibliophile
Psychee
Posts: 7,307
Registered: ‎04-17-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



mastkudi25 wrote:


Phebemarie wrote:
When the past headmasters acknowledged Harry, Ron and Hermoine, why is Severus absent? In addition to the weeping DD, I would have enjoyed seeing a brief moment between Harry and Snape. Perhaps it's because Snape's sacrifice was more about his love for Lily rather than compassion for Harry.




Also, when Umbridge was the Headmistress appointed by the Ministry earlier, the Head's Office had "sealed" itself and refused Umbridge entry into the room. So when Snape is appointed the Headmaster by the Ministry here, why did the Head's office allow him entry? So if Snape was allowed to enter the office, then that means that the gargoyle at the entrance of the Head's room recognized Snape as the Headmaster (when it had refused to do so for Umbridge). If this is the case, then Snape's portrait SHOULD be amongst those of the previous heads in the office. What happened? Was this just such a minute detail in Rowling's eyes that she ignored to comment/write on this? Doesn't seem like her....




JKR answered this question in her recent Webchat. She said that the portrait did not appear because Snape had abandoned his post. She added, though, that she liked to think that Harry found a way later to get Snape's portrait included in the Headmaster's office..

http://www.mugglenet.com/app/news/full_story/1156
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



Psychee wrote:
Bently, please don't misunderstand my opinion of the Floo network. Mugglenet, Accio!Quote and the Lexicon are extremely well done, and I have relied on their work for a long time. They deserve the commendation they received from JKR.

And I do believe that their editorials are well thought out and that they try, as much as they can, to base their theories on canon. But those theories are not canon in and of themselves; those theories often include speculative guesses. Take a look at the list of editorials written in the past now and you will see that many of the conclusions they reached prior to the publication of DH turned out to be wrong. The beauty of their work is that they are very careful to distinguish between personal opinion (editorial) and canonical fact (Lexicon), and I don't think they would be very happy about anyone claiming that something is true just because someone stated that as an opinion or guess or hypothesis in an editorial.

Going back to the wand, it is my understanding that you believe that Grindelwald was never the Master of the Elder Wand because he just stole it from Gregorovitch, and had not in any other way, insofar as we know, "defeated" him. You base your belief that he was not the Master of the wand on a further belief that "stealing" is not the same as "defeat". You then suggest that Dumbledore must have defeated the real last Master (Gregorovitch or someone before him) in a duel outside of what we were given as canon and that is how he became Master of the wand. (If I have misunderstood your position, please correct me...)

But I then say that canon tells us (through the story of the Three Brothers) that the first brother lost the Mastery of the wand in this manner: "That very night another wizard crept upon the oldest brother as he lay, wine-sodden, upon his bed. The thief took the wand and, for good measure, slit the oldest brother's throat."(p.408) First he stole it as a thief and then "just for good measure" killed him.

Lovegood then says that Masters of the Wand can be easily traced through history by the fact that "the possessor of the wand must capture it from its previous owner, if he is to be truly the Master of it."(p.412) He does not use the word "defeat"; he uses the word "capture".

He then says that one of the owners, Godelot, died in his cellar after his son Hereward took the wand from him. Again, this is an example of the wand being stolen or captured by another and the Wand then giving its allegiance to the man who captured it.

Then, we have the canon evidence that Harry never fought Draco to get his wand; he simply took it (and two others he was holding) out of his hand. In other words, he "captured" it.

We also have numerous instances in the book of wizards feeling powerless and impotent when their wands are taken from them or broken. Once a wizard loses his wand he feels "defeated".

Finally, the whole idea of "unbeatable wand" is only given to us as part of a Children's Fairy Tale -- " a wand that must always win duels for its owner". (p.407) Lovegood later tells us, though, that we can't take everything written by Beedle as actual truth; that it is, after all, a story for children.

On the basis of that canonical evidence, I believe that we can take the story at face value -- that even though he just stole the wand, Grindelwald was a true Master of the Elder Wand, and when Dumbledore somehow captured it from him, in a duel, Dumbledore became the Master of it.

I don't think I've strayed one iota from canon here, have I? Have I imagined duels that were not in the text, or third party people who were defeated who were not in the text?

But I do agree with you about one very important thing -- it really would have been nice to have had this "unbeatable wand beaten" thing (and several other logic puzzles she left us with) clarified more in the text of the last book. On the other hand, if you like puzzles, then her lack of clarification about these things was a Dumbledoresque gift. I happen to like puzzles, so this was an unexpected gift to me -- a logic puzzle that I was still thinking about a week after I had completed reading the book...

Let me just add that I am "persisting" in this debate only because it is a fun mental exercise for me and you are a fun person to debate things with... thanks for that! :smileyhappy:




Sorry Psychee..busy elsewhere. Sorry for the delay in responding; but I have finished thinking about the book; but just happened to check back.

I have to agree that the Floo Network deserves a hand and is quite a credible site. Like I said their hypotheses which I passed on in a helpful way to one of the posters was on the Lexicon. I am glad also that you persevere. I found it odd that one of the posters (I think the one that I tried to assist with the Floo Network response...obviously thinks that there is some sort of Harry Potter type duel going on here and I hate to disappoint that person; but there is not). I think that every person should have the right to express their opinion or their version of the facts (even though we are talking about a work of fiction) and their rights to do that should be respected. I certainly respect your right to disagree with me and I assume that you feel likewise. It also doesn't mean that I agree with your hypotheses any more now than I did originally though I admire your stamina. So if I do not respond, I don't want anyone to assume that I have skulked off to lick my wounds. Au contraire..Not. I find the site very enjoyable and love the give and take and the ability for a good old fashioned debate. I know Psychee that you would agree as well.

Now getting back to the other points you raised:

I read and internally listened to your arguments and you make a good case. However, there are so many exceptions to everything that Rowling has said previously, put in the books and now discussed on a variety of tv spots and interviews that there is very little that can be nailed down by text in the books any longer. She negated and/or invented responses for all of the anomalies or inconsistencies. I personally am disappointed that this happened; but I understand that the young readers are looking for closure and see these characters as friends, etc. and as living people rather than fiction. I am still convinced that the unbeatable wand statement is not verifiable and most likely untrue. And there is still the discrepancy between capture and defeat versus the wand having some free will or artificial intelligence (like Harry's wand when he claimed that it was making decisions and fighting on its own). Rowling is brilliant, the series is brilliant and I am happy with the inconsistencies and am not losing any sleep over it. I am sticking with my consensus that there are still many unknowns and/or contrived Rowling responses after the fact. I doubt however we will see any series have the phenomenal success of HP in the future.

I agree it all is a puzzle and I loved that about the series and the book. Your energy has been quite contagious on the thread and I can see that you are a good sport despite my agnostic conclusion on the matter.

Take care,

Bentley
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



mastkudi25 wrote:


bentley wrote:


agnijay wrote:
I don't think Snape is dead. This is because there was no mention of his portrait in the headmaster's office.




Didn't he say Look at Me as his final words to Harry and then die and then Harry filled up a vial (also coming from Snape). I really thought Snape died based upon the scene in the book where he did just that.

What mention of a portrait are you referring to? Curious?




I think the "Look at me" from Snape right before he died was a way for Snape to look into Lily Potter's eyes, the love of his life's eyes, one last time before he died. Didn't JK Rowling say in every book how much Harry's eyes were exactly like his mother's? So I htink that last "look at me" was a way for Snape to look into Lily's eyes (via Harry's).




No disagreement from me. Snape died as far as I was concerned. And I agree that he wanted to look into Lily's eyes once more and Harry was the closest resemblance.

Regards,

Bentley
New User
itsaudreyy
Posts: 2
Registered: ‎08-02-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36

i actually was kind of hoping harry would finish bellatrix off to avenge sirius.
but the neville idea was a good one too.
however, when mrs. weasley called her a bitch i had the biggest smile on my face.
audrey™
New User
itsaudreyy
Posts: 2
Registered: ‎08-02-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



bentley wrote:


mastkudi25 wrote:


bentley wrote:


agnijay wrote:
I don't think Snape is dead. This is because there was no mention of his portrait in the headmaster's office.




Didn't he say Look at Me as his final words to Harry and then die and then Harry filled up a vial (also coming from Snape). I really thought Snape died based upon the scene in the book where he did just that.

What mention of a portrait are you referring to? Curious?




I think the "Look at me" from Snape right before he died was a way for Snape to look into Lily Potter's eyes, the love of his life's eyes, one last time before he died. Didn't JK Rowling say in every book how much Harry's eyes were exactly like his mother's? So I htink that last "look at me" was a way for Snape to look into Lily's eyes (via Harry's).




No disagreement from me. Snape died as far as I was concerned. And I agree that he wanted to look into Lily's eyes once more and Harry was the closest resemblance.

Regards,

Bentley




when it was revealed that snape was good, i was so happy.
throughout the series i always thought snape was bad, and to be proved wrong felt good.
and his last words, "look at me" ahhh! it was amazing.
audrey™
Author
ConnieAnnKirk
Posts: 5,472
Registered: ‎06-14-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36

This message has been moved to a more appropriate location. This helps to keep our boards organized.

ABI
Frequent Contributor
ABI
Posts: 2,577
Registered: ‎07-19-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36

[ Edited ]
I've finished the book, so i probably shouldn't be here...this is the Elder Wand chapter, right? Well, if it is, I LOVED it! I read it again the moment i finished the book. "Try for some remorse, Riddle..." That's the BEST line! I was hoping Voldy WOULD feel remorse, then we could watch him writhe in excruciating pain! And then we'd feel sorry for him, and there'd be something more to talk about...

Well, back to the Ministry of Spoilers!

Also, I loved Sev. in that chapter, "Look...at...me..." ---Heartbreaking! To want to look into Lily's green eyes...Ah, this IS the last chapter before the epilogue right? Oh, I hope so!

Message Edited by ABI on 08-08-2007 02:00 AM
"There is nothing easier than self-deceit."
"Bombing for peace is like f***ing for virginity"
"There is no such thing as death, only the absence of life."
"There is no end, unless you let it."
Frequent Contributor
dedaviswright
Posts: 135
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Harry AND Neville defeat Voldemort

When I read this chapter, I never got the impression that Harry killed Voldermort. Voldermort killed himself, by the backfiring of his own spell. Am I reading this incorrectly? I thought it was a wonderful twist to the ending. Yes, Harry and Neville did bring him down, so did Ms. Weasley (by doing away with Belletrix), but all in all, Harry mentally brought Voldermort to a voneralble state that reduced Voldys strength in his powers.
Frequent Contributor
dcsbelle
Posts: 1,041
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Harry AND Neville defeat Voldemort

Yes, you're right! Voldy died when his own AK backfired because the Elder Wand would not kill its true master, Harry.

dedaviswright wrote:
When I read this chapter, I never got the impression that Harry killed Voldermort. Voldermort killed himself, by the backfiring of his own spell. Am I reading this incorrectly? I thought it was a wonderful twist to the ending. Yes, Harry and Neville did bring him down, so did Ms. Weasley (by doing away with Belletrix), but all in all, Harry mentally brought Voldermort to a voneralble state that reduced Voldys strength in his powers.


Debbie

Hedwig is not really dead; it was all just a big misunderstanding
Frequent Contributor
HarryIsMyHomeboy
Posts: 67
Registered: ‎06-14-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Harry AND Neville defeat Voldemort

I think that this is one of my favorite instances of the series: It was by Harry's hand that Voldemort was vanquished once and for all, but Riddle was the orchestrator of his own demise. I simply love the fact that Harry defeated Tom, but did not have to resort to murder in order to do so. Riddle, whose soul was so mangled and torn, never understood magic in the way he needed, and he was so brought down by this vulnerability by Harry, whose heart (even after all that pain) remained pure. And when it came down to it, his soul also remained pure and completely intact.

It truly goes to show the differences between good and evil, Harry and Voldemort.



dedaviswright wrote:
When I read this chapter, I never got the impression that Harry killed Voldermort. Voldermort killed himself, by the backfiring of his own spell. Am I reading this incorrectly? I thought it was a wonderful twist to the ending. Yes, Harry and Neville did bring him down, so did Ms. Weasley (by doing away with Belletrix), but all in all, Harry mentally brought Voldermort to a voneralble state that reduced Voldys strength in his powers.


__________________
To read is to love a book
To read Harry Potter is to be in love with a book
Users Online
Currently online: 4 members 217 guests
Please welcome our newest community members: