[Sca-cooks] Nicholas Flamel

[Sue Clemenger]

Hmmmmm....
Okay, so I'll give you logic points on this one, although I still think 
there's more to Hagrid.
RE: struggle between Harry and He-who-must-not-be-named....I saw in an 
interview an interesting tidbit.  JK was saying (in reference to the 
first encounter that got Harry the scar) that what we should be asking 
(IIRC), was not why did Harry live, but why didn't HWMNBN *die?*
Say...do we know for sure that HeWho....isn't a half-blood himself? It 
seems sometimes like the worst racists and bigots can be those who are 
the thing they hate....
ISTR, as well, that JK's said it wasn't Harry who was the prince of the 
title.  Although I wonder, too, at all that money, especially since his 
parents died relatively young, and didn't have a reputation for a 
substantial lifestyle, so to speak.  I'd imagine, at the very least, 
that his aunt would have been aware of something if the money came from 
his mom's side of the family in some way, so my bet is on Dad, who 
definitely seemed to have that "golden-boy" 
negligently-rich-and-talented thing down pretty good in those memories 
of Snapes'.
--maire, who's not aware enough yet to think of OFC, although Pain 
Perdue *would* be tasty for breakfast....hmmm.....

Laura C. Minnick wrote:

> Erm, no, I don't think so. I think that Dumbledore A) wants to protect 
> Hagrid- after all, a fair part of books 4 and 5 dealt with the 
> discrimination Hagrid faced as half-giant. And I also think there's more 
> to the Hagrid/Tom story too. And there's something about the way 
> Dumbledore says that he would trust Hagrid "with my life" that bothers 
> me. I do hope that it doesn't figure into an end for Dumbledore!
> 
> As to Godric, well, there's a lost of things that feed into my theory, 
> so I'll try to tease them out.
> 
> Joanne said recently that the storyline for book 6 had tried to come out 
> in book 2, but she couldn't let it because it would have messed up the 
> main plot of CoS, basically by hijacking it. She said she pulled it back 
> off and set it aside, but that there were thin remnants of it left. So I 
> re-read CoS with an eye towards possible undeveloped plots. And what was 
> the one that made the most sense to me (especially since I read that 
> they'd kept the inner Chamber sets from film 2!) was the story of the 
> four Founders- Godric Gryffindor, Rowena Ravenclaw, Helga Hufflepuff, 
> and Salazar Slytherin. You may remember that Professor Binns (not dear 
> Minerva, as in the movie)  explains that the rift began when Slytherin 
> wanted to be more selective about admissions, and that it was an 
> argument between Gryffindor and Slytherin that initiated Slytherin's 
> departure. Slytherin of course left a nasty secret behind in the basement.
> 
> Harry has three encounters with the Sorting Hat in PS and CoS- a Hat 
> which had been Godric's, that he enchanted and left to serve the school. 
> Harry first meets the Hat at his Sorting, and the Hat offers the choice 
> of Slytherin- but when Harry rejects that (was that a test?), the Hat 
> puts him into Gryffindor.
> 
> Harry next meets the Hat when he is sent to Dumbledore's office, and 
> Harry asks if he's been put into the wrong house. That Hat says that he 
> _would_ have done well in Slytherin. Note that he did not say that Harry 
> _should_ have been in Slytherin, or that it was wrong to be in 
> Gryffindor. He _could_ have- if he'd _wanted to_. Which oddly reminds me 
> of something in the movies that wasn't in the book (or at least not 
> where it is), at the end, when Voldemort tells Harry that there is no 
> right and wrong, only power, and those too weak to seek it. So there we 
> are with an interesting balance, where it was an act of will for Harry 
> to say no to Slytherin and what it represented, while Voldemort says 
> that was weakness, not to seek it. (How very like the power-hungry, 
> ambitious Slytherin!)
> 
> Then, when Harry is in the Chamber, and has defiantly told Tom off for 
> dissing Dumbledore, Fawkes shows up, with the Hat. An odd thing for a 
> bird to bring, and only when it is really needed does the sword appear.
> 
> Whose sword? Godric's.
> Whose Hat? Godric's.
> To fight what? The Basilisk.
> Whose Basilisk? Salazar's.
> 
> Dumbledore/Fawkes could have brought any measure of things, objects, 
> etc, to help Harry. But it came with that particular payload- Godric's 
> Hat and sword. Godric, defender of mixed blood, again battles Salazar- 
> in the form of Tom Riddle, Heir of Slytherin, and Harry Potter, 
> apparently close kin if not the actual Heir of Gryffindor.
> 
> The Sorting Hat in book 5 gives dire warnings against internal divisions 
> with a little more light on the initial quarrels, and I have given this 
> a great deal of thought in the past few months. It occurred to me that 
> if Slytherin's admission requirements had prevailed, Harry, and indeed 
> Lily, would never have been admitted. Ironically, neither would Tom 
> Riddle. :-/)
> 
> So here we are, Voldemort, Heir of Slytherin, who hates muggles and 
> mudbloods and halfbloods alike, wants little more than to obliterate the 
> half-blooded Harry (and he could have done it in the graveyard, too, had 
> he not succumbed to the movie villain's need to show off in front of his 
> cronies by gloating and telling his long, twisted tale instead of just 
> killing swiftly. *sigh* Villains...). And Harry just wants to stay 
> alive, yet to do the Right Thing (TM), whatever the cost to himself.
> 
> What is the titanic struggle between Voldemort and Harry is an extension 
> of the tensions of the past? What if part of Slytherin's motivation to 
> exclude mixed blood was a desire to exclude Gryffindor? What if 
> Gyffindor was himself a half-blood? Seems that half-bloods of all types 
> figure rather importantly in this story, yes?
> 
> As to the 'prince' part, that's easily enough accounted for (a sword 
> like that, not to mention the money for the school, a 'hollow' named 
> after you, and anyone ever wondered about all of Harry's gold?- points 
> to something like gentle breeding, I'd think). The real question is, 
> which parent was the frog?
>