Thoughts About Harry Potter & The Half Blood Prince (SPOILERS)

[Alia]

Hesta, do you think DD is still alive, or will come back?

And I agree, I think DD gave himself up, in appearance to help Snape and Harry...

 

[Jaxom_Ruatha]

Well, I have a couple of things to say. For starters I wasn't under the impression Snape loved Lilly either, even when she was defending her didn't he call her a dirty mudblood or something? Also RAB could just as easily be Sirius' brother Regulus as Amilia Bones, and I believe it was Regulas for two reasons. 1. It also mentioned earlier in the book that he only lasted a year after leaving the Death Eaters and secondly, someone reminded me that Harry found a locket in some drawer while staying in the Black Manor (You know No. 5 Grimmauld place) in the fifth book?

Personally, I wasn't satisifed with Dumbledores death either, it just seemed too easy. But I don't see how he could come back without a horcrux and I don't think he is the kind of person who could kill someone else unless it were in self-defense. I was wondering, since Dumbledore died protecing Harry much like his mother did, would that make Harry even more powerful?

My personal favorite book was the fourth (I can't wait for the movie to come out!) I don't think the fifth and this last one were very good. They just didn't seem as creative, re-using many of the same spells etc. A lot less detail that make books so good, someone I talked to about it mentioned that it seemed as though the books being made into movies might be effecting her writing because indeed the last book seems almost script ready to be made into a movie, perhaps it would have been best if they had made the movies after she had finished writing like they did with The Lord of the Rings. But she has changed a lot from writing her first book as a single struggling mom, to now being one of the richest women in England with a new husband and having just had her third child. It seems as though she has lost her ambition to write great Harry Potter stories, there has to be a lot less pressure now knowing that she has a rabid following of devoted fans that will love her books basically no matter what she does. Sorry, I'll stop before I start author bashing, by the way did anyone notice all the spelling errors in the book? I hope I wasn't the only one


This last book is almost script ready

 

[Alexa]

I personally still have some doubts regarding DD's death. He was the wizard Voldermort feared most and Snape killed him so easily ? Come on. He was playing with Draco and didn't fight with Snape ? And the fact he hides and immobilizes Harry in the same room puzzles me.

For a story, Rowlings gave us a story.

 

[Alia]

And the fact he hides and immobilizes Harry in the same room puzzles me.

Why do you think DD immobilizes Harry? Why not let him run down and get Snape? What was the purpose of keeping him there? No one was hurt but one death eater...

 

[Princess Ivy]

Snape offers the most questions. Is his malice toward Harry purely because he was bullied so badly by James?

yes, the killing scene and the escape, seem very forced. i'm not a snape fan (although i love rickmans portrayal), but refusing to go for potter, just seemed so easy.
I'm not even going to speculate on who RAB is. but my biggest question is whether or not that horrux is destroyed. to destroy one took dumbledores hand, and we know he is the greatest wizard etc...

 

[LadyFel]

Why do you think DD immobilizes Harry? Why not let him run down and get Snape? What was the purpose of keeping him there? No one was hurt but one death eater...

I think it pretty much ties in with the rest of DD's behaviour with Harry in the previous books - he doesn't want Harry to be seen, but he wants him to see, learn and understand something from what he witnesses...Alas, the plans of mice, men and Dumbledore don't always work out that way...

The thing that stuck in my head was that Harry is now feeling a sort of kinship with Draco, who is in danger of losing his parents if he doesn't follow Voldemort's orders...And he had to see that Draco, for all his bravado and threats of the last five years, is really just a scared teenager who's seriously rethinking his actions in that last confrontation with DD...

I think part of the reason that Snape is the one to kill DD is that Draco has to stay 'innocent' in the sense that while he's done some nasty stuff, he still hasn't taken a life, while Snape at the same time has nothing to lose by killing DD...

One thing that keeps going through my head about J.K. Rowling though, same as with GRRM...They're both pretty active on the Internet, and I can just see them lurking on various boards, reading all the speculation and then doing something completely different to what they had planned just because someone may have hit too close to the mark So I'm gonna shut up writing now

 

[mzarynn]

I read the end of the book in total state of denial. I just couldn't believe that Dumbledore had really died. I'm with those who think his death was a sham to get Snape on the inside. That's why Snape had to "kill" him instead of Draco or another death eater. He pushed Draco aside right away, no hesitation. I'm still holding out for Dumbledore's return in the next book.

 

[LadyFel]

Oh, I don't really think his death was a sham...just the situation that led up to it...

But again...The way people's minds work, Rowling could well surprise me...

 

[A1ien]

I think R. A. B. is definitely Regulus Black. He was mentioned in Order of the Pheonix and I believe in Half Blood Prince and there was no real reason unless this is true. Also, when they were clearing out 12 Grimmauld Place they found a locket. Conicidence? I dont think so. I think Kreacher has it hoarded somewhere.

I also dont think DD is dead. I think that he was actually pleading for Snape to "kill" him. And I think the pheonix is significant. Remember his patronus is a pheonix as well? It's completely possible that when he fell to the ground he never actually got there, only a copy of him (Polyjuice potion, or the like). I'm still not sure about Snape. On the one hand, he had to enter into the Unbreakable vow to prove he was a Deatheater. On the other, Dumbledore trusted him implicitly. But also, Dumbledore has been wrong before about who he trusts.

Oh and the Tonks thing, I thought she was in love with Sirius? and that was why she was so upset, because he died. That was why her patronus looked like a big dog as well. (I know they were cousins but they were both from pure blood families with long traditions of intermarriage)

Draco is almost certain to come over to the good side I think. It makes sense.

The scar-horcrux theory does make sense as well. although, the main problem with it is that all along we were sure that voldemort was trying to kill harry because he was his enemy. and why would voldemort reduce himself to the satate he was in afterwards when he was at the height of his power?

Sorry about the length of this post, I was just trying to fit everything in!

 

[Adasunshine]

Bit late on this I know, new to site...

Anyway, the horcrux scar thing, totally didn't click onto that theory whilst reading but it makes sense. Maybe it's why Voldemort is so reluctant to have anyone else kill Harry? Perhaps he knows of a way to remove the horcrux and regain the power he lost when trying to kill Harry, if Harry's scar is a horcrux and a few have already been destroyed then he will definitely be instructing people to leave Harry for him.

I completely believe their fates are tied and the prophecy itself (did anyone remember this?) says pretty much the same thing, "one cannot live while the other exists" or something like that. I think even if Harry does survive the series, he will lose something by killing Voldemort.

As for RAB, I hate to speculate on these things but just as the R could be a prefix for Amelia Bones, it could also be a prefix for Dumbledore, or something to make others think it's him. It ties in with the theory as to why he took Harry to the cave in the first place.

The only thing I've never quite understood about this whole series is how comes Dumbledore knows so much about Voldemort's movements and yet has done nothing to prevent any of this happening? There is some sort of link between those two also methinks. The fact alone that Fawkes' feathers are the feathers used for Harry & Voldemort's wands is suspect enough, tie into that his implicit trust in Snape and reluctance to make a move on Voldemort... Well it's something to think on anyway.

I'm not saying Dumbledore is bad persay, just a little suspect. He knew loads more than he was letting on, always. Also, whilst I'm rambling, why did he let Harry go through each of the 5 confrontations with Voldemort when it was implied all along he knew exactly what was going on? Why, when he confronted Voldemort himself at the Ministry didn't he just finish him off? Why, when he was teacher to Tom Riddle, hiding a basilisk did he let Hagrid take the blame? All little things that occur to me when I'm off in fantasy land.

Perhaps I'm just a bit too suspiscious of anyone and everyone.

xx

 

[Allanon]

just because he knows whats going on or whats probably going to happen it doesn't mean he's allowed to change it. that would be wrong of him. he knows the fight is between harry and voldemort and has to let it happen. if harry dies then he wasnt the one to beat evil and fate will have taken the right path. i dont think he can interfere with that.

 

[Adasunshine]

I wasn't debating whether or not he's allowed to change it, my question is why didn't he do anything with any of the information he had?

It makes no odds who the 'fight is between' or whether or not he 'has to let it happen'. It's supposed to be good vs evil, DD's supposed to be good, Voldemort bad.

Any prophecy/foretelling is there to be interfered with, if it's a true telling, the end result will be the same, now matter how it's reached.

I was just throwing a few thoughts out there for discussion is all, I know DD is revered as some sort of God on HP sites but it doesn't mean others can't suspect him of being a little bad and a little conspiracy can be fun.

xx

 

[Alia]

I was just throwing a few thoughts out there for discussion is all, I know DD is revered as some sort of God on HP sites but it doesn't mean others can't suspect him of being a little bad and a little conspiracy can be fun.

Any thought is a good thought. We are still very much in the dark when it comes to HP.

It makes no odds who the 'fight is between' or whether or not he 'has to let it happen'. It's supposed to be good vs evil, DD's supposed to be good, Voldemort bad.

I wouldn't say that it's that clear cut. And I agree with Allanon on the subject. Harry is the one who has to bring V down.

 

[Adasunshine]

Hello Alia!

Nice to see the Potter threads being discussed again!

The fact that we are so kept in the dark where HP's concerned is why it does generate so many opinions and conspiracy's - I bet JKR's having a hoot reading these sites!!

As for DD and it not being as clear cut as that, I think sometimes it is and I'm not sure that Harry is necessarily the one to bring Voldemort down atall, I just think their fates are too intertwined in the books for anyone to be able to think otherwise and I think JKR's done an astounding job on these books - children's or not - where this is concerned!

I don't know why I suspect DD, I just can't seem to shake it off, if it helps anyone any, I've felt this way about him since the first book but like I said, I am prone to a suspiscious nature! It's just his constant inability to warn Harry or help Harry. Like in Chamber of Secrets, he knew what was going to happen and prepared Fawkes to help Harry (or so I believe), but yet, why didn't he warn Harry of who he'd be facing in the first place, especially as he knew of the Chamber of Secrets, the monster within and who the heir to Slytherin was!

Onto another little gripe of mine...

The Marauders Map in Azkaban, why didn't the Weasley twins see Peter Pettigrews name next to Scabbers, it was only one of the most infamous murders to happen to the wizarding world, surely they would have seen it or noticed it at some point or another? Not saying the Weasley's are bad in any way, love the Weasley's!

BTW, has anyone noticed the Nazi theme in these books or is it just me?

xx

 

[Alia]

I don't know why I suspect DD, I just can't seem to shake it off, if it helps anyone any, I've felt this way about him since the first book but like I said, I am prone to a suspiscious nature! It's just his constant inability to warn Harry or help Harry. Like in Chamber of Secrets, he knew what was going to happen and prepared Fawkes to help Harry (or so I believe), but yet, why didn't he warn Harry of who he'd be facing in the first place, especially as he knew of the Chamber of Secrets, the monster within and who the heir to Slytherin was!

I can only speculate as to the reasons why. One would be for Harry to grow and learn. I've noticed that people seem to forget that part of V is in Harry too. Harry is a much stronger wizard then his friends, hence the broomstick lesson, the wands, the stag (I forget the name, sorry.) All signs that Harry is growing and learning and is stronger than his friends and some of those even older than him. DD will try to push those strenghts to their limits making the boy improve and better himself. Because Harry is the only one who can match and bring down V, he has some of V in him. How I'm not sure.

The Marauders Map in Azkaban, why didn't the Weasley twins see Peter Pettigrews name next to Scabbers, it was only one of the most infamous murders to happen to the wizarding world, surely they would have seen it or noticed it at some point or another? Not saying the Weasley's are bad in any way, love the Weasley's!

Minor point in the story. Thousands of reasons can explain this... Not looking for Peter Pettigrew so overlooked it. They were looking for teachers, not dead people that aren't really dead. Peter wasn't around in the general area that they were looking. Besides all that, what fun would it be if the twins discovered Peter and not Harry. Again... minor point in the story.

Hello Alia!

Nice to see the Potter threads being discussed again!

Hello Adasunshine!

I agree, it's been awhile since this thread has been dicussed. Glad to see some people are still alive and thinking of Harry with different points of view.

 

[hermi-nomi]

Adasunshine wrote

The Marauders Map in Azkaban, why didn't the Weasley twins see Peter Pettigrews name next to Scabbers,

The reason I would put forward for this oversight is merely that while Pettigrew lived with the Weasleys he was a rat. As a rat he was scabbers and nver once did he become Pettigrew the man, so Pettigrew the man wouldn't show up on the map.

 

[Adasunshine]

Don't mean to nitpick but he was a rat when he was spotted by Harry on Marauders. Am more inclined to go with one of Alia's oversight theories.

xx

 

[Thadlerian]

BTW, has anyone noticed the Nazi theme in these books or is it just me?

If you're referring to the deatheater/mudblood thing, I think you're right. There's a certain similarity to elements from Nazi ideology.

I don't know if Rowling intends to allegorize here. But if she does, the straight-forward unsubtlety makes it a rather unconvincing statement. Everyone's seen it before so many times I can hardly imagine it having any influence on the mind of the reader.

 

[Adasunshine]

Also, the fact that Voldemort is supposedly half-blood himself. Hitler was rumoured to be half Jewish and completely struck out against the Jewish community just as Voldemort strikes out against anyone who isn't pure blood.

I'm sure there are other comparisons to be made but for the life of me cannot call them to mind right now.

I don't imagine it influences the reader atall, it was just an observation and wondered if anyone else had spotted it.

Thanks!

xx

 

[hypocriticHarkonnen]

am I the only one who has the theory that Harry is the last Horcrux, hence the need for his demise? heh.