A little late, but finally finished HP6.
Jul. 23rd, 2005 12:11 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shirenomadOkay, I'm in the "Snape didn't want to do it" crowd. Back in Chapter 2, I think he was probing Bella and Cissy for information -- he didn't actually have a clue what the plan was; notice he didn't even mention Draco's name until Cissy did -- and since he nonetheless wanted to protect his student, he was glad to take the Oath if it meant he could get more details. Then the "and complete the task if Draco fails" got thrown in, and Snape hesitates (despite claiming that Voldemort was going to give him the task anyway), but he's in too deep now so he has to accept. Remember, if my theory's correct, he didn't actually know what the mission even was at this point, so he may have thought at the time that there was some way to complete it without doing any permanent damage.
Thanks to a certain spoiler, I had a good idea by the end of the chapter just what the mission was, and I just went "Oh, HELL no..." When I heard Unbreakable Oaths could be broken (it just killed you in the process), I was hoping Snape would choose to die rather than kill Dumbledore (and then someone else would take the big D down), but no dice. But I like the theory that Dumbledore's sudden "please," after his total lack of fear in the face of four Death Eaters, was giving Snape permission to do the deed, rather than die pointlessly from Oath-breaking just to let one of the Death Eaters finish off Dumbledore (plus probably Draco) anyway.
Then again, Dumbledore might have known Snape was a traitor, just like he knew Draco was up to no good, and simply chose to ignore them both to buy them time to change their mind. Then the "please" was giving Snape one last chance not to do it (or at least not in front of Harry).
Either way, the following quote proved prophetic: "...as I have already proven to you, I make mistakes like the next man. In fact, being -- forgive me -- rather cleverer than most men, my mistakes tend to be correspondingly huger." No matter whose side Snape is on, Dumbledore probably could have avoided being cornered if he hadn't been weakened by drinking all that slop, for what turned out to be nothing at all (well, a hint where the real locket was, but the point stands). On the other hand, it's a FAR huger mistake if Snape is back with the Death Eaters for real.
I'm keeping my options open; it would be very mean of JK Rowling to make us think Snape was evil for Book 1, bitter but okay for Books 2-5, and then spin around to reveal that he was evil after all in Book 6... and being mean about these sorts of things is par for the course. Then again, it would be equally mean to leave us cursing his name during the long gap between books, only to make him okay again in Book 7.
Anyway, enough on that subject! On to the other stuff!
Like my brother, I lean toward Harry/Luna, but I'm fine with Harry/Ginny as well. I must admit I thought they were cute as early as Book 2, and it gives him a chance to join the Weasley clan officially (assuming both of them survive Book 7 and nothing else happens to make the hiatus permanent), when they've already been his home away from home for so long. Plus, yum, redheads. (But with Cho I was all "Yum, Chinese" and that didn't turn out so well, so what do I know?)
As for Ron/Hermione, seems to finally be entering full swing and about time (and not in a cutesy fashion, thankfully), though I think the Lavender business on the way there was unnecessary and overkill.
While hunting through various other commentaries on the web, I found this. Yeesh, some people just have too much time on their hands. I mean, Angelina/Montague? Marcus Flint/Daphne Greengrass? Who cares?
Where was Neville? After the last book, I need my Neville fix! Neville rocks, dammit!
After all this time, turns out the DADA position really is cursed. Explains why Fake Moody said from the start he'd only be hanging around for a year; he knew darn well what would happen if he stuck around and he didn't want to take any chances by even pretending he'd stay longer. Also explains why Dumbledore never gave Snape the position, which makes me wonder why he did this year... it certainly suggests that he knew from the start that they both knew Snape would be bugging out by the end of the year.
I smell War on Terror parallels, but maybe that's just due to the recent London bombings.
So... no Hogwarts next year? Well, Fred and George have already established that you can be pretty darn successful without a degree, but I think Harry will have to bank on his fame as much as anything. Maybe he can write that biography they were talking about earlier. (Again, assuming he lives through Book 7.) And as someone else brought up, it'll give us a chance to see the rest of the wizarding world. On the other hand, it means that outside the Big Three, we'll see very little of the student body. Unless Hogwarts really does close altogether (which I could see McGonagall doing; she's not as gutsy as Dumbledore), which will free up a few more to tag along stubbornly.
You'll notice I keep hitting the "lives through Book 7" point. I would not at all be surprised if Harry sacrifices himself to take down Voldemort, with or without the "Harry is a Horcrux" theory being true. I would also not be surprised if Snape sacrifices himself to protect Harry, finally proving himself once and for all. In fact, I find the latter so likely as to be unavoidable, unless Snape really is on the side of bad again. But then again, Rowling is anything but predictable.
And finally, something that I don't think has been established in canon. It's clear from Phineas that the headmaster portraits retain the personality of who they depict, but it's not clear how much memory they keep, if any. McGonagall's going to be pumping the new Dumbledore painting for advice as much as possible over the next few days (week, months) -- in fact, I predict one of the first two or three chapters of Book 7 will be devoted to it -- but how good the advice is, especially whether there's anything useful for Harry to know, will depend on whether the portrait can speak for just what Dumbledore's knowledge and motivations were. Especially a) where the remaining Horcruxes are, and b) why he trusted Snape so absolutely. Then again, if it's absolutely useless on the subject, there's still the Pensieve.
Two years to wait... grr...
Thanks to a certain spoiler, I had a good idea by the end of the chapter just what the mission was, and I just went "Oh, HELL no..." When I heard Unbreakable Oaths could be broken (it just killed you in the process), I was hoping Snape would choose to die rather than kill Dumbledore (and then someone else would take the big D down), but no dice. But I like the theory that Dumbledore's sudden "please," after his total lack of fear in the face of four Death Eaters, was giving Snape permission to do the deed, rather than die pointlessly from Oath-breaking just to let one of the Death Eaters finish off Dumbledore (plus probably Draco) anyway.
Then again, Dumbledore might have known Snape was a traitor, just like he knew Draco was up to no good, and simply chose to ignore them both to buy them time to change their mind. Then the "please" was giving Snape one last chance not to do it (or at least not in front of Harry).
Either way, the following quote proved prophetic: "...as I have already proven to you, I make mistakes like the next man. In fact, being -- forgive me -- rather cleverer than most men, my mistakes tend to be correspondingly huger." No matter whose side Snape is on, Dumbledore probably could have avoided being cornered if he hadn't been weakened by drinking all that slop, for what turned out to be nothing at all (well, a hint where the real locket was, but the point stands). On the other hand, it's a FAR huger mistake if Snape is back with the Death Eaters for real.
I'm keeping my options open; it would be very mean of JK Rowling to make us think Snape was evil for Book 1, bitter but okay for Books 2-5, and then spin around to reveal that he was evil after all in Book 6... and being mean about these sorts of things is par for the course. Then again, it would be equally mean to leave us cursing his name during the long gap between books, only to make him okay again in Book 7.
Anyway, enough on that subject! On to the other stuff!
Like my brother, I lean toward Harry/Luna, but I'm fine with Harry/Ginny as well. I must admit I thought they were cute as early as Book 2, and it gives him a chance to join the Weasley clan officially (assuming both of them survive Book 7 and nothing else happens to make the hiatus permanent), when they've already been his home away from home for so long. Plus, yum, redheads. (But with Cho I was all "Yum, Chinese" and that didn't turn out so well, so what do I know?)
As for Ron/Hermione, seems to finally be entering full swing and about time (and not in a cutesy fashion, thankfully), though I think the Lavender business on the way there was unnecessary and overkill.
While hunting through various other commentaries on the web, I found this. Yeesh, some people just have too much time on their hands. I mean, Angelina/Montague? Marcus Flint/Daphne Greengrass? Who cares?
Where was Neville? After the last book, I need my Neville fix! Neville rocks, dammit!
After all this time, turns out the DADA position really is cursed. Explains why Fake Moody said from the start he'd only be hanging around for a year; he knew darn well what would happen if he stuck around and he didn't want to take any chances by even pretending he'd stay longer. Also explains why Dumbledore never gave Snape the position, which makes me wonder why he did this year... it certainly suggests that he knew from the start that they both knew Snape would be bugging out by the end of the year.
I smell War on Terror parallels, but maybe that's just due to the recent London bombings.
So... no Hogwarts next year? Well, Fred and George have already established that you can be pretty darn successful without a degree, but I think Harry will have to bank on his fame as much as anything. Maybe he can write that biography they were talking about earlier. (Again, assuming he lives through Book 7.) And as someone else brought up, it'll give us a chance to see the rest of the wizarding world. On the other hand, it means that outside the Big Three, we'll see very little of the student body. Unless Hogwarts really does close altogether (which I could see McGonagall doing; she's not as gutsy as Dumbledore), which will free up a few more to tag along stubbornly.
You'll notice I keep hitting the "lives through Book 7" point. I would not at all be surprised if Harry sacrifices himself to take down Voldemort, with or without the "Harry is a Horcrux" theory being true. I would also not be surprised if Snape sacrifices himself to protect Harry, finally proving himself once and for all. In fact, I find the latter so likely as to be unavoidable, unless Snape really is on the side of bad again. But then again, Rowling is anything but predictable.
And finally, something that I don't think has been established in canon. It's clear from Phineas that the headmaster portraits retain the personality of who they depict, but it's not clear how much memory they keep, if any. McGonagall's going to be pumping the new Dumbledore painting for advice as much as possible over the next few days (week, months) -- in fact, I predict one of the first two or three chapters of Book 7 will be devoted to it -- but how good the advice is, especially whether there's anything useful for Harry to know, will depend on whether the portrait can speak for just what Dumbledore's knowledge and motivations were. Especially a) where the remaining Horcruxes are, and b) why he trusted Snape so absolutely. Then again, if it's absolutely useless on the subject, there's still the Pensieve.
Two years to wait... grr...
