Harry Potter - From the Beginning! (May refer to Book 7)

[Túrin Turambar]

The pain in Harry's scar had absolutely no consistent relevance. It wasn't shown to be either Quirrel or Snape related and was left vague.

In the scene in the Great Hall, Harry was looking past Quirrel’s turban at Snape – the pain came from Lord V stuck to the back of Quirrel’s head. This wasn’t an issue in the Leaky Cauldron as Lord V had not yet attached himself – he only did so after Quirrel failed to break into Gringotts (‘I needed to keep a closer eye on him’). This also explains how Quirrel was able to shake Harry’s hand when they first met.

Finally, we are told that the reason Snape hated James more than anything was because he saved his life. Now, maybe I'm missing something here, but I have no recollection of this. Perhaps Dumbledore is speaking figuratively, in that he saved Snape from being a DeathEater, but that was really Lily, not James.

[…]

I don't deny her skill in tying it up neatly, but I don't credit her with it being that clearly thought out in advance. Thats my story and I'm sticking to it.

Athrabeth’s explanation makes sense, though. Dumbeldore is not going to tell the 11-year-old Harry the real reasons why Snape hated his father. She may not have thought of S (L) L at that point, but there’s no reason to assume that she hadn’t.

[Erunáme]

the Babylon 5 episode where Sheridan and Sinclair both are "the one".

I hadn't gotten that far in B5 yet.

[Alatar]

the Babylon 5 episode where Sheridan and Sinclair both are "the one".

I hadn't gotten that far in B5 yet.

Don't worry Eru, I'm spoiler sensitive and that tells you absolutely nothing about the episode. Really. Even after you've seen it its confusing.


Lord_M, my point about the scar was that after that intial sharp pain Harry has classes with both Snape and Quirrell and the pain does not return. If it was Quirrell with Voldemort attached, (as I assume its meant to be) why doesn't he get pain in every DADA class?

Please, guys, I'm not stupid. I know that there's possible explanations for these things, I'm just telling you my gut feeling on a re-read is that JK was going with the flow a lot and tidying up loose ends after. There's nothing wrong with that. I'm not insulting the woman!

Chamber of Secrets starts well. I'm enjoying the lighter tone in these early books. Dursleys "Do I look stupid?" while fried egg dangles from his moustache still makes me laugh! Dobby's entrance is well handled but his choice of methods seems strange. Destroying the pudding gets Harry in trouble, and locked in his room, but its hardly going to stop him from returning to Hogwarts. The Burrow is brilliant, but I wonder if it was a bit much to describe it like something that grew out of a pigsty? The Burrows may be untidy, but its homey and loving. A sty makes it sound dirty.

I like the images of Knockturn Alley, though it seems a bit of a giveaway if you're caught hanging round there. Might as well stick a Pointed hood and skull mask on. Nice to meet Hermione's parents and to see them changing Muggle money. Things like this make me wonder about the world a bit. Why do Wizards or Goblins want Muggle money? So why would they be willing to change it in Gringotts? What sort of conversion rate is it? Do the Grangers end up spending thousands on Hermione's education? Which always leads me to wonder, how did they get into Diagon alley the first time, without Hagrid there to help them like he helped Harry?

Anyway, Lockhart has made an appearance, and Lucius, and Arthur and Molly Weasley. All great new characters, but Lockhart is the one I'll be glad to see the back of. Lucius is just fantastic, and of course Jason Isaacs portrays him brilliantly in the movie. I couldn't believe when I heard JK had intended to kill Arthur in OotP! Much as part of me would have loved to see the fallout of that between Harry and Ron, I'm glad she didn't.

[Crucifer]

I think Dobby was hoping that the pudding thing would get Harry expelled, because of the trace thing. The only magical person in the area, according to MOM was Harry.

[Alatar]

Ah yes! Thats a good explanation. It seemed a bit random.

[Pearly Di]

... but its like, say, the Babylon 5 episode where Sheridan and Sinclair both are "the one".

Or, as one of my friends liked to call them, Captain Cardboard One and Captain Cardboard Two. Very rude of him.

But I really liked Sheridan! I regarded him and Delenn as sort of equivalent to Aragorn/Arwen in the whole saga.

Al, I remember really liking 'Chamber of Secrets'. I've not read it since November 1999, which is when I discovered the HP thing ... just before the huge LOTR movie fandom went 'kaboom'.

Sirius certainly has an extremely dark side as well. It's one of the main reasons why I respect these books so much. Rowling doesn't dress up her characters in pure white or black, but rather creates layers that the reader can peel back in order to better understand them. In the end, it is the wonderfully complex humanness of her characters that I think resonates for me more than any other aspect of the tale, and that has come as quite a surprise.

Athrabeth, this is the main reason why I have become quite a fan of the books, at this late stage. DH simply knocked me for six.

Before that, 'Prisoner of Azkaban' was my firm favourite, which I regarded as the best-crafted story, and moving to boot.

[Erunáme]

Can we stop with the B5 spoilers please? Sorry to be a spoil sport.

[Athrabeth]

Please, guys, I'm not stupid. I know that there's possible explanations for these things, I'm just telling you my gut feeling on a re-read is that JK was going with the flow a lot and tidying up loose ends after. There's nothing wrong with that. I'm not insulting the woman!

Alatar, I don't think anyone has implied that you're stupid or that you're insulting Rowling. Your "gut feeling" is as viable as anyone else's, and it's interesting to consider. I really appreciate you starting this thread, as it's jogging my memories and allowing me to look back over the entire series (I can't commit to re-reading the books, but I'm definitely looking up/remembering some key scenes). My gut feeling is different from yours regarding Snape. I think his character was carefully and cleverly revealed over the course of the seven books, and I see no inconsistencies with the final outcome, just layers (as I said before) of complexity added to his backstory. For example, in the PoA, when Snape has Sirius cornered in the Shrieking Shack, his vitriolic rage now seems much more sensible to me because of course, he despises Sirius for betraying the Potters and causing Lily's death. At the time, it just looked to me as if Snape was obsessively hung up on an adolescent rivalry........you know, just kind of "cuckoo" (and since we're experiencing the whole story through Harry's eyes, that certainly did "fit" at that moment in the tale).

[Crucifer]

when Snape has Sirius cornered in the Shrieking Shack, his vitriolic rage now seems much more sensible to me because of course, he despises Sirius for betraying the Potters and causing Lily's death.

You know what, I never thought of that.

And I totally agree with you that Snape is like an onion.

[Alatar]

No. Ogres are like onions. Sheesh!

[Crucifer]

Doesn't mean Snape isn't too...

[Túrin Turambar]

I’m re-reading PS now, and occasionally I run into weird things I’ve never noticed before. For example – it never hit me before, but the whole Mirror of Erised episode implies that Dumbledore likes to cast dissolutionment charms over himself and stalk his students around the school at night. This is a far more disturbing revelation than anything in DH in my view.

[Crucifer]

L_M, I think it was more that he was keeping an eye on the mirror.
Or perhaps he just prowls the corridors at night, and chuckles to himself when he sees students wandering around. He took special interest in Harry, as he always has done.

[Rebecca]

I just reread DH and now want to reread the whole series. I enjoy seeing your thoughts as you reread them, Alatar. I'll try to share some of mine as I'm reading. There are so many little things that didn't have a lot of meaning that were foreshadowing and I want to discover more of them!

[Alatar]

Yes, I look forward to more of that as we progress. As I said before though, I expected to see more of that in Philosophers Stone than I found. What was there seemed to be less about foreshadowing and more vague than I expected. As others have pointed out, I may be giving JK too little credit for having this figured out in advance, but my feeling remains that much was added after the fact and backworked to fit, so to speak. I suspect that the foreshadowing will start in earnest in book 3.

I must say I was a little disappointed to find that Dumbledore's "pair of socks" comment about the Mirror of Erised wasn't more significant. It would have been lovely if that line had actually had tied forward right to book 7, as it seemed to promise when we were reminded of it at the beginning of Deathly Hallows.

[Rebecca]

Yes, I look forward to more of that as we progress. As I said before though, I expected to see more of that in Philosophers Stone than I found. What was there seemed to be less about foreshadowing and more vague than I expected. As others have pointed out, I may be giving JK too little credit for having this figured out in advance, but my feeling remains that much was added after the fact and backworked to fit, so to speak. I suspect that the foreshadowing will start in earnest in book 3.

Hmm, yeah, it's disappointing not to see more in the early books. But, then again, they are so much shorter! Most of the foreshadowing she probably would have put in was probably cut out.

I must say I was a little disappointed to find that Dumbledore's "pair of socks" comment about the Mirror of Erised wasn't more significant. It would have been lovely if that line had actually had tied forward right to book 7, as it seemed to promise when we were reminded of it at the beginning of Deathly Hallows.

I did like that she told us what he really saw...Harry did mention that he figured Dumbledore didn't really tell Harry what he really saw.

[Alatar]

Yes, but think how nice it would have been if he'd made a casual aside about a girl and two boys, long ago... or something equally enigmatic.

[Pearly Di]

I've just begun to re-read Philosopher's Stone.

Now I remember why I picked up this book in the first place, back in November 1999. The Harry Potter literary phenomenon was just beginning to gather pace, and I was intrigued by the hype.

I enjoyed the book enormously on that first reading. What kept me hooked, as an adult reader, was Rowling's dazzling imagination, deft plotting and sly wit. I was hooked and went on to read CoS and PoA in quick succession.

Now, I need to keep an eye out on that foreshadowing ...

[Túrin Turambar]

Re-reading PoA, a few things occurred to me.

1. This book certainly sees some great quidditch – probably the best throughout the whole series. What I’ve never gotten over, though, is the way that the players are allowed to buy and use different brooms. It can hardly be much of a sport, especially on a school leave, if one team can outclass another simply with more money.

2. From the perspective of Book 7, it’s interesting to see Trelawney constantly predicting Harry’s death. That, combined with the centaurs in Book 1, makes it start to look like the end of DH has been foreshadowed from the start.

3. I can understand that JKR doesn’t what to overload her readers with too much in one book, but the whole Hogsmead thing sure came out of nowhere. Azkaban was mentioned in Book 2, but it seems like Harry only discovered Hogsmead for the first time in Book 3. Given that higher years would have been visiting it in Book 1 and 2, it seems odd that he’d never heard of it. Probably the biggest ‘why hasn’t this come up before?’ moment in the series for me.

4. After reading Book 4, I have to wonder how Harry intended to kill Sirius in the Shrieking Shack. The AK curse has not yet been mentioned, but it’d be impossible for him to do it at 13 anyway. On the other hand, we haven’t heard of any other killing curses. Maybe there’s some minor ones – what did Molly use to kill Bellatrix in Book 7?

5. It’s interesting to see the tale ‘grow in the telling’ as Tolkien puts it. What starts out as ‘isn’t it funny that there’s a secret community of wizards living among us?’ starts to turn into something far deeper and more epic.

6. Most readers (myself included) seem to see a leap in quality in the series from CoS to PoA. While PoA is better, I’m wondering whether CoS isn’t maligned a little because of the film. I hadn’t read the book in years when I picked it up this week – my last re-read of the series began at PoA. I enjoyed it – it was a definite improvement over PS. PoA is certainly better, but I think I’m starting to see a bit more of a progression in JKR’s writing ability rather than a step up.

[Crucifer]

It can hardly be much of a sport, especially on a school leave, if one team can outclass another simply with more money.

Well, Slytherin have the second best brooms in the world. The only one better is Harrys firebolt, and the Gryffindor chasers do a pretty good job on what I believe are shooting stars or something equally out of date.

I think PS could be a stand alone book, easily. There was an extremely long wait between PS and CoS. If it had left me hanging, I would have gone mad.