On a similar vein as Matthew’s post on fictional mentors, The Torch online has an article on the best pets, familiars, and animal companions in the fantasy genre. The article, though, restricts itself to only those pets, familiars, and animals that have a real world counterpart. But two Harry Potter pets make the list. If you’d like to comment on this article, feel free to not restrict yourself to only real world animals but on any pet, familiar, or animal companion found in fantasy stories. Enjoy!
The last two words of Chapter 2 of Half-Blood Prince, “Spinner’s End,” are “fiery snake.” These were very well-chosen words by J.K. Rowling, especially given what she wrote in Deathly Hallows. The term “fiery snake” is used to describe the third and binding magical movement of the Unbreakable Vow.
Dumbledore said to Snape in “The Prince’s Tale,” “You are a braver man by far than Igor Karkaroff. You know, I sometimes think we Sort too soon…” In the book’s Epilogue, Harry called Snape “the bravest man I ever knew.” [click to continue…]
When I wrote the post, “Shades of Evil,” I’d no idea Rowling had used that exact phrase in an interview with Entertainment Weekly in 2000. Here’s the quote:
You have a choice when you’re going to introduce a very evil character. You can dress a guy up with loads of ammunition, put a black Stetson on him, and say, “Bad guy. Shoot him.” I’m writing about shades of evil. You have Voldemort, a raging psychopath, devoid of the normal human responses to other people’s suffering, and there are people like that in the world. But then you have Wormtail, who out of cowardice will stand in the shadow of the strongest person.
I found the quote in the Borders’ release, The Great Snape Debate, which I’ll be reviewing in two parts once I’m done. We can officially add a fourth shade of evil to my initial post – the evil that results from cowardice.
Update: Move along to another essay. JKR destroyed this theory a couple days ago. So much for my attempts at predicting things! Rowling’s statement doesn’t entirely annihilate the theory, since my particular version of the theory doesn’t have Snape hiding under the cloak at the house while the Potters were killed, but I’m moving on to other things for now, rather than scrambling to edit.
You’ll need to read my first shot at this to understand this second post, so make sure you read here first. This is probably really wrong. I’m just having a bit of fun, ’cause my HP work today has all been literary criticism (mythlogical archetypes), and that has been broken up by articles on the history of education.
I’m going to make an attempt at constructing an order of events for the handing off of James’ invisibility cloak that is (a) faithful to the canon (i.e., that James actually left the cloak in Dumbledore’s possession, and not a third person who picked it up on the night of the Potters’ deaths), and (b) ties significant plot points together, so as to be a “crucial” part of the plot.
[click to continue…]
Joivre on 
korg20000bc on 
Red Rocker on 
Arabella Figg on 
revgeorge on 
Loading ...
