Shadows and Secrets

That's me, peeking through the doors of the Skull and Bones building on campus. Isn't it a freaky picture? The freakiest part is that there was light coming from under the door and when I put my eye to the crack of the doors I could see the inside was lighted (but I couldn't see anything else). Molt has a pizza, you know, just in case the door opens and we need an excuse.

Speaking of secret societies and freakiness, it's high time I blogged again about our dear Harry Potter. Unfortunately, Molt and I will be hermetically sealed and locked up in German School for the next 7 weeks, so we will miss the release of the last book (we aren't allowed to read, speak, or think anything but German). So, before we go into German lockdown, I have to give my predictions. And pray that I don't hear any spoilers before I get to read Deathly Hallows in August.

Here we go:

RAB is: Regulus A (Aberforth?) Black - mentioned several times in Half-Blood Prince as a plant for the next book. Underestimated by Sirius (who thought he was an idiot), known defector from the Death Eaters.

Horcrux #3 (the locket) is: the locket found by Harry, Hermione, and the Weasleys while cleaning out Grimmauld place in Order of the Phoenix. Thus, it is either 1) with Kreacher, who was stealing things "magpielike" from the refuse pile or 2) with Mundungus Fletcher, who we know has been stealing valuables from Grimmauld place (why include this bit of information in HBP if it is totally irrevelant?).

So, Harry, Ron, Hermione will probably be involved in some interrogation of Kreacher and Mundungus, as well as returning to Grimmauld Place (now Harry's, conveniently). Maybe check out that interesting family tree of the Black family again...Also, did Kreacher accompany RAB to hide the locket in the cave? He could've ridden on the boat with Regulus, since he isn't a full wizard.

Horcrux #4 (the Hufflepuff cup) is: connected to Zacharias Smith, whose name has a startling resemblance to Hepzibah Smith - use of rare Hebrew names and shared last name. Zacharias is probably descended from Hufflepuff...and maybe we'll learn more about the cup from him. Also, an adventure to the Hufflepuff countryside may be necessary. At the beginning of HBP, we hear of Death Eaters causing the collapse of Brockdale Bridge - in antiquated English brock=badger and dale=valley. Remember the Sorting Hat song: "Sweet Hufflepuff from valley broad."

Ollivander will figure in somehow - we have more to hear from the kidnapped wandmaker, maker of both Harry's and Voldemort's wands. Perhaps Voldemort is going to have a new, better wand - one that won't get all funny when it encounters Harry's.

Is Harry going to go, Aeneas-like, into the realm of the dead? There certainly is a growing population of dead people he could visit! Does "Deathly Hallows" hint at this? I think Rowling has said that we'll find out why some people are ghosts and some are properly dead...Maybe a visit with the truly dead will give us this information. And don't forget that two-way mirror from Sirius!

Lilly will definitely be back in the picture - long-neglected parent figure, mentioned again and again but only in a shallow way ("you have her eyes," "she was a dab-hand at potions") while Harry's father and his gang have been the prominent ones. Of course, this leads us to the big one:

SNAPE. I think I have done all the theorizing on Snape that I can. I think he's on the side of good, but still a nasty piece of business. Falling in love with a girl you hate, then losing her to your arch-enemy and then mistakenly KILLING her and then teaching her son who worships his father, your arch-enemy, can make you very grouchy. I'm guessing he will die, somehow redeemed and justified. And Harry will know all the sordid past.

I think Snape's goodness/evilness is more interesting than whether Harry dies or not, but I'll venture a tentative guess: I think he will live. He was and is and will be "The Boy Who Lived."

Now off to Deutschland!

Snape and Miscellany

First the Miscellany: Angelina has been cast as Grendel's mother in an upcoming Beowulf film. At first I found this highly appropriate and funny. However, I later read a short description of her role on Rotten Tomatoes: "Jolie will play the queen of darkness, who tempts the Viking as he makes his way in the quest to become king." Ummmm, yeah: "She grasped out for him with grisly claws,/ and the warrior seized;/ . . .Then bore this brine-wolf, when bottom she touched,/ the lord of rings to the lair she haunted/ whiles vainly he strove, though his valor held, weapon to wield against wondrous monsters/ that sore beset him." Sounds verrry seductive. And Beowulf never had ambitions to be king nor was he a Viking, but whatever.

On to Snape. I will do the magic spoiler thing now, so highlight the text to read it. So, with Snape I'm of two minds. One is that JKR is telling the story straight and she has made it obvious that Snape is evil, once and for all. There will be no more twists and turns, just more of the same. This is JKR re: Snape in an interview:

MA: OK, big big big book six question. Is Snape evil?
JKR: [Almost laughing] Well, you've read the book, what do you think?
ES: She's trying to make you say it categorically.
MA: Well, there are conspiracy theorists, and there are people who will claim -
JKR: Cling to some desperate hope [laughter] -
. . .
JKR: Well, okay, I'm obviously – Harry-Snape is now as personal, if not more so, than Harry-Voldemort. I can't answer that question because it's a spoiler, isn't it, whatever I say, and obviously, it has such a huge impact on what will happen when they meet again that I can't. And let's face it, it's going to launch 10,000 theories and I'm going to get a big kick out of reading them so [laughs] I'm evil but I just like the theories, I love the theories.

So...it seems that hope for Snape is "desperate" but, of course, we don't know anything, really. Some unfilled holes I find in the Snape story:

1) Where is the "iron clad" proof Dumbledore claimed he had proving Snape's loyalty? He tells Harry that Snape had "remorse" - but the entire Order was in disbelief that this was the proof. I'm not ready to buy that we know the whole story. This is where my Lily theory comes in: Snape has been mysteriously and absolutely silent about Lily with Harry - quite unusual. I believe they had a relationship of some sort, and it helps to know they were both whizzes at potions (like minds perhaps?). I could hardly see Snape having "remorse" for James, but for Lily, perhaps. There is a telling (I think) moment in the aftermath of Snape killing Dumbledore where Harry says something like, "And we know what [Snape] thought of my mum - he called her a Mudblood." And the narrator tacks on: "But Harry didn't explain how he knew this..." This, of course, prompts the reader to remember that Harry never heard this from Snape's mouth EXCEPT in a memory from some 20 years ago. Could JKR be hinting that things had changed since that memory? Could Dumbledore's proof be related to Snape's relationship with Lily? Additionally, we know Snape is the Half-Blood Prince, so calling Lily a "Mudblood" may just have been an off-the-cuff way to insult her for show... There is also the intriguing nuggets from the interview - a) Lily had a choice to live or die, and she chose to die and b) when asked whether there was anyone else at Godric's Hollow that fateful night, JKR answered, "No comment." Hmmmm. Could Snape have been there? Did Lily have a choice because of Snape? Did Snape leave Voldemort because he killed Lily anyway? Speculations abound.

2) What exactly did he agree to in taking the Unbreakable Vow? Because JKR had to keep the reader in suspense regarding Malfoy's task, we never hear explicitly what Snape vowed to do when he and Narcissa. Could it have been something other than killing Dumbledore? I guess not because that was clearly Malfoy's task. BUT: Did Snape even know what he was vowing or was he ad-libbing on the spot? I guess it would be foolhardy to take the Unbreakable Vow for something you didn't know about... but this is a possibility since we never hear Snape state (or have stated to him) explictly what he must do.

3) In terms of my prior theory about Snape training up our hero by abusive methods and spoiling Malfoy, I think that's held true: Malfoy didn't have the mental/emotional strength to kill Dumbledore. Harry, on the other hand, was able to be obedient to Dumbledore and be courageous, even in the midst of the Inferi in the cave, with Dumbledore flippin' his wig.

4) Snape does refuse to hurt Harry (or let others hurt him) and stops Harry from using the Unforgivable Curses. He even "advises" Harry before he Apparates - he tells Harry that as long as one cannot perform Occlumency or non-verbal spells, one is weak. So, there's that. Of course, he's also patting himself on the back since he's great at Occlumency and non-verbal spells.

5) Snape is turning out to be as great a figure as Voldemort and Harry. These are their similarities: 1) they look alike 2) they're all 1/2 bloods 3) they all have a title ("Lord Voldemort," "The Half-Blood Prince," and "The Chosen One") 4) they all had abusive childhoods. Snape is more important than we all have thought - especially in light of the fact that book 6 is named after him. What does this mean??

On the whole, I refuse to believe that it's as simple as: Snape killed Dumbledore, Snape is evil. There must be more, even if "more" is not "Snape is good." I do know that both M and I felt depressed for a few days after finishing the book. I was shocked I felt so bad - I guess I watched my own personal hero murder someone who seemed like the only source of hope in the books.

I Was Wrong: I am the Height of Cool Compared to These Freaks

Gaunilo's asked about my theories on Snape now that I've finished HBP - I am thrilled at the opportunity to geek out yet again. But before I do, I just had to direct your attention to what are probably the funniest cases of fan outrage I have ever witnessed. Premise: (and I don't really consider this a spoiler, but read on at your own risk) there have been hints at romantic relationships throughout the HP books. Apparently, some "shippers" (the fan word for those obsessed with relationships) have actually believed, up until bk 6, that Harry and Hermione would get together. They call themselves "Harmonians" (get it, Harry + Hermione) vs. the (more sane) Herons (Hermione + Ron shippers).

In recent news, JKR gave an interview with the webmasters of Mugglenet and The Leaky Cauldron. During this interview, all parties involved had a good laugh at the sadly mistaken Harmonians. Emerson, the Mugglenet moderator, used the word "delusional." Harmionian reaction has been raging on ever since. You MUST read this, which Emerson calls his "Wall of Shame" - excerpts of fan reaction as clipped from the forums. No, I mean you MUST read it, and ALL the way down. And MAKE SURE you link to the petition.

Incidentally, I have fallen in love with a new net abbreviation: IDGRA. As in: I Don't Give a Rat's Ass.
Snappy.

My Name is MarianEvans and I am a Geek

I watched Trekkies the other night...only to see what I could become, what I am only a few posts on a web forum away from becoming.

Just to give you an idea, in the last week I have:
1) argued heatedly on a Harry Potter forum*
2) schemed with a fellow forum member to begin a new thread
3) partially reread HP canon to prove my theory and disprove another*
4) started using "canon" in reference to the HP books

I am horrified to discover that it's so easy for me to be sucked into the world of obsessive geekdom. This is especially apparent when I reveal that HP is not my main nerd addiction - I am also a devotee of Tolkien and Studio Ghibli.

But what really separates these interests from those considered socially "normal" and "acceptable"? Is it because fans of these particular movies/books oftentimes withdraw from reality and assume the characters they so love? Can it be that these fans are rarely exposed to sunlight? I feel that I have unique perspective since I straddle the line (at least I hope I do!). I see the attraction of a shared world and fantasy, but I prefer to share it with people I know, have actually seen in the flesh. I also do not construct my entire life around one obsession or spend money on fan paraphernalia... Fellow quasi-geeks: what are your thoughts?

*In case you're wondering what the theory/contraversy was about, here it is (HP spoiler alert! run your cursor over to read the hidden text**): I'm a proponent of the popular theory regarding who R.A.B. is in the Half Blood Prince - Regulus Black. I feel that there is more storyline evidence supporting this theory, seeing how so much time is spent on the Black family and its possessions (actually, a locket is found in the house in bk 5). There has been, however, an alternative theory that R.A.B. is Amy Benson, one of the orphans that Tom Riddle takes down to the cave before he went to Hogwarts. This theory is based mostly on the fact that her name is mentioned in conjunction with the cave. The rest of the theory, in my opinion, is based on hooey. So, I have spent (wasted) a lot of time arguing with the main advocate of this theory. In the end, I don't give a rat's ass whether it's Amy Benson or Regulus Black - but I found myself ready to kill this woman because of her dogmatism and her complete ignorance of Ockham's Razor. Sigh. What's wrong with me?

**Oh my god, I have written "spoiler alert".

Oh Severus!

No, I’m not in love with Severus Snape – but I thought I’d indulge in a little fan-wanking today, on the eve of the release of Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince. And, to me, there is no better person to theorize about than Snape – one of the most intriguing characters of the septology. J. K. Rowling has said that she finds fans’ attraction to Snape disturbing, but how can she blame us when he is so damn ambiguous? Here are the major basic theories regarding Snape, from my scan of forums (check out Mugglenet.com – it’s very amusing):

1) Snape is a traitor – still. He is so skilled at Occlumency that he’s got us all, including Dumbledore, tricked. He is still a Death Eater.

2) Snape is good, and faithful to Dumbledore.

3) Snape is an opportunist, both Death Eater and one of the Order of the Phoenix. He’s waiting to see who wins before declaring his total allegiance.

4) Snape is a vampire. I find this one particularly tickling. Fans base this theory on the fact that a) Ron's joked about him being able to change into a bat (and whenever Ron jokes about something it's usually right) b) Snape never eats c) Snape wrote a large, spiky "D" on Harry's O.W. L. diagnostic and d) he's so pasty, and that's emphasized over and over again.

I am very interested in #1, and I recently figured out how this could be true given Voldemort’s pronouncement regarding Death Eaters missing from the circle at the end of Goblet of Fire. He said that there are a) his most faithful servant at Hogwarts b) “one who I believe has left me forever, he will be killed, of course” and c) a coward. The most logical matching of descriptions to names at that time seemed to be a) Barty Crouch, Jr. b) Snape and c) Karkaroff. But people have been theorizing that Snape may be the most faithful. I never heard a really convincing explanation for this, but I thought of one that might work the other night as I tried to distract Moltmannian from Badiou. b) could possibly mean Crouch Jr. – if it is simply a descriptive statement/prediction rather than a pronouncement of impending punishment. And this prediction does come true – Crouch is killed, leaving Snape to be the most faithful Death Eater.

But my theories on Snape fall more in line with #2, that Snape is faithful to the Order. Here is what I (like to) think: The greasy hair and hook nose are really a distraction put in place by Rowling in order for readers to pigeonhole Snape as untrustworthy. The more we discover about Snape, the more complex he grows. At first we only thought he was an atrocious person, particularly abusive toward Harry because of his grudge against James Potter. In the first book Dumbledore tells Harry that Snape saved his life so that he could hate James "in peace," having repaid the debt he owes James from having James save his own life. But we later find out that Dumbledore was dead wrong. Snape never believed James saved his life or did anything noble by keeping him from Lupin-in-wolf-shape. So, why did he do it? Let's leave this question for the moment.

We also discover more about Snape in Order of the Phoenix. During Harry's Occlumency lessons we find out that Snape has also had a rough childhood, growing up in an abusive environment, much like Harry and, not coincidentally, Voldemort (Tom Riddle). Snape also gets a chance to see how bad Harry had it - not at all the life of a puffed-up child celebrity, which Snape has accused Harry of being before. This is interesting. Every single year Snape has cut Harry down, told him he is not special, etc. etc. He tells Harry during Occlumency that he is neither signficiant or special - but this is definitely not true. Snape knows this full well: he knows the prophecy, he's a part of the Order. What gives? Looking at the other advice that Snape gives Harry gives us a clue: he tells Harry that weakness is in those that wear their hearts on their sleeves, those who cannot control their emotions. I think this is getting at the heart of Snape. He has experienced something in his past that has taught him to safeguard himself from hurt and vulnerability. Could it be that Snape has been applying his understanding of psychology very consistently with Harry over the years? Who is he steeling to restrain his emotions, to learn control, to withstand ridicule? Harry. Who has he been buttering up, making weak through favoritism and easy shortcuts? Malfoy. Perhaps Snape is not the abusive teacher we have known all along - cutting down the Dark Lord's enemy and helping a Death Eater's child - but very cleverly bringing up our hero to be strong (in his mind) while making the Malfoy heir weak, all the while seeming to have allegiance to Voldemort.

Of course, there are times when Snape is truly nasty to Harry and gleeful when Harry is in pain. This could be vestiges of his hate for James. But now we return to why Snape did save Harry's life (besides being faithful to Dumbledore). I believe that Snape had a friendship with Lily Potter. One very interesting omission from all of Snape's insults to Harry is the use of Lily as a barb. James he will ridicule - nothing is off bounds with him - but Lily is never mentioned. We know from Snape's pensieve that Lily once stood up for him, though he may not have shown appreciation for it then. Could it be that they developed a friendship later? And if Snape had feelings for Lily, all the more reason to hate James! There is one part early in Order that interested me. Aunt Petunia tells Harry that she knows about Azkaban because she heard "that awful boy telling her about them years ago." I don't think that "awful boy" is James. I think he's Snape - who is a hundred times more awful (looking, at least) than James.

Well, we'll all find out soon enough. I'm holding out for my own personal hero, Severus Snape.