WordWolf

For free, here's the worst offenders of the misconceptions I hear. 1) Dumbledore survived or will return. No, JKR's been very specific. He is definitely dead, and will not be "doing a Gandalf." 2) JKR said exactly 2 characters die in Book 7. No. She said she changed part of the story, so 1 character who was slated to die, will live instead, and 2 characters who were slated to live, will die instead. So, 2 MORE characters will die. Since the plot was worked out long in advance, such a change obviously does NOT refer to Harry or Voldy. (If they die, they were planned to since Book 1 was out.) 3) JKR said she's going to kill off Harry so there will be no sequels. No. She said there will be no sequels. 7 books and the story is over. Possibly, there may be an 8th book for charity like "Quidditch Through the Ages" and "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" as a sort of sourcebook for the series, and possibly footnotes on "whatever happened to" characters after Book 7. As for Harry, she was asked about killing him off. She said she understood why some writers kill off the character, to prevent a sequel. If anything, one might suspect she was disagreeing with them, which suggests Harry survives. (Meanwhile, I use the OTHER quote to point to his survival.)

Since I think you'll find it useful, here's something I posted elsewhere. August 1, 2006, JKR did a public appearance with John Grisham and Stephen King. Someone made a transcript of the whole thing, divided into 3 parts. I took all 3 parts, and stripped out all the lines that related to JKR in any way, then reposted them together as one document. I left them labelled as A, B, C rather than parts I, II, III, so if you want to see if I'm lying, you can go look for all 3 parts and know which part to check. This settled a number of nagging questions, IMHO. So, here's the relevant quotes. ======================== Excerpts from 8-1-06 JKR Press Conference. From A: JKR:"I always planned seven books, and I planned this particular ending, and if I get through it and do what I meant to do when I first committed to this story, then I'll be proud. Audience member question (paraphrased): Why did Dumbledore have to die [asked by TIME for Kids representative] Rowling: I did an interview last year in which I was asked this question. In the genre in which I'm writing, you usually find that the hero has to go on alone. There comes a point when his support falls away and to be truly heroic he has to act alone. Harry is not completely alone, he still has his two faithful sidekicks. This was summarized for me by the person who asked the question with, you mean the old wizard always gets it, and that fundamentally, that is what I was saying. I was as trying to dress it up a little better than that. So that's why. In these sort of epic sagas, the hero eventually has to fight alone. Audience member question (paraphrased): Have there been any changes to what you initially planned out? Rowling: It is different to an extent. The essential plot is what I always planned when working toward the end I've planned toward the beginning. But a couple of characters I expected to survive have died and one character got a reprieve, so there have been some fairly major changes I suppose. ========================== From B: Nina: I just wanted to know what Hermione would see if she looked into the Mirror of Erised? J.K. Rowling: Well -- (crowd laughs and applauds) -- at the moment, as you know, Harry, Ron, and Hermione have just finished their penultimate year at Hogwarts and Hermione and Ron have told Harry that they're going to go with him wherever he goes next. So at the moment I think that Hermione would see most likely the three of them alive and unscathed and Voldemort finished. But I think that Hermione would also see herself closely entwined with...another...person (crowd roars and applauds loudly). I think you can probably guess. Thank you, very good question. I've never been asked that before. Now we have another. Unknown (1): Can muggles brew potions if they follow the exact instructions and they have all of the ingredients? J.K. Rowling: Well, I'd have to say no. Because there is always a magical component in the potion. Not just the ingredients so at some point they will have to use a wand. I've been asked what would happen if a muggle picked up a magic wand in my world and the answer would probably be something accidental and probably quite violent because the wand in my world is merely a vehicle or a vessel of sorts and there is a very close relationship as you know between the wand that each wizard uses and themselves. And you'll find out more about that in book 7 (crowd applauds). For a muggle you need the ability, in other words, to make these things work properly but you're right and I think that's an interesting point. As Potions seems on the face of it to be the most muggle-friendly subject. But there's normally a point in which you need to use magic. Thank you, good question. Unknown (2): First I just want to say happy belated birthday! J.K. Rowling: Oh thank you! Unknown (2): You said in a recent interview that Snape -- J.K. Rowling: Snape! Unknown (2): Uh huh (crowd applauds and screams) -- had a sort of redemptive quality about him, and I was wondering if there was any chance that Draco Malfoy might redeem himself? J.K. Rowling: All you girls and Draco Malfoy (crowd applauds). You've got to get past this. Unknown (2): And if any other characters might redeem themselves? J.K. Rowling: Well, I believe that almost anyone can redeem themselves. However, in some cases, as we know from reality -- if a psychologist were ever able to get Voldemort in a room, tape him down, take his wand away, I think he would be classified as a psychopath (crowd laughs). So there are people for whom redemption is not possible. So I'd say for my main characters, yes, there's the possibility for redemption for all of them. Draco I think -- Harry's view is that even given unlimited time would not have killed -- I'm assuming you all have read book 6 by now (crowd laughs), because I don't want to here a child cry that he was five pages away from the end -- let's just say that Draco would not have murdered the person in question. What that means for Draco's future, you will have to wait for. Samantha: In the wizarding world there are many wandmakers, Ollivander's being the one we're most familiar with. How come Ollivander chose the three magical cores for the wands he makes to be phoenix feather, unicorn hair, and dragon heartstring? And how come he decided that these are the three most powerful cores as opposed to others such as veela hair? J.K. Rowling: Good question. Well, it is true that there are several wandmakers and in my notes about Harry I have many different cores for wands. Essentially I decided Ollivander was going to use my three favorites. So Ollivander has decided that those are the three most powerful substances. Other wandmakers might choose things that are particular to their country because countries as you know in my world have their own particular indigenous magical species so veela hair was kind of obvious for Fleur's wand. But um, yeah, good question. I've never had that one before (crowd applauds). Todd: You mentioned before in the video that you had written the final chapter, but umm, how do you know when to stop writing an ending? J.K. Rowling: How do I know when to stop? Todd: How do you know when to stop, yeah? J.K. Rowling: Well I think some of the reviews of Phoenix suggest that I didn't know when to stop ha ha (crowd laughs). Well, I decided, you know, sixteen years ago, or thereabouts where I was going. And I will say, I'm quite a long way into writing book seven now. And there's a lot still to explain. I hadn't really realized... There's still a lot to find out, and there's a lot to figure out... and I'll probably leave some loose ends hanging that you'll be able to say, "Oh, well, in book eight, she'll explain why" (crowd screams approval). "You mentioned the toad!" That's not significant, by the way, just to save myself 500 letters. "You mentioned the toad!" Yes, but I do know where I'm going, I really do know where I'm going. I'm really going to miss writing Harry Potter; I will miss it fiendishly. Twenty-seven? Any thoughts on twenty-seven? (crowd laughs). No, I've plotted it out, and I think you'd start to see that I was running out of plot if I pushed it past this (crowd applauds). Stephen King: We'd like to take a few more questions and I'd like you to welcome the moderator who's going to [unintelligible] her name is Soledad O'Brien. ================= From C: JKR: I notice you like Snape. Just never give up hope you people, do you? Christina: My name is Christina and I'm 13 years old and from Staten Island, New York. If you could bring one Harry Potter character to life, other than Harry, who would it be? JK Rowling: If I could bring somebody to life? Christina: Other than Harry. JK Rowling: Other than Harry. Umm, personally, although it's a really tricky one, Hagrid. If I could have anyone (crowd applauds). Because I think - I think we'd all like a Hagrid in our life. Liability though he often is. It would be really great if I met a fundamentalist Christian, to say, "Would you like to discuss the matter with Hagrid?" (crowd laughs and applauds). Unknown (1): I'm 18 years old and I'm from New York. My question is, in Half-Blood Prince, Aunt Petunia is said to be oddly flushed when Dumbledore announces that Harry will be returning only once more to Privet Drive. Does this mean that Aunt Petunia harbors a hidden love or fondness for Harry and the connection he provides her to the wizarding world? (crowd laughs and applauds). JK Rowling: That's an excellent question (crowd laughs). And like all the best and most penetrating questions, it's difficult to answer. But, I will say this. There is a little more to Aunt Petunia than meets the eye and you will find out what that is in book seven (crowd roars and applauds). Cory Mayer: My name's Cory Mayer and I'm 9 years old and I'm from Bordentown, New Jersey. I absolutely love your books. I'm not a big reader but your books make me want to read and that makes my mom happy (crowd and JK Rowling laugh). She loves your books too. In a recent interview you hinted at two main characters dying and possibly Harry Potter too. Was Dumbledore considered one of the main characters or will we have the chance to see him in action once again? Since he is the most powerful wizard of all time and Harry Potter is so loyal to him, how could he really be dead? JK Rowling: Ohhhhhhhh (Jo puts her head in her arms and crowd cheers and applauds). I feel terrible (crowd laughs). The British writer Graham Green once said that every writer had to have a chip of ice in their heart. Oh no (Jo says half weeping while crowd laughs). I think you may just have ruined my career (crowd laughs). Umm, I really can't answer that question because the answer is in book seven but ... you shouldn't expect Dumbledore to do a Gandalf. Let me just put it that way. I'm sorry (crowd moans and applauds). Salman and Milan Rushdie: Hello. We are Salman and Milan Rushdie (crowd applauds). Umm - JK Rowling: I'm not that sure this is fair (crowd laughs). I think you might be better at guessing plots than most. But anyway, off you go. Salman and Milan Rushdie: We are 9 and 59. And one of us is good at guessing plots, not me. And this is really Milan's question and it's kind of a follow up to the previous one. JK Rowling: Alright. Okay. Salman and Milan Rushdie: Until the events of Volume 6, it was always made plain that Snape might have been an unlikable fellow but he was essentially one of the good guys (crowd screams approval). JK Rowling: I can see this is the question you all really want answered. Salman and Milan Rushdie: Dumbledore himself - Dumbledore himself had always vouched for him. JK Rowling: Yes. Salman and Milan Rushdie: Now we are suddenly told that Snape is a villain and Dumbledore's killer. JK Rowling: Un hunh. Salman and Milan Rushdie: We cannot, or don't want to believe this (crowd laughs). Our theory is that Snape is in fact, still a good guy (crowd applauds). From which it follows that Dumbledore can't really be dead and that the death is a ruse cooked up between Dumbledore and Snape to put Voldemort off his guard so that when Harry and Voldemort come face to face (crowd laughs). Harry may have more allies than he or Voldemort suspects. So, is Snape good or bad? (crowd laughs, applauds and screams and Jo chuckles). In our opinion, everything follows from it. JK Rowling: Well, Salman, your opinion, I would say is ... right. But I see that I need to be a little more explicit and say that Dumbledore is definitely ... dead (crowd gasps). And I do know - I do know that there is an entire website out there that says - that's name is DumbledoreIsNotDead.com so umm, I'd imagine they're not pretty happy right now (crowd laughs). But I think I need - you need - all of you need to move through the five stages of grief (crowd laughs), and I'm just helping you get past denial. So, I can't remember what's next. It may be anger so I think we should stop it here. Thank you (crowd applauds). Stephen King: That's a good idea (crowd laughs and applauds) I'll tell you what. I think our idea of what scares us changes as we get older. As a young person, one of the scariest things I ever read was Lord of the Flies. Because of the idea of those kids turning feral just scared the dickens outta me. Sometimes you get surprised into fright. When I picked up the Harry Potter books, I was not prepared for the depth of some of the frightening passages in there. Frankly, I was surprised by how scary the deatheaters were (crowd applauds) So there was plenty of scary stuff there. You know I've read a range of modern scary stuff. I try to keep up with the competitors (crowd laughs) The deatheaters - deatheaters are good. JK Rowling: I scared Stephen King! (crowd applauds) Stephen King: You scared Stephen King. Yeah. I hope you're proud of yourself! JK Rowling: Oh, I'm very proud of myself! Thank you yes I am! (crowd laughs) Martha Hoover: Good evening. Thank you. It has been an honor. This evening my question for you is, what is the one question your fans have never asked you, and should have? (crowd laughs and applauds). JK Rowling: Oh, God (crowd laughs). How can I answer that? I can think of a couple of things that give away the ending of book seven (crowd laughs). Having got this far ... having got 16 years down the line, I kind of feel that would throw it away (crowd laughs). For me, anyway, having put the effort in. I think that I've been asked excellent questions, it's just that the final book contains a couple of pieces of information that I don't think you could guess at. So umm - I would umm - I'm sorry. You see, people think that it's all so fixed in my head. It's not that obsessively plotted out. For example, this afternoon I believe I changed my mind on the title of book seven (crowd oohhs). Having been quite convinced that I had the title, I suddenly thought, "No, that would be better, wouldn't it?" in the shower just before coming out here, so - (crowd laughs). But you know what, I'm not going to tell you either version, because I don't - (crowd groans). Oh, come on! Now really! Have I not given you enough? I gave you Aunt Petunia. I told you Dumbledore is really (Jo moves finger across neck). So, I am trying to give something to you. Anyway. I'm sorry. I suppose it's that question. Everyone's really pleased you asked that question. It's me who's let everyone down, not you. sorry (crowd sighs and applauds). Soledad O'Brien: I'm going to pose the final question to you and I'd like all three of you to take a stab at it. You can do it in any order that you would like. If you were to have dinner with any five characters from any of your books -- take a moment to think about it -- who would you invite, and why would they be on your list? Any order. JK Rowling: Well I'd take Harry, to apologize to him (crowd laughs). Um, I'd have to take Harry, Ron and Hermione. JK Rowling: I would - this is - (crown shouts suggestions). JK Rowling: See, I know who's actually dead. JK Rowling: Pretend I can take anyone? Well then I would definitely take Dumbledore. I'd take Dumbledore, Harry, Ron, Hermione...and.. (crowd shouts characters) um, Hagrid. I'd take Hagrid, yeah. And Owen because he wouldn't take up much space (crowd laughs). ====================== A number of us, once I pointed out that closing comment, interpret it as follows. She was asked to name 5 characters to have dinner with. She names 3, then pauses, saying she knows who's actually dead. Then she found out she can invite characters who are dead, so she names Dumbledore. What that suggests is that she thought she could only invite characters who survive to the end of the series, and named Harry, Ron and Hermione. Therefore, all 3 of them survive. All bets are off on everyone else.

============ Well, we gave you a chance to make your case, without just cut-and-pasting, or replying solely in links. You have elected to avoid speaking for yourself, and have elected to dodge when plain questions called for plain speaking. We're not interested in what you have to sell. We've given you the benefit of the doubt, and you've had time to give us data to form an opinion. We've formed opinions. Most people would consider persisting here a waste of time, since we are now disinterested in your sales pitch, and the returns are "diminishing returns." However, if you really, really want to persist, we can do so. Just don't have the nerve to be surprised when you reap what you've been sowing (as opposed to what you MEANT to sow.)

Well, since the third date set (1918 was the third year when the Apocalypse was predicted, and 1975 was the fourth), the world still seems to be moving along. This is an incredibly slow Apocalypse. If you're looking for converts, this is the wrong p[ace. We're pretty convert-resistant, have been burned before ("once bitten, twice shy") and have little interest in having our heads shaved again or any other cult initiation. Nevertheless, if you really want to dance this dance, by all means, I'll call for the orchestra.....

Just because she HAS friends (here) and you don't is no reason to be a'hatin'.

BTW, this is a digression, but I thought you might want to look this over. This is a set of links about the "fat" thing. JKR said this, and it started the discussion. http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/extra..._view.cfm?id=22 Then suddenly this popped up in her "Rubbish Bin"- someone claimed JKR was hypocritical in her previous comments! http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/rubbi..._view.cfm?id=14 We missed something important! Ok, here is the article-which is what we missed... in 3 links: http://www.mugglenet.com/viewer/?image_loc...lscans/MoS1.jpg http://www.mugglenet.com/viewer/?image_loc...lscans/MoS2.jpg http://www.mugglenet.com/viewer/?image_loc...s/DailyMail.jpg All of that prompted a MuggleNet editorial, seen here: http://www.mugglenet.com/infosection/opinion/fatfem.shtml which prompted many responses, which prompted this followup from MuggleNet... http://www.mugglenet.com/infosection/opinion/fatfem2.shtml Which explains what showed up in her Rubbish Bin. Me, I think the sloppy newspaper writer was careless enough to confuse the movie for the book. When junior high school students do that in a book report, it's bad. When a professional does this, it's unforgiveable. That was the Daily Mail, which is supposedly a respectable newspaper, if not, say, the Wall St Journal or the NY Times. He's unfamiliar with the books he's criticizing, and based his criticism on the MOVIES based on the books. As any HP fan (or LotR fan) can tell him, there can be BIG differences between the two. JKR has NO control over casting. Says so on her website. JKR's sole involvement in casting was being asked if she had ANY recommendations before Movie 1 was cast, and she said "Robbie Coltrane for Hagrid." "Hollywood" has made the characters pretty or handsome by casting pretty or handsome actors. The only characters we really know the weights on- and are either thin or fat- are Harry in Book 1 (who is malnourished), Hagrid (he's big, and carries extra weight, but well), Dudley (who's fat but loses weight by Book 5), Petunia (who's THIN), and one other. It's very interesting that Madame Maxime is supposed to be big in every dimension- but the actress cast is THIN. So, that one is the OPPOSITE of what JKR did. Remember Book 4? Maxime told Hagrid that she was "big-boned"? That's the favourite response of some people who are fat- "I'm not fat-I'm big-boned." (Cartman's made that a mantra..) Harry pretty much confirmed she's not thin... "Only thing with bigger bones than her is a dinosaur." So, blame the directors, but not JKR.

Boggles my mind that parents would consider that class- complete with the pictures of naked people thru a considerable portion of that class- was acceptable to have a 12-year-old girl to attend, let along RECOMMEND she take it. This, to me, ranks up there with the live CFS classes when vpw showed the pornographic movie of the 2 women doing stuff to that dog, and there were under-18s in attendance.

Raised on page 1, and still not addressed except to say it was addressed while still not actually ADDRESSING it. That would be novel. See, this is a DISCUSSION forum. We DISCUSS stuff here, not just post links of OTHER people's opinions or discussions. Dodging issues or ignoring them is not the same as DISCUSSING, which is what we do here. Links are fine as PARTS of discussion, but are not SUBSTITUTES for discussion. (I really don't think I'm unreasonable when I say this, and I don't get why some people think I am, unless their standards aren't reasonable.)

We can use any song from any era. I guess 1965 works just as well as 1970. Besides, I gave my opinion. If 1965 works better, great. Besides, anybody can post from any song. I've posted oldies because I knew some of the others would appreciate it. The only rule we've pretty-much agreed on was AIRPLAY. If people post songs nobody ever had a chance to hear on the air, then it's unfair to expect them to know them. I don't post songs I've only heard in my music collection for that reason, and others have agreed. That having been said, any song or any line is still fair game. We don't have to vote on that. (And we don't get to vote on what my OPINION should be, nor should we. )

Let's see if this works....

This is an old topic. http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.php?showtopic=960 This topic overlaps it. http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.php?showtopic=489 This post was from the "Don't ya just love it when" topic. Hope R said "When you tell someone you have a medical condition and they immediately tell you to go to the health food store and buy vitamins, or do the cleanse or take some other concoction when they no NOTHING about your illness. I have a chronic condition that I've learned to live with. If and when I tell people what it is, 9 times out of 10 they say "oh, my Grandmother had THAT! She stopped drinking milk and got better." or "you should think about doing the colon cleanse." OMG - the cleanse would probably just about KILL me! What I want to do is hand them all the books I've read and give them the links to the websites I've looked at regarding my medical disorder and say "read these, then come back and tell me what to do". Instead I just try to quickly explain what is wrong with me and how they've got it mixed up with something else, which is usually the case." This is from the "Good or Evil?" thread. Pirate1974 said "Looking back from over 25 years of being out, I can't say that I ever experienced anything that I could classify as "evil." Stupid, yes. Lots and lots of stupid. Of course, I was never in any kind of leadership position at all. I was just the nut on the way tree. I had no contact with New Knoxville except for an hour wandering around the farm at the ROA. If I had to describe most of the people where I was, they would be "nerds." Except for a few exceptions, good little boys and girls who never stepped out a line, especially in anything involving twi, no matter how hard I tried to push them. I enjoyed the twig meetings and coffeehouses, but I hated the pressure to take classes and witness and go wow and do the colon cleanse. If you didn't do those things, you weren't walking the walk. If they had just left me alone to be the nut on the tree, I might have stayed longer, but probably not because of personal stuff. When I was in, we were all supposed to aspire to the Holy Grail of the Advanced Class. To reach that pinnacle of spiritual success, one had to complete something called "home studies" a fill-in-the blank exercise in way doctrine. I did the first one, got marked down for putting a comma in the wrong place, threw it in the trash and never did another one. No spritual perfection for you!!! The only way corps people I ever met were some passing through on their way to somewhere else,like Bo Reahard or Randy Anderson. I've been told I met Martindale, but he must not have made much of an impression on me, because I have no memory of it. Our leaders were all college kids my own age or a little older. Even the limb leader was in his 20s, and this was one of the twi "hot spots" Greenville, NC. Different times, different places, different experiences. When I first discovered Waydale, it was hard to connect the stories that I read there with the collection of dorks and twerps that I knew. When I heard that Rosalie was president, I almost fell out of my chair. When I knew her, she could barely run a twig. That was my experience. Doesn't mean I don't believe what happened to other people just because I never saw it." That's what I found, anyway. I'd check those threads for discussions so far, but feel free to have a new discussion on it, especially since sometimes new stuff comes to light. (And even if it doesn't, enjoy your discussion. :) )

[WordWolf in brackets and boldface again.]

Last I heard, there was a time-period that the Watchtower Society (the JWs) forbade organ transplants, but they're ok now. The strictest Jew following the most strict interpretations of the Mosaic Law, and the Talmud and so on, WILL take a blood transfusion to say his life. Supposedly, the restrictions governing transfusions are from the Old Testament. If I understand correctly, the current restrictions say that blood is forbidden to eat, therefore it is also forbidden to transfuse to save a physical life, and dying is superior to accepting a transfusion of blood. Furthermore, a transfusion of blood is forbidden, but a transfusion of PART of the blood- such as plasma or the like- is PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE. Now, I didn't see a distinction in the eating blood thing, but apparently the Watchtower Society DOES. And it's a very SELECTIVE ONE. So, "eating blood = transfusing blood. No eating blood =no transfusing blood. Transfusing PART of the blood= acceptable to God. Transfusing ALL of the blood=\= acceptable to God. (Based on "no eating blood.) Eating nonkosher red meat=acceptable to God (despite containing blood, moreso than kosher red meat even.) Transplants=acceptable to God, and before transplants =\= acceptable to God, and that was based on this same rule of blood." This "rule" is needlessly capricious. It stops some lives from being saved, makes distinctions so fine as to gag a lawyer, and does not stay the same from year to year. Now that we've had time to discuss it, I'm almost surprised twi never assumed this ruletook when they were regulating everything else. ======================= "Do not pass 'GO'. Do not collect 10% of my income."

Correct! Personally, I try to confine my RECENT songs to nothing that didn't come out after 1985-1986 to give the older posters a chance. Personally, I'd prefer older posters try to make most of their songs ones that came out after 1970, to give the younger posters a chance. This wouldn't apply to all songs, just most, and is simply MY PREFERENCES. Anyone can post whichever ones they want in their turn. However, I think long stretches of obscure songs drive interest off the thread, which chases off occassional or new players, and I for one like to see all sorts of posters take a turn. =============== So, it's Bluzeman's turn. (Just to be official.)

"I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian because I hate plants!" "Vegetarian: from an old Indian word meaning 'bad hunter' " Although I'm aware there are very preachy and obnoxious vegetarians and vegans out there, they tend to leave me alone. In fact, I've eaten at the same time with them, and they've left me alone. I'm perfectly fine with adults eating whatever they want so long as it's not going to kill them immediately. Want to sit down to a plate of raw turnips? Fine with me. Fish eyes? Knock yourself out. I'll be eating this tuna over here. Dry wheat toast? Enjoy it. The ones that put in the time and eat nutritionally-balanced stuff? More power to them. I'll be eating this meat in moderation. The Surgeon General has determined that trying to take the food of my plate can be hazardous to your health.

I insinuated nothing about you. I agreed with Tom's points, thus disagreed with you they lacked merit. If you review my post, you'll see the word "rude" appears in quotes, right after a link. That's a link to a sticky at the forum, which gives advice. The main point was what I quoted and then repeated- that there's no consensus, no ONE opinion, of posters. ( I still recommend reading the sticky.) A number of times, new people arrive, decide we're all a homogenous lot, and pass judgement on us. Looked a lot like something that was happening here. Some might see Bumpy as doing exactly that. It's a situation common enough to have gotten tiresome here. You and Bumpy are entitled to your opinions. Mind you, some posters will rebut you if they think the facts disagree with you. That's what I did there. I also try not to gloss over anyone's posts when possible, which is another mistake that's easy to make.

Next song. "I'm not into your passport picture- I just like your nose."

Is this "Law and Order"?

Wow- an oldie I can get! Finally! This is "Chubby Clementine." As for an artist who performed it, I name DANNY AIELLO. See, when he hosted Saturday Night Live, he did sang this song in his monologue. Which is the only way I've heard the song.

For fun, here's a list of ideas JKR debunked on her own website, complete with links. Rumors menu: http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/rumours.cfm "Section: Rumours Harry will be asked to become Minister of Magic in book seven Seventeen is much too young to enter politics." Professor Lupin does not have a twin, Neville Longbottom was never Peter Pettigrew's son, Crookshanks is not an animagus-he's a 1/2 Kneazle, JKR has no prequels or sequels planned after Book 7, Lily was never a Death Eater, and Lily and James are definitely dead, neither Voldemort nor Dumbledore are related to Harry, Luna and Neville don't "hook up", Nicholas Flamel (alchemist) passed away after Book 1, "none of the characters in the books has returned from the future" (and thus Dumbledore is not Ron in the future sent back or anything), Mrs Norris (Filch's cat) is just a cat, Wormtail's silver hand will not be used to kill Remus Lupin, and Stubby Boardman is not Sirius Black. (Thus one is one I actually floated once, when challenged to come up with the silliest theory possible. I then realized I made it sound possible- as in "Sirius goes thru a Veil of TIME, and gets sent back to the past, assumes an alias and lays low until he's pronounced dead, then begins working behind the scenes...." I didn't REALLY think this would be how he returns-I expect him to return, but with different tools- but I would have gloated if it was correct.) Her LAST rumor busted.... Section: Rumours At the end of book seven, Harry and Voldemort will 'merge' to form a single persona who will command both the forces of good and of evil This is not really a rumour, more a lone theory on the net that the son of a friend of mine pointed out to me. He wants me to repudiate it, so I'm repudiating: Harry will NOT merge with Voldemort to become a single entity, nor would Harry ever wish to command Death Eaters/Dementors/Inferi. " Meanwhile, http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/faq.c...f=aboutthebooks here's the most useful of the FAQ answers... "Section: F.A.Q. (SPOILER WARNING) Why did Harry have to forget the mirror he had been given by Sirius in 'Order of the Phoenix'? I can’t give a full answer to this, because it is relevant to books six and seven. However, the short answer is that Harry was determined never to use the mirror, as is clearly stated in chapter 24: ‘he knew he would never use whatever it was’. For once in Harry’s life, he does not succumb to curiosity, he hides the mirror and the temptation away from himself, and then, when it might have been useful, he has forgotten it. The mirror might not have helped as much as you think, but on the other hand, will help more than you think. You’ll have to read the final books to understand that!" "Section: F.A.Q. Will you write more Harry Potter books after the seventh? If you mean more novels, then I think it highly unlikely. I’ve got enough story for seven books and I never planned to carry the story beyond the end of book seven. I might do an eighth book for charity, a kind of encyclopaedia of the world so that I could use all the extra material that’s not in the books... we’ll see!" "Section: F.A.Q. What did Dumbledore's Howler to Aunt Petunia mean? ('Remember my last'?) Well, it is a relief to move on after the Mark Evans fiasco. This time, two out of the three poll questions had interesting answers (or so I think) and thank goodness you chose one of them. So: Dumbledore is referring to his last letter, which means, of course, the letter he left upon the Dursleys' doorstep when Harry was one year old. But why then (you may well ask) did he not just say 'remember my letter?' Why did he say my last letter? Why, obviously because there were letters before that… Now let the speculation begin, and mind you type clearly, I'll be watching… P.S. It has been suggested that I am wrong in saying that Dumbledore's last letter was the one he left on the doorstep with baby Harry, and that he has sent a letter since then concerning Harry's illegal flight to school. However, both Dumbledore and I differentiate between letters sent to the Dursleys as a couple, and messages directed to Petunia ALONE. And that's my final word on the subject - though I doubt it will be yours :)" "Section: F.A.Q. What is the significance of Neville being the other boy to whom the prophecy might have referred? Finally, I am answering the poll question! I am sorry it has taken so long, but let me start by saying how glad I am that this was the question that received the most votes, because this was the one that I most wanted to answer. Some of you might not like what I am going to say – but I'll address that issue at the end of my response! To recap: Neville was born on the 30th of July, the day before Harry, so he too was born 'as the seventh month dies'. His parents, who were both famous Aurors, had 'thrice defied' Voldemort, just as Lily and James had. Voldemort was therefore presented with the choice of two baby boys to whom the prophecy might apply. However, he did not entirely realise what the implications of attacking them might be, because he had not heard the entire prophecy. As Dumbledore says: 'He [the eavesdropper] only heard the beginning, the part foretelling the birth of a boy in July to parents who had thrice defied Voldemort. Consequently, he could not warn his master that to attack you would be to risk transferring power to you.' In effect, the prophecy gave Voldemort the choice of two candidates for his possible nemesis. In choosing which boy to murder, he was also (without realising it) choosing which boy to anoint as the Chosen One – to give him tools no other wizard possessed – the scar and the ability it conferred, a magical window into Voldemort's mind. So what would have happened if Voldemort had decided that the pure-blood, not the half-blood, was the bigger threat? What would have happened if he had attacked Neville instead? Harry wonders this during the course of 'Half-Blood Prince' and concludes, rightly, that the answer hinges on whether or not one of Neville's parents would have been able, or prepared, to die for their son in the way that Lily died for Harry. If they hadn't, Neville would have been killed outright. Had Frank or Alice thrown themselves in front of Neville, however, the killing curse would have rebounded just as it did in Harry's case, and Neville would have been the one who survived with the lightning scar. What would this have meant? Would a Neville bearing the lightning scar have been as successful at evading Voldemort as Harry has been? Would Neville have had the qualities that have enabled Harry to remain strong and sane throughout all of his many ordeals? Although Dumbledore does not say as much, he does not believe so: he believes Voldemort did indeed choose the boy most likely to be able to topple him, for Harry's survival has not depended wholly or even mainly upon his scar. So where does this leave Neville, the boy who was so nearly King? Well, it does not give him either hidden powers or a mysterious destiny. He remains a 'normal' wizarding boy, albeit one with a past, in its way, as tragic as Harry's. As you saw in 'Order of the Phoenix,' however, Neville is not without his own latent strengths. It remains to be seen how he will feel if he ever finds out how close he came to being the Chosen One. Some of you, who have been convinced that the prophecy marked Neville, in some mystical fashion, for a fate intertwined with Harry's, may find this answer rather dull. Yet I was making what I felt was a significant point about Harry and Voldemort, and about prophecies themselves, in showing Neville as the also-ran. If neither boy was 'pre-ordained' before Voldemort's attack to become his possible vanquisher, then the prophecy (like the one the witches make to Macbeth, if anyone has read the play of the same name) becomes the catalyst for a situation that would never have occurred if it had not been made. Harry is propelled into a terrifying position he might never have sought, while Neville remains the tantalising 'might-have-been'. Destiny is a name often given in retrospect to choices that had dramatic consequences. Of course, none of this should be taken to mean that Neville does not have a significant part to play in the last two novels, or the fight against Voldemort. As for the prophecy itself, it remains ambiguous, not only to readers, but to my characters. Prophecies (think of Nostradamus!) are usually open to many different interpretations. That is both their strength and their weakness." BTW, the "Extra Stuff" section on the website is worth reviewing, even if only for some characters and scenes that never "made the cut". http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/extrastuff.cfm Say, did anyone here take either of the 2 WOMBAT exams? What was your score? And are you planning on taking the third?

Thing is, James and Severus are constrained to act under the rules in HP as outlined by JKR, not by how you or I would call it. (In those cases, SS might owe NOTHING.) JKR had Dumbledore explain the situation, and HIS conclusion was that SS owed James for saving his life. DD may not be perfect, but he's as expert an expert on magic as the series has, and he often serves as JKR's mouthpiece. (Him or Hermione reading something in a book, as she's pointed out.) Furthermore, Wormtail owes Harry a life, as seen in Book 3. My personal theory: Voldemort owes Harry a life, based on Book 4 and the use of Harry's blood to return him to full life (or what passes for it.) If not, I still have no explanation for the "gleam of triumph" in Dumbledore's eye when Harry reported what happened. The stupidest possible explanation was that DD was working for Voldy and wanted him to win- I heard that one, if you can believe it.

Is this the episode that mentions "the wife of a Caesar"?

How many people here have noticed that this RELEVANT question (it affects the stance of the poster dramatically) has been dodged at least TWICE so far? Does anyone else think that's an answer in itself? As in "I refuse to confirm my beliefs because I'm not proud enough to declare my beliefs. I'm ashamed of my associations and will not speak of them. But you should agree with the doctrines I've gotten FROM them." I prefer not to jump to conclusions, but, in lieu of anything other than a DUCKING of the question REPEATEDLY, by golly, a refusal to answer is indicative of the answer....

I disagree on both counts. Furthermore, I'll add he had 2 legitimate points which were glossed over: A) some people arrive and are SWIFT to decide they know us all B) some people arrive and operate under a delusion there's a consensus here The main consensus is that there is NO consensus on virtually ANY issue. http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.php?showtopic=7913 "There is no one single opinion of the posters. There is no universally-accepted opinion of the posters. (There are even a few people who are convinced vpw never wronged anyone.) Please try not to be accusatory, vicious or otherwise rude in posting." While I expect that some people would not accept it, I would be shocked if some people did NOT accept it- so long as it was perceived as coming from the heart, springing from sufficient reflection and full contrition of the will. No consensus here, remember?