Posted on 07/21/2007 5:18:11 PM PDT by JenB
Snape's love for Lily was THE most powerful influence in his life. It consumed him. Dumbledore understood this, which is why he trusted Snape to do the right thing when the time came.
He knew Snape would help to defeat the wizard who had killed his love ... and who, not incidentally, had killed Snape's chances of gaining Lily's love. His loyalty to Voldemort was acting when he called her a 'Mudblood.' He lost the one good thing in his life to Voldemort.
Voldemort couldn't read Snape, because he couldn't get past Snape's love of Lily. Everything about Snape's behavior can be explained by referring back to his love for her.
Did you notice how Ginny objected to Cho taking Harry to the Ravenclaw Common Room and insisted Luna do it?
Hon, I cried when the owl died, so I am in no position to judge who cries at what! LOL! I did think it was very sweet and it definitely pulled at my heartstrings. I think I started tearing up when Neville came out of the portrait and didn’t stop until I closed the book. (I generally cry at everything)
Oh, I thought of another great line. In the final battle, Ron saves Malfoy (again) and he says, “That’s twice we’ve saved your life, you ungrateful bastard.”
So Snape had a love/hate thing with Harry, with the hate dominating? She had Lily’s eyes, but was just like James in his actions.
He, not she.
JKR was needlessly bloodthirsty IMO. Why did she have to kill Hedwig and Dobby? And Tonks for that matter?
Now go back and read Book 1 again. The first wizards he really meets in the first book, are the last ones mentioned in the epilogue. Neville, Malfoy, Ron, Hermione, Ginny.
As Ravenclaw's door said: a circle has no end.
If you weren't reading too fast to notice, Ron basically said that, too.
Right that’s classic tragedies. Modern tragedies don’t bother with fatal flaws, they just kill the character, check out John Irving’s works he’s probably the master of the modern tragedy, his character pretty much die because it’s time to end the book. Where classic tragedies are about a life cycle and being consumed by your own flaws, modern tragedies tend to be primarily about death and the pointlessness it puts in life. In a modern tragedy all the struggles come to naught because the character dies anyway. This is, of course, why modern tragedies aren’t that popular, people don’t really want to read hundreds of pages of a book just to be told in the end that the entire exercise was pointless. And I think they’re popular with the literati crowd largely because they’re unpopular with the general populace, whatever the people are “too dumb to understand” will always find an audience with the literati.
I like the black screen of the Sopranos, I thought there was definite resolution, you just had to think about it. The resolution was the survive again, and in the end very little changes. The black screen to me was David Chase doing a Ferris Beuhler, telling us all to go home, the shows over.
It’s buried now, but I said way up thread that the second I was done I had the urge to re-read the entire series. After I finish listening to DH on CD, I’m going to start the series over again.
None so blind as those who will not see.... They make the mistake of the Pharisees, who elevate the written word above the Spirit Who informs it.
Symbolic -- it's what happens when you place your body above your soul. "Where your treasure lies...."
Rowlings' Scriptural references are sparse, but extremely well-chosen.
Exactly why Harry couldn’t die. Rowling couldn’t have the message of her story be “none of that fighting matters, good can’t really win” could she?
Fairy tales need the hero to marry the princess at the end. That’s how they work.
Have you seen the movie Galaxy Quest?
I’m not sure the hate dominated, so much as was a necessary display. Think of it like Dumbledore in OOTP deliberately separating himself from Harry. There’s Snape the Deatheater, still publicly loyal to the cause, with Draco Malfoy in his house regularly feeding info to his father. Snape has to publicly hate Harry, any overt kindness to Harry blows his cover completely. Now I’m sure not all of the frustration and anger he leveled at Harry was acting, Harry is living proof of his unrequited love and frequently took glee in annoying Snape much like his father had, but I think the constance of vehemence of it was mostly cover.
I think Dobby was killed to continue the mystery of Dumbledore and the mirror. Otherwise Dobby would have just told Harry that Aberforth sent him.
Especially if he dies when he appears to die. She could sort of get away with the final battle resulting in both Voldy and Harry dieing, but to die while Voldy still lives (even if he is killed later by somebody else) would seriously damage the moral of the story.
None of the teachers were married with children. If HP did teach, he couldn’t be at Hogwarts and raise his own young children. None of them were even married from what I could tell.
Spot on. The moral couldn't be: stand up for what's right and die anyway.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.