COS Chapter Eleven: "The Duelling Club"
Nov. 19th, 2010 06:39 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
for-diddled.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
deathtocapslock
* Percy’s looking “in far better spirits than last time they’d met”. Wonder if he’s been seeing Penelope in one of the less-used sections of the library?
* Although if we asked JKR, she’d probably say that he’s in a state of sadistic glee after docking points from a first-year, or something like that.
* Percy and Ron both seem quite hung up on the fact that it’s a girls’ toilet. Perhaps Gryffindor wizards are just insecure about their sexuality (cf. Harry), and so compensate by rejecting anything even remotely connected with the feminine sex.
* Harry can’t see why Ron and Hermione would be in the bathroom, but goes in there anyway, proving (as if any more proof were needed) that logic isn’t one of his strongest points.
* Trying to kill someone because you’ve just lost a Quidditch game would be totally IC for a Gryffindor, IMHO. Less so for a Slytherin, though: you’d have thought that a member of a House noted for cunning would be able to put such things into better perspective.
* Or at least they would, if JKR could convincingly write a cunning person.
* Ron immediately assumes it was Lucius Malfoy who opened the Chamber last time round, even though he has absolutely no idea whether Lucius was actually at school when that happened.
* Ron belittles Hermione’s reading, except when he needs her to do his homework for him, in which case he’s glad she knows so much.
* The Twins are giving Ginny nightmares until Percy stops them. This does not stop Percy from being the tactless one with no people skills, obviously.
* Is Neville “almost a Squib”? He’s always having magical accidents, to be sure, but his problem mostly seems to be one of control, rather than actual power. (Cf. Snape’s “we’ll be sending Finch-Fletchley home in a matchbox” comment.)
* Is there any explanation for Draco staying at school? He always goes home during the other years, AFAIK, so why break the pattern now, if not for authorial convenience?
* Or perhaps he’s just started going out with Pansy, and is spending a romantic Christmas Holidays with her…
* On a side note, I’ve never really got all the Pansy-hate that goes around. I can sort of understand it in the books, from a Doylist perspective if not a Watsonian one (Pansy being based on some girls who used to bully JKR at school), but why does fandom seem to hate her, too? Seriously, I don’t think I’ve ever read one fic where she’s portrayed in a positive (or even a neutral) light, which is surprising given that (a) she doesn’t do anything that bad in canon, and (b) fandom (or at least parts of it) seems determined to like pretty much every other Slytherin in the books.
* Anyway, let us leave such characterisation conundrums, and return to the actual book…
* Harry has got to think of a way to steal something from Snape’s stores without being seen. *sigh* If only he had some sort of magical garment – a cloak, maybe, or something like that – which could make him invisible…
* As Harry, unfortunately, does not have any such garment until Rowling remembers about his invisibility cloak, he’s instead stuck with disfiguring the Slytherins to create a diversion.
* BTW, Hermione’s “I’d better do the actual stealing, as you’ll get expelled if you get caught” line doesn’t make much sense, given that Harry would surely be in even more trouble if he were found lobbing fireworks into cauldrons full of dangerous potions than if he were found stealing something from Snape’s stores.
* Snape turns a blind eye to Draco flicking puffer-fish eyes at Harry, which obviously counterbalances Harry’s getting the rules bent to help him, receiving free top-of-the-range broomsticks free of charge, being given extra tuition by Dumbledore, having the House Cup rigged so his House always wins…
* Oh, Harry, the things you have to do to save the school. I bet you hated disfiguring Malfoy like that, didn’t you?
* For all that we’re expected to see Snape’s dislike of Harry as an irrational result of his dislike for James, Harry doesn’t really do much to prove him wrong. He is lazy, arrogant, rude and mediocre, and here he’s endangering other pupils’ safety. It’s no wonder Snape doesn’t like him.
* For “he knows a tiny little bit about duelling”, read “he knows enough about duelling to completely wipe the floor with me”. And Harry, too, but unfortunately we’ll have to wait until HBP to enjoy that.
* “‘Wouldn’t it be good if they finished each other off?’ Ron muttered in Harry’s ear.” Note that this is completely different to Draco wishing that Slytherin’s monster would finish Hermione off.
* I’d love to be a Slytherin in this scene. It’s so rare they’re given a chance to shine, watching their Head of House publicly kick arse must be a very enjoyable occasion for them.
* I don’t see why they don’t teach Expelliarmus in the normal curriculum. It seems to me that spells like this are the first thing you’d teach them in DADA (maybe Stupefy and Protego as well).
* Lockhart bounces back from his humiliation as usual.
* Snape’s “splitting up the dream team”, as he put it, makes me wonder why pupils aren’t made to work with their peers from other Houses more often on assignments and suchlike. Having the Gryffindors work with the Slytherins might teach them that their counterparts in other Houses are human being too, not caricatures of evil like most people seem to think.
* So did Malfoy use Expelliarmus on Harry, then? Harry still seems to have his wand, but that could be attributed to Malfoy just learning the spell and, therefore, not being very good at it. If so, then Harry’s the one who actually starts using non-Expelliarmus spells.
* “Whoops – my wand is a little over-excited” must surely win the award for most Freudian sentence in COS.
* So is Snape the one who gave Draco the idea of using the snake spell? If so, why? Using random dark magic (presumably) just for the hell of it doesn’t really seem his style. Is it perhaps because he knows that Harry doesn’t know how to block proper spells, and just wants Draco to cast one which Harry will be able to avoid more easily?
* Also, is Draco’s already knowing the Serpensortia spell a sign that Slytherin has its own duelling club? It wouldn’t actually surprise me to find that Slytherin has the best clubs; given what we’ve seen of inter-House relations, I doubt that Slytherin students would be made to feel very welcome in any school-wide clubs they did join, so they’d probably set up their own.
* I have to admit, that “What, drop my wand?” line is rather funny.
* Better not tell Harry that, in a society as small as the WW, and given that Salazar lived a thousand years ago, everybody’s probably related to him several times over.
* Anyway, the idea of there being one heir of Slytherin doesn’t really seem very likely. Even if there’s only one legitimate heir, all it would take would be for one descendant over the past thousand years to have one illegitimate child, and there could be any number of unknown heirs. It could be anyone. It could even be Dudley Dursley… (Now there’s a fanfic idea if ever I saw one!)
* I like the way everyone assumes that (a) being Slytherin’s heir automatically makes one evil, and (b) all Slytherin’s heirs would get sorted into Slytherin. And people say that blood’s not important in Harry Potter?
* BTW, I wonder what the Slytherins all think of this constant vilification of their House’s founder?
* That’s right, chaps, Salazar spoke Parseltongue, so anyone who speaks Parseltongue must also be evil. Just like Slazar wore clothes, and ate, and got married, so anyone who does any of those things must also be—no, wait…
* Come to think of it, the evidence for Harry being the Heir is much stronger than the evidence against Draco. Not that this’ll give Harry pause for thought when he knocks out two of Draco’s friends to spy on him.
* “‘He always seems so nice, though,’ said Hannah uncertainly.” Don’t worry, Hannah, we’ll stamp that out of him soon enough.
* Harry’s voice is “shaking with anger” now, both foreshadowing CAPSLOCK!Harry and making him look like the dangerous menace the Hufflepuffs all think he is.
* Harry’s really unlucky in that he has a motive for attacking everybody who’s been attacked so far. Maybe Tom’s trying to discredit him, like Lucius is trying to discredit Dumbledore?
* I like the way going to Dumbledore’s office is seen as such a big deal. You can tell he’s got such a close relationship with the student body, can’t you?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-11-20 05:41 pm (UTC)It involves snakes and is performed by somebody Harry doesn't like, so I'd say so. ;)
If JKR says a magical snake coming out of a wand is dark magic she is crazy.
I don't care if she writes it in stone, that isn't a dark magicl spell.
How is shooting out a snake from a wand any worse than say...shooting out a lion or a raven or a groundhog (or whatever the hufflepuff animal is)
JKR is on mind alterning drugs if she says a snake out the wand is dark magic or she needs to seriously watch animal planet and/or discovery channle to find out snakes are not evil.
no subject
Date: 2010-11-20 05:55 pm (UTC)Or vicious canaries. >(
Well, to be fair, snakes have typically been depicted in Western culture (as well as non-Western cultures) as symbols of deception and evil, so their bad reputation has been around for a long time. Lions, eagles, and badgers, whatever their varying symbolism in Western culture have been, traditionally do not have that sort of negative connotation. It's not just JKR. But she did choose to have them represent a House that was feared and condemned by the good guys as corrupt and evil, without doing anything to clear up that misconception.
As a matter of fact, I'd think that a snake would be a safer bet than a lion, since the snake that was conjured could very well be one of the harmless variety of species, like a garden snake. Whereas a lion would always be dangerous due to its claws, teeth, and strength.
no subject
Date: 2010-11-20 06:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-11-20 06:31 pm (UTC)Lions are usually portrayed positively because they typically represent courage and strength. Plus, there's the whole "king of cats/king of the jungle" trope and I guess that people want to root for the guy on top. :)
As for hyenas, well, the reason for their negative portrayal in Western culture is because of some odd characteristics they have. They have that infamous weird laugh, although they do hunt as well as scavenge for food, they're mostly depicted as scavengers, (they don't "honorably" and "bravely" hunt their prey themselves, they just eat what's already been killed - like vultures and jackals, which are also not usually portrayed positively in Western culture), they're usually nocturnal (can't trust any animal that comes out at night, of course), and their cubs attack each other as soon as they're born.
But I don't care. Snakes and hyenas are cool and awesome. ^^
no subject
Date: 2010-11-20 06:56 pm (UTC)As for hyenas, well, the reason for their negative portrayal in Western culture is because of some odd characteristics they have. They have that infamous weird laugh, although they do hunt as well as scavenge for food, they're mostly depicted as scavengers, (they don't "honorably" and "bravely" hunt their prey themselves, they just eat what's already been killed - like vultures and jackals, which are also not usually portrayed positively in Western culture), they're usually nocturnal (can't trust any animal that comes out at night, of course), and their cubs attack each other as soon as they're born.
They're also matriarchal, said to be ridden by witches in some African folklore, and have some of the most horrifying female genitalia in existence.
But I don't care. Snakes and hyenas are cool and awesome. ^^
Very much so.
no subject
Date: 2010-11-20 07:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-11-20 07:50 pm (UTC)Which is why hyenas have often been used as symbols of (female) promiscuity and androgyny in both European and African cultures.
no subject
Date: 2010-11-20 07:10 pm (UTC)Plus Rowling's astrological sign is Leo, so she has a bias... LOL
they're mostly depicted as scavengers, (they don't "honorably" and "bravely" hunt their prey themselves, they just eat what's already been killed - like vultures and jackals, which are also not usually portrayed positively in Western culture
They are basically the "garbagemen" of the animal kingdom, and if it weren't for them there would be rotting carcasses all over the place causing disease.
And if it wasn't for snakes, we'd be overrun by rodents...
no subject
Date: 2010-11-20 07:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-11-20 07:40 pm (UTC)Yep. I just wanted to point out that scavenging has no reason for the bad rep that it's gotten.
(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2010-11-20 08:11 pm (UTC)Why are scavengers so often seen as evil by humans? Are they somehow perceived to be less "manly"? Corvids are some of the most intelligent birds, even to the extent of tool use, and ravens can be taught to speak, but they're so often stereotyped as evil. Vultures have a bad reputation as well for no reason (though, amusingly, Heracles is said to have considered them the most noble birds because they don't kill their prey). It's weird.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2010-11-21 03:28 am (UTC)Oh yea, thats right, her and Harry share a birthday don't they?
And if it wasn't for snakes, we'd be overrun by rodents...
Which makes you wonder about Peter Petigrew, I bet he gave the snake a wide path most of the time and I'm pretty sure he avoided using his animagus form when she was around.
no subject
Date: 2010-11-20 11:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-11-21 03:58 am (UTC)All the way back to the serpent in the Garden of Eden . . .
no subject
Date: 2010-11-21 06:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-11-21 06:08 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-11-21 06:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-11-21 07:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-11-21 04:10 pm (UTC)I wonder if there is magic to create humans this way? How would a conjured human differ from a natural one?
no subject
Date: 2010-11-21 07:14 pm (UTC)hum, I don't know if I would agree with that idea. But I haven't really given a lot of thought to the idea either; that creating a organism would be evil, if a person could do it with magic.
What about the aspect of, if you could somehow magically bring someone back to life after they died. I know that JKR says once you're dead you're dead but we've see there are examples that defy death in her story. Maybe there not examples of 'full' ressurection but we also don't know that all the characters know everything about magic either. I alwasy got the idea that there was more out there than poeple like Voldie, Dumbledore, Snape, etc. etc. knew/know.
I just personally can't see a spell itself as bad or evil - even when some of the characters call them 'dark spells' - JKR allowed her good characters to do the so called dark magic.
So for me, it almost seems like a personal opinion of the characters rather than a spell/magic being truly evil. I would have to say it depends on how the magic is used and to what end.
no subject
Date: 2010-11-21 07:34 pm (UTC)My point is that there are some people in the Poterverse for whom Dark Magic has cooties - merely calling something Dark means it is evil (James, Lily, the trio) while others, mostly in Slytherin, but also Xenophilus Lovegood, define some kinds of magic as Dark based on the way the magic acts or the way it involves the caster or some other traits. And by this definition Dark magic isn't necessarily bad and isn't necessarily wrong to use, but always requires *caution* (something the former side tends to forget once they decide a Dark spell is the right thing for the moment).
See Terri's essays and subsequent discussion here and here.
(BTW at some point Albus' definition of Dark Arts becomes 'joining Voldemort'. You can Cruciate and Sectumsempra your enemies, but as long as you haven't joined Voldemort you aren't doing Dark Arts, apparently.)
no subject
Date: 2010-11-22 01:55 am (UTC)It also depends on how the soul works in the Potterverse. It seems only to sustain the mind for the transition to ghosthood or the afterlife, but victims of a Dementor's kiss seem to lose their minds as well (maybe the trauma of losing your soul makes you braindead, or the Dementor eats both) so it's ambiguous as to what a soul does and whether or not it's necessary for sapience. Certainly if a human in the Potterverse had a fully functioning mind but was incapable of surviving death in any form, I would consider them a person, but it's unclear if Potterverse sapients can be sapient without a soul.
no subject
Date: 2010-11-24 11:56 pm (UTC)Overall, the main places I see souls (and mucking about with souls) explored on an active level are anime/manga. The Yuugiou manga is a pretty good example of this- when the soul is removed from the body (or incapacitated as Kaiba is when his heart is shattered), the body simply goes comatose.
Tom Riddle's mind goes with his soul; as Voldemort he was able to inhabit a new body with his soul and, putting aside the damage done to his soul (and thus mind) by splitting it so many times, the process seemed to have worked effectively. So while I'm normally skeptical of the idea that Rowling actually has something resembling sense behind the magic of the series, I'm actually leaning towards it being a case of 'without a soul a person isn't sapient (or sentient, or indeed aware at all)'.
Admittedly, a lot of this is probably just my experience with other fantasy at work. The very idea of a human body that's lost its soul still being able to think and talk and feel emotions is just...horribly creepy. There's nothing to make it work! *shudders* So while this opinion is probably influenced by my experience with other works, I don't think that you can honestly engage with the concept of soul=person and then have there still be a person left once the soul is gone. They just aren't compatible.
no subject
Date: 2010-11-25 12:50 am (UTC)Based on the existence of Horcruxes, Harry and Voldemort's mental connection, and the Dementor's kiss, my best bet would be that a Potterverse soul is the metaphysical "container" for the mind just as the brain is the physical container. Which would imply that the more Horcruxes you make, the harder it is for your mind to focus and the more unstable you become. According to Dumbledore, a seven-part soul was unprecedented, so experts may simply not have observed much of an effect with the standard two-part soul.
no subject
Date: 2010-11-25 02:28 am (UTC)