HBP Chapter Thirteen

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

*I sense another plot time-out coming for a Pensieve trip.

*The school is buzzing about Katie, who has been removed to St. Mungo’s. I love that nobody ever seems upset that there’s no actual investigation into this with any updates or anything like that. An unknown assassin targeting students seems unremarkable on the rumor mill. But then remember this is a school where the most popular boy jock is going out with the most popular girl jock is far more interesting than the most popular boy exsanguinating a classmate.

*Wizards are kind of ridiculous fame-whores, really. When Sirius Black was on the loose it was a big deal because he was famous. For all the way it's put down tabloid-reading Petunia totally as the personality of a wizard.

*Ron and Hermione are now feigning deafness whenever Harry brings up his "Malfoy is a Death Eater" theory. You’d pretty much have to be deaf to not see that this theory isn’t all that illogical even from their pov. ETA: Actually, perhaps their problem isn't that they can't believe it but that they know even if he is a Death Eater it's probably not going to matter.

*What’s far more odd is that Ron and Hermione—Hermione especially—have no interest in alternate theories or indeed the case itself. Somebody just tried to kill someone in front of them and it's not worthy of conversation? If only they'd been this blase about whatever Dumbledore was keeping at the school back in the first book the Sorcerer's Stone would still be safe and sound.

*Harry’s indignant that Snape was the one to cure Katie Bell. He probably got his Snape cooties all over her!

*Harry identifies Phineas as Sirius’ great great grandfather—is he Draco’s great great grandfather too? I mention this because I’ll bet when/if this information comes up Harry will be completely shocked by it. ETA: Silly me. As if Phineas's family matters anymore.

*DD assures Harry that Mundungus is now afraid of facing him. Mundungus was allowed to steal whatever the hell he wanted from Grimmauld Place when he was stealing from the Blacks—Phineas is still the only person who cares about that. But this book Dumbledore’s not going to miss a chance to show he’s on Harry’s side. Yeah, he’s all over Mundungus. Sure.

*Dumbledore says he’ll take appropriate measures to investigate who murdered Katie. Not that anyone will hold it against him if they never turn up anything. Katie’s not one of those awful Purebloods whose parents might come to the school demanding answers.

*ETA: Seriously, it's not that his measures are a problem--we know that he knows who did it and is keeping them safe for no reasons of his own. But it's bizarre that nobody ever really cares about this stuff. Bizarre but not OOC since he handled the Goblet incident the same way and nobody cared. Basically he just tells everybody that he's handling it and since he's Dumbledore obviously it's taken care of and they shouldn't worry their heads over it. If he can't find the answer there must either be no answer or Dumbledore has a good reason for not acting on it.

*ETA: It's no wonder this guy has to still show up to tell everyone what to think about stuff even after he's dead.

*Harry feels a bit resentful—color me shocked! If his lessons are so important, why are they so far apart? Gee Harry, you think maybe you’re supposed to be thinking about the last lesson on your own in between?

*Why does Dumbledore even call them lessons, anyway? Aren’t they more like…information sessions? Just drawn out interminably through use of the Pensieve?

*ETA: And useless information sessions as well. Rita Skeeter's implied seduction scenario actually makes more sense as an explanation for what's going on here. All Dumbledore's really doing is bonding with Harry and flattering him before he dies using Voldemort memories. The only practical information he gets is that Horcruxes exist that he'll have to destroy.

*Harry’s indignant at Caractarus Burke cheating Merope for her necklace. You know, the kind of thing that would be clever and cute if it had been Lucius Malfoy selling the necklace to the Twins.

*Dumbledore explains that Merope couldn’t use magic because she either didn’t want to be a witch anymore or her powers were sapped by despair, which can happen to witches in love. I don’t see why we need a rather disappointing subplot with Tonks to prove this, but apparently we do. The guy you’ve been enslaving for months leaves you? The guy you like doesn’t want to marry you? Poof! There go your powers. If you’re a girl.

*Harry is indignant that Merope didn’t save herself for her son. Dumbledore asks if he feels sorry for Lord Voldemort. Haha! That’s funny Albus. Like Harry would care. He’s just judging Merope.

*Dumbledore asks Harry not to judge Merope too harshly, since after all she never had his mother’s courage. Well, jeez, that explains it. I’m amazed she managed to put her clothes on in the morning without the all-important courage. That’s why we need Gryffindor to lead us!

*ETA: A book later Dumbledore's theory of people is still amazingly out of line. Don't blame her, Harry. She just didn't have the guts the people in your family do.

*Younger!Albus has auburn hair, so he must be pretty cool.

*Also he’s dressed in plum velvet and garish taste in clothing is a sign of being a good person. (In the books, that is. Fandom continues to try to hang tacky ruffles on the Malfoys and dress the Weasleys in vintage chic.)

*ETA: Oh jeez, do I even have to say it? I was possibly being too generous in thinking the garish taste was code for fun-loving, good person. Perhaps it was a clever way to say he was something else...

*Mrs. Cole may have seen a lot of horrors running a home for orphans in a poor section of London, but faced with a man in purple she can barely put two words together.

*Tom’s name’s been down for Hogwarts since his birth, so yeah, it’s written by a magic quill. A magic quill that still manages to create a pretty homogeneous student body and a serving class with funny accents.

*ETA: BTW, small point but doesn't that magic quill kind of confuse the whole "Neville didn't know if he'd get into Hogwarts" issue? No way does the quill write down Squibs. If his family was worried they could just ask if he was on the list. It might give them a chance to euthanize him young start alternate education early.

*Mrs. Cole is an inconveniently sharp woman, meaning that she asks a question or two before turning over a pretty boy orphan to a strange man dressed like a pimp.

*So Dumbledore zaps the woman’s brain to make it easier. Gee, that doesn’t disturb me at all. It’s good to know wizards can do stuff like that when they want a child for themselves. ETA: Or a driver's license.

*One wonders why Dumbledore feels the need to also get Mrs. Cole drunk, having already addled her mind. Sadly, I think in his mind he feels like this makes it somehow less manipulative—she chose to get sloshed, she deserved it!

*Mrs. Cole tells how one night Merope Gaunt showed up, gave birth, and died an hour later. Then she had to clear off quick because there was a long line of other destitute Victorian women with secret noble pedigrees waiting to give birth to orphans to star in their own nineteenth century novels.

*This story might be somewhat sad if it wasn’t lightened by Mrs. Cole’s alcoholism. Thank goodness for demon gin!

*Tom was a funny baby. Even as an infant he made bad choices.

*Dumbledore asks if Tom is a bully and Mrs. Cole says yes. Well, you can certainly see why he succeeded at Hogwarts, then.

*ETA: Note that because it's Tom he's just a bully and not just kind of a git at this age but he'll probably grow out of it like James.

*Mrs. Cole also explains that Tom’s showing signs of being a sociopath—luckily again he won’t stand out at Hogwarts.

*Mrs. Cole then wanders into that odd grey area of the HP books where some kind of sexual abuse is suggested by hinting at something dreadful happening when the two little children followed Tom into a cave, but if you bring it up the more hysterical fans would probably tell you you were sick. I admit it does add a nice little frisson to the proceedings!

*There was no trace of the Gaunts in Tom’s face. It’s all in his blood.

*I love Tom’s TELL THE TRUTH! mantra, though I’m not yet sure what it means. One thing I do know is he’ll never get his wish from Dumbledore, who follows the Obi-Wan “from a certain point of view” method of truth-telling.

*ETA: Nope, still not sure why she went with TELL THE TRUTH with Tom. Though part of me can't help but think that it fits because Tom is literally "the truth" that underlies Wizard society. His blatant bigotry and viciousness towards lower orders is just the same as Dumbledore's if Dumbledore would be truthful. Instead they just kill the messenger.

*Dumbledore’s all comforting to Tom telling him that he’s not mad, he’s just a magician. The budding signs of sociopathy will easily be fixed through the ability to perform violent magic, I’m sure.

*Tom looks fevered. Awww, he’s like little Draco the Nutter.

*ETA: ::sigh:: I miss Draco the Nutter. Things that would have made DH better #891: Draco actually goes insane.

*Hee. I kind of love little Tom’s switch from psycho to polite schoolboy. I’m sure we’re supposed to think Dumbledore’s super smart for seeing through this act, though of course a Muggle psychiatrist would probably be a lot better at it.

*Err, in fact the Muggles may have been in general more hip to Tom’s true evil nature had he stayed in that world.

*Okay, so Tom, the budding sociopath who’s already killed animals and attacked children, demands a demonstration of Dumbledore’s magic and Dumbledore obliges by...setting afire a wardrobe? Can anyone explain what the man’s thinking here? A simple levitation spell wouldn’t do, he’s got to tempt him with arson?

*Dumbledore then warns Tom that thieving is not tolerated at Hogwarts under the previous headmaster’s reign. In his own years as headmaster Luna Lovegood’s putting up notices for the return of her stolen possessions in the corridors.

*Luckily I’m sure tormenting other students was considered all in good fun even then, so Tom will still be able to indulge in some of his favorite hobbies.

*In fact, if Tom Riddle and Fred and George had been at school at the same time, we’d probably be reading about Voldewarts and the two houses of Slytheriddle and Weasleydor.

*Dumbledore continues to lecture Tom on the law and order that supposedly governs at Hogwarts, so he won’t be able to torture other students. Erm, so am I to assume it was Dumbledore who introduced the current policy of "Gryffindors have their reasons?"

*Dumbledore tells Tom as a wizard he must abide by their laws. He hasn’t yet told him wizard laws bend like silly putty, if you know the right people.

*There’s a fund at Hogwarts for kids who need to buy robes and things, a fund I suspect was just made up this second since Ron Weasley goes through an entire year with no wand, but whatever.

*Harry thinks Dumbledore will insist on accompanying Tom to Diagon Alley and is surprised when he doesn’t. I’m not sure why Harry’s surprised. When’s Dumbledore ever been particularly responsible about kids?

*Tom somehow knows that being a Parseltongue is the strangest power he has. I guess the knowledge is carried in his blood too.

*Dumbledore points out that Tom Riddle used the word "special" to describe the fact he could do magic, contrasting him to the wonderfully humble Harry who could not believe he was a wizard. Well, we can see which one of these boys belongs in stinking Slytherin! Only villains think they’re above other people. Heroes know they’re above other people and shoulder the responsibility nobly.

*ETA: That's such a consistent way of dealing with Harry, though. The second he shows the slightest hint of an admirable quality it's rewarded far out of proportion and just becomes part of his general superiority complex.

*ETA: Anyway, Harry didn't have trouble believing he was a Wizard because he was humble, he had trouble believing it because nothing good ever happened to him.

*Dumbledore says he intended to keep an eye on Tom, which he would have done anyway, being that Tom was alone and friendless. Either Dumbledore’s stopped keeping watch over the alone and friendless by the present day, or else "keeping watch" means "watching kids be alone and friendless without doing anything to interfere."

*So it’s interesting and ominous that Tom had some control over his powers and used them. You mean like turning a teddy into a spider as a toddler? Or trying to make an Unbreakable Vow? That kind of interesting and ominous control at a young age?

*Dumbledore also reminds Harry of Tom saying he could hurt others if he wanted to…err…so he’s a lot like our band of hero wizards then?

*Dumbledore mentions Parseltongue is an ability associated with the Dark Arts, but as "we" know it also exists amongst the great and good. Oh my god, does he mean Harry? Laying on a little thick even for you, Albus, aren’t you?

*ETA: I'm not surprised that the Dark Arts was never ever explained at all beyond "stuff that's bad when Slytherins do it." Parseltongue is bad because it's associated with snakes and Slytherin. And despite what Dumbledore says about it existing amongst the great and good I believe JKR said that Harry can no longer speak it and is quite relieved at that fact.

*"Time is making fools of us again," says Dumbledore, having another one of his little hiccups of sounding really gay in the fourth grade definition of the word. ETA: And apparently in this universe the fourth grade definition is the only one.

*Tom Riddle also has a magpie-like tendency, so he can’t be all bad. Magpie-like is a lot better than serial-killer like.

*Heh. Wouldn’t it be cool if instead of making horcruxes out of stuff like rings and cups they were made out of, like, body parts of his victims? ETA: Things that would have made DH better #892.

*Again, all this stuff could probably just be told to Harry, perhaps with more focus and explanation. I know Dumbledore’s pretending to "teach" so he wants to be all proud when Harry makes a connection or sees where all this is going, but a straight profiling might be more effective.

*ETA: Also, something of practical use that will come up in the plot to justify the existance of this stuff.





IITS
Setting a wardrobe on fire. Just for dramatics? WTF?

Designated hero
Should I be worried by the fact that magical talent and conduct disorder share so many of the same symptoms?

Informed Attributes
From listening to Dumbledore talk one would almost think he was a responsible headmaster instead of whatever the hell he really is.

Misdirected Answering
Sadly, this is probably my favorite Tom Riddle flashback and yet it still just kind of stops the plot dead without any real payoff. The basic idea seems to be: look, here’s Tom still evil, but smaller. I guess it could come into play in the next book if Harry has to do anything psychological with Tom, but Harry doesn’t seem to have much skill for that sort of thing. All these flashbacks could be told straight out in one sitting.

ETA: Nope, nothing psychological. In fact, this entire chapter remains what it really is: a really good trailer for a movie that doesn't exist.

Final score: 4

I almost went for the James Bond exposition score, but I think a true Villain Exposition speech would have been less tedious.

Slytherin Liquid Count: 2

Yes, we’re back to Slytherin again and that water level rises accordingly! Dumbledore and Harry dip into the pensieve, and Dumbledore gets Mrs. Cole so pickled on gin she’s all but drooling over her desk.

Comments

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

It's not that there's evidence of sexual abuse, or that that's what really happened. It's just that when you set up somebody going into a cave and then say "something dreadful" happened but we'll leave it up to the imagination some sort of defilement is one of the things that suggests. Even if Tom was doing something magical that had nothing to do with sex it's still this idea of unspeakable violation that can't be spoken of. That's the taboo thing; what Tom does is Wrong for a child to do. Somebody isn't wrong for not thinking it's sex--it probably isn't. But I can't believe JKR isn't using that language knowing it sounds somehow obscene. So while it's not right to say that this is the "right answer" it's imo not fair to say any reader who thought that got the idea only out of their own twisted mind.

[soldurios.livejournal.com]

Oh, I definitely agree that it's not fair or even sick to call any reader who got that impression.

It's one of many ideas, certainly.

However, my disagreement is here: But I can't believe JKR isn't using that language knowing it sounds somehow obscene.

I can. Things have been brought to her attention that people have interpreted as having some sort of adult connotations and she's been pretty shocked at many of them. The HP books really aren't that deep and they're certainly not that adult. It's like the whole Fenrir issue. It's easy to construe him as a pedophile but what Rowling likely had setting him up was as a child's boogeyman. She seems to have little idea as to what she's actually writing and the interpretations that could spring from it. Rowling really isn't that deep. One doesn't need to look any further than DH to realize that her books are for kids and little else.

I mean, hell, you take these books apart constantly and you spot plotholes, loopholes, systematic fuckups. Even in this one the comparison between Tom Riddle and Fred and George Weasley may be humourous, but it's there. And we both well know that Rowling would shit bricks if you pointed all of these things out to her with any trace of seriousness.

And I'm not sure if the word defilement was actually used in that scene.

[artystone.livejournal.com]

But I can't believe JKR isn't using that language knowing it sounds somehow obscene.

I would agree if she hadn't done the exact same thing to Delores Umbridge.

[soldurios.livejournal.com]

What happened to Umbridge can be interpreted many ways but that's left up to the interpreter and has little to do with Rowling's actual thoughts on the subject. I'd love it if that scene was brought up to her and we got her reaction to the theory of Umbridge being raped by the centaurs. I doubt she'd agree that that's what happened and I say this believing in Magpie's theory of what occurred.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Oh, I don't think defilement was used. It just seemed like she was reaching for such a cliche with the Victorian woman whispering about some nasty goings on that you couldn't speak of. I don't think she meant anybody to specifically worry about Tom raping anybody there, but it seemed like she'd kind of have the same background associations with this stuff. Though you could also be right--maybe she was only thinking about magic. I was thinking also more of her hints about Aberforth and his goat. She doesn't really intend for him to be a canonical goat-fucker, obviously, but it's hard not to think that was the joke of Dumbledore's inappropriate charms on a goat or whatever he said then.

[soldurios.livejournal.com]

Heh, again, I don't think Rowling has that sort of depth regarding the whole Victorian woman thing. And yes, there are other examples as to Rowling's writing that can be interpreted as having sexual leanings but I just don't think she actually meant them that way based on her reactions to so many other things. It's like her entire faux pas with the sexuality of Dumbledore and him going gay because he has to be 'evil'. She really doesn't think about these details.

[elanor-x.livejournal.com]

I was thinking also more of her hints about Aberforth and his goat. She doesn't really intend for him to be a canonical goat-fucker, obviously, but it's hard not to think that was the joke of Dumbledore's inappropriate charms on a goat or whatever he said then.

In one of her interviews she was asked about Aberforth's goat fascination. JKR asked how old the child was (approximately 5-6) and then laughingly answered he liked their horns(?)/some other part/thought they looked nice.
From another interview:

(Mugglenet and Leaky Cauldron joint interview with JKR 7/16/05)
ES: What on earth was Aberforth Dumbledore doing with those goats?
[Big laughs from all]
JKR: Your guess is as good as mine! [Evil laugh!]

She obviously intended older fans to understand it's sexual in Aberforth's case. I also remember DEs levitating Muggle family (including a woman) at the QWC. Young kids would think it was embarrassing and frightening, while adults would get rape connotations too.

[soldurios.livejournal.com]

She obviously intended older fans to understand it's sexual in Aberforth's case.

Maybe I just need things spelled out for me but I fail to see how "Your guess is as good as mine!" equates to "HA HA! Yes, he was fucking those goats and needed a charm to make their twats bigger! Ya got me!" Or any such derivative.

How is this in any way obvious?

Young kids would think it was embarrassing and frightening, while adults would get rape connotations too.

...What?

So DEs levitating and spinning a family = rape? What? How?

[elanor-x.livejournal.com]

Maybe I just need things spelled out for me but I fail to see how "Your guess is as good as mine!" equates to "HA HA! Yes, he was fucking those goats and needed a charm to make their twats bigger! Ya got me!" Or any such derivative.

That really doesn't spell such a thing. I got the impression from another interview (now found it and put in bold):

Q: In the Goblet of Fire Dumbledore said his brother was prosecuted for practicing inappropriate charms [JKR buries her head, to laughter] on a goat; what were the inappropriate charms he was practicing on that goat?
JKR: How old are you?
Eight.
JKR: I think that he was trying to make a goat that was easy to keep clean [laughter], curly horns. That’s a joke that works on a couple of levels. I really like Aberforth and his goats. But you know Aberforth having this strange fondness for goats if you’ve read book seven, came in really useful to Harry, later on, because a goat, a stag, you know. If you’re a stupid Death Eater, what’s the difference. So, that is my answer to YOU.
[loud applause]

[soldurios.livejournal.com]

She also said that it works on a couple of levels. Meaning it's indicative of the person's interpretation. So yes, while that is her answer to a child, then...what? Then her answer is different to an adult? What is the actual canon answer?

Because Rowling can't give a solid, basic answer, there is no actual canon fact for anything. It's nothing but a joke in words.

However, when we have the QWC as you so pointed out, we actually see what's going on and, surprise surprise, there isn't any rape. We don't see what happens to Umbridge when she gets dragged off. We don't see what Fenrir does to kids. We DO see what happens to the Muggles at the QWC. We see them being levitated and spinning.

So I fail to see how you're getting any rape connotations out of this.

[elanor-x.livejournal.com]

Yes, I took it to mean her answer to an adult could be different. There is no canon answer. Just various more or less likely interpretations.

I got sexual undertones at the QWC from the following passage:

"One of the marchers below flipped Mrs. Roberts upside down with his wand; her nightdress fell down to reveal voluminous drawers and she struggled to cover herself up as the crowd below her screeched and hooted with glee."

There was no rape at that specific occasion, but it made me wonder about possible other cases of Muggle torturing with it. A group of violent men laughing at a woman trying to cover her body, which they've just uncovered, has rape connotations. JKR decided to turn Mrs. Roberts upside down, not her husband or children. Imo she chose so since Mrs. Roberts is a woman and her being frightened and sexually harassed made the scene even creepier. Revealing a woman's underwear is considered a sexual harassment in our world. Of course, it's not directly stated in canon, but I believe my interpretation of what JKR has written (not what she intended, though imo she intended adults to see sexual harassment too) is valid and highly probable.

[soldurios.livejournal.com]

So, by that logic, the marauders sexually harassed Snape and offered up rape connotations by their prank on him.

They did not rape the woman. Sexual harrassment does not mean rape. Really, there's inferring things from the canon text and then there's embellishing on things that really aren't there at all.

[artystone.livejournal.com]

So, by that logic, the marauders sexually harassed Snape and offered up rape connotations by their prank on him.

You just know there's an endless supply of fics that say this very thing.

[elanor-x.livejournal.com]

No, because Snape is a man. If Lily tried to defend him and James decided to turn her down and we were told about people laughing at her underwear, it wouldn't be exactly the same as turning down Snape scene.

I should have said: "Young kids would think it was embarrassing and frightening, while adults would get sexual harassment connotations too." I thought what DEs would do, were they not stopped, and the idea immediately jumped into my mind. Interesting what other readers thought about that.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Maybe I just need things spelled out for me but I fail to see how "Your guess is as good as mine!" equates to "HA HA! Yes, he was fucking those goats and needed a charm to make their twats bigger! Ya got me!" Or any such derivative.

The "how old are you" and "that's my answer to you" reads to me like it's obviously a dirty joke. I don't know any other way to interpret the laughter there and the focus on the kid's age. She knows it sounds vaguely dirty. There is no specific dirty answer that she's thinking about in canon, but she obviously gets that the very term "inappropriate charms on a goat" sounds dirty to all the adults in the room. You put "goat" and "inappropriate" together in a sentence and you have to work for it not to be dirty. The other stuff, like the pantsing (both of Snape and the family--I agree there is no double standard there) are not the same type thing imo.

[soldurios.livejournal.com]

The other stuff, like the pantsing (both of Snape and the family--I agree there is no double standard there) are not the same type thing imo.

How are they not?

Both groups hate the victim. Both groups have the power of numbers over the other. Both groups are doing things for the laughs. Both groups are intending on humiliation and degradation. Both groups are reveling in the helplessness of their victim.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

No, no--I meant that the thing with Snape and the thing at the QWC were not the same thing as the comment in the interview about the goat. I totally agree that they're the exact same thing to each other.

[soldurios.livejournal.com]

Ah, yes. Had me worried there for a second.

And well, yeah. There's nothing in any interview about those two events.

[soldurios.livejournal.com]

1) DEs are not Nazis. DEs want to exterminate Muggles. Not torture and humiliate them. The only reason why they didn't kill anyone was because they were likely drunk and they lacked Voldemort to hide behind. James, and more to the point Sirius, enjoyed torturing and humiliating Snape. Just because you can imagine someone raping another more easily than another doesn't mean that what they did wasn't the same exact thing.

2. Please don't tell me you're bringing up statistics for this. Men are also less likely to report their own rape. I fail to see how statistics helps your argument in any way.

3. Again, James was attacking Snape with three others behind him. He had the power of numbers and all those people had wands. This is not equal footing. In fact, this would be unequal footing.

[mmmarcusz.livejournal.com]

2 - In Snape's case it was sexual harassment too. But women get sexually harassed and raped much more than men (I don't talk about prisons and such, but usual people on the street).


Because prisoners aren't real people? Not "usual" people, anyway. Slytherins, you could call them...

[montavilla.livejournal.com]

I would agree with you that JKR wasn't conscious of these sexual connotations if it weren't for her answer to the child who asked about Aberforth's goats. When the child asked what he had done with the goats, she first asked how old the child was, and, learning that she was ten, gave an age-appropriate answer that practically winked at the adults in audience and let them know that, yes, Aberforth was having "relations" with his goats.

And then, there 's the comment about her more "sensitive" readers probably realizing all along that Dumbledore was gay. (When her very sensitive readers were more likely trying to avoid that conclusion. because to suggest it seemed like falling into the trap of calling a metrosexual "homo").

Which makes me lean to the idea that JKR is deliberately dropping these sexual references in as an inside joke with her adult readers, while keeping it just vague enough that it goes over the heads of the children. I don't think she's trying to be prurient so much as having a laugh about it. But it does give me a queasy feeling because pointing it out makes it seem like one... how to put it? Like one has a dirty mind.

[soldurios.livejournal.com]

I have my doubts about the whole gayness of Dumbledore and just when Rowling decided to drop that bomb. And I'd fully agree with you about everything had I not read DH and realized that pretty much everything in that book absolutely reeks of childhood fables, lacking character development, and the interviews pretty much undoing canon fact.

Rowling, to me, just doesn't seem all that deep and while she answered that child in that manner, that doesn't mean she really meant anything by that answer. It's an answer for a child of that age, which means she has several more answers for other people depending on their age. However, if we're going by canon fact, than the only real answer to that question would be the answer Rowling gave. And there was nothing sexual about it.

That being said, if the goat thing was her dropping an inside joke, then it wasn't very subtle, much like the rest of Rowling's writings. Subtle enough that may a five year old wouldn't get it but an adult or teenager would pick it up. As opposed to the possibility that an eleven year old got up to sexually molesting two other kids around his own age. Despite Rowling already writing up other things Tom had done that deals more with mental damage to kids than anything physical. Tom wanted to terrorize and make people fear him. He didn't want to get his rocks off.

With grown up Voldemort, there's nothing sexual in his killing or terrorizing of others. He doesn't get a sexual thrill out of death. So why would he care anything about it when he was only eleven.

Also not exactly sure when boys grow out of the cooties stage but Tom isn't exactly that emotionally well-developed. Even as Voldemort, he acts out like a child rather than a well-balanced adult. And even before he becomes Voldemort, he lashes out as a child would if he didn't get what he wanted and having tantrums.

So with those reasons in mind, I don't see the sexual predator undertones that a few other people see. And I can't see Rowling as actually going along with the whole 11 year old Riddle as a molestor no matter how old the interviewer happens to be or her going for most of the other examples stated above mainly due to the fact that she always tends to be surprised when people bring these things up to her. If she did think hard about what she wrote, there wouldn't be so many loopholes in her canon, she would've realized that Dumbledore didn't go gay because she needed a reason to make him evil, and she wouldn't be called out on so much of what she said as contradicting her own canon in interviews and on her website.

[seductivedark.livejournal.com]

And I'd fully agree with you about everything had I not read DH and realized that pretty much everything in that book absolutely reeks of childhood fables, lacking character development, and the interviews pretty much undoing canon fact.

I was so surprised at the lowering of quality of a seventh book by a single author, until I remembered that the fabled "Epilogue" had been written beforehand, as a sort-of promise, something to reach for. The epilogue, even though she seems to have brushed it up (the last word changing from "scar"), reads like writing by someone not as experienced as Rowling should be at this point. Some of the other scenes read that way, too, scenes which change things that have developed over the course of the series, like flying.

In DH, Voldemort can fly, Lily can do something similar with her controlled float from the swing. Wizards and witches need brooms to fly so what's up with this? This makes Voldemort super-scary special, I suppose, he can do something ordinary people can't or wouldn't dream of cultivating. At least Harry thought it was out of the ordinary when he saw it.

Unlike the Lily-&-swing episode. In HBP, young Tom Riddle is scary for having learned to manage his magic as well as he has without knowing he's a wizard and without ever having had a wand or training. This is ominous. Yet in DH, Lily Evans can float from a swing and can make a flower open and close its petals like a butterfly if I remember the description correctly. Instead of making her a scary villain and potential Dark Lord, this indicates superior magical ability. Why the disconnect?

I'm sure there are other examples - I was thinking about them as I went to take a nap but they seem to have dissolved with my dreams.

[violaswamp.livejournal.com]

Yeah, possibly I just have a dirty mind, but when I hear about "inappropriate" (was that the word?) things being done with goats, it makes me think it's an innuendo because there are so many jokes about "goat-fucking" in the English language. *shrugs* If it had been a different animal maybe my mind wouldn't have gone there.