October 22, 200718 yr Harry Potter: Is that your magic wand or are you just happy to see me? :laugh: I have a good one that is almost worth the suspension that would result from posting it.................:cry: I'll give you guys a hint. It involves a purposeful misspelling of "Potter".
October 22, 200718 yr If you look back at some of the passages in the last book, it does tie things together What passages in the last book? I've tried to think of some but haven't been able to and don't care enough to look back at the book.:lol:
October 22, 200718 yr What passages in the last book? I've tried to think of some but haven't been able to and don't care enough to look back at the book.:lol: My guess is the last book, book 7. The whole chapter where we find out about Dumbledore's past and his friendship with Grindelwald.
October 22, 200718 yr “Neither Dumbledore nor Grindelwald ever seems to have referred to this brief boyhood friendship in later life,”’ Rowling writes. “However, there can be no doubt that Dumbledore delayed, for some five years of turmoil, fatalities, and disappearances, his attack upon Gellert Grindelwald. Was it lingering affection for the man or fear of exposure as his once best friend that caused Dumbledore to hesitate?” Bathilda Bagshot, says of their meeting: “The boys took to each other at once.” In a letter to Grindelwald, Dumbledore discusses their plans for gaining wizard dominance: “‘(I)f you had not been expelled we would never have met.”’
October 22, 200718 yr She also took a shot at those who have opposed her books for the promoting witchcraft by saying something to the effect of, "this will give the churchgoers and another reason to not like the books."
October 22, 200718 yr Maybe they should have got Ian McKellen to play the part of Dumbledore in the movies.
October 23, 200718 yr “Neither Dumbledore nor Grindelwald ever seems to have referred to this brief boyhood friendship in later life,”’ Rowling writes. “However, there can be no doubt that Dumbledore delayed, for some five years of turmoil, fatalities, and disappearances, his attack upon Gellert Grindelwald. Was it lingering affection for the man or fear of exposure as his once best friend that caused Dumbledore to hesitate?” Bathilda Bagshot, says of their meeting: “The boys took to each other at once.” In a letter to Grindelwald, Dumbledore discusses their plans for gaining wizard dominance: “‘(I)f you had not been expelled we would never have met.”’ I never took it that way as I was reading but you know some of it does make sense now.:creepy:
October 23, 200718 yr Did not like the books and rally don't care ? But why now to gain more recogniiton for the books or the movies.!
October 24, 200718 yr I never took it that way as I was reading but you know some of it does make sense now.:creepy: I never took it that way either - But now it does make sense!
October 24, 200718 yr As a diehard Harry Potter fan I've had many arguments and discussions about potential plot twists and no one ever thought something like this would come up. It feels like J.K. Rowling betrayed all her readers by telling us this now.
October 24, 200718 yr Does this mean that Gandalf and Sarumen had something going?? (Gasp)...and Frodo as the ring bearer..now it all makes sense!
October 24, 200718 yr On her last stop of her book tour, Rowling went on to explain the Dumbledore situation: "The plot is what it is," said Rowling. "(Dumbledore) did have, as I say, this rather tragic infatuation, but that was a key part of the ending of the story so there it is. Why would I put the key part of my ending of my story in Book 1?" Rowling said Tuesday she found it "freeing" to out Dumbledore, adding that the passages about him will mean different things to different readers. "I think a child will see a friendship and I think a sensitive adult may well understand that it was an infatuation," she said. *from http://www.mugglenet.com
October 24, 200718 yr As a diehard Harry Potter fan I've had many arguments and discussions about potential plot twists and no one ever thought something like this would come up. It feels like J.K. Rowling betrayed all her readers by telling us this now. ccfball, she couldn't really give away a part of the story in book 1 now could she? It was meant for us to realize what was going on in book 7, but some people didn't pick up on it or want to believe it until JK officially said he was homosexual.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.