The Sugar Quill
Sugar Quill Community
- S.P.E.W (SQ History)

Fan Fiction and Writing
- Ask Madam Pince
(Story Submissions)
- Floo Network (Links)


Administrative Links

Dumbledore's Army

The Sugar Quill at HP4GU

Or: Can You Guess Why We Started Our Own Site?

Gathered by Gryfny

Revision date: January 15, 2005

May 2001-The End (October 2002)

Return to Table of Contents

From: bbennett@j...
Date: Tue Jun 12, 2001 11:32 am
Subject: Re: Ginny's crush

--- In HPforGrownups@y..., Melanie Brackney <ilovbrian_99@y...> wrote:
> We see this cooling effect especially with the Weasley family. At
first, they are obsessed with the fact that he is "the famous Harry
Potter" and couldn't believe that Ron had made friends with him. >
I don't think I agree with the term "obsessed". Although the Weasleys
were initially as shocked as anyone to see Harry at King's Cross,
they all seemed to quickly accept him as Ron's friend and pretty much
leave it at that (Ginny excluded, of course!). Percy, the twins - I
don't recall that any of the Weasleys that Harry came into contact
with during the beginning of the first term seemed to be obsessed
with him - they seemed to me to treat him as their kid brother's
<But now I think that they see Harry as there brother(maybe not Ginny
though, cuz I'm still a Ginny/Ron shipper). It is hard to say if
Ginny is over her hero worship of Harry, cuz she really hasn't been
very developed at this point. My guess is she is over that..and her
admiration for Harry is merely a average crush.>
You're a Ginny/Harry shipper and not a Ginny/Ron shipper, right? <g>
Although we don't really know much about Ginny by GoF, I don't think
she's still hero worshipping Harry - as someone said, it may be hard
to hero worship someone you've actually gotten to know, even just a
little, and Ginny's spent some time around around Harry by GoF. But
neither do I think it's merely an average crush; I think 4 years is a
long time for a regular crush to go on (my 23 year long crush on
Harrison Ford not withstanding).
<She probably does admire him, but I know that there have been many
guys that I have I don't think this is that unusual for
a girl of her age.>
Again, I think it's more than just admiration - I think Ginny really
does love Harry from afar, regardless of the fact that she hasn't
spent that much time with him (this doesn't mean I see evidence of
H/G in canon - this is just my interpretation of Ginny from the
little we have of her in the books). Of course, at that age, I found
horses far more interesting than boys, so my opinion may be
questionable <g>.
From: bbennett@j...
Date: Tue Jun 12, 2001 2:02 pm
Subject: Re: Ginny, will she die next, & H/H/R

--- In HPforGrownups@y..., Melanie Brackney <ilovbrian_99@y...> wrote:
> Okay there has been a great deal of talk on many message boards,
and a little here that one of Harry's biggest admirers might die in
the next book. <snip> Why wouldn't it be Ginny? >
An English-lit-majored friend thinks that either Harry will die
sacrificing himself for his loved ones or that Harry's love will
be killed by the bad guys, breaking Harry's heart and thus driving
him to take out Voldemort by whatever means necessary. I can't
recall the exact terms of her argument, but she went on and on about
classical literature, heroes, and villians, and it all made sense at
the time <g>. I think JKR has a lot in store for Ginny and won't
kill her off in book 5. However, if Harry and Ginny do become an
item, I'm worried that she won't survive her 6th year (on
top of being worried that Harry won't survive his 7th).
Catherine wrote:
<I agree! I have stressed before the fact that Ginny seems remarkably
mature - not just in behaving in a considerate way over the Ball, but
keeping Hermione's secret, comforting, almost mothering Ron when he
has embarrassed himself in front of Fleur. What initially made me
think there was more to her than some people on this list allow,
though, was when she stood up for Harry in Flourish and Blotts, when
Malfoy is ridiculing him about Lockhart. She wasn't afraid to speak
in front of Harry when she was defending him. I thought this was very
sweet, and very brave. >
I like Ginny. She does come across as young in the first two books
(which she was), but I really liked her in GoF, especially
considering we see so little of her. I think that it's telling of
her advancing maturity that we get the idea Ginny *doesn't* rush
off to cry into her pillow when she finds out Harry asked Cho to the
Melanie also wrote:
<For one thing, I am envisioning some sort of brief
Ron/Hermione/Harry triangle. Although, I don't think it would be more
than a misunderstanding on Ron/Hermione's part. I think that Ron will
think that Harry and Hermione like each other, when they don't see
each other that way at all.>
I like this idea, Melanie! By my interpretation of canon,
A: Harry has no interest in Hermione and vice versa*
B: Harry is quite aware that Ron is interested in her
C: Ron is a clueless idiot on the subject.
*I don't think Hermione has romantic feelings for Harry, but I know
opinions vary on the subject :*)
When Ron starts to recognize his feelings for Hermione, I could see
him misunderstanding Harry's relationship with her. How would
Hermione react to Ron thinking she and Harry have a romantic

From: bbennett@j...
Date: Wed Jun 13, 2001 1:24 pm
Subject: Re: The Valentine (was Ginny's crush)
<<We also assume that the Valentine Harry receives in CoS is from
> Ginny - I'm of the opinion that it wasn't. Her discomfort in that
> scene (which Harry interpreted as embarassment over the Valentine)
is later revealed to be fear over discovering that Harry had the
> Nice to see someone else thinks that too. I've always been of the
opinion that Gred and Forge sent it, it would be just like them to
pull something like that especially since it would give them so much
fuel : )
Has it been stated positively anywhere that the Valentine came from
Ginny? It was my initial interpretation that Fred and George sent it.
From: bbennett@j...
Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 1:12 pm
Subject: Re: Has anyone named a child after HP characters?

--- In HPforGrownups@y..., rowanbrookt@y... wrote:
> I would say that IMO that is fanatical
Rowanbrook, you should try searching the archives; I'm sure this
topic as been discussed before. Additionally, this isn't really an n
topic discussion - have you had a chance to join HP4GU-Chatter? Lots
of OT (off topic) things are brought up there - it's an interesting
off shoot of this group. If you check the files group, you'll find
information about what gets discussed here and what gets discussed
And as for naming a child after a character - I personally think it'd
have been cool if I'd been named after a beloved literary character
from one of my parents' favorite books. If it seems a bit fanatical
to some, so what? All my favorite people are fanatical about
something. IMO, it's much more interesting to name a child after
a character that means something to you than to simply choose a name
from a baby book.

From: bbennett@j...
Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 11:40 am
Subject: Re: SHIPPING of Love and War
Ab's Goat wrote:
<A number of shipping posts have recently pointed out that a lot of
bickering may be great for a torrid romance but not for life-long
companionship. For the record, I agree. >
I don't think this is an agree or disagree situation – I
don't remember reading a post from anyone who has said a
relationship will only work if you have bickering or conflict. This
simply depends on the personalities involved (as many here have
mentioned as well). I know people who were good friends, fell in
love, and after many years and nary an argument are happily married
and still tremendously in love. I also have friends who bicker a lot,
have less in common temperament-wise, and are more in love after ten
years of marriage than when they first went to the alter. It's
not fair to a lot of wonderful relationships to say that one in which
there is no arguing is better than one in which there are
disagreements. Although I think most of us would say that of course
we'd prefer to be in a relationship where there is no arguing,
how much we bicker in a relationship may just depend on whom we fall
in love with. And honestly, bickering/debate is a hobby to some the
way gardening is to others.
That said, I don't take objection to a H/H relationship because I
think a lack of conflict = a lack of sparks; I simply disagree that
they are attracted to each other (I understand the discussions and
respect the opinions of those who see that Hermione has an underlying
attraction for Harry; I don't). Ron and Hermione do argue a lot,
but as David theorized in his excellent post (20724), the heart of
much of their conflict seems to be over basic respect (and
misunderstandings of that respect) for each other. As David also
mentioned, when it comes right down to it, Hermione and Ron obviously
rate each other very highly (again, see post 20724 – I can't
state it better). These basic misunderstandings are likely to be
worked out as they come to understand each other better/grow up. And
even if they continue to bicker, it doesn't mean they can't
have a lasting and successful relationship.
As a side note on the "bickering as a hobby" comment, I see
Hermione as someone who enjoys the challenge of a good disagreement.
Ron is more than willing to go to bat and argue the opposing
viewpoint; Harry is more inclined to disagree privately and go on.
Not that this means there is a spark with one that can never be with
the other, it's just that Hermione might disagree with the theory
that because Ron argues back he's bad for her.
From: bbennett@j...
Date: Mon Jul 2, 2001 12:29 pm
Subject: Re: MOVIE: Soundtrack info, Rickman as Snape

--- In HPforGrownups@y..., Amanda Lewanski <editor@t...> wrote:
> > > "I developed a theme for Hedwig," Williams says.
> > "Everyone seemed to like it, so I will probably use
> > that music as one thread in the tapestry.">>
Everyone "seems to like" Williams music in general <shakes head>.
What a modest statement from a supremely talented man.
And on Rickman (although I'm probably not adding anything new
here)... Although I've always been curious about Snape, I never found
him intriguing until I saw Rickman in the latest trailer. Yes,
the "Mr. Potter, our new celebrity" sent shivers down my back as
well. Rickman is older than the character (Rickman was born in '46, I
believe), but nothing about him makes me think "too old" (and that
voice is just perfect, IMO). I imagine Snape as not having aged
particularly well, considering all he's been through, and a younger
actor might very well have looked *too* young (assuming they could
have even found someone else to pull it off - as someone already
mentioned, Snape must be difficult to play as appropriately meanacing
without crossing the line into cartoon evil). To be honest, I'm
shocked at how unbelievably delighted I am with both the casting and
the trailers. I think this has the potential to be one of the all-
time great films.
From: bbennett@j...
Date: Thu Jul 5, 2001 11:30 am
Subject: Re: Request/Two General HP-Related Questions...
--- In HPforGrownups@y..., "Ebony AKA AngieJ" <ebonyink@h...> wrote:
England sounds wonderful (anywhere sounds wonderful at the moment -
I've been forbidden a vacation until the comprehensive plan for the
jurisdiction where I work has undergone revision and approval), and I
hope you're having a great time.
> 1) Is the Hogwarts Express the only way that kids get to Hogwarts?
I'm having a hard time believing it. I knew the UK areawise is
nowhere near the size of the US, but I had no idea that England is as
big as it is until I got here... <snip> Scotland's *much* further
away from the South than I thought. >
Is it at *all* possible that the train makes stops that Harry simply
doesn't mention? I know this is weak, but thought I'd throw it out
there. I don't have PoA with me, so I can't recall if the stop for
the Dementors was regarding as unusual because the train actually
stopped, or simply noted because of the way the train stopped (an
unscheduled slam-on-the-breaks type thing, if I remember correctly)
and the subsequent excitement of the Dementors, etc. If the train
does make stops at different stations along the way, I don't know
that Harry would comment on it.
> 2) Why does no one have tea in the books? Heidi has a fascinating
> theory about this that I buy (she was a history major once upon a
> time), but why no tea in the wizarding world, yet house-elves wear
> tea-cozies and tea-towels? This tea thing is really so much a part
> of the culture here that I immediately wondered about its absence
in the books. Unless I am forgetting something...
I've missed Heidi's theory - could someone point me in that
direction? As for tea, I just assumed they have it but don't mention
it. Or maybe Harry just doesn't care for it, and since it's from his
Oh, well, when you're having your scone and clotted cream, Angie,
please think of me.
From: bbennett@j...
Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 12:53 pm
Subject: Re: Dying characters/HP as children's books

--- In HPforGrownups@y..., Marianna Lvovsky <mariannayus@y...> wrote:
> I don't think there is going to be some sort of
> Armageddon at the end. It's a children's book after
> all.
I'm not the only one who disagrees with the label 'children's book'.
It was marketed to children, but that's not the same thing. Also keep
in mind that by the end of the series, H/H/R will be 17/18. Lead
characters this old aren't featured in books classified
as 'children's'(I'm not a children's literature specialist, and none
of my librarian friends are picking up the phone right now. Young
adult, maybe?).
I personally don't think any of the characters are safe, but I'm most
especially concerned for
A: Harry
B: whomever Harry might develop a romantic interest in (be it Ginny,
Cho, Hermione, Pansy, the giant squid... :)
From: bbennett@j...
Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 2:45 pm
Subject: Re: Dying characters/this list's name

--- In HPforGrownups@y..., Magda Grantwich <mgrantwich@y...> wrote:
> > As delighted as I think most all of us are that the HP stories are
> > so widely read by children, it should be noted that JKR did not
> > intend these as children's stories. That's only how the publisher
> > decided to market them.
> Then why is this list called HP for Grownups rather than HP for the
> Appropriate Audience?
I always assumed it was to suggest that some of the discussions might
not be appropriate for younger audiences.
From: bbennett@j...
Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 2:46 pm
Subject: Re: Dying characters/HP as childrens' books

--- In HPforGrownups@y..., Penny & Bryce Linsenmayer <pennylin@s...>
> bbennett@j... wrote:
Excuse me! I reposted; the subject line was incorrect.
> That's the 143,852nd reason why the decision of the NY Times to
remove the HP books from their Main Bestseller List makes no sense.
You all thought I'd forgotten that, didn't you? Nope. I snarl at my
Sunday paper every week in fact.>
A friend just called, a childrens' librarian, and I asked how she
would classify the HP books. "Adult fiction," she said, without
pause. I asked why she considers them adult fiction and not
childrens'. She said:
*they are much too long to be childrens or young adult
*the writing is too complicated
*there are too many sublots
She said that basically the only thing childrens' book-like about
them is that the lead characters are children. She also said some not
very nice things about the NY Times.
Penny wrote:
> I'm not too concerned for Harry. I have a hard time believing the
> series will end & he will be dead.
To be honest, I think you're probably right. Although JKR has
basically said she isn't going to flinch away from "dark" writing, I
have a hard time believing she'll kill Harry, not because I think
heroes don't die in childrens' books (which simply isn't true
anyway), but because I think JKR is fully aware of how beloved Harry
is by a lot of children (and adults). On the other hand, people have
sacrificed for Harry his entire life, and it's going to cost him. I
don't think this will end happily for him.
B (Excuse me, I'm going to go read something fluffy - I've depressed

From: bbennett@j...
Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 7:36 pm
Subject: Re: HP as childrens' books

--- In HPforGrownups@y..., "Amy Z" <aiz24@h...> wrote:
> This is a really sad commentary on what children are expected to be
> able to read.
> I totally agree that HP is not *only* for children, but this
suggests that it is beyond the audience the publishers claim will
enjoy it. There are 6-year-olds of my acquaintance who are enjoying
the books thoroughly and understanding them very well--they'll
understand them better when they're 10, and still enjoy them when
they're 33 <g>, but the books are emphatically not too long or
complex for them.>
Since my comments in my previous post were partially based on my
friend, the childrens' librarian, I called her to discuss the issue
further. Here's what she said:
"Part of what defines a book is the reading level. Something age
appropriate will take the average reader a few days to a week or so
to read. It may take an 8 year old several weeks to sometimes months
to read the Potter books - I know, because I see them go out of my
library. My big problem with this is that because so many kids are
desperate to read Potter, they spend months struggling through GoF
and ignoring more age appropriate books that would improve their
reading and comprehension abilities. And I will argue that most 6
year olds do not grasp the complexities of GoF. This doesn't mean I
think children shouldn't read the books, but loving the books and the
characters and understanding what's going on plot-wise doesn't mean
they also understand the intricacies of the books on the level that
an adult does. These are adult books."
To further emphasize her position that the Potter books are adult
fiction, she suggested I think about Holes. This Newbery winner is a
brilliant book - well-written, with great characters and a clever
plot. I have recommended this book to all ages, and I've yet to find
someone who didn't think it delightful. But can you classify GoF a
childrens' book, when Holes, classified as Young Adult, is not nearly
as complex?
I know some very smart 8-12 year olds who adore Harry Potter. But if
you talk to them about the books, they don't have the same
understanding as do the adults I've known who've also read the books.
Of course, there are always exceptions, as a few people have
mentioned on the list, and I'm not saying I think children shouldn't
read the books, or that they're somehow inappropriate (I recommend
them to everyone I run across), or that children are somehow
subhuman. I just believe the Harry Potter books are adult books that
are being enjoyed by children, and not the other way around.
> I hope HP has a lasting effect in redefining what children are
> capable and willing to read. How many times have we heard it
> said, "It's so amazing to see children reading a 700-page novel!"?
I hope it will stop being amazing soon and start being a case of
children looking at long and complex books and saying "Hey, if I read
Goblet of Fire, I can read this!">
That's my friend's concern - that it *will* redefine what children
are expected to read, and they'll be pushed into reading books that
are more than they can handle. There are a lot of *wonderful*
childrens' books out there (add this to the reasons to be frustrated
with the NY Times list - an award winning childrens' book must have
great characters, and excellent plot, AND be written on a level that
can be understood by the target audience. Tell me it doesn't take as
much or more effort to write a great childrens' book as it does to
write an adult best seller!). Again, I don't want to suggest
children shouldn't read Harry Potter - I think everyone should read
Harry Potter! But I don't adults always remember childhood
accurately. I was an advanced reader, and I've no doubt I could have
read all four books by age 8. But at that age, I was plowing through
Trixie Belden - I wasn't reading adult novels (a friend recently told
me she read Lord of the Rings at age 10 but didn't "get it" until she
read it as an adult - same sort of thing, I think).
This is an interesting thread, but if I don't go to the grocery I'm
going to go broke ordering take out.

From: First Mate Moey <moey@s...>
Date: Tue Jul 10, 2001 11:49 pm
Subject: Re: Who's going to die?

Dave wrote:
<First off, as far as Harry goes, we've discussed
before thatthe surest way JKR can save herself from
having to write sequels is to "Push Harry into
Reichenbach Falls". On the other hand, she risks
making everyone hate her by giving the saga such a
tragic end, especially as this series has been touted
all along as "A wizard's coming of age"...
(How can he come of age if he dies in the process?)
And who would get Dumbledore's "torch" if he died?
I put Harry's death chances at 0.0001%.>
I'm with you on this. In early chats when asked if
she would consider writing books after Harry's 7th
year, I believe she stated that she hadn't thought
about it, but that she wouldn't rule it out. Now
she's taken to saying "What makes you so sure he'll
survive." I personally think she's having a little
fun with us.
>Sirius - 65%
<I go along with those who think JKR would have to be
the cruelest writer in the world to rob Harry of yet
another parental/mentor figure. On the other hand, I'm
all too aware of the track records of authors
and their "Sirius-like" characters (e.g. Edward
Rochester and L.M. Alcott's Dan), so I'd say 60%
Sirius will survive safe and sound, 20% he'll die, 20%
he'll squeak through but come out of it badly
Don't say 'disfigured' and 'Sirius' in the same
sentence around here, Dave. You might find an angry
mob on your tail. ;) I'd say odds are Sirius won't
die. I just don't get the feeling from the books that
that is what she has planned. Besides, he is the key
to Harry's family and their past. He's probably the
only person (besides Peter) that can clue Harry in on
his parents. That is, if Harry ever has time to sit
down and actually ask some questions.
>"Voldemort - 60%"
>Voldie's outta here. No way he lives through this
<Agreed. If Voldy survives in any form, JKR *will* be
obliged to write sequels!>
Hmmm. Now that you put it that way, there's a little
bit of me that might root for him. How selfish am I?
:P While, IMHO, I don't think she's going to have
Voldy survive, there is always the possiblity that he
could simply disappear without a trace much as he did
that Halloween night. She could always decide to
leave us with that shadow of a doubt.
>I think there's almost no chance Dumbledore will live
through this. He's going to pass the torch to Harry
(think of Yoda here) and depart,likely saving Harry
one last time.
Poor Albus. There was way too much foreshadowing in
GoF and I doubt Dumbledore lives past Book 6. Harry,
as well as the entire wizarding community relies much
too heavily on him. He really *has* to die so that
they can fight their own battles, so to speak.

>Agree, double agents don't have long life spans or
easy deaths.
<I keep having this recurring nightmare about Voldy
dealing a fatal blow to Snape, and Severus dying in
Harry's arms... Maybe I like the guy more than I'll
Nightmare? Some people I know wouldn't call that a
nightmare. Personally, I was never a Snape fan until
Alan Rickman. Now he's clouding my judgement. Before
him I would have said that Snape was a sure fire
goner. I'm going to have to say that he probably
still is. But of course, his death will be redeeming
in some way.
>Percy probably will die. As Voldemort's agents'
influence grows in the
>MoM, Percy will die getting the warning out. No
Weasley can turn evil.
<I don't think Percy will turn evil, but I'm afraid of
his turning into either Fudge (goes into denial about
V) or Crouch Sr. (sends a relative to the Big
Yes, no Weasley can turn evil. I pretty sure it's
impossible. :) However, I agree with you again Dave.
Percy is just going to have to *sort out his
priorities*. He's going to learn a hard lesson. But
will he do it before it's too late?
As much as it makes me sick to think about, a Weasley
is going to die. I think the odds are against all nine
living through it all. I'm not sure who yet, but it
may very well be Percy - when he realizes he was wrong
and attempts to *fix* whatever it is he's
inadvertantly done. I'm betting that he unknowingly
puts Arthur in grave danger and figures it out in the
eleventh hour. She didn't show us that clock (with
it's 'mortal peril') in their living room for nothing.
Ugh - I need an antacid. :P
<I don't think they'll get together -- I think she'll
retain her current status as the "Unreachable
"Unreachable Goddess - good one! Which really sums it
all up. Cho was a crush and I'm sure he's over it -
especally after what happened at the end of GoF.
<But it's good for once to see a proposed "Death List"
that doesn't list either Ron or Hagrid! :)>
From: bbennett@j...
Date: Wed Jul 11, 2001 9:51 am
Subject: Re: HP as children's book & how are they marketed?
First off, I'm really enjoying this discussion - this is a great
topic! I do want to clarify something, though. My original post was
in no way meant to insinuate I think kids shouldn't read Harry
Potter, that they can't get anything out of it, or that they
shouldn't be challenged by reading. My points were meant to back up
my thought that these are categorically adult books and not
childrens' or young adult books. OK, on with the post... :*)
Allison wrote:
<I really don't think the HP books fit into any one particular
category, be it children's or YA or adults. JKR said she wrote them
as something she would want to read, and they're placed in children's
mainly because the main characters are young.>
I think you're right, Allison. I think they're considered childrens'
books because the lead characters are children. But how about when
the lead characters are 17 and 18?
<I'm 16, and I love the books. I'm trying to get my friends hooked,
but it's hard work because they all think they're children's books
(another reason they shouldn't be classified as such - it detracts
from a large group of possible readers). >
I agree, Allison, and this is my biggest frustration, I think -
what's wrong with childrens' books? As I said before, a well written
childrens' book must have the same elements as a well written adults'
book, PLUS it must be clear and consise enough to be understood by
the desired reading audience. If you ask me, a lot of adult writers
could learn a lot by reading good childrens' literature.
< I discovered the joys of HP from my grandmother, who had PoA in her
car. I picked it up and started reading it out of boredom. >
I wonder how many people read HP because it was recommended to them
by an adult and not the other way around? Although an 11 year old
friend suggested I read PS/SS, I'm the one who pushed HP on my adult
<I think younger kids can enjoy the books, but they won't get as much
out of it as an adult. They can enjoy the books more at face value -
an exciting tale of a boy with magical powers who fights evil. But
it's the adults and more perceptive children (I probably could've had
fairly good grasp of the finer points at age 9 or so) who can
appreciate the morality issues, the battle between good and evil and
just what separates the two. But kids can still enjoy the books - I
had a job at a day school with kids going into kindergarten or older
for a few weeks this summer, and several of the kids had read and
enjoyed the HP books.>
Yes! Kids can definitely enjoy the books, and it delights me to no
end that the HP books have stimulated an interest in reading among
children. I feel your comment about children not getting as much out
of the books (especially as they progress; I think GoF is more
complicated than PS/SS) point toward the argument that they're really
adult fiction. Childrens' book can be stimulating and challenging,
but they are written to be understood by children (keep in mind I'm
talking about how children are classified in the literary world - I
think aged up to 12 fit in this, but I'm not positive). The HP books
are more complex than this.
<Plus, children's books are just some of the best books out there. I
come from a family of voracious readers, and was always encouraged to
read pretty much whatever I wanted, but I chose to stay with
children's books because they were and are just better. I did and
still do read "adult" books, but I find I don't get the same joy out
of them as I do from rereading an HP book for the tenth time, or any
other of my childhood favorites (which are still my favorites
period). >
More evidence as to why the NY Times list people are WRONG.
Amy wrote:
> However, I'm not sure what the problem is. My only concerns about
> kids reading beyond their level are
> (a) they'll get discouraged and give up on reading,
> (b) they'll be scared/overwhelmed/introduced to aspects of life
that they aren't developmentally ready for, and
> (c) there's a lot of it that they just won't get.
> For (a), maybe your friend can say otherwise, but I am not seeing
this happen with HP, nor hearing about this from elementary school
teachers or parents of young children. >
Amy, I agree with a lot of what you say, and again, I wasn't saying I
don't think kids shouldn't read the books; I don't think they're
categorically childrens' books. I agree that I don't think kids will
get so discouraged they'll give up on reading, and I don't think my
friend thinks that either; her point was that by rushing into Potter,
they may be skipping more developmentally appropriate books,
especially when you consider how long it may take a younger reader to
get through a Potter book (two friends, both 11, now see me in a
whole new light since I told them I read GoF in 2 days :*).
<For (b), parents and others who know the kid well will have to judge
whether he/she is ready for it. >
Yes, but they may not know the books. A friend has been reading all
the books to his 7 year old. When I finished GoF, I hit they phone,
and called to tell him it gets quite serious, and that he might want
to read ahead before reading aloud to Daniel. He ended up editing
parts of the book. Later, he told me he never would have thought "a
kids' book would be so scary", and he thanked me for the heads up.
Because the lead characters are children, he assumed it was a
childrens' book.
> I have friends who have read their kids 1-3 but are holding off on
4. I know one little girl whose parents read her SS when she was 6,
and regretted it; she was scared. The next year, they tried again
and she loved it and has motored through the rest (again, having them
read to her).>
I love JKR's daughter's reaction. JKR was concerned she'd be upset
about Cedric, but as long as Harry was ok, she was cool with it :)
> Concern (c) is not really a concern for me. These books work on
many levels. There are lots of books that I read when I was "too
young," but still enjoyed, and re-read as an adult to much deeper
understanding. I read _Animal Farm_ when I was 11, for heaven's
sake, and I hadn't a clue who Trotsky was. >
Again, I'm not saying at all that more advanced books can't be read
and enjoyed, or that kids can't get a lot out of it. I've no doubt a
lot of 11 year olds could read Animal Farm and find it entertaining,
but that doesn't make it a childrens' book (I know you weren't saying
it is, Amy). Books written for children are written to be understood
by children. I still think the Potter books are adult novels that can
be enjoyed by all ages, and not childrens' novels that are enjoyed by
all ages. The subplots simply get too complex to be classified as
childrens' novels.
> On the flip side, I'm still getting new things out of Beatrix
Potter and Ezra Jack Keats (I'm 33). And I reread _The Secret
Garden_ almost every year.>
The Secret Garden is wonderful! I re-read that a lot myself. And have
you read Holes?
> I also wonder which list they put young adult books on. Or don't
> teenagers read enough for any of their books to make the best-
seller list?
The Young Adult category ranges from 13-16/17, but there aren't a lot
of YA books sold, outside of the series-type stuff. This is because
by the time most kids hit middle/high school, they've moved on to
reading adult fiction.
OK, question:
I said in an earlier post that I think the HP books are marketed to
children, but the more I look around, the more I think maybe that's
not so. The kids' merchandise, for example, seems to be an
afterthought; the really cool stuff seems to be targeted at us. JKR
said she wrote the book for herself. Are we (adults) actually the
target market?
I'll shut up now :)
From: bbennett@j...
Date: Sun Aug 12, 2001 10:29 am
Subject: Re: Robes (was Predictions - Robes, etc)

--- In HPforGrownups@y..., Rita Winston <catlady@w...>:
> > They're in stupid uniforms! Why aren't they in wizarding robes?
> Because stupid Muggle WB is more interested in making look like a
> traditional British boarding school story than in making it look
> accurate.
The uniform robes are actually what I pictured for Hogwarts. In the
books, JKR is never really clear as to what the robes look like.
Since it's been said she was consulted regarding the movie, I can't
imagine that A: they didn't ask her what the robes looked like (since
she isn't specific in the books) and B: she would have neglected to
tell them "Hey, you've got the robes wrong!" if they DIDN'T ask.
Just my two cents :) Personally, I'm delighted with what I'm seeing
in the movie.
From: bbennett@j...
Date: Tue Aug 28, 2001 12:53 pm
Subject: Re: Harry Dying -- childrens' books - Percy
> Bente13@p... wrote:
> I don't think Harry will die in the books. Partly because I seem to
remember JKR saying something to that effect once (although I could
be wrong) but more importantly because it doesn't go along with the
tenor and theme of the books. They are childrens books, whether JKR
intended them as such when she wrote them or not (and I'm sure she
did, in one sense of the word at least; they're *about* children).>
Penny wrote:
> Sorry -- I couldn't disagree more. <snip> But, the fact that the
protagonist was a child when the series began does not make these
books "childrens' books."
I won't go into all the reasons why I also disagree that these are
childrens' books (there's a thread that's a few months old that is
full of my opinions :), but I will say you can't argue that these are
childrens' book simply because they're about children. Just read Lord
of the Flies.
<I personally don't believe that he will die at the end of Book 7,
but it's not because I think JKR will keep the tone light because
they're just childrens' books. It's also not because of her
statements about not writing more than 7 books. I just don't have
the gut feeling that Harry will die in the end. :--)
My opinion that Harry won't die also comes from my gut (a friend who
is quite well versed in the classics argues that the ending chapter
may very well be "The Man Who Died". I tend to put my hands over my
ears and hum loudly when she brings this up). But the 'Harry won't
die because these are for children' argument doesn't hold up if you
remember that lots of people die in lots of books that have been
written for children.
Penny wrote:
>I know we've had this debate before, but I'll say again that IMO,
Hermione is a far, far better judge of character than Ron.
Except in the case of Lockhart :). Seriously, though, I agree that
Percy is not a bad guy just because he can be difficult sometimes.
You can't think a character is destined to fail or to give in to
the "dark side" just because of flaws. Sometimes the flaws are the
things that make you stronger.

From: bbennett@j...
Date: Wed Aug 29, 2001 11:37 am
Subject: Re: HP/children's literature
- In HPforGrownups@y..., Bente13@p... wrote:
> I thought "Lord of the Flies" was a children's book...? (And yes,
I've read it. At school, at 11 or so.)>
Although some consider Lord of the Flies a young adult book, I think
most consider it an adult novel. I asked a children's librarian
what she thought, and she said maybe she could buy that it's YA, but
that it's definitely not a children's novel. 11 is quite young to
have been assigned such a book; I didn't get it until high school.
< The problem seems to lie in our perception of what a children's
book is.
>If it has to have a simple storyline, card-board one dimensional
characters, easy language, etc., then, no, the Potter books are not
children's books. They're certainly better crafted, in language,
plotting and characterization, than most children's books are, but
that doesn't mean they're not children's books; it's just means
they're *better* children's books.>
You're not reading the right children's books! There's some
brilliant children's lit out there - Holes (one of the best books
I've ever picked up), all of Sharon Creech's work, 'Getting Near to
Baby', just about every Newbery award winner ever... I think it takes
more to turn out a well written children's book than a well written
adult book, because a children's novel not only has to have wonderful
characters and a good plot (all the things an adult novel needs), it
has to be clear and concise enough to be understood by the target
audience. Actually, the 'concise' thing is one part of part of why I
don't think the Potter books can be classified as "children's books" -
at 700 pages, GoF is longer than a lot of "adult" novels.
I'm not arguing that HP shouldn't be read by children - far from it!
I think the first book is excellent for readers starting around age
9 - but range that through adult, and consider increasing 'starting'
the age some with each progressive book. This has nothing to do with
the age of the characters, the amount of violence in the books, or if
children's literature is "good enough" to be enjoyed by adults, but
everything to do with the complexity of the series. The above books I
mentioned are excellent, and are written to be fully comprehended by
most of the people in their target audience (again, 8 or 9 - 12,
although some may consider Holes YA). While Harry Potter can be read
and enjoyed by people of all ages, the increasingly complicated
subplots are not going to be *fully comprehended* by most people
between the ages 9-12. And as the characters age, the situations are
growing increasingly complex. A lot of the children who are now
reading the HP series will read them in 10 years and interpret them
differently. This is great, but I also think it's telling that these
aren't expressly children's novels. The average 9-12
year old can read Sharon Creech's 'Walk Two Moons' and fully
understand the writer's intentions. My age may allow me to appreciate
this book a little differently that a younger reader, but I'm not
interpreting it on a different level or understanding
something the younger reader isn't. This isn't the case with Harry
Potter - or with Philip Pullman's series, or I'd even argue with The
Chronicles of Narnia. Just because a book features young characters
or can teach something to/be read by /be enjoyed by/ a young reader
doesn't make it a children's book.
This isn't meant as ageism - to say that children are incapable or
that children's literature isn't worthy reading. There are brilliant
works of children's literature out there that adults could be getting
a lot of and aren't because they somehow think they couldn't possibly
learn anything from something written for a young reader to
comprehend. Their loss, IMO. And there are of course many young
readers who fully understand literature written above their age
group. But again, this doesn't make these works children's novels.
Penny added several points to this discussion in message 22500.
> They're what all children's books should be, but unfortunately
aren't. But this is one of those issues we'll just have to agree to
disagree on, I expect...>
Again, check out the children's section of your library. You're
missing out on some great stuff.
From: bbennett@j...
Date: Fri Aug 31, 2001 12:04 pm
Subject: Re: Kiddiefic reprise

Of course this discussion both hits full swing and winds down on the
day my computer misbehaves :*).
> My argument is that GoF crosses the line for sure into adult
literature, and the latter 3 books promise to go even further. So ...
how to categorize the *series*. Is it a "childrens' series" just
because Harry was 11 when it all started? Seems short-sighted to me. >
<Cheers Penny> You can pretty much add a "ditto" for me on this.
<I will bravely come out and say that I *do* see HP as children's
books, and that this is NOT by any means a slur on them. They are
well-written, sophisticated children's books, so much so that they
appeal to adults as well, even those who refuse to identify the books
as such because they have patronising assumptions about the genre.>
I don't refuse to identify the HP books as solely for children
because I have patronizing ideas about children's literature. My
point remains this - I believe a well-written children's book should
be fully *comprehensible* at the average young reader's level. If
this criteria is not met, I don't think the book can be classified as
strictly children's lit, and I don't believe Harry Potter meets this
criteria. This is in no way a criticism of children's literature or a
criticism of the Harry Potter books - nor am I saying children
shouldn't read Potter OR any other literature they might not fully
understand until they're a bit older (believe me, I'm an equal
opportunity book pusher :*). Many people on this list have agreed
that they believe some of the more complicated plot aspects of Harry
Potter will not be fully understood until the reader is older, and I
think we can expect the complexity of the series will increase as the
books progress. There are other points that can be debated (does the
age of characters have anything to do with classification, length of
text, what audience does the book appeal to, etc.), but I see them as
secondary to the "yes or no - is this book completely understandable
by a young reader?" question.
And while I understand and may agree to a certain extent with the
argument that books are categorized by how they are marketed, this
doesn't change how well a book will or won't be understood by the
general reader in the audience to which it is marketed. Mark Twain
believed Tom Sawyer should be marketed to adults, but was convinced
it would sell well to children, which it did. But the fact it was
marketed to children or that it features a child doesn't make it
solely children's literature. I'll use Sharon Creech as an example
again - she is a brilliant author, and her books are written to be
fully comprehended by the average young reader. I also consider JK
Rowling a brilliant writer, but if there are aspects of her
books that aren't (and won't be, as the series progresses) fully
understood by the average young reader, then how can those books
strictly fit in the same category as Creech's books (i.e. to say that
they are fully understood by the average reader under 12)? If
Creech's books are "children's books", then Rowling's at the very
least should be "children through adult books".
This is also why I don't think the HP books should be left off the
general NY Times Best Seller List.
OK, I'll shut up now! But come on, you have to admit this has been an
interesting topic :*).

From: bbennett@j...
Date: Fri Oct 5, 2001 12:34 pm
Subject: Re: Hermione as Heroine -- Krum/Harry/Hermione

--- In HPforGrownups@y..., Penny & Bryce <pennylin@s...> wrote:
In any case, the alternative is that she, without any particular
motive of getting rid of Krum, *talks about Harry all the time,* with
the result that Krum is very jealous of Harry as a romantic rival.
Where's Ronniekins in that scenario? If she really talks about him
all the time "because they're friends" as Harry asserts (perhaps even
defensively), then wouldn't she also talk about Ron all the time
too? Nah, the girl's got feelings for Harry I tell you. :--)
I mentioned this the last time this topic came up - why *would*
Hermione talk about Ron? Harry is the one she and Viktor have in
common, and when talking with someone you don't know well, a polite
conversationalist looks for topics in common to discuss (in
particular, I don't think you discuss someone you may have just
realized you're sweet on with someone you barely know). I don't
question that Harry is on Hermione's mind (he is; she's helping with
the Tournament), and if she and Viktor were intimate friends and she
continued to speak only of Harry, then I'd see this as evidence of a
crush. But as it is, I only see proof that Hermione is a well-
mannered girl determined to be friendly with Viktor; that she hasn't
picked up on Viktor's jealously can't be held against her.

My two knuts :*)

From: bbennett@j...
Date: Fri Oct 12, 2001 9:36 am
Subject: Re: First Crush - Ron/Fleur
--- In HPforGrownups@y..., b.jebenstreit@b... wrote:
> Yes, I agree, that was a first flush off hormones for Ron there. But
> compared with Hermione´s crush on Lockhart a year earlier or
> with Fleur a year later, it is still a mild case. :-)
I don't think Ron has crush on Fleur; I see that more as a case of
(to quote Ron) animal magnetism. He thinks she's pretty (everyone
does), but his attraction seems much more veela-inspired than crush-
like (he admits he'd pretty must lost control when he invited her to
the ball, and his reaction at seeing her at the ball was
embarrassment - not jealously that she was with someone else). I
think Fleur is veela-attraction, and I agree that Rosmert was
a "flush of hormones" - but I think Hermione is his first actual
crush (jealously, won't admit to an attraction, etc).

From: bbennett@j...
Date: Wed Oct 24, 2001 1:22 pm
Subject: Re: Shippers and Non-Shippers

--- In HPforGrownups@y..., Penny & Bryce <pennylin@s...> wrote:
> Kanna Ophelia wrote:
>It's not any mention that concerns me, it's the "forcing it down our
throats" that I'm dubious about. What's wrong with wanting to keep
the focus on the books on the magic of Hogwarts, friendship and
fighting the baddies than on pre-adult fumblings?
Penny wrote:
> I'm not sure where the "forcing it down our throats" notion comes
from. Is it that people believe JKR was heavy-handed with the romance
subplot in GoF (Ron's developing crush on Hermione)? I trust that
she'll handle that aspect of the books with her usual finesse and I
doubt that anything will seem forced. I've never said that I expect
or even want the *focus* to be romance-related. I just think it will
be there in some measure, and I welcome this. It would seem
unrealistic for it to be otherwise. >
I agree with Penny; I'm not sure where the idea of "forcing down our
throats" originated in regard to romance. JKR has, IMO, been
beautifully subtle with what she's written so far, and I
have no reason to believe that she'll do likewise in coming novels. I
also agree with Penny in that it would be unrealistic to avoid some
aspect of romance; this is part of growing up, regardless of whether
your first date comes at 14 or 10 years later.
As to the original thread on shipping, I don't support the notion of
Ron and Hermione potentially being in a relationship simply because I
like the pairing; I support this theory because I interpret that this
is where JKR is going in canon (yes, Ron obviously likes Hermione,
but I believe it's also there that Hermione likes Ron back). If JKR
decides not to go in this direction, far be it from me to criticize
my favorite author - although I would expect to see some sort of
explanation as to what I would perceive as a characterization switch
in her future writings.
From: bbennett@j...
Date: Wed Oct 24, 2001 4:18 pm
Subject: Re: Shippers and Non-Shippers (in defense of Ron)
--- In HPforGrownups@y..., lady.nymphaea@f... wrote:
<This is kind of funny, because I was having this discussion with my
13-year-old cousin, who is definitely in the H/H camp. (Harry and
Hermione are closer friends than Ron and Hermione, after all.) She
likes Ron and thinks he's funny, but she feels he has a bit of
growing up to do before he'd make a decent boyfriend, especially for
Hermione. He's too fixated on looks at this point.>
I'm amused when I hear statements like "Ron is too fixated on looks
at this point". Yes, Ron made the comment regarding poor Eloise's
crooked nose, but Ron is obviously the one that has an interest in
Hermione - bushy haired, pre-teeth straightened and all. Harry is the
one with the crush on the exceptionally pretty Cho, yet Ron is always
accused of being the superficial one. Really, this makes no sense to
And since I'm being argumentative :*), I'll also say that I don't see
evidence that Hermione is a much closer friend to Harry than she is
to Ron. Remember, the books are from Harry's POV, so we see the time
he spends with Ron and with Hermione, but we don't hear about the
time Ron and Hermione might be spending together, unless Harry
happens to allude to it. Ron and Hermione bicker, but Harry
frequently agrees with Ron's position - he just doesn't open his
mouth to agree. I don't see the bickering between Ron and Hermione as
evidence of a less intimate friendship than the one Harry shares with
Hermione; Hermione seems to me to be the type who loves a good
debate, and Ron is the one who'll "fight" with her, not Harry (in
other words, while she often expresses vexation at Ron's opinions,
she doesn't seem put that out that Ron *expresses* his opinions). I'm
not at all arguing that Hermione and Ron are closer than Hermione and
Harry, just that there's no evidence Harry and Hermione are closer
than Hermione and Ron.
My, I haven't defended Ron in quite a while - that felt good <g>.
From: bbennett@j...
Date: Wed Oct 24, 2001 9:38 pm
Subject: Re: Ron/Ball (was Shippers and Non-Shippers (in defense of Ron)

--- In HPforGrownups@y..., lady.nymphaea@f... wrote:
> My thoughts on the Ball: Ron is definitely interested in Hermione,
> but IMO he didn't think of asking her out beforehand because, well,
> it would have been like asking Harry out. They were going to be
> hanging around together all night any way, as usual (which is what
> Harry and Ron did in the end, without Hermione.)
I agree that Ron was being a prat, and I think you nailed it - he
just assumed it would ultimately be three of them at the ball. He had
*no clue* anyone else would think to ask Hermione (I did say he was
being a prat, right?), and God forbid he actually ask her as if it
were a real date - someone might *think* he liked her! The horror! :*)
From: "bbennett320178" <bbennett@j...>
Date: Wed Dec 12, 2001 12:26 pm
Subject: Re: SHIP: R/H: Muddying the pool -- Fanfic vs. Canon (More)

--- In HPforGrownups@y..., Penny & Bryce <pennylin@s...> wrote:
> As for Harry/Hermione, whatever Harry may think or feel at this
moment, what's clear to me is that Hermione feels something a great
deal more than sisterly or maternal affection. She talks about him
all the time to Krum for example. We don't see Krum saying that she
talks about Harry *and* Ron all the time, do we? What we do see is
*Krum* interpreting Hermione's actions as evidence of romantic
interest in Harry. Krum seems like a sharp enough fellow.>
Hi Penny. Work is mad at the moment and I'd like time to respond to
all of your post, but the above bit caught my eye, as I responded to
it the last time this came up. Here's what I wrote then:
I mentioned this the last time this topic came up - why *would*
Hermione talk about Ron? Harry is the one she and Viktor have in
common, and when talking with someone you don't know well, a polite
conversationalist looks for topics in common to discuss (in
particular, I don't think you discuss someone you may have just
realized you're sweet on with someone you barely know). I don't
question that Harry is on Hermione's mind (he is; she's helping with
the Tournament), and if she and Viktor were intimate friends and she
continued to speak only of Harry, then I'd see this as evidence of a
crush. But as it is, I only see proof that Hermione is a well-
mannered girl determined to be friendly with Viktor; that she hasn't
picked up on Viktor's jealously can't be held against her.
This still sums up my thoughts on the idea that Hermione speaking
about Harry to Krum hints at romantic feelings for Harry on
Hermione's part, regardless of how Krum interpreted it.

From: "bbennett320178" <bbennett@j...>
Date: Wed Dec 12, 2001 2:01 pm
Subject: Re: SHIP: H/H: Muddying the pool
--- In HPforGrownups@y..., "cassandraclaire73"
<cassandraclaire73@y...> wrote:
<I think it would be quite easy for her to chat about Ron around
Viktor -- Ron is a huge Quidditch fan, he really admires Viktor (or
did at one point.) It isn't as if there's nothing to say about Ron,
and Harry and Viktor are hardly close; there's not much Harry-related
to say other than Tournament chat. Also, she spends almost all her
time with Ron and Harry -- they are her best friends. It is natural
to talk about your best friends.>
I don't think there's a lot to say about just Harry, either, but I
think there's probably a lot to say about Harry-in-relation-to-the-
tournament. This gets into something shippers will argue until we're
100 - character personality. :*) I see Hermione's chats with Viktor
as her trying to be polite/looking for common
interests in conversation, because that seems to me to be the kind of
girl Hermione is. Who knows - maybe she did bring up Ron, but Ron's
the one she wouldn't have much to say about to Viktor, IMO, not Harry
(once she got past "my friend Ron is a big fan and loves Quidditch",
what would be left to talk about). If Hermione's mainly trying to be
enjoyable company, then I think it's perfectly reasonable for her to
mostly think to bring up Harry (Harry and the tournament are the
primary things she has in common with Viktor, Viktor is essentially a
stranger, she's looking for things to talk about, etc).

<I am of the opinion that there is something in the way
she talks about Harry that struck a nerve with him.>
:b Well, yes, maybe, but I don't think it matters how she talked
about him. <g> If Viktor likes Hermione, and Hermione brings up Harry
a lot, then Viktor is likely to assume that Hermione likes Harry.
Which he does.
<Either way I chew on the fact that Viktor is jealous of Harry, I
cannot see it as an argument *for* Hermione being interested in Ron
that she does not talk about him much. What's next? "Ron asked her
out and she said no. Aha! She's interested! If she really didn't like
him, she'd say yes!">
Nuh-uh, I mean it the other way ;). I'm not saying not talking
about Ron means Hermione has a crush on Ron (although I do think she
might be less inclined to discuss him at length to a stranger if
she's sweet on him, but that's not really the point); I'm saying I
don't believe this scene offers proof that Hermione likes Harry.
B, who loves it when shipping discussions come up on HPGUs!
From: "bbennett320178" <bbennett@j...>
Date: Wed Dec 12, 2001 2:37 pm
Subject: SHIP: Re: Krum/Hermione
<Ah, but at the time of the Harry-Krum conversation, Krum isn't
she barely knows. That conversation takes place in the last week of
per GoF, so it's a full 5 months after the Yule Ball. She may well
not known Viktor terribly well when she accepted his invitation to
Ball (since this acceptance of a date is apparently roughly 5-7 weeks
after he arrived at Hogwarts on Halloween). But, by late May, I think
we can assume that Hermione knows Krum reasonably well. Cassie makes
the point that we don't know much about the Hermione/Krum
in the intervening months between the Yule Ball & the end of the
but we do know that he asked her to visit in Bulgaria & she was his
"thing he'd miss most" in the 2nd Task in late Feb. All of this
suggests to me that Hermione was spending *some* amount of time with
Krum, and it would seem that they have moved past the "awkward
conversation" stage of the relationship.>
She's probably spending all the time she doesn't spend with Harry
with Krum, since H/Hrs argue there's no proof she spends any of it
with Ron<bg>. No, siriusly, you're right, Penny, Hermione has been
acquainted with Krum for 5 months, but that doesn't necessarily mean
she's developed a friendship with him or that they're past the
awkward conversation phase; neither do Krum's feelings for Hermione
mean she feels comfortable around him. All we know is that Hermione
has had conversations with Viktor, that she's talked about Harry, and
that Krum has developed feelings for Hermione. As you said, there are
too many things we don't know about the relationship; my point was
simply that Hermione talking about Harry to Krum does not equal
Hermione liking Harry as more than a friend.
„« Either way I chew on the fact that Viktor is jealous of Harry,
> cannot see it as an argument *for* Hermione being interested in Ron
> that she does not talk about him much. What's next? "Ron asked her
> out and she said no. Aha! She's interested! If she really didn't
> him, she'd say yes!"
<Hee, hee.
Oh, stop it. You two are terrible. :b
;) B
p.s. For anyone who's interested, Arabella wrote an outstanding take
on GoF from Hermione's POV (Hermione Queen of Witches), and Elanor
Gamgee is writing an excellent version of GoF from Krum's POV (Moody
Slavic Man). Both do a great job with character interpretation of the
events in that book. HQoW has a (very, very well written) R/H slant,
but MSM is strictly Krum's POV.. Both stories are at The Sugar Quill
From: "bbennett320178" <bbennett@j...>
Date: Wed Dec 12, 2001 4:06 pm
Subject: Re: SHIP: H/H: Muddying the pool
--- In HPforGrownups@y..., "cassandraclaire73"
< See, I disagree that after six months of interaction, and I would
say friendship, that Viktor is still essentially a stranger to her.>
< Here were are, many of us making the point that Harry is something
Viktor and Hermione
have in common. He is a celebrity. He is in the Tournament with
Viktor. If she was must trying to make conversation, it might make
sense she'd talk about Harry. Fine. But is Viktor incapable of making
that same deduction about her motives? Again, I don't think he is
stupid and I hardly think he wouldn't be able to understand that on
his own. Therefore I have to make the assumption that he's annoyed by
something beyond simply Hermione talking about her friend Harry as a
point of interest for her and Viktor to share.>
I don't think Krum's stupid either, but I'm not sure how much
intelligence comes into play much when interpreting the motives of
the opposite sex :*). I've known this guy for 6 months or so. He
likes me. I know he likes me, and while I think he's nice person, I
don't have any romantic interest in him. When I'm around him, I try
to think of nice, pleasant conversation, and I try not to get into
intimate discussions, hoping he'll get the hint. He hasn't, and if
you were to ask him, he may think we're much closer than we
actually are - but just because I've known him all this time doesn't
mean that I feel we are good friends. Hermione may very well feel
like Krum is a good friend, but it's not unreasonable to argue that
she doesn't, even after 5 months - especially considering we already
know Hermione isn't the type to have a lot of close friends.
> :D Cassie, waving her Viktor is Cool flag
Cassie, you should read Elanor Gamgee's Moody Slavic Man. It's at SQ.
She has an *awesome* characterization of Viktor.

From: "bbennett320178" <bbennett@j...>
Date: Tue Mar 5, 2002 4:30 pm
Subject: Re: Hermione, kindness/insensitivity
Serenadust wrote:
> > Her insensitivity to others can
> >be breathtaking at times. Remember her response to the death of
> >Lavenders rabbit? She consistently favors being right over being
> > kind.
You're talking about personality type, Serena. Hermione can
be kind to others, as Amy pointed out, but when her sense of Right is
challenged, proving her point becomes her main goal - not being
sensitive to others. Myers Brigg (and Keirsey/Jung) categorize people
into Thinkers and Feelers. Thinkers are primarily interested in what
is Just, a concept they determine through the use of impersonal logic
(facts they can determine that are dependent of
personal 'interference'). Feelers are primarily
concerned with what is Fair, which is determined through their
relationships with people and the use of personal logic. The House
Elf situation is a good example - Hermione's primary interest in this
situation is seeing Justice served and the House Elves liberated,
which her impersonal logic tells her is the way things should be -
she has little interest in relating to the House Elves on a personal
level once she finds out they are wary of her plans, and does not let
their personal feelings sway her. This is very Thinker behavior (I
think Harry is a Thinker as well).
This of course doesn't mean a Feeler would decide the House Elf
situation was A-OK once they talked to the Elves (a Feeler would
proceed with plans on a more personal level, taking the Elves
feelings into account), or that Thinkers are somehow naturally rude -
it's just a difference in how people think.
This has been discussed some over on the OT thread; Keirsey's website
has more on the T/F difference (
From: "bbennett320178" <bbennett@j...>
Date: Wed Apr 24, 2002 9:40 pm
Subject: Enneagram/Keirsey/HP personalities
Ooooo, I love this stuff. I'm not really familiar with the Enneagram
(outside of a short summary I've read), but I'm fascinated by Keirsey
& Myers-Brigg.
We've discussed character personality on a thread at SQ. At last
glance, I think opinions were paused at:
Hermione - ENTJ (confident leader, likes to be in charge, decisive,
likes intellectual exchange, ingenious and resourceful in solving
complex problems, logical, independent, strives to be the best)
Harry - ISTP (prefers action to conversation, likes adventure and
challenge, does well in crisis, enjoys hands-on skills, resourceful,
independent, self-determined, realistic, reserved, detached, curious
Ron - ESFP (friendly, gregarious, enthusiastic, good communicator,
creative, practical common sense, caring, enjoys helping others)
ESFJ (enthusiastic, sociable, engaging, likes to be needed and
appreciated, personable, trustworthy, loyal, shows love in practical
There may have been some discussion on Ron being an N, as well as
debate over Hermione being an E - but she is quite outwardly-
oriented, which is an E trait (keep in mind that you can be
realitively quiet E and a rather loud-mouthed I, depending on the
subject at hand). I personally see her as an E.
I think it's interesting that Hermione and Harry are both Thinkers,
especially Hermione (female Thinkers aren't extremely common), and
that Ron is a Feeler (more Feelers are female).
Here's the thread:
Included is my brilliant post on why that many people really don't
have a Hermione-like personality, even though they may have very
Hermmione-like behaviors. :D
B, INTP <waves at Heidi for directing her to this thread!>
From: "bbennett320178" <bbennett@j...>
Date: Mon May 13, 2002 3:48 pm
Subject: Re: Ron and Hermione friendship
> David wrote:
> We need Amy's list.
> Amy wrote:
> <bows> Your wish is my command.
>Is this the way a writer would portray a relationship between two
people whose only connection was their friendship with a third? I
don't see how JKR could make it much clearer that Ron and Hermione
are friends in their own right. They spend too much time voluntarily
in one another's company-not just to be with Harry, but just being
together even when he isn't around-and have too wide a variety of
pleasant interactions for their relationship to be less than genuine
In addition to saying that Amy is my new favorite person, I just
wanted to comment that it seems to me that many readers see Hermione
as a 'victim' of sorts in the arguments with Ron (I don't mean in
connection with the current discussion, as I haven't had the
opportunity to read all of the posts, but in general).
Hermione has always struck me as the type who enjoys having her ideas
challenged, if for no other reason that it gives her the opportunity
to prove herself right. Like many of us on this list, I don't think
Hermione would bother 'giving back' to Ron if she wasn't on some
level enjoying herself in the process.

From: "bbennett320178" <bbennett@j...>
Date: Tue Sep 3, 2002 9:03 am
Subject: FYI: The Sugar Quill website
Just to let everyone know:
The Sugar Quill is experiencing technical difficulties. We were not
hacked - the owner of the server cancelled without giving the
administrator any advance notice. At the moment, the Sugar Quill is
trying to decide the next course of action. Headmistress Zsenya has
everything backed up, and as soon as we can regroup, hopefully the
archive at the very least will be back within a few weeks.
We're very sorry for any inconvenience.
Thank you,
B Bennett
From: "michelle_ravel" <michelle_ravel@y...>
Date: Mon Sep 9, 2002 1:58 am
Subject: Re: Ron: GoF: Betrayed or Jealous? Revisited.
--- In HPforGrownups@y..., "bboy_mn" <bboy_mn@y...> wrote:
> So, what say you all; jealousy or betrayal?
Is there no way that Ron could have felt BOTH jealous AND betrayed?
Don't you think it's most likely that he felt a terrible mix of both
emotions, letting them fuel one another until it all blew up into an
anger that he couldn't control?
That seems the most plausible to me. Humans usually feel more than
one emotion at one time.
I totally agree with you that Ron felt betrayed--you have made a
wonderful case. You are right--Ron obviously feels very left out, and
very alone.
But Hermione wasn't wrong when she said that Ron was jealous. Ron IS
jealous of Harry and his fame. Ron has always wanted to be important--
we've known that since Book 1--and it's not a strech to assume that
he was jealous in this situation.
Just remember how much fuel it added to Ron's fire when Harry was
called for publicity photos. The FAMOUS Harry Potter got to him.
Ron is jealous of Harry, but he'd always been able to contain it
before because Harry was his FRIEND. You see? But when he
was "betrayed" (or at least FELT betayed, as you pointed out) it was
too hard to contain his jealousy, and so it all began.
I don't think that the jealousy/betrayal debate really is a debate. I
don't think it's an either/or.
Ron's too good a character to only feel one thing. He probably felt
those two emotions, and tons more besides!
Michelle Ravel
From: Lilac <lilac_bearry@y...>
Date: Tue Oct 1, 2002 5:00 am
Subject: In Defense of Ginny-some SHIP ( was Re: Re: SHIP: H/H, H/R or other?)
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 17:23:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Moonstruck <myphilosophy2001@y...>

Subject: Re: Re: SHIP: H/H, H/R or other?

<lengthy snip>
Ginny Weasley is a serious thorn in my side. She’s the
wild card. Right now, she’s merely a caricature and
that makes me extremely suspicious.
I described her as the "Ace" up JKR’s sleeve the other day, but the "Wild Card"
seems to fit a little better because we just don’t know what will happen. Lot’s
of interesting card imagery here, though...
I’ve always been suspicious of why she played such a big role in COS, and then
disappeared into the background again. When I read the series the first time, I
kept looking for more development about Ginny from books 3 and 4, but to no

As a Weasley, Ginny is simply too important to the plot to remain
underdeveloped. Besides, how many characters in the HP
series can you truly call underdeveloped? I think OoP
will make or break her as a potential partner for
Harry –– and Rowling has said Ginny be playing a bigger
role. Perhaps I’’m a pessimist, but my overwhelming
sense with Ginny is that, as the series, progresses
and we discover more about Lily Potter (another
development JKR has said will begin in OoP –– and I
fear that’’s not a coincidence), we’’re going to
increasingly find that she’’s a modern day embodiment
of Harry’’s mother. There are really only two thoughts
that lead me in that direction right now and they’’re
•• Ginny is a shortened version of the name ""Virginia.""
I believe this is significant because the name ""Ginny""
is not particularly common and it’’s close enough to
the name ""Jenny"" that there must be a specific reasonshe chose that variation
of the name. ""Virginia"" means
""chaste, virginal."" The flower ""lily"" is a symbol of
innocence, purity and beauty. It seems to me chastity,
virginity, innocence, and purity all represent the
same ideals.
•• Ginny has red hair –– a weak case for hardcore
comparison, but show me another female anywhere near
Harry’’s age who has red hair.

I’ve wondered myself if there would be a parallel between Lily and Ginny by JKR.
We had Harry’s dad’s story in POA, and we’re told by JKR that we will learn more
about Lily in a future book, and Ginny will play a bigger role in book 5.
I have to say for Ginny and Harry what I said for Ron
and Hermione –– JKR is fond of establishing parallels
between characters. It makes sense then that the
romantic developments in Harry, Ron, and Hermione (but
particularly Harry and Ron) lives will mirror those of
their parents’’. We all ready know Harry is the
spitting image of his father in both appearance and
behavior. It wouldn’’t be a huge stretch to believe
Ginny will closely resemble Lily, making Harry and
Ginny the obvious match for one another.
But JKR is going to have to REALLY go a long way to
convince me that Ginny Weasley is either (a) a feisty,
smart heroine type, or (b) Harry’’s ideal gal.
Well, if her mother is any indication, Ginny may very well already be a feisty,
fiery red-head just by being raised by one. We’ve never seen her temper to know
this, however. Also, Ron tells us that she never shuts up (COS, 40), another
indication that she may be a bit more feisty than Harry perceives her to be, as
Ron knows what she’s really like at home. She stands up to Malfoy to defend
Harry at Flourish and Blotts (COS, 61), which is pretty feisty for someone who
can’t even look Harry in the face. Smart? Do we know anything about her grades?
Nope. Any talents? No, we’re not told. That doesn’t mean she doesn’t have any. I
think she might understand parselmouth, having been possessed by Riddle to open
up the chamber and summon the basalisk. Of course, this is my personal
assumption based on the same concept of bits of Voldy staying with Harry from
the infamous AK. Heroine type? IMO, she has a life-debt to Harry that may come
into play. She’s survived a terrible ordeal from the COS, but we don’t know if
she’s chosen to learn and grow stronger from this experience so she isn’t used
as the Dark Lord’s pawn again (as I suspect may be the case). If anything, she’s
pretty heroic to survive living with F & G, let alone 5 other males in that
crazy Weasley household!:-)
As for Harry's "Ideal"...time will tell with that as well. What is his ideal?
I’m sure there are as many opinions to this question as there are readers. Does
Harry even know his ideal? We just need more input regarding Ginny! Keep your
word, Jo!
Ginny’s just been too much giggly and blushing in the first
four books to impress me much. In fact, she embodies
all the stereotypical traits of femininity that I find
highly irritating –– and of which Hermione represents
an antithesis. Ginny’’s entire identity is woven around
her schoolgirl crush on Harry. The only book in which
she plays any importance, CoS, centers on how her
seemingly all-consuming infatuation of Harry nearly
topples the balance of the universe and leaves her in
need of rescuing. Please. Does she do *anything* but
sit around pining for Harry?"
"Seemingly" is the operative word in that sentence, since the story is from
Harry’s POV and we have our own perceptions/interpretations of what we’ve read.
We can’t assume that’s all she does because she’s just not in books 3 and 4 very
much to prove that. Her few appearances since COS includes the singing
get-well-card she gave to Harry in POA, and blushing when first seeing Harry at
the Burrow in GOF. So, I understand why you think that’s all she does. That’s
all JKR lets us see in what few scenes written about Ginny since COS. But what
does she do when Harry’s not around? Do we know? No! So, we can’t assume that’s
all she does. Is that L.O.O.N.y enough for ya?
A little aside here...I have a theory that it was Gred and Forge who sent that
Valentine to Harry as a joke. I mean, come on..."His eyes are as green as a
fresh pickled toad..."? A girl thinking romantically about a boy is not going to
compare his eyes to something gross you’d find in a bottle on Snape’s potion
shelves. I think the twins did it because they knew of her crush, and...just
because they’re Fred and George. " "Yeah, she’ll be wanting your autograph,
Harry", Fred said with a big grin." (COS 35). Brothers can be so cruel.
Perhaps I don’t find her irritating because I remember an 11-14 year old me who
had crushes and blushed incessantly. But I grew out of it, and there is evidence
she is growing out of this as well.
In fact, I see little hints that Ginny is maturing throughout the series. In
COS, she just squealed and closed the door when she first saw Harry ( 40). In
GOF pg. 54, she blushed but didn’t look away when Harry smiled at her and
Hermione at the Burrow. Now, it's a far cry from putting your elbow in the
butter dish (COS, 44) to being in the same room talking about Percy and
Pigwidgeon with the trio, and not blushing (GOF 55-58). Hey, it’s not much, but
it is progress! That’s all JKR has given us to go on. We don't know how
all-consuming this crush was for sure, only heresy from Tom and Harry's own
perception in his POV. Tom does say that she talked about things other than her
crush, like how her brothers tease her and how everything she has is secondhand
(COS 309).

Jessica (I think quoting this article on this website):
"Ginny, thus far, is the helpless, hopeless princess
who, in her emotional ignorance, wreaks total havoc on
herself and then waits for her prince to come and
rescue her. Is that *really* what we want for Harry?
Methinks not. However, the importance of her and her
feelings for Harry in one of Harry’’s big battles with
Voldemort/Tom Riddle causes me pause. Perhaps it is an
indication of the centrality those emotions will play
if future books."
This quote kind of makes it sound like it was Ginny’s plan all along to be saved
to snag Harry. We need to remember who really did the havoc wreaking here. Ginny
was duped by Tom Riddle. He used *her*. The only thing she is "guilty" of here
is confiding in a diary. "I suppose the real reason Ginny Weasley's like this
(near death on the Chamber floor) is because she opened her heart and spilled
all her secrets to an invisible stranger." (Tom Riddle, COS 309) It is Tom who
twists her deepest hopes and fears to his advantage by being charming and just
listening to her. It was he who used her soul to come out of the diary, and
that’s why she needed saving, being near-death and all. She had been used up and
couldn't very well do it on her own. Helpless and hopeless? After what Tom had
done to her, yes, she seems pretty helpless and hopeless. Does she wreak the
havoc upon herself? Uh, no, that would be Tom. She did try to dispose of the
diary after she stopped trusting it, remember? She tried to help herself. One
thing we need to remember was that she was ONLY 11 YEARS OLD! How strong were
you at 11? We’re told that she fought till the end... "(Tom) made her write her
own farewell (my thoughts...Imperio, perhaps?)....She struggled and cried....But
there wasn't much life left in her...she had put too much into the diary, into
(Tom)" (COS 313). Emotional ignorance? Yes, of course, because, SHE IS ONLY 11
YEARS OLD! Dumbledore tells everyone, "Older and wiser wizards than she have
been hoodwinked by Lord Voldemort." (COS 330) Let’s give the girl the chance to
grow up before we decide she’s always going to be like a stereotypical 11 year
old! We give the same courtesy to Neville, expecting him to come-out of whatever
is holding him back. Why not Ginny?

It’’s very possible JKR is throwing us all curve balls,
as she’’s been known to do in the past, but it still
seems to me she’’s leaning toward a Harry/Ginny,
Ron/Hermione situation.
Here’’s my hunch:
Rowling has long said she based Hermione on herself.
She’’s also said she named her hero Harry because it’’s
her favorite male name. In fact, she goes so far to
say that if she’’d had a son, she would have named him
Harry. My instinct is that JKR thinks of Harry as a
son –– after all, she did, in a creative sense, give
birth to him. So if JKR identifies with Hermione, it
would be unnatural from her perspective to pair Harry
with Hermione. I think that’’s why Hermione takes on a
protective companion/mothering role with Harry.
Hermione acts as JKR in giving guidance and support to
Harry. Or maybe I’’m reading too much into things.
That’s the way I’ve seen Hermione with Harry, as a mother to him. Or, like a big
sister, kind of like Meg looking after and feeling very protective of her
extra-special and talented younger brother, Charles Wallace, from the Madeline
L’Engle books.

Anyway, there’’s tons more I’’d like to write, but this
is becoming rather depressing and it’’s beginning to
resemble a doctoral thesis. -Jessica
You’ve brought up some good points. I understand we have many highly intelligent
females on this list who relate completely with Hermione, and so it makes sense
why Ginny is an irritation. But, what if you were judged for the rest of your
life by how you were at 11, or how you were perceived to be by others? Isn’t
Dumbledore a firm believer in second chances (i.e. Snape)? I know I grew out of
my 11-year-old Ginny-ness, became over-the-top Hermione-ish in high school and
college, and have settled into a nice balance between the two characters now.
I just want to sum it up by saying that I’m keeping an open mind concerning
ships and character development, especially in underdeveloped characters such as
Ginny. To borrow a phrase from Tolkien, my heart tells me that Ginny has some
part to play yet, for good or ill, before the end. Because, as we know all too
well, anything is possible in the Potterverse.
Lilac (who feels like a protective big sister to Ginny)
From: Lilac <lilac_bearry@y...>
Date: Fri Oct 4, 2002 2:45 am
Subject: Re:Thoughts on SHIPS
> I have to weigh in on this discussion of SHIPS and
> their importance to the HP series.

Thank you very much for doing so! I thought your post
was brilliant and I am sorry to snip any of it as I
add my thoughts. I sincerely hope that everyone on
the list read your post and, if they did not, I hope
they will go back and read it now.
I even saved Jessica's post because it was *that* good! Even though we differ
on some opinions, Jessica, there are some that are exactly the same!
> There seems to be a climate of dismissiveness toward
> the development of romantic relationships amongst
> the Hogwarts students -- specifically Harry,
> Hermione, and Ron. The inference, it seems to me, is
> that these types of relationships are trivial to the
> overriding action of the books. I could not disagree
> more. Indeed, I believe they will prove vital to the
> battle against Voldemort, the development of the
> plot, and the survival/redemption of many of the
> series' characters.
I completely agree with you here. While I highly
enjoy discussions of character motivation, symbolism,
etc., I have found that there are very few discussions
about romantic relationships and that when there are,
they are differentiated from other posts and often not
taken as seriously. I think this is very sad as I
think that love is the most important thing in the
world and I would venture to say that it is *the*
central theme in this series.
And I'll even venture to say that love will be what ultimately destroys
Voldemort, since he embodies the opposite of love and goodness.
> As much as one can’t consider the romantic pairing
> of James and Lily Potter trivial, I don’t think it’s
> fair for one to consider the pairings of Harry and
> his contemporaries to be trivial. Don’t get me
> wrong – I’m not at all interested in the series
> dissolving into some silly teen Harlequin. In fact,
> it seems to me that the these pairings will have far
> less to do with drippy romance, than with the
> significance of two people finding they can
> contribute something vital and lasting to each
> other, something that will make them stronger,
> braver, wiser, and more aware of their potential as
> an individual.

My thoughts exactly. I don't want to see these books
become Harlequin romance novels either but the
presence of loving relationships between the
characters does not doom HP to become a cheesy
bodice-ripper of a series. <snip>
As far as Ron and Hermione go, they have had a very
contentious relationship but I think that a lot of
this stems from the affection that they feel for each
other but have not yet acknowledged. Conventional
wisdom tells us that when we care very, very deeply
for someone they are often the person we hurt the
most. This is because we have so much vested in them
emotionally that the slightest word or glance from
them has a great power to wound us. When Hermione and
Ron fight, it seems to me that they have the ability
to hurt one another much more than anyone else hurts
them. Furthermore, the worst sting is when someone
that we truly care about points out one of our flaws
because we want to be something more for that person,
we don't want to be seen as flawed by them. I believe
this is why Ron becomes so defensive when attacked by
Hermione. In my opinion, he really wishes for her to
see him as someone special and so anytime she points
one of his flaws out to him it is especially painful.
It's a constant reminder that, to his mind, he is not
good enough for her. Is there anything more painful
than believing that we are not good enough for the
person we love? There is also the issue or Ron's
behavior when Hermione goes to the Yule Ball with
Krum. From the first time I read that scene, it
seemed blatantly obvious to me that Ron was crazed
with jealousy. He had admired Krum and openly gawked
at Krum as if he were a god until Krum developed an
interest in Hermione. Suddenly, Krum became public
enemy #1 and Ron was ripping the head off his Krum
figure. He had assumed that Hermione would be
available to him and when he realized that she is seen
as an object of attraction by another person, he can't
handle it. She's *his* Hermione and Krum has a lot of
nerve to think he can muscle in on Ron's territory.

Some very good points that make a lot of sense to me, Nicole.

As for Harry and Ginny, I admit that this was a
pairing that I did not think much about until rather
recently. Of course I noticed that Ginny had a crush
on him as that's apparent from the books but in
reading through some of the posts on this group and
having some discussion with Lilac, I have realized
that there are several reasons why Ginny would be
perfect for Harry. For one, there's the obvious
answer. If Harry were to marry Ginny, he would become
a true member of the Weasley family. For another,
Ginny is really the only other person in the WW who
has some idea of what Harry has suffered at the hands
of Voldemort. She too has been tortured by him, which
is something that Ron and Hermione and most other
people in the WW cannot possibly understand and relate
to, at this point. I think that Harry will find a
kindred spirit in Ginny and that's very important to
him because, as Jessica pointed out, he is very
isolated and seems to feel very alone. When someone
is the victim of a crime or a terrible tragedy, they
often withdraw into themselves and feel that no one
else understands until they meet someone who has been
through the same experience. This is why support
groups exist--once someone is shown that there are
others who understand what s/he is going through, s/he
is able to unburden him/herself before people who will
have carried similar burdens. This shared experience
creates a safe environment and helps foster recovery.
I think that Ginny and Harry will become a support to
one another and that, through this support system,
they will begin to heal.

Thank-you, Nicole! I didn't realize that my mindless chatter made sense to
someone other than me!
I've read the "Fantastic Posts" page with the discussions on SHIPS, and this is
one point that seems to have been left out of the H/G pro-argument: they both
have been in direct contact with Voldemort and lived. Think about it...I'm sure
Ginny blames herself for nearly killing several students, and knowing Harry,
he'll blame himself for indirectly causing Cedric's death. Like Nicole said,
these two might be able to open up to each other because they have similar
(although Harry's had far more worse) experiences. This is some common ground
on which to build a friendship, even if nothing more than friendship develops.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love for something to develop, but friendship is a good
start for any relationship.
And here's some more Ginny speculation...
1. What does Ginny hear when the dementors come close to her? On the train to
Hogwarts in POA, after the dementor leaves, she is shaking very badly and
wimpering, even after Harry regains consciousness. On my first reading, I
thought it was just because of her reaction to Harry fainting, but I suspect it
has something to do with the horrors from her 1st year. (Also, Neville is
affected more than the others, save Harry and Ginny. Does he hear his parent's
screaming in agony from the repeated Cruciatus curse that he might have
witnessed as a toddler?)
2. Could Ginny have possibly learned to conjure a Patronus because of her
reaction to the dementors? I know, it's very advanced magic, but we don't know
what kind of student she is or even how powerful of a witch she is because Harry
doesn't know any of this from his PoV. If Lupin taught her, than I'm sure he
would have mentioned something like, "Oh, and Harry...there is another student
who is in 2nd year who can conjure a patronus as well, which is pretty
remarkable because it's very advanced magic. Just to let you know..." I
speculate that Dumbledore could have given her a private tutorial if she went to
him with her concerns, or even if the seemingly omniscient Headmaster came to
her and asked her if there is anything troubling her, anything at
all...Dumbledore probably wouldn't mention anything to Harry because it's
Ginny's business, just like how Neville's parents died is Neville's business, as
Harry inadvertantly found out.
3. Have "bits of Voldy" stayed with Ginny as well? I guess it would be more
correct to say "bits of Tom", who Dumbledore says was probably the most
brilliant student Hogwarts had ever seen (CoS). What gifts would stay with a
person who was possessed? Would parselmouth have stayed with her? Would her
powers be augmented in any way? Was she "possessed", or did the diary cast
"imperio" upon her to do Tom's bidding? I like the ideas that she can speak
parseltongue, but we have no proof for this yet (come on, book 5...).
Just some ideas on what could happen...
> -Jessica, who is an eternal big mouth
~Nicole, who thinks Jessica is not a big mouth.
Instead, she thinks that Jessica is very eloquent and
has started a very thought-provoking discussion.
~Lilac, who says ditto to Nicole. Be kind to yourself, Jessica!
p.s. My husband, familiar with some of the acronyms on the list, just asked me
what SHIPS stands for, then he answered his own question... "Is it SO, HARRY IS

From: Lilac <lilac_bearry@y...>
Date: Sun Oct 6, 2002 4:12 am
Subject: Re: Re: The Ginny Weasley Quotient (some SHIP)

Ah, yes....Jessica.
We meet again! <eg>
I’m sure that Pippin has already sent a reply to this post, but I’m feeling a
bit feisty about this topic, so I can’t *not* reply...
You said:
I'm not sure Ginny's lack of giggles and blushing
necessarily indicates increased maturity or growing
sophistication in her dealings with Harry. On the
contrary, I would think Ginny's reaction to Harry's
last-minute need for a Yule Ball date to be a just as
troublesome and over-reactive. Granted, she has a
terrible crush on Harry and she wishes Harry would
notice her as something more than "Ron's Little
Sister." I think we've all been there in one way or
another and it's no fun. Little things make you twinge
and feel discouraged.
Nonetheless, it seems to me than anyone with a
developed sense of reality and maturity and a genuine
concern for Harry *as a unique individual, not a hero*
would have had the sensibilities to take a more
thoughtful and less self-absorbed view of Harry's
And this is your line of reasoning because 13/14 year-olds are very thoughtful
and not very self-absorbed on the whole, correct?<g>
Well, I’ll admit, she does seem sorry for herself (see canon below), I’ll give
you that. But I don’t see how her reaction is still her hero-worship stage. I
would picture hero-worshiping Ginny like she was in COS...barely talking and not
standing up for herself.
And Harry has been the epitome of "reality and maturity" <g>. After Harry asked
Cho to the ball and found out she was already going with Cedric, here are his
"He had been starting to quite like Cedric– prepared to overlook the fact that
he had once beaten him at Quidditch, and was handsome, and popular, and nearly
everyone’s favorite champion. Now he suddenly realized that Cedric was in fact a
useless pretty boy who didn’t have enough brains to fill and egg cup."(GOF 398)
Just thought I’d throw that out there...
Perhaps I'm expecting too much from a
thirteen year old experiencing her first crush...
Yes, we agree on something!
...but there are gaping holes of logic and sensibility in her
seeming devastation that Harry needs a date to the
Yule Ball and she's all ready taken.
Let’s take a look at canon, shall we...
"I asked [Cho] to go with me just now," Harry said dully, "and she told me
[she’s going with Cedric]."
Ginny had suddenly stopped smiling.
"This is mad," said Ron. "We’re the only ones left who haven’t got anyone –
well, except Neville. Hey – guess who he asked? *Hermione*!"
"*What*?" said Harry, completely distracted by this startling new.
"Yeah, I know!" said Ron, some of the color coming back into his face as he
started to laugh. "He told me after Potions! Said she’s always been really nice,
helping him out with work and stuff – but she told him she was already going
with someone. Ha! As if! She just didn’t want to go with Neville...I mean, who
"Don’t!" said Ginny, annoyed. "Don’t laugh – "
Just then, Hermione climbed in through the portrait hole.
"Why weren’t you two at dinner?" she said, coming over to join them.
"Because – oh shut up laughing, you two – because they’ve both just been turned
down by girls they asked to the ball!" said Ginny.
That shut Harry and Ron up.
"Thanks a bunch, Ginny," said Ron sourly.
<snip argument about going with someone, etc. and Hermione storms off>
"She’s lying," said Ron flatly, watching her go.
"She’s not," said Ginny quietly.
"Who is it then?" said Ron sharply.
"I’m not telling you, it’s her business," said Ginny.
"Right," said Ron, who looked extremely put out, "this is getting stupid. Ginny,
*you* can go with Harry, and I’ll just – "
"I can’t," said Ginny, and she went scarlet too. "I’m going with – with Neville.
He asked me when Hermione said no, and I thought ... well ... I’m not going to
be able to go otherwise, I’m not in fourth year." She looked extremely
miserable. "I think I’ll go have dinner," she said, and she got up and walked
off to the portrait hole, her head bowed.
Ron goggled at Harry.
"What’s got into them?" he demanded.
But Harry had just seen Parvati and Lavender come in through the portrait hole.
The time had come for drastic action. <asks P and L, etc.>(GOF 399-401)
Is this where you are saying she is overreacting? Looking extremely miserable
and walking off to dinner with her head bowed? I argue that this is not what I
would consider an overreaction. I’ll grant you that she is bummed that she might
have had the chance, slim as it was, to go with Harry at Ron’s suggestion, but
she could also be bummed that she is going with *Neville*, whom the boys were
laughing at just a minute ago..."[Hermione] wouldn’t want to go with Neville – I
mean, who would?" as Ron said earlier. To be the brunt of that joke would make
me miserable as well. And she found out the object of Harry’s affections just a
few moments ago was the very pretty Ravenclaw Cho. The whole situation isn’t
pleasant for her. But, instead of bursting into tears and running up to her dorm
room, she feels miserable and leaves with her head bowed. I consider this a
natural reaction, not an overreaction. Especially for a thirteen-year-old female
who is probably experiencing a bourgeoning of emotions just from going through
puberty. But hey – that’s just me!
Ginny's baselessly assuming that Harry would have
asked her to the ball if she wasn't all ready going
with Neville. I could understand her having a little
disappointment that she were "out of the running," so to speak, if there were
even the slimest chance. But
what reason does she have to actually believe Harry
would've even considered her?
Do you mean considered her before this scene in the book, when the boys *should
have* been asking girls and not procrastinating, or considered her at that
moment of Ron’ suggestions? I consider those situations to be very different .
I will point out that we have no reaction whatsoever from Harry after Ron
suggests Ginny go with him. We don’t read thoughts like, "Oh, no, *Not Ginny*!
She’ll be blushing the entire time!" Or "Yeah, that would work. At least I would
go with someone I know." Or anything. So, if we are talking about this scene in
particular, then we don’t have any canon supporting whether Harry considered it
or not. If we are talking about *before this scene*, then yes, we know that
Harry didn’t consider her. But she did accept Neville’s invitation, which shows
me even if she was waiting around for Harry to ask her, she decided that she
should accept Neville’s invite so she could go to the ball just for the sake of
going. A more mature way to be than turning everyone down because she won’t give
up on her dream date Harry and end up not going at all so she could cry all
night on her bed.
We do, however, have Ron’s reaction of not understanding what is bothering
Hermione and Ginny. Poor clueless Ron.
He doesn't really have any kind of friendship with
her, outside of the fact that she's Ron's sister. He
has consistently and from their first meeting either
ignored, been embarrassed by, or shrugged off all of
the glaring indications that she fancies him.
I guess the way I’ve read how he reacts to her in CoS is that he "politely
ignores" her blushing and awkwardness, like her elbow in the butter dish. In the
rest of the books, he’s always been pleasant to her, but he doesn’t give any
indication back that he is interested. I still stand by my theory that Fred and
George sent Harry the embarrassing valentine and not Ginny.
She doesn't even seem to move in the same orbit with
Harry. Sure, she's a year younger than Harry, so he'sless likely to be around
her, but we see more of the
Creevey brothers than we do of her.
She's essentially a non-entity in Harry's life. How is
it, then, that anyone with the tiniest shred of logic
would actually assume that the likelihood of Harry
asking her were great enough that she should get so
obviously bent out of shape and go hide in her room?
Me: says she went down to dinner...You might be thinking of Hermione
getting very obviously bent out of shape and storming off to her room after her
confrontation with Ron about not noticing her (I snipped that part above but
it’s on page 400 in GOF).
I don't think it's too much to expect of Ginny that,
despite her feelings for Harry, she be able to
acknowledge the reality of the situation and react
like a reasonable human being.
Like Hermione did, right?<g>
Instead, she's thrown into a misery so great that she
immediately loses the ability to carry on a
conversation with Ron and Harry or even be in Harry
I guess we interpret that scene differently, because I don’t see her, as you
melodramatically put it, in a "thrown into a misery so great..." She’s
miserable, probably for many reasons like I stated above, and she leaves after
she’s done talking about it. I wouldn’t say she lost the ability to converse.
I just think her emotional intensity is
neither reasonable nor mature given her lack of
evidence that he would consider asking her.And her reaction strikes me as just
as childish as the
giggling and blushing.
The problem with Ginny, in my mind, is that she's
guilty of the behavior so many exhibit around Harry
and that he abhors. She doesn't know Harry. Her
interest in Harry is not for the qualities that
*really* make him Harry Potter, but for the mythic,
heroic persona that the WW has thrust upon him. To
her, he's an idea, not an actual person. Sure she's
only 13, but Ron and Hermione, at 11, knew of Harry's
reputation and still managed to forge layered, complex
relationships with him as an individual. They weren't
so terribly blinded by his celebrity that they
couldn't see past it to the real person.

I’ll agree with the point that plot-wise Ginny’s role in COS was the
stereotypical female fan (Colin being the male), but I don’t see evidence of
that now in GOF. I think she knows him as more than Harry the Hero. She know’s
he’s also Ron’s best friend, Hermione’s friend, her mom’s adopted son, a boy who
has a hard time screwing up the courage to ask out girls and a boy who was
rejected. These are things she can see from just being in Harry’s circle of
As for Ron and Hermione’s friendship, they didn’t *like him* like him, in a
romantic way. They had a bit of celebrity shock when first meeting him, but got
to know him as a friend soon thereafter. When I *liked* someone at that age, I
was nervous around them, I said and did stupid things, and I blushed a lot. That
sort of stuff got in the way of getting to know the person as a friend first. I
would say her *liking* him is what has held Ginny back in getting to know Harry
as a friend, more than the celebrity status/hero worship has. That is what I
want to see...Ginny grow all the way out of her crush and just get to know Harry
as a friend.
If Ginny *did* have any genuine concern for Harry, she
would she would have acknowledged, based on a
three-dimentional, fleshed out, unselfish
understanding of Harry, the unlikelihood of Harry
asking her to the ball. She would be surely be a bit
disappointed, but be able to put a realistic spin on
the situation. In being so wrapped up in the
superficiality of Harry's public image, she negates
his voice, his very existence as an individual. She either ignores or dismisses
Harry's uncomfortable and
uninterested pattern of behavior toward her because
she wrapped up in this dream vision of him as her
knight in shining armor. She disrespects his need to
be understood, beyond The Boy Who Lived hysteria, as a
*living boy*.

By what you are saying here, I think the only person perfect for Harry is
I still don’t see strong evidence that she is still in hero-worship mode,
because of how little she is in the books after COS, and the few scenes she is
in shows she has matured somewhat in her reactions to Harry.
I don't assume that any of these behaviors are
intentional on Ginny's part. She's not a bad kid. I
don't think she has the self-awareness to understand
to shallowness of her emotions for Harry. In other
words, if she's *ever* going to be the girl for Harry,
she's got a lot of growing to do.
Yes, Ginny does have some growing up to do, as do the Trio. I think she has
started her ascent to maturity in GOF, and I truly hope we get to actually read
about how she is maturing emotionally so that we don’t have to speculate whether
she’s still in hero-worship-mode or not.
As always, Jessica, you put forth a good argument. I hope what I said made sense
to someone out there. I was never very good at debate; drama was more my cup of
tea. I’m doing this more for my sake than trying to convince Jessica or anyone
else out there of my side because I have a need to defend Ginny...I don’t know
why, I just do.
Lilac (who respects Jessica and agrees with her on the "Wrinkle in Time" series,
but will agree-to-disagree with her on this issue :-)

From: Lilac <lilac_bearry@y...>
Date: Sun Oct 6, 2002 9:59 pm
Subject: New Acronym
Okay, everyone...
I'm nervously putting forth a new acronym. I looked all over Inish Alley for a
theory like this, but I couldn't find anything about the valentine (If someone
else knows of one, please let me know). I ran it by Nicole, my acronym beta
reader :), and she gave me her thumbs up, so here goes...
Okay, I've always thought that the valentine that Ginny supposedly "sends" to
Harry in COS sounded a little fishy. And then I found fan-fic while waiting for
book 5 and have read in numerous fics (I don't even remember which ones, too
many to research at the moment, but suffice it to say that it is not my original
idea) that say that Fred and George sent the valentine, and that made a whole
lot of sense to me.
Here is canon:
"Right," [the dwarf] said, sitting on Harry's ankles. "Here is your singing
His eyes are as green as a fresh pickled toad.
His hair is as dark as a blackboard.
I wish he was mine, he's really divine,
The hero who conquered the Dark Lord."
Harry would have given all the gold in Gringotts to evaporate on the spot.
Trying valiantly to laugh along with everyone else, he got up, his feet numb
from the weight of the dwarf, as Percy Weasley did his best to disperse the
crowd, some of whom were crying with mirth.
"Off you go, off you go, the bell rang five minutes ago, off to class, now," he
said, shooing some of the younger students away. " *And* you, Malfoy -- "
Harry, glancing over, saw Malfoy stoop and snatch up something. Leering, he
showed it to Crabbe and Goyle, and Harry realized that he'd got Riddle's diary.
"Give that back," said Harry quietly.
"Wonder what Potter's written in this?" said Malfoy, who obviously hadn't
noticed the year on the cover and thought he had Harry's own diary. A hush fell
over the onlookers. Ginny was staring from the diary to Harry, looking
"Hand it over, Malfoy," said Percy sternly.
"When I've had a look," said Malfoy, waving the diary tauntingly at Harry.
Percy said, "As a school prefect -- " but Harry had lost his temper.
<snip part about disarming Malfoy and getting diary back and Percy taking points
away from Gryffindor because of magic in halls>
Malfoy was looking furious, and as Ginny passed him to enter her classroom, he
yelled spitefully after her, "I don't think Potter liked your valentine much!"
Ginny covered her face with her hands and ran into class.
(CoS pg 238-239)
For one thing, there is no proof that Ginny wrote the valentine. We assume this
by what Malfoy says, but I will argue that Ginny's reaction to Malfoy was that
she was embarrassed that he thought she sent it, and how he said it in front of
Harry pretty much humiliated her.
The other thing that makes me suspect the twins is the wording of the poem. Not
romantic. At all. Rather funny, actually, causing some students to cry because
they were laughing so hard. Maybe they were laughing at the situation more than
the poem, but I still think this is not a poem a girl with a crush would write.

Now, I *can* see Fred and George writting this...
"Okay, how should we start the valentine?" said George.
"Well, what does Ginny like about him?" said Fred.
"His green eyes. Oh, yes..I've got it...'His eyes are as green as a..a...' "
"...Fresh pickled toad!" Fred finished for him
"That's perfect!" said George, writing it down. "Which contrasts so nicely
with his black hair and pale skin."
"Black hair, black hair..." Fred repeated, trying to think up the next line.
"Hey, how's board, rhymes with dark lord! His hair is as black as
a blackboard and something something dark lord!" George said excitedly.
"Black as a blackboard is good, but a little about 'His hair is
as dark as a blackboard'."
"Good point, Fred. Okay, first two lines done, two more to go...Oh, this is
going to be classic! Hope we're there to see it..."
On page 240, Harry escapes the common room that night partly because Fred and
George keep singing "His eyes are as green as a fresh pickled toad" over and
over again. They weren't there to hear the valentine in the hallway, but they
know it enough to sing it over and over again. Granted, someone could have
shared the info with them, but I think this is their way of reveling in their
joke, especially since they weren't there to see the actual delivery.
Okay, so now Harry thinks, because of what Malfoy said and his knowledge of
Ginny's crush, that Ginny sent that awful valentine. So, Ginny's chances of
having a future date with Harry is now slim at best. So, I submit to you...
Fred and Twin Concoct Harry’s Abhorrent Note,
Causing Everyone’s Attention Towards Blusher As
Loving Longingly.

~Lilac (who wears her BUTTERFLIES badge all the time, but on this situation,
also wears a PRATTLESNAKES one right next to it)
From: Lilac <lilac_bearry@y...>
Date: Mon Oct 7, 2002 5:11 pm
Subject: Re: New Acronym
Sheryl said:
I agree and would also like to point out that it does sound like a
poem concocted by Fred and George:
"Sunshine, daisies, butter mellow,
Turn this stupid fat rat yellow."
I believe that creative, er... poetry is in Fred and George's line. If
not mistaken I believe that have also tutored the suits of armor in
versions of Christmas Carol's. The signs clearly point to the twins as
main suspects. Ginny, I believe, was just an innocent bystander.
Now me:
Thanks for pointing that out...I'd forgotten about that one! It is writen in
a similar style. They should stick to Weasley's Wizard Wheezes and quit their
day-job as poets. :-)

Acire said:
Well, I reread part of PoA today, and I found this:
"...and Ginny Weasley, blushing furiously, turned up with a get-well
card she had made herself, which sang shrilly unless Harry kept it
under his bowl of fruit" (PoA pg. 183, US Paperback).
Now, I'm taking this to mean that she sent the Valentine card, if
she's giving him the get-well card as well. Especially since the get-
well card sings, and the Valentine card was a singing one.
Of course, one could argue that she figured, "What the hell, I've
already been embarassed when people thought I sent him the
Valentine, why not go ahead and give him the get-well card?"

Yes, we can interpret this card either way as well. But we don't read anything
about Ginny blushing when the singing Valentine was "delivered", and she was
standing right there. There wasn't even residual blushing when she was looking
from Harry to the diary in Malfoy's hand. Granted, she was probably shocked
that Harry had the diary now and the thought of him being told things she'd
written could have knocked the blush right out her. I think she is blushing
with the singing card here because she *likes* Harry and still gets embarrassed
around him, but wanted to do something nice for him.
But I still think F & G sent the Valentine. Those evil twins!


The Sugar Quill was created by Zsenya and Arabella. For questions, please send us an Owl!

-- Powered by SQ3 : Coded by David : Design by James --