• ↓
  • ↑
  • ⇑
Записи с темой: теории (список заголовков)

Интересная идея

It's Vader...
Прочитала здесь http://book7.co.uk/sixteen версию о смерти Вольдеморта, аналогичную моей, только исполнитель другой - сам Гарри (с помощью времяворота, конечно). Причем идея очень изящная: с помощью времяворота ГП вернется в тот самый день, когда были убиты его родители, и спасет самого себя. Сам же при этом погибнет (убьет Вольдю и умрет сам). И в то же время круг замкнется - маленький Гарри останется жить, чтобы в будущем исполнить пророчество и освободить мир от Вольдеморта. Мало того: время-место этого события указаны в названии 7й книги (Холлоу-Хэллоуин)!

@темы: теории


О хорьках

It's Vader...
Саму теорию, что Гарри является хоркруксом Вольдеморта я здесь повторять не буду, это и так слишком очевидно. Но до сих пор у противников идеи был один серьезный аргумент (остальные все сводятся к тому, что "мне это совсем не нравится") - Вольдя бы убит авадой и никак не мог успеть произнести некое темное заклятие, запечатывающее душу в выбранном темным магом сосуде. Но это возражение легко можно снять, если принять факт, что Снейп был в момент убийства на месте. И именно он, увидев, что заклятие отрикошетило от Гарри, не убив его, запечатал хорек Вольди в теле Гарри. Единственной причиной, по которой он мог это сделать, я считаю то, что без этого Гарри умер бы.

@темы: теории


Все о том же

It's Vader...
Теория не моя, но среди прочего интересного там есть ее подтверждения. Странно, что автор таки не додумался до моей мысли, что Снейп убил Вольдю.

Simply said, I think Severus Snape is far, far more Albus Dumbledore's man than Harry Potter could ever hope to be. Specifically, I believe this because I think that Harry has a tendency to go into his tasks somewhat blindly, and I believe that Snape does it with his eyes wide open.

I believe I can back almost all of what I'm about to say up with canon, but I would enjoy some discussion.

Was there a Prophecy Concerning Snape?

A friend of mine, who as far as I know is not on MNFF, has the theory that there was a prophecy about Snape. I am ambivalent on this, although I believe this could easily contribute to Snape's comment to Harry in OotP that "you are neither special or important, Potter".

Eileen Prince murdered?

Courtesy of RedHen (and anyone who is unfamiliar with RedHen should stop reading this missive immediately and run to RedHen post-haste and devour the entire website), I am of the opinion that Eileen Prince Snape was murdered by the early recruits to the Death Eaters for being a blood traitor.

Eileen's ancestry?

Independently of RedHen, I believe that she is a descendant of Everard, who, along with Dilys Derwent, is "one of the most celebrated headmasters Hogwarts ever had" (according to Dumbledore in OotP); he is described as having sallow skin and black "fringe" ("bangs" in American English – in other words, sallow face and black hair). His portrait hangs at the Ministry as well as at Hogwarts and his rapid action contributed significantly to rescue of Arthur Weasley after he was attacked by Nagini.

We interact with only five of the ex-heads of Hogwarts (someone named "Fortescue", whose forename we don't know; Dilys Derwent, whose portrait hangs at St. Mungo's; Phineas Nigellus Black; Armando Dippet, although not often; , and we know the surnames of all of them, except Everard. There really isn't any good reason for us to not know that . . . unless there's a really good reason to not know it.

Now, quite frankly, I would find the paradox here quite amusing. Phineas Nigellus was Hogwarts' least-liked headmaster, yet his great-great-grandson was one of it's most popular students. On the other hand, Everard, if his surname is, in fact, Prince, had a descendant who was inarguably one of the least liked students and professors.

Further, because I am obsessed, and also because there is a great deal to cover in Book 7, and because Jo has said that "Ravenclaw will have their day" in book 7, I am firmly of the opinion that Eileen and Everard were Ravenclaws. Although, to be perfectly honest, this is completely irrelevant to the rest of my theory.

Why was Severus so obsessed with the Dark Arts?

Someone else I know, who is also not on MNFF, has an incredibly well-reasoned essay that identifies Spinner's End as being in Yorkshire. Granted, she is from Yorkshire and may have her own reasons for her theory, but she also knows a great deal more about Yorkshire and it's culture. She postulates that Snape's excessively posturing, mannerisms and speech are a result of him trying to pass himself off as something other than a lower-working-class lad. I can buy this. And while it is also not relevant to my theory it could, easily, support it.

I think it's quite possible that Severus saw his mother being murdered. I think the reason that he threw himself into the Dark Arts (he knew more about the Dark Arts than most seventh years on his arrival at Hogwarts) , was both because he wanted to be able to defend himself, and also because he wanted to avenge his mother's death.

When asked when Snape had ever been loved, Jo's reply was "Yes, he has, which in some ways makes him more culpable even than Voldemort, who never has." And Dumbledore, in HBP, says "Harry, despite your privileged insight into Voldemort's world (which, incidentally, is a gift any Death Eater would kill to have)(1), you have never been seduced by the Dark Arts, never, even for a second, shown the slightest desire to become one of Voldemort's followers! You are protected, in short, by your ability to love!" said Dumbledore loudly. "The only protection that can possibly work against the lure of power like Voldemort's! In spite of all the temptation you have endured, all the suffering, you remain pure of heart, just as pure as you were at the age of eleven, when you stared into a mirror that reflected your heart's desire, and it showed you only the way to thwart Lord Voldemort, and not immortality or riches. Harry, have you any idea how few wizards could have seen what you saw in that mirror?"

Honestly, that entire statement sounds like it could apply to Snape. That Snape's failing is that he *was* "Seduced by the Dark Arts" and that he did have the desire to become one of the Dark Lord's followers.

Why didn't Snape report the 'prank' Sirius played on him?

One of the unanswered questions of the series is exactly why Snape didn't report or escalate after Sirius played the "let's use my best-friend who is a werewolf as a weapon against this kid I don't like because it'll be OMGKEWL" prank. We know that Snape was born 9 January 1959, we know the prank took place when Sirius was sixteen, and we know that the 'prank' took place in sixth year. Now, Harry is sixteen through his sixth year, but Hermione turned seventeen early in her sixth year, and Ron a little over midway through it. We don't know when any of the Marauder's birthdays are specifically, so Sirius could easily have been sixteen when Snape was seventeen. And if the 'prank' took place after Snape was of age, Dumbledore, legally, would not have been able to influence Snape at all.

A number of people think that Draco Malfoy was Marked by the time the Trio encountered him at Diagon Alley, and at that point he was only sixteen. Certainly, an of age wizard who was a master of the Dark Arts would have been brought to Voldemort's attention, if it is true that he was in a "gang of Slytherins who nearly all turned out to be Death Eaters", at least some of whom were older than him.

I think it's quite possible that Snape arrived at Hogwarts bent on joining the Death Eaters and that he could not be swayed from that goal. If the Death Eaters were already actively recruiting him, then I see Snape as perfectly capable of using the 'prank' to his advantage, to cement his claim of hating Dumbledore and wanting to get back at the blood traitors Potter and Black.

That Small Matter of Trelawney's Prophecy

For those of you who haven't read RedHen, I'll summarize one of her points here. In HBP, Trelawney mentions that when she was interviewing for her position, she and Dumbledore were "interrupted by Severus Snape". We've seen Trelawney in a trance – nothing will "interrupt" her. She says her thing and then she wonders what happened. Except, according to Dumbledore, only the first part of the Prophecy was revealed to the Dark Lord by Snape, who supposedly only HEARD the first part of it. Logically, Trelawney wouldn't be "interrupted" until after she said the whole prophecy to Dumbledore. Yet, Snape only told Voldemort the first part. (Really, read RedHen, if you haven't.)

Why Dumbledore Trusted Snape

Independently of anyone, I have firmly been of the belief that Snape was at Godric's Hollow the night the Potters were killed, and not with Voldemort, for some months now. I believe I can absolutely back this up with canon.

To begin with, all that we know about the happenings at Godric's Hollow on 31 October 1981 (Voldemort went to kill them, James died first, Lily jumped in front of the curse meant for Harry and thus provided some protection for him, Voldemort turned on Harry but the curse rebounded and appeared to have killed Voldemort), is a report you get from an eyewitness.

Now, at Spinner's End, Bellatrix Black Lestrange asks Snape where he was the night the Dark Lord disappeared, so that indicates that Bellatrix was there, and that she has reason to believe Snape was not. Further, Voldemort himself seems to believe this. Voldemort, when he is resurrected, makes mention of three missing Death Eaters, "one, who I believe has left me forever . . ." referring to Snape. We know that it refers to Snape, because at Spinner's End, Snape says to Bellatrix "Yes, the Dark Lord thought I had left him forever, but he was mistaken."

We know that Snape had a life-debt to James. Can anyone figure a better time and way to repay the debt than when the darkest wizard of all time is going to kill the guy, his wife, and his kid? I sure can't.

The minor issue of CAPSLOCK!Snape, or Did Snape really just have a grudge against Sirius, or did he really think he was guilty of something other than attempted murder?

In the Shrieking Shack, Snape comes completely unglued at Harry, screaming that "You'd have died like your father, Potter, too arrogant to believe you might be mistaken in Black!" That's yet another eyewitness account. How the devil would Snape know how James died, if he weren't there to see it?

Yet, Sirius wasn't the Secret Keeper, Peter was. There appears to be little to no physical resemblance between Sirius and Peter; Sirius is tall and slender with black hair, grey eyes and good looking, Peter is short, dumpy, balding, with mousy hair (go figure). It's fairly safe to bet that Snape, having been the classmate and victim of Sirius, was perfectly capable of telling Sirius' voice from Peter's voice.

But I don't think he could tell the difference from Sirius' whispered voice and Peter's whispered voice. I don't believe, for example, that Harry could tell the difference between Draco's whispered voice and say, Crabbe or Goyle's, although he certainly can recognise Draco's voice at a normal turn.

See, this is what I think happened.

• Snape felt the summons, and responded.

• He was covered under James' invisibility cloak. (2) Much like Harry was in on top of the Lightning Struck Tower.

• He didn't cross into the general meeting, but, like Frank Bryce in GoF, was on the other side of the wall.

• Like Peter did in GoF, he whispered the location to Voldemort, and either Snape overheard him, or like Voldemort did in GoF, he repeated what Peter said to him.

• OR, they were all masked and cloaked, and Peter wrote it down, like Dumbledore did in OotP, and Snape somehow was able to catch a glimpse of that paper.

• Snape Disapparated, and went to Godric's Hollow to argue with the Potters to leave. Because he, like the rest of the world, still thought Sirius was the Secret Keeper, he tried to argue with James that Black had betrayed him. James, knowing that Sirius couldn't have betrayed him even if he'd wanted to , as he was not the Secret Keeper to begin with, didn't leave, thinking that Snape's report was more inaccurate than it was.

• Now, Lupin seemed surprised ("'You heard James?' said Lupin in a strange voice") when Harry claimed to have heard James' voice in his Dementor induced flashbacks. I don't know whether this is because James temporarily had laryngitis, or if they had a two-story house and James' body was found outside, or downstairs, or what (3), but Lupin did seem (to me) to be startled by that revelation. Why?

• I postulate that it was Snape's voice that he heard. And Harry isn't able to recognise Snape's panicked and hurried, 10 years younger voice, versus SnapeTheDeathEater/ProfessorInAllHisSnarkiness voice.

• Now, we know that Peter was at Godric's Hollow. We know this because he gave Voldemort his wand back. I'm fairly certain that when the Aurors arrived, they'd have taken Voldemort's wand if it had been there.

• I also think Peter is why Voldemort would have spared Lily. Lily was to be PETER'S prize, NOT Snape's. (This theory is straight out of the HP4GU group on Yahoo.)

• But why wouldn't Snape have recognized him then? Well, either Peter didn’t accompany Voldemort into the house, which is entirely probable (and stayed outside, for example), or they were cloaked and masked, which is also entirely probable.

• Now, IF there was a paper upon which the address was written, presumably Voldemort was carrying it since Peter knew where it was to begin with. If Voldemort was holding it, then I'm thinking he probably dropped it when he dropped his wand. Given that I think he'd value his wand more, and all.

• IF there was a paper, then Snape took it with him when he took Harry to Dumbledore.

Snape took Harry to Dumbledore?

Well, of course he did. The attack happened near midnight on 31st October. Vernon woke up the next morning and went to work and came home and there were owls flying about. Harry was left at the doorstep that night and there's no way a fifteen month old child would survive in England, exposed to the elements, for 24 hours, in November.

So either it was written down and Snape had a copy of it, or once the Secret is revealed to who it is being hidden from, anyone can see it.

I'm venturing on the latter, otherwise, Harry's not going to be able to take Ron & Hermione to Godric's Hollow, and if he wasn't able to see the thestrals until fifth year, I'm not entirely sure HARRY will be able to see his parent's house Godric's Hollow.

Snape's Animal Magnetism (rated G, no less!)

One of the things that's brought up on dumbledoreisnotdead.com is that Fawkes pops out of mid-air, presumably from several hundred miles away, to swallow a non-verbal Avada Kedavra curse that Voldemort aimed at Dumbledore with no warning.

Where was Fawkes when Snape did it verbally?

Further, Crookshanks, who is part Kneazle according to Jo, goes after Scabbers/Peter for most of third year. Tries to eat him several times. In the Shrieking Shack, when Harry's ready to kill Sirius, Crookshanks bodily defends him. Yet, only moments later, Snape busts in, ready to kill Sirius, Crookshanks ignores Snape. And he was still in the Shack, because he led the party on the way out.

And although Hermione and Crookshanks were at 12 Grimmauld Place, and Snape was in and out of it, and bickering with Sirius, Crookshanks never goes after him. At worst, Crookshanks' attitude towards Snape can be called indifference.

Versus the outright hostility he shows to Peter. It can't be the Dark Mark that makes Peter appear as untrustworthy to Crookshanks so it's got to be something else.

Harry's lack of obsession with a Pensieve

How many times has Harry been in a Pensieve? Without consulting my books, I come up with at least nine (9) off the top of my head.

It has been a huge theme throughout the entire series that Harry has a huge desire for a loving family.

He clearly knows how to use a Pensieve – why hasn't he retrieved his memories of his time with his mother and father? I have two theories, the first of which is mine, the second of which is from someone on SugarQuill.

Paraphrased (with all the pertinent parts) from an interview with Jo:


Originally Posted by JK Rowling

The memories stored in a Pensieve reflect reality not the views of the person they belong to. It’s important that I have got that across, because Slughorn gave Dumbledore this pathetic cut-and-paste memory. He didn't want to give the real thing, and he very obviously patched it up and cobbled it together. The magic of the Pensieve is that being able to examine your own thoughts from a third-person perspective that you haven't noticed personally but can go and see yourself. It recreates a moment for you, so you could go into your own memory and relive things that you didn't notice the time. It’s somewhere in your head, which I'm sure it is, in all of our brains. I'm sure if you could access it, things that you don't know you remember are all in there somewhere."

So the memories, according to Jo, are there.

Again, there's no good reason for us not to have seen this, unless there really is a good reason for us to not have seen it.

I postulate that the three memories Snape religiously put into the Pensieve when he was training Harry in Occlumency are:

1. the one we saw, where James and Sirius tormented him, Lily defended him, and Snape called Lily a Mudblood

2. Snape either overhearing or revealing the prophecy to Voldemort

3. Snape being at Godric's Hollow

Harry can't Occlude his mind to save his OWN life, he certainly won't be able to Occlude it to save the life of someone he detests. I think that explains why Snape absolutely lost it, too, because the one thing Snape absolutely cannot afford is for Voldemort to know that he heard the rest of the prophecy and has refused to reveal it to him, and that Snape really was at Godric's Hollow trying to get the Potters to leave (and offering to hold Voldemort off), and not at the school where he was ordered to be like he claimed.

And why would it be so important for us to know the difference between a legitimate memory and a modified one?

Unless we're going to see another memory (or series of memories) that has been modified.

Like . . . Harry's for example.

Oh, but wait, if you didn't read that theory (which you should), hear me out. Remember when Harry is having flashbacks to Godric's Hollow? How he keeps falling through "white fog"?

We don't see that "white fog" again until Harry views Slughorn's modified memory (we don't see it either, for example, in the diary).

I am of the belief that Harry's memories were modified and he's going to find out and have to come to terms with the fact that he has been wrong about Snape this entire time. That Snape, no coward he, really was at Godric's Hollow, that he has never lied to him, and that, no matter how unpleasant he is, he's ALWAYS been on Dumbledore's side, and was willing to stop at nothing to ensure the destruction of the Dark Lord.

I would love to hear anyone else's input on this.

1. And how would Dumbledore know this, anyway?

2. We know that James had an invisibility cloak. And we know that he left it in Dumbledore's care. This doesn't make a great deal of sense, when you think about it. James had a great deal of need for that invisibility cloak, he could have used it to hide his family, or he certainly could have used it to protect his Secret Keeper. What the devil would have possessed James to part with such an expensive and rare item as an invisibility cloak unless the Order/war effort had a greater overall need for it?

3. We know that James was there, because Hagrid claims to have seen the body, so unless his body was moved from another location, which I find somewhat unlikely, James was most likely there.

4. If you play the Sorcerer's Stone DVD movie frame-by-frame, at the part where Hagrid is telling Harry about the attack on Godric's Hollow (you know, that whole part that had to have an eyewitness to that I mentioned earlier?), it definitely looks like someone is trailing Voldemort.

5. In no particular order, when he goes into Dumbledore's in GoF, when he goes into Snape's memories in OotP, when he views Slughorn's modified memory, when he views Slughorn's accurate memory, when he sees Dumbledore going to the orphanage, Hokey's memory, Morfin's memory, Bob Ogden's memory and Voldemort asking for the DADA position)

@темы: теории


Собственно теория

It's Vader...

1. Когда палочка Вольдеморта стала испускать призраки убитых ею жертв, среди них не было самого Вольдеморта, хотя он таки был убит.

2. Роулинг в интервью не ответила на вопрос "был ли кто-нибудь еще в момент смерти Поттеров на сцене", что равносильно признанию, что был.

3. Дамблдор очень доверяет Снейпу.

4. Дамблдор в книгах всегда различает вопросы "почему Гарри спасся" и "почему умер Вольдеморт" в момент нападения на Гарри.

5. Лучи заклятий при попадании в какое-либо препятствие отражаются.

Итак, вывод-предположение: Вольдеморт не был убит отскоком собственной авады, хотя и думает именно так. Вполне возможно, что некто другой (наиболее вероятно, что Снейп, отсюда доверие ДД) убил его в тот самый момент, когда он пытался убить Гарри.

Как я уже сказала, слова Роу, приведенные в предыдущем посте, подтверждают мою теорию.

@темы: теории


За что я люблю Роулинг :)

It's Vader...
Новый ответ Роу на предположения фанов на ее сайте:

Предположение: "Snape was hiding under the Invisibility Cloak on the night the Potters died"

Ответ: "No, he wasn't." :))))))))))))))))))))

Иными словами: "Да, он там был, но под плащом не прятался :))))))

@темы: теории


Дамблдор и карты таро

It's Vader...
Итак, начнем. Как всегда, издалека. В интервью Роу в прошлом году сразу после выхода ГП-6, на вопрос, умер ли Дамблдор, она не ответила вообще. Почему же теперь, спустя год, она решила четко объявить, что "Дамблдор мертв"? Что изменилось? Почему нельзя было то же самое сказать год назад, раз уж это не секретная информация? С другой стороны, в новом интервью ей вообще-то задавали вопрос о том, убил ли Дамблдора Снейп. Но она не сказала "да". Хотя что стоило вместо слов "Дамблдор умер" сказать "Дамблдора убил Снейп"? Вроде ничего (особенно учитывая, как она хотела, чтобы все в это поверили). Если только это на самом деле не так. Таким образом, косвенно подтверждается, что Снейп ДД не убивал. Тогда что же с ним случилось? Тут имеется две версии (если кто предложит еще, милости просим :))). Первая: на момент сцены на башне ДД УЖЕ был мертв. Это довольно непривлекательная для меня версия, но в ее пользу есть одно свидетельство из книги - момент, когда ДД выливает якобы свои собственные воспоминания из флакончика, хотя должен был бы извлекать их из собственной головы.

Вторая версия мне нравится гораздо больше, но у нее таких подтверждений нет. ДД не умер после падения с башни. Но он УЖЕ умер (на момент интервью Роу №2 она вполне могла описать его смерть в 7й книге). Именно поэтому она ответила, что ДД умер СЕЙЧАС, а не год назад.

Ну а теперь о картах таро. На карте таро "Пронзенная молнией башня" (название главы!) с башни падают ДВА человека. Один из них ясен. А вот кто второй???

@темы: теории, размышлизмы

It's Vader...