Chapters 6-8 - All Systems Go

DADAProfAE wrote:1. Were you surprised with Hermione's revelation that she summoned the books owned by Dumbledore, those books containing information about Horcruxes, from the late Headmaster's study? I'm not referring to her skill in summoning since there is no doubt about that at all. What I'm referring to is the very action of getting somebody else's property without permission, books of dark nature at that. Books securely kept by Albus moreso. Judging from Hermione's sheepish reply when Ron pressed her to explain, I'm guessing she felt a twinge of. . .embarrassment perhaps? Discomfiture over something she knew she shouldn't have done? Is it the result of being in the company of the two boys for so long their rule-breaking nature has finally rubbed off on her? Or is this quality ingrained in her, her willingness to break certain rules? You may want to refer to Books 1-6 for references.

You know, this can also be a question of, does the end justify the means? I mean, one can say that getting hold of those books were clearly necessary. It helped them find ways to destroy the horcruxes. But it was still stealing. Rule-breaking if we want to soften the offence. Anyhoo, I think Hermione will do almost anything to achieve her goals. Especially if she believes she's right and/or doing the right thing. Her heart is in the right place which is why she knows where to draw the line especially when it really matters. But she's also willing to toe that line if needed. A clear contrast from Harry but that's a different discussion altogether.

Back to the books, I was actually more surprised that she got those books without trouble! Do you guys think Dumbledore set it up to be so?

DADAProfAE wrote:3. If you were in the shoes of the trio, how would you try to escape the controlling ways of Molly? Granted that she really just want you to be safe hence the never-ending chores, you know that you have a job to do. You need to prepare. How would you go about it, also given the tight space over at the Burrow?

More to come!

Maybe they could have done the 'hide in the bathroom' trick again.
One of them could pretend to be alone in there...
Although I don't think that will give them much time to talk.

Honestly, I don't know why they couldn't have stayed up longer and planned during the night.
Hermione could have easily gotten Ginny's cooperation to not tell Molly she's been sneaking into the boys' room.

lianne wrote:

Honestly, I don't know why they couldn't have stayed up longer and planned during the night.
Hermione could have easily gotten Ginny's cooperation to not tell Molly she's been sneaking into the boys' room.

[/color]

DADAProfAE wrote:

4. Finally, what did you think of Ginny's birthday present? Was Ron's indignation called for? Was he right when he said quite angrily that Harry was just giving Ginny false hope about the relationship? Or was Ginny the one giving Harry false hope?

Share your thoughts!

DADAProfAE wrote:1. Hermione was adamant that the Minister should've given the sword to Harry as bequeathed by Dumbledore, but the Minister decided against it, claiming that the sword belongs to any Gryffindor student worthy of it. If you were the Minister, would you have arrived at the same decision? Was that an impartial judgment on his part?

2. I've always wondered about the nature of the Deluminator. It's a gadget that we've seen as early as Philosopher's Stone and we know how it works, or at least the basics of it. It sucks out the light from a source, say a lamp, and can be restored or used for later needs. I wonder if it works with non-mechanical objects such as a candle? And is there no other magical way (that is, non-gadget way aside from one's wand) to remove light from a source and to restore it as it originally was? I'd like to think Dumbledore (or any of the other competent wizards and witches in the narrative) can deal with light and darkness as easily as Disapparating from a place. Or do you think this has something to do with magic and Muggle technology being at odds, hence the need for a mediating gadget?

3. I wonder how Albus kept track of the Golden Snitch first captured by Harry from Book 1. Did he ask for it from Madam Hooch or did he go to the Quidditch locker room and Accio'ed it himself? I wonder when Albus actually did this particular task, given his very busy timetable. . .

4. Finally, what did you think of Ginny's birthday present? Was Ron's indignation called for? Was he right when he said quite angrily that Harry was just giving Ginny false hope about the relationship? Or was Ginny the one giving Harry false hope?

dementedlouise wrote:

lianne wrote:

Honestly, I don't know why they couldn't have stayed up longer and planned during the night.
Hermione could have easily gotten Ginny's cooperation to not tell Molly she's been sneaking into the boys' room.

[/color]

-I would just like to comment on this. I think Hermione opt not to ask for Ginny's cooperation since there's a possibility that Ginny might ask what they are up to. Why would Hermione has to sneak into the boy's room? Of course, it would be fishy for Ginny as to why she has to sneak. Their mission is top secret. Knowing Hermione, she wouldn't want anyone to give her an excuse as to in any matter know their mission.

True. But I think at this point, Ginny already knows enough about what the trio plans to do and knows she wouldn't get specific answers even if she asks. Remember, they helped Ron with the ghoul in the attic. They know he [Ron] plans to leave with Harry but they don't know what they intend to do, which is find horcruxes. So I don't think getting Ginny's help would be too much of a problem.

What I'm really amazed of is how Mr. Weasley can just let his youngest son go off and do his thing. I mean, that's an awful lot of freedom to be giving your 17-year old kid. Even if he IS of age.

Which makes me think that as much as Mrs. Weasley mollycoddle her kids, Mr. Weasley is the complete opposite. What do you guys think? Is Mr. Weasley too lax in his parenting? Which parent would you rather have?

lianne wrote:

What I'm really amazed of is how Mr. Weasley can just let his youngest son go off and do his thing. I mean, that's an awful lot of freedom to be giving your 17-year old kid. Even if he IS of age.

Which makes me think that as much as Mrs. Weasley mollycoddle her kids, Mr. Weasley is the complete opposite. What do you guys think? Is Mr. Weasley too lax in his parenting? Which parent would you rather have?

siriuslystrange wrote:

2. I've always wondered about the nature of the Deluminator. It's a gadget that we've seen as early as Philosopher's Stone and we know how it works, or at least the basics of it. It sucks out the light from a source, say a lamp, and can be restored or used for later needs. I wonder if it works with non-mechanical objects such as a candle? And is there no other magical way (that is, non-gadget way aside from one's wand) to remove light from a source and to restore it as it originally was? I'd like to think Dumbledore (or any of the other competent wizards and witches in the narrative) can deal with light and darkness as easily as Disapparating from a place. Or do you think this has something to do with magic and Muggle technology being at odds, hence the need for a mediating gadget?

Interesting .. I only know of the Deluminator(gadget) and its spell counterpart, Lumos/Nox. I don't think there are further explanations about this topic, but how many spells or gadgets does a wizard need to deal with light (or lack thereof)?

DADAProfAE wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong though, but isn't Lumos/Nox the incantation for producing light specifically from one's wand, and not from an another light source (say, a lamp or a candle)? So L/N are not exactly counterparts of the Deluminator. As to how many spells/gadgets for light, that's the root of the question above. Why was there a need to invent the Deluminator if a competent witch/wizard can ably produce light from a wand? Unless it's mere function is really just for the sucking of the light for later use (light-saver, hahaha). And unless the wizard's/witch's powers do not extend to Muggle technology, as mentioned previously, heance the need for a mediating gadget.

siriuslystrange wrote:

DADAProfAE wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong though, but isn't Lumos/Nox the incantation for producing light specifically from one's wand, and not from an another light source (say, a lamp or a candle)? So L/N are not exactly counterparts of the Deluminator. As to how many spells/gadgets for light, that's the root of the question above. Why was there a need to invent the Deluminator if a competent witch/wizard can ably produce light from a wand? Unless it's mere function is really just for the sucking of the light for later use (light-saver, hahaha). And unless the wizard's/witch's powers do not extend to Muggle technology, as mentioned previously, hence the need for a mediating gadget.

Yes they are different in that way, I just stated them as an example because like the Deluminator, they also deal with light and have the same effect (putting lights on and putting them out).

And my last question was rhetorical.