Talk:Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter/Books/Deathly Hallows/Chapter 36

To WithinFocus...

First, I introduced myself as a new user as you indicated, but I'm not sure how to do the commenting back and forth thing... but I'm trying to reach you in order to let you know that the info I posted for the Greater Picture on HP book 7 is totally, 100% authentic...

Next, I say thank-you, I'll take it as a compliment that you suspected plaigiarism. Truth is I happen to be a pretty good writer... if you could ask my friends who always come to me for their master's theses, school work, and even their job reports, you'd understand. In lieu, you'll just have to take my word for it and maybe check the "User info thingy" < can't remember what it's called and I was just there 5 min. ago > and you'll be able to recognize the writing style.

Anyway, I wrote it last night as a word doc and copy/pasted into the Muggles Guide book... so if you need to see the original doc properties to verify, it can be included as an email attachment if you wish to share how to get in touch.

From: lmskiver@hotmail.com


 * I have responded on your talk page. -within focus 17:53, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Too many friends killed off
I think J.K. could have done a little less killing off close friends of Harry Potter.If she had also killed of Hermione and Ron i think he would not have given a shit about dying or Voldemort.I think she should have left either Tonks or Remus alive and Dobby's death was pretty useless also cause in the end the goblin still fooled them.Besides all the fuss about a sword that still shows up when its needed.


 * But then his death would have been of no use... it was because he was dying to protect his friends that Voldemort was unable to harm Neville. And yes, the sword shows up when needed... if one has the Sorting Hat, that being where it seems to come from, though nobody yet knows that it has that habit. As to all the deaths: that is part of what makes it a good story: consistency. Death Eaters kill people, if there were too many spared, it would feel false. Myself, if either Remus or Tonks was to die without the other, I think it would just be too sad for words; they are so very much in love with each other. And again, consistency: whichever one died first would spur the other into a bout of berserk rage, and he or she would be extremely likely to get killed as well... though not alone. I have to admit to feeling a little short-changed at not seeing their final battles... Chazz (talk) 17:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

That bit in the greater picture section
I removed it cause first of all we don't know if there will be future books and secondly cause it was all pure speculation (little of which was logical, I might add).


 * We discussed this in some detail, Raven and I, and came to the conclusion that, while it was extremely speculative, there was not justification for removing it. Herewith, I replicate the discussion from Raven's Talk page. Chazz (talk) 20:02, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

The Twins and time travel
You recently restored some text indicating a possibility that the Twins could perhaps travel in time. I think I have to react with extreme skepticism... because if they could, why would they have bet with Bagman? Within 24 hours after they had won, their money would have disappeared; surely they could have gone back in time to warn themselves. Additionally, there is the fact that Hermione never did go forward in time, only backward; it seems that there is a limitation there, and it seems to me a natural one, that you cannot go forward, because the future has not yet occurred and so you don't have a target to aim at.

However. More to the point: The twins made some very bad decisions, decisions that could have been avoided if they had time travel, and the fact that they made those decisions indicates that they didn't know what was going to happen. I tend to believe that the accuracy of the Twins' wager was more due to attentive following of the sport and the players, and a view of the players' capabilities unbiased by team or national loyalty. It is only just possible that they had found some technique for clairvoyance, and the reason they did not see Bagman's defection or Fred's death was because they were not looking for it. But it is pretty much impossible, in my opinion, that we will ever see Fred again.

If you want to leave that text standing, or modify it to include my thoughts, be my guest... I will even go through and add the links later. But my immediate thought is that it does not belong because it is just too far out in left field to even qualify as speculation. Chazz (talk) 23:01, 20 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I certainly did not appreciate having someone anonymously deleting my text as "nonsense" and without discussing it with me. The Twins time traveling is hardly "out in left field" as we have seen characters do just that. I came across several online comments by readers several years ago on the possibility that the Twins could have used this method to determine the Match's outcome. It seemed plausible to me (more likely than having found a clairvoyance technique), and led to my speculation that George would consider using it again to save Fred. He would, in fact, do anything to save his brother. I also read speculation on the Harry Potter WIKI that both Bill Weasley and Percy Weasley could have used a Time Turner to achieve so many OWLs while studying at Hogwarts. If that is true,then maybe the Twins "borrowed" it from Percy at some point while he was still at Hogwarts and were unable to access it later to go back and change their resulting losses. Regardless, it is reasonable they could have time traveled, and it could be endlessly speculated about other ways they obtained the results to no point and with less proof.


 * Also, saying that it is not possible to go forward in time based on Hermione only being seen going back is without merit. Hermione would have been under strict restrictions on how she was to use the Time Turner and may have only been allowed to use it one way, or she simply chose not to go forward in time, only back (being as she is a creature of habit). We simply don't know. I wrote the section as an intersting speculation based on what we've seen the characters are capable of doing in the series, and on how Rowling plants clues long before they are explained. George's missing ear also seemed a little too obvious to me as a means to tell the two apart. Just how all this would happen, if it was included in a future book, is up to the author, I'm just saying it is possible, and of all the characters who were killed or presumed killed, then Fred and Mad Eye Moody seem the only ones who could possibly reappear. PNW Raven (discuss • contribs) 21:05, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I don't agree, to me it feels counter to anything else we've seen in the series... but I don't see this as worth a battle by any means. And I will point out that we did see Fred dead, therefore it is extremely unlikely that it would be possible to bring him back&mdash;it would cause a paradox. If you want, I'll go in and linkify it. Chazz (talk) 23:53, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding the links.PNW Raven (discuss • contribs) 21:45, 22 January 2011 (UTC)