Mmm.. yeah, looking back, I skimmed through the previous posts. Damn, I'll be more careful next time

 

This fic has good potential. I would like to see further updates too. So far I give it a 3.5/5. Sorry but I'm a chapter length whore, and the shortness of chapters without rapid update is a common complaint of mine.

 

The AN from 5 is interesting, I'm surprised I didn't notice it before. Then again, I'm not entirely anti-Ron. ^^;

- Ron Weasley. What do you all think about Ron Weasley? Most people hate him (and from Canon, there's good reason.) But I always felt J.K. Rowling completely and utterly shortchanged him, by never, ever, letting him grow up. I mean, book seven, and she just repeated the interactions of book 4? ("I shall now betray my best friend - despite the fact I adopted him into my family - because I'm envious.") Was there a reason to keep him utterly insecure, jealous, and traitorous to a friend he's demonstrated a willingness to fight, protect, and die for? And does that characterization seem to be a bit conflicting to anyone else? Like, oh, it makes no bloody sense?

 

I'm not exactly anti-Ron myself, but I hated the way JKR wrote his character after PoA. By that point, Ron would have seen very well the things he has that Harry doesn't, and the shit Harry has to go through for the things he has that Ron doesn't.

Then again, Ginny didn't die in canon, so Ron wasn't quite forced to take a look at the world, himself--and grow up--until much later in JKR's work. Too bad her Ron change at all once it happened.

At any rate, I can't wait to see how Myst handles a Ron who does have very good reasons to grow up. Not to mention how she handles the interactions of the trio with the rest of Hogwarts.

 

...in book 7, Ron betrayed them again because the horcrux was mind-fucking with him, not because of any obvious insecurities.

This is why I hate author's notes: they either lie (oh noes! My updates are slow becoz mah computer broke/hard drive crashed/dog ate the last chapter/(insert bullshit here), or they preach for no fucking reason on shit (a) that can usually be divined from how they portray characters , or (b) that they're simply wrong about - such as with this author.

 

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't the Horcrux have limits? It could only depress him, lower his spirits, and prey on existing insecurities. He still abandoned them. And spare me the trite "Dumbledore gave him the deluminator because he knew Ron would want to come back" line.

 

Please, if Dumbledore knew he would come back he knew he'd leave in the first place. JKR's Ron was a little shit.

 

Limits? WTF bro'; the last person who had physical contact with a horcrux for any extended period of time got possessed (the diary). They knew this, yet they wore the thing anyway. So what if he has existing insecurities? Having insecurities and not acting on them is the same as not having the insecurities, in the end at least. It's like arguing 3+1 is better than 2+2.

And I won't mention the Deluminator, because that's such a deus ex machina it blows my mind. Of all the dumb-fuck powers to combine in a single object - putting out lights and...for a lark...being able to find your way back to your friends ?

See above about my feelings on the faggotry that is the Deluminator. But since Dumbledore did give it to him, think of it as an airbag: does having an airbag in your car mean you're going to get into an accident ?

Or perhaps, considering that Dumbledore knows Harry likes to go things alone, he gave it to Ron to help him find Harry if he tried to give them the slip. He did as much when he sacrificed himself.

 

I'm inclined to agree with blaise on this one. Personally, I hate Ron and his ginger guts and believe that Harry would have been much better off without him. But putting aside my huge amount of bias, blaise made some good points.

JKR's Ron did grow up by DH. I don't doubt that he still had those insecurities buried deep down somewhere, since issues that old and deep-seated don't go easily, if at all, but by DH Ron matured enough to be able to see that they were stupid and childish.

It is likely that if they had figured out a way to shield the Horcrux's influence, Ron would never have left. The Horcrux impaired judgement and exacerbated bad feelings all around, after all, Harry wasn't exactly a saint either. I also agree that Dumbledore used the Deluminator as a precaution, he had first hand (pun not intended) experience on how tempting a Horcrux could be, and probably just wanted to make sure.

As for the Horcrux having limits, that's not exactly a powerful argument (read: possession). Besides, drinking has limits too, it's called alcohol poisoning, but that doesn't stop it from making us do ridiculous shit.

EDIT: Don't give me that crap about Dumbledore + Resurrection Stone + Ariana. While that did play some part, the Horcrux still compelled people to try and put it on regardless. Dumbledore just couldn't resist so much temptation.

 

You won't make it.

 

Do you think that, because the horocrux influenced people's minds via magical means, that occlumency would have worked? It is after all a technique that is mainly used to shield ones mind. It might go either way if the horocrux uses a different form of magic. But I think, however, that it would work. This is mainly because in the DOM battle, when Tom is possesing Harry, the book mentions Harry trying to force him out with occlumency. Ignoring the fact that because Harry sucks at occlumency it didn't work, I think that it supports occlumency as a legitimate form of protection against possesion.

What do you think?

 

There was a mention of Harry trying occlumency at the DOM battle? Are you sure?

Possession is more related to the soul and less to the mind. In fanon terms, it would be soul magic, though I don't care for fanon terminology. The reason occlumency was suggested for Harry was - as Albus pointed out in Snape's memory - that with Harry and Riddle, both their minds were linked through the Horcrux. It was not necessarily because occlumency is a defense aginst possession. So I don't suppose occlumency would actually help guard against possession. But the process of beating back an attempt should be similar to beating the Imperius - using strength of heart and powerful emotion.

 

First off, I'm pretty sure there is mention of him trying to use it. Not that it mentions it directly, but that if you think about the way it's said you can see why I think Harry is trying to close out his mind and push Voldemort out of it.

Secondly, the Merriam Webster Dictionary's first definition for possession is,"the act of having or taking into control". Now reading this, I can see where you think that possession involves the soul. However I've been thinking, and I now think that instead of possession being a matter of taking over one's mind or soul or body, it is instead required that you take over all three.
If Voldemort took control of Harry's body, Harry would be thinking about gaining back control of his body. He would use his raw emotions of love and all his will power to get his body back under his control. However, if Voldemort decided to take control of his mind then Harry wouldn't be thinking about getting back in control. It is at this point that Harry very well could be utterly screwed. Sure his soul might instincualy fight against the evil foreign pressence in the body but with the mind under control, it'd only be a matter of time before the soul is subdued. After that Voldemort would have absolute control over the body due an abcense of resistance from the mind or soul.
So, in conclusion it is not just occlumency or will power/strong emotions that save the day, but both.

 

Updated!
* bounces around *
This story gives us a Trio that are going to be a Team, and that gives indications that each of them will be strong and interesting.
4/5 (and hopes for a faster update rate.)

 

Huh? Chapter 5 was out in October...

 

Indeed..Banner, you rised my hopes up and then cruelly crashed them :-/

 

Weird. I literally got the email alert today. I just checked my recycle bin. The date is 12/7.

 

Updated again.

I freely admit that I more skimmed than read Deathly Hollows, so a great deal of my impressions of key moments in the book are probably influenced by fanon and posts I've read in various discussions, so perhaps I'm wrong here. But there are two points regarding Ron I haven't really seen refuted or discussed:

1) Why did JK choose Ron to be the one who betrayed Harry? Why not Hermione? Why not Harry himself, tempted away. Why did it have to be Ron who fell by the wayside (a continuing theme, you must admit.)

2) Also, Ron himself, if I recall correctly, admits that the horcrux had a greater effect on him than on the others. If JK truly wanted to show him growing as a character, why? Or why have him still fail, when resisting it when it was harder for him would have been a true sign of strength?

3) Last, I might be being unfair, but it seems like Ron didn't do much better than his eleven year old sister as far as horcrux resistance goes. And really? That's kind of sad. Even if Ginny had potential Mary Sue powers.

The last isn't really point, it just. I don't know, feels odd. Because yes, he didn't get possessed like Ginny did, but on the other hand, he wasn't "pouring his heart and soul" into the locket either. (I hope.) It seems like that'd even out.

[Edit: Edited to remove friends-slang as promised. ^_^ ]

 

Brief grammar note: when doing dialogue, don't put commas for verbs that don't convey speaking. For instance,

is wrong. The following is correct.

A very useful guide to dialogue (although I don't agree with all of the tips especially the ones about "said bookisms") is here. The specific section:

The term “speech tag” is commonly used to refer to the “he said/she said” part of dialogue, the part that tags the identity of the speaker. Your punctuation may shift if you choose to use speech tags with your dialogue or what Browne and King, in Self-Editing for Fiction Writers, call a “beat”. Beats are “little bits of action interspersed through a scene, such as a character walking to a window or removing his glasses and rubbing his eyes — the literary equivalent of what is known in the theater as stage business” (102).


First, the difference:


Tag: “You’re it,” GW said.

Beat: “No, I’m not. You missed me! Nyaa nyaa!” The reader stuck out her tongue in a nasty fashion.

When you use a beat, it’s a new sentence. So your dialogue ends with a period, question mark, or exclamation point, and the next phrase starts a new sentence, complete with capital letter. I myself still prefer two spaces between sentences as well. You do not write your sentence like this:


“No thanks, I use toilet paper,” the Grammar Wench stuck her thumbs in her ears and waggled her fingers.

Well, you’re quite welcome to stick your thumbs in your ears and waggle your fingers — in fact, I recommend it on certain occasions — but please don’t treat a beat like a tag when punctuating dialogue.


...




“The term ‘saidbook’ comes from certain pamphlets, containing hundreds of purple prose synonyms for the word ‘said,’ which were sold to aspiring authors from tiny advertisements in American pulp magazines of the pre-WWII era,” the Grammar Wench yawned.

I am quite the talker, even when tired, but I cannot yawn words. And despite what your 10-year-old son insists, one cannot belch words either, although I have to say, if you were writing dialogue in which the words were belched, I personally think the ban on said bookisms should be temporarily lifted. Regardless, the correct way to punctuate the above sentence would be to put a period after era and capitalize “the” in front of Grammar Wench.


Another one I bet a lot of you have used, I mean, seen, is:


“Oh, I get it now!” the reader smiled.

Or


“I’m so proud of you. I was beginning to worry,” the Grammar Wench chuckled.

You can’t hurry love, and you can’t smile words. You can smile or chuckle while you say words (the reader said with a smile), but you can’t smile them. You definitely can’t shrug words. I see that one a lot. If you tire of writing “he said, she said” over and over, replace more of your tags with beats. Properly punctuated, of course.
​

 

First off, I have never read any book titled "Deadly Hollows." The final Harry Potter book is titled "Deathly Hallows." I mean, come on.

Secondly, I imagine that she didn't paint Ron in that strong of a light, probably because he isn't a strong character. He has inferiority issues; gets jealous. Still, his character does grow. Just not that much.

I have to say, though: I like this story. And this chapter didn't disappoint. I especially enjoyed the trio's disappointment with their collective authority figures. And the cold not-quite detachment that Harry portrays while still being a definite good-guy.

Story so far: 4/5