While it's debatable whether the people selling that shit actually believed it (and if the public believed them), it wouldn't be the first time a hate group made ridiculous claims about something, in order to create more hatred toward those they are oppressing.

Besides, in a world of magic, where you can split your soul to become partially immortal, 'theft of magic' just becomes another kind of magic, doesn't it? Just as feasible as 'soul splitting immortality,' if not more so?

But, yeah, the ultimate point is that it's a ridiculous claim, it's completely untrue, but who's going to put a stop to it?

The heroes of the book, that's who.

Harry looked badass in Runcorn's leather coat. In Fleur's wisp of a bra... not quite so much.
That is all.

 

Personally, I gave up on trying to figure out the non-existent math years ago. Because let's be honest, Rowling (like pretty much every author who ever lived) is shitty at Math, and we are better off making our own stuff up, ideally stuff with some form of justification.

 

That's exactly my point. I was under the impression that the new regime wanted to appear as the legitimate one and they expect people to take them seriously while selling such crap? In that situation, of course there was no other way for them to stay in power but through fear and opression.

But if they didn't have any magic in the first place (they had to steal it), how did they exercise the kind of magic necessary to perform the theft?

I meant the uniforms worn by the Ministry regulars in the scene where Harry, Ron and Hermione infiltrate the Ministry. They look like friggin' German troopers. Seen here at 2 minutes, 32 seconds.

 

Babies are mean sons of bitches. Just when you're not looking - and wham! - you're a squib now.

 

Didn't think about it, but no, I don't think it's funny. Actually, it makes quite a bit of sense. In a number of different ideas of spiritualism, a person must enter an altered state of consciousness before they are possessed/oppressed/the boogey man gets 'em. So it'd make sense to play on that idea and have her be drunk before she could actually foretell the future.

It also makes her whole spiel about "the inner eye" that much more hilarious, because the only way for her inner eye to be clear is for her to get cross-eyed drunk.

(alright, not that drunk, but I was going for impact)

 

I don't think they implied babies stole magic. But that adult muggles stole magic from real wizards and stole their wands.

 

Regarding Hogwarts fees, and keeping in mind the way Rowling uses numbers as a kind of tool to evoke mental images (a hundred thousand at the world cup to evoke the atmosphere of a Muggle world cup, a thousand students at Hogwarts to evoke an average high school size, small class sizes to evoke an elite boarding school, etc), Rowling probably imagines Hogwarts fees as basically the same as a traditional boarding school: around £12k-£15k a year.

 

That's if she does imagine there were fees. It's stated no where in the books that there is a tuition iirc. As far as we know it's the only magical school in the UK (also iirc), so it also stands that it quite easily could be free entry. That is as long as you meet the criteria of being able to perform magic.

It's up to whoever the author is really, but I always felt is was a public school. We never hear of fees or of anyone every being turned away or not allowed entry to Hogwarts.

 

They are Death Eaters first and foremost. They wanted to get rid of muggleborns, so they decided on some flimsy justification so that people couldn't complain or they would be considered traitors.

Sure, everyone knows it's a lie, but it's a nice sounding one (except if you're muggleborn) and not many people were willing to cross LV over it.

 

Like hell they do; ever hear of blood libel? Everyone knows it's a lie, right? Not so much in Germany in the 1940s. Hatred will cause you to believe many things. Don't discount that people thought it was real. What's rational to you is not rational to someone else, and what's rational to them, isn't necessarily rational to you.

If there's anything about the part of the series that isn't believable, its that JKR didn't include that idea earlier, so that it was a theme that could be picked up on and exploited just like blood libel was.

 

What is known about the Slytherin Common Room in canon?

 

I never said it didn't make sense, but still hilarious, and she did always treat it in a humorous fashion.

No doubt that's the idea she's playing on, but I admire the tongue-in-cheek tone of it.

 

I understand what you mean...I wasn't trying to be a prick about it. It just never really struck me that way. But now that you mention it, coupled with McGonagall's "tripe" comment, and a few other things, I can see the humor.

 

Other than Harry's dying at the end of PoA, which could still count as a prediction given she thought he'd see the grimm, and he did, what predictions has Trelawney made that have not come true?

 

What do you folks think would have happened had Hermione been the one to find the Prince's book instead of Harry? Do you think she would have handed it in to one of the teachers or kept it for herself?

 

I think she would have kept it, but not for the potions information.
There were spells in there, so she'd probably try to research them.

Unfortunately, there's a 50% chance that Harry never sees the book and doesn't get to make his almost successful attempt on Malfoy's life.

Next time, Harry, aim a little higher.

 

I just never quite understood why she never helped him in the first place to research all the information the book contained. I mean, it just seemed like the sensible thing to do.