My take on Tonks is that she can, let's say, put on perfect disguises. Animagi are capable of transforming their bodies to such an extent that they physically become an animal they turn into, not just look like it. Tonks can look like any person she wants and imitate some minor animal traits perhaps, but underneath she's always herself. I also headcanoned metamorphmagic and animagic as being mutually exclusive.

 

That might be canon, actually, because I've always thought I remembered Tonks telling Harry that she couldn't become an Animagus, but I've never been able to find the source for that.

 

I can't remember anywhere in canon where she mentions that, I think that might be fanon. Harry really doesn't discuss the animagus transformation with anyone at all in canon.

 

Dementors can't be killed with force, but they can starve and diminish.

In HBP they multiplied due to the depression of the UK due to Voldemorts rise and terrorism.

After DH public mood was on the upswing and the Dementors would of been driven off to plsces they couldnt feed. So they would dtarve and diminish again.

In a utopia world there would be no Dementors, but if that society collapsed Dementors would come back.

They dont mate sexually, they manifest.

 

Pepperoni sounds very nice right now.

Damn you Oz, now I want to have pizza!

 

With regards to split personalities being needed to cast more than one spell at the same time from different wands, how about James Garfield, 20th president of America.

He could simultaneously write in Latin with one hand, and ancient Greek with the other.

If a muggle can do that, imagine what a superior wizards like Voldemort and Dumbledore can do.

http://www.ipl.org/div/potus/jagarfield.html

 

It always interested me, the proportion between purebloods and muggle-borns... Do you guys have any thoughts?

 

Look at the list of students beginning Hogwarts in Harry's first year.

See how many of them are purebloods and how many are muggleborns.

Then, assume it's the same for the rest of magical society.

Why? Because I suspect Rowling did the same.

 

I always thought the distinction, if any, between wizards and witches was interesting. We have Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, and so forth, with the distinction being made in other places like book titles and the like.

Other than alliteration, I don't think there's any real purpose to such a distinction, but it might be an interesting bit of HP etymology. Witches are never referred to as 'wizards' unless it's used as the neuter noun for all magical humans, as in 'the wizarding world.'

However, on a person to person basis, wizards are often referred to as warlocks, which, as we know, is the male equivalent of 'witch.' What does this mean? How are we supposed to understand it?

What's the difference in HP between warlocks and wizards, if any? Is Tom Riddle a warlock because he's evil? He's often called a Dark wizard. Is Dumbledore a warlock because he's old? Perhaps. He is, after all, the Supreme Mugwump, Grand Warlock, etc.

Is it just more alliteration? Wizards, witches, warlocks?

Thoughts?

 

Does it come with cheese?

 

It is often said on DLP that some fics, while praised when they were initially released, have not aged well and would be considered cliche and even unreadable by today's standards.

But I wonder how the reverse would look?

How would fics written today, for example Taure's Alexandra Potter, Jeram's Mysterious Curse of the Girl Who Lived, enembee's Forests of Valbone or Myst Shadow's Forging the Sword be received in 2006?

 

They would be trend-setters if they got popular enough, obviously.

See: Barb's trilogy, FP's YoR, etc.

 

Does the Ministry of Magic control Magical Ireland or just the northern part? Seamus Finnigan is obviously Irish but we are never told whether traditional Muggle borders translate in the international wizarding community.

 

Considering Ireland split in 1922 I doubt magical Britain gave a shit what the muggles did.

 

So, was curious as to what Harry's MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator) would be. Then I wondered about Hermione's and Ron's. I have my first thoughts, but what are your opinions?

Harry - INFP
Hermione - Seemed like ESTJ
Ron - Was harder to place, but I think maybe ENTP?

So yeah, what do you guys think? About Harry, Ron & Hermione, or other characters?

 

This is something I've ruminated on, so have a chart. The maxims are of my own devising, so don't take them too seriously.



[as if anything I post should be taken very seriously]

 

The Head of Research in my old company once hired based on MBTI. Of course, he never had a course in it, accreditation, or anything scientific to base that decision on - he just saw a book in the book store and bought it. He then decided what the best employees would be, self assessed the people on his team and fired or hired accordingly. Interestingly, his own self-identified profile (which he posted on the office wall) matched serial killer. That's why he ultimately stopped using it - he figured it was garbage after that little gem was discovered (and anonymously posted right next to his profile one night - lol).

Looking at the stereotypes., I would say:

Dumbles: ENFJ - cult leader, manipulative
Ron: INFP - emotional bully, slacker
Ginny: ISFP - stalker
Luna: INFP - dreamer
Hermione: ISTJ - anal retentive
Harry: ISTP - Independent, Avoids Attention, Rule breaker

As noted previously, should not be taken seriously.

 

Considering the British colonisation of Ireland didn't really start until after the statute of secrecy was signed I'm not sure any parts of Ireland would ever have been part of it.

 

Bill Door, meet history. Alright, yes you say colonisation and qualify it with 'really', but frankly I would dispute the idea that Britain ever 'really' colonised Ireland. If you insist on discounting the Normans though, British (or at that time, English) 'colonisation' of Ireland began with the Tudor conquest, which was well before the Statute of Secrecy. Even Cromwell was before. So yeah... No matter how you spin it, it was before the statute.

Having said that, having magical governments mirror muggle governments any more closely than they already explicitly do in canon has always been a slight pet peeve of mine. My headcanon has always been that magical Ireland is unified and independent and has never been ruled by magical Britain. Seamus Finnegan's mother could have personal reasons for sending him to Hogwarts - if it was normal for Irish students you'd think there would be more of them anyway... not that Rowling wrote that many Welsh and Scottish characters.

EDIT: I should probably clarify what I said above. I don't mean that Britain didn't try to colonise Ireland, just that it was never really successful. The Normans certainly succeeded in colonising part of Ireland (The Pale), at least for a time. The Tudors tried with the plantations, and there were later waves of settlers from England, Scotland and Wales, some Catholic and some Protestant. The point is though, that although Ireland as a whole became more British (particularly more English), the population was never replaced as a whole by colonists, and there is no separate cultural group in Ireland today that you can point to and say 'these are the foreign invaders'. The colonists were either subsumed into Irish culture or left. Yes, there is the religious divide today, but many Irish Protestants are the descendants of Irish converts, and many Irish Catholics are the descendants of British settlers.