If we're going to get into an argument concerning hermeneutics, it'd probably be better to do it in a different thread.

But, to simply state as if it were fact that "the author is dead" or "authorial intent" is the absolute and only method of legitimate interpretation is arrogant at best, since there is a vast amount of academic writing going back and forth on this very point.

So, back to the purpose of the thread: where did the Weasley's Anglia go after CoS? Did it just hide in the forest?

 

It died once it rusted through in the damp Scottish forest.

 

Maybe the Centaurs are driving it around for kicks.

 

I'm not saying Rowlings is the only way to interpret a work. I'm just saying WOG is canon by defintion. You can choose to discount it, but a person using canon source material as harmless as a charecters name should not be a reason to dislike their work.

 

Well, yes? It is her property and she can do whatever she wants with it.

Retroactive continuity is around, though.

 

Y'know, I think I'm comfortable in my heresy (have been for a while now) and can move on from this.

 

Of course she can. In fact, she has. Newer editions of the seven main books have changes from the originals. Often these changes are minor but she has changed plot points before. For example, in early editions of GoF, James exited Voldemort's wand before Lily. If left to stand this would mean major things for the plot, casting into doubt things we thought we knew. Rowling subsequently changed this so Lily exited first in later additions. This was done so the scene matched past information but the fact remains, she changed it.

 

I think being purposefully confrontational and obtuse until he think he's won the discussion is a good bet.

 

Since you're such a fan of TVTropes, how bout a direct quote from that page:

Not a mistake Rowling made, or her going back and ret-coning something. Literally a editor error that was fixed later. Maybe read the tropes page you link before trying to use it as evidence for your arguement.

 

Portkeys don't work in Hogwars, correct?

 

Well, Dumbledore created some at Christmas during Order of the Phoenix in response to Arthur being attacked.

That could just be because Dumbledore is Dumbledore, of course.

 

Dumbledore created one at the end of OoTP to send Harry to his office from the Ministry, and the GoF portkey was on Hogwarts grounds. However, it is canon that Dumbledore can remove the anti-apparation protections (book 6, appiration training), so the answer is probably 'only if Dumbledore lets portkeys work'. It would have been easier to use portkeys than vanishing cabinets, for example.

 

"Only the headmaster can make portkey's in hogwarts" is fanon, right?

 

Of the three portkeys (that I remember) that could travel to and from Hogwarts, two were created by Dumbledore, and one was the Triwizard cup. It could have theoretically have been created to travel from the maze to awards ceremony place or something, with an extra step added by Barty later. Plus, I really doubt that the death eaters would have spent a year waiting with the vanishing cabinet if they could use portkeys.
The headmster can remove anti-apparation charms (see book 6, Apparation training), so why not anti-portkey charms?
Although 'only the headmaster can make portkeys in Hogwarts' was not explicetaly stated in canon, I believe it can be mostly extrapolated with common sense.

 

Unless Voldemort is a retard, only the headmaster can make Portkeys that work in Hogwarts. Also, the Triwizard cup and the maze were quite a distance from the castle so whatever stops them (anti-portkey charm, wards; take you pick, I don't care) might not work that far from the castle.

 

You can call it fanon, but the headmaster being the only one able to make portkeys in Hogwarts is perfectly sensible, and I consider it extrapolatable from canon. It is, technically, fanon, as it never showed up in book, and no WOG confirmed it.

Its also possible that only Professors can make portkeys in hogwarts, and Snape was all "Hey Voldemort, I like, forgot how to make portkeys or something." This would explain book 4 better, but as you can see has other problems.

 

Potions are magic, why shouldn't they be able to affect clothing? You may as well ask how they work nearly instantaneously even though the digestive system is slow.

 

In PS Voldemort was extremely weak and could barely talk, the flying didn't occur til DH

 

Spells pass right through clothing all the time, should we start asking why magic doesn't affect clothing as well?

I can think of one fanon potion that effected clothing (Jberns 'Lie I Lived' had a clothing disolving potion), otherwise we don't really have many instances of finished potions being thrown/poured on people. The times we see in potions class where people get drenched with half-baked concoctions either Snape has some type of antidote on-hand, or he vanishes the potion near-instantly.

Is that a question or...?