It's a little thing, but still confusing. During his confrontation with Harry, the diary horcrux claims:

"I, keep the name of a foul, common Muggle, who abandoned me even before I was born, just because he found out his wife was a witch?"

The diary was created using Myrtle's murder, which happened in June 1943. Tom wouldn't have met his old man till August of the same year when he massacred the Riddles and pinned the blame on his uncle. The horcrux obviously doesn't share original's memories after its creation - so how would he know what went down between his parents? It's not like Tom Senior gave an interview to the Prophet about his wife being a witch.

So either I'm missing something or the young Tom knows way too much about something he has no way of knowing.

My theory is that he doesn't actually know. Maybe it's all just a supposition/projection by young Tom who was very bitter about being left in British orphanage in 1930s. And also very racist against regular people. After all, even we don't really know what actually went down between Tom and Meropa. We only have Dumbledore's theory (with very little factual substance) and Voldemort's off-hand comment (which may be colored with a tiny bit of bias).

Blaize can see thestrals, in the Care of Magical creatures lessons in book 5, in book 6 we hear his mother is a very beautiful witch who has had many husbands die in mysterious circumstances.

So he's seen death... Has he seen the death of his step fathers / father? Was he the perpetrator, the co-conspiritor or just the witness?

Given that when speaking about 'the trace', parents are generally trusted to stop their children from using magic so there's a chance he cast a killing spell with his mother's wand.

He could have of course just murdered manually without magic.

Another theory could be he killed her husbands in the belief no one is good enough for him and is mother. When speaking of Ginny 'even Blaise thinks she's good looking '. Could his standards be so high for himself and his mother that he'd kill on that belief?

Slughorn invites him for lunch and of this meeting he says Slughorn 'isnt interested in death eaters'. So the mysterious circumstances are unknown and not punished.

Could he have just seen the death/s? Could they have just been mysterious and misadventureous?

I think he did it 👀

As Remus Lupin dies at last and there isn’t a marauder alive, what do you reckon happened to the map? Would it stop working?

I bought these bookmarks from the official store. Anybody else have them?

Mine is so thick it wont let the book close.

https://harrypottershop.co.uk/products/gryffindor-scarf-bookmark?srsltid=AfmBOoqQLd6-wQ0FSb47B3FLVOduv6nZ2t-E44nzKt91Og41qRVhoQ1g

You’re telling me that in a high school in the 90’s, that not one person yelled out “GAY!” when they saw that Ron was the person that meant the most to Harry during the Tri-Wizard Tournament?

I don’t believe it.

I think the charm is a really cool concept and I think it could have been fleshed out a bit and used in other contexts.

What other applications do you think it could have?

🤔

There’s a lot of discussion out there about how 16 year old Tom Riddle could’ve gotten away with the murder of his father and grandparents while he had the trace on him. Dumbledore explanation that the Trace doesn’t tell you who only where used magic doesn’t explain why the ministry didn’t seem know that there was a second, underage, wizard in the area that was unaccounted for. So they would know that there was an underage wizard present during the time of the murders.

I won’t go into to extensive details on the various speculations and arguments about this you can search this sub if you want, but the most common answer I see people settle on is some variation of “yeah well, the ministry is dumb, and there justice system sucks, and morfin confessed so they were lazy.” This is not satisfactory for me or most people I think, if for no other reason (and there are, many, many other reasons why this doesn’t make sense) because I highly doubt Voldemort would’ve left it to chance by just assuming the ministry wouldn’t investigate, because if they did it would be hard to connect the dots;

Underage wizard was present at the murder >>> all or the vast majority of underage wizards in the country are students of Hogwarts >>> check student list >>> see there’s a student with the same name as the victim, and the middle name of the alleged murders father, >>> get suspicious

I was thinking about this the other day, and I wondered. Could Legilimency be used for this? We know that skilled Legilimens can do it without a spell or wand, and Voldemort is known to be extremely skilled in it. Could he maybe have subdued his uncle, and then either directly controlled or forced him to commit the murders? Or maybe just brought the past hatred of the senior riddle back to the surface and helped to kindle it? Then wipe his memory, all without using a spell himself.

Flaws:

1. We do not know if this is something achievable with Legilimency. We don’t know if mind control beyond very surface level emotional manipulation or highlighting specific memories is possible or not. The only time we see this is when Voldemort tries to do it to harry, but they have a unique connection, and it’s unclear if this ability is a product of that connection, or just an advanced Legilimency technique. We also don’t know if it can be used to erase or modify memories without a spell. And just to clarify, yes, in the movies Snape makes it clear that Voldemort can do many things with Legilimency, but these things are not in the books.

2. Even if this is possible, would Riddle be capable of it yet? We know he is a prodigy but at only 16 would he be able to do something like this? How would he have learned, and practiced? We know a lot of his experimenting and innovations happened after he left Hogwarts.

I saw a post a while back that was about whether it was right or wrong for Fred and George to test their products on first year students and it got me thinking about the other Hogwarts experimenters like Snape and the Marauders and I was left thinking that what they were doing was dangerous

Lupin directly comments that the process to become an Animagus is very risky and potentially deadly and that is why the government oversees it

In Snape's case we know that the creation of spells can be deadly (Luna's mum) and especially a spell like septumsempra and I don't remember if it was him or Slughorn but one of the 2 in class said that you have to be careful with a certain potion because if it goes wrong it could induce what is basically a coma and not even they could do anything about it and it's like, and yet Snape was messing experimenting and modifying the potions recipes?

and of course Fred and George trying things with unverified effects on young people

of course since all this turned out well these teenagers are called geniuses but what if it hadn't turned out well?

and that's when I thought "how irresponsible the government and the school should be aware of these things" but then I thought, how? magic is something inherent in every wizard and witch, it's part of them it's not an object whose sale you can regulate and although there are things like wands in the strict sense you don't need them (there is wandless and non-verbal magic) so the truth is I can't think of a way in which the government can really impose its rules and prevent any wizard or witch from doing whatever they want with their magic (like when Dumbledore made an illegal portkey in Hogwarts in a couple of minutes)

So on that side I think I have to be more understanding with the ministry workers

Hogwarts House is: "what you were kinda like when you were eleven." Honestly, it's not even that. It's "what you kinda liked when you were eleven," because the Sorting Hat takes the student's choice into account. I'm somewhat tired of seeing posts like "This character should be in [insert house name]" "This character does not belong in [insert house name]".

1. People get sorted at 11, and people can change very much after that.

2. The Sorting Hat is not infalliable. It's not an all-knowing, all-seeing God, it's more like a judgemental person with Legilimency in a form of a hat.

3. People also get sorted on what the value, instead of what they are. For example, Hermione valued bravery over book-smart (she literrally tells Harry this before he faces Quirrell), and she was sorted into Gryffindor.

4. People are multifaceted. Most people could probably be sorted into any of the four Houses and fit in just fine. You can be ambitious, brave, fair, and intelligent at the same time (or at least, you could think they are all important).

I get it, it's still fun to think about Houses, that's kind of the point, but I didn't want the House of a character being seriously thought of an accurate specification of the character. Hufflepuff prides itself for having the least number of dark wizards, but that means it still has some dark wizards. There are always exceptions anyway.

(UPDATE: Thanks to all who have engaged in good faith discussion, half of you seem like good ones but I’m muting now)

Before I go into the lore points, I imagine that Dumbledore being in Gryffindor was probably established early on just as a character device to make him more closely related to Harry and emphasise the point about Gryffindor was the ‘heroes’ house as a counter to Slytherin

From everything what we see of Albus Dumbledore’s character, directly in his own words, from characters like Aberforth, Elphias and even Voldemort who knew him in the past and all the exposition about his life, it does appear like the Hogwarts House he’d be least suited to is Gryffindor.

Gryffindor main traits are chivalry, daring and nerve. Whilst Dumbledore doesn’t lack courage, he is not daring and never reckless in his actions. Everything he does is highly calculated and controlled, with a deep layer of anxious caution and regret over previous failures plaguing his thoughts. He is not chivalrous as he continually lies, manipulates and distances himself from others, often especially those he is closest with.

Whilst he understands that his actions can be harmful, he consistently justifies them through his self-belief in his own superior intellect and power. This defining trait of his is far more aligned with Ravenclaw or Slytherin.

On an emotional level, while he feels a deep respect and compassion for sentient beings in general and displays a great care or “fondness” for his close friends and family, it is notable that he’s not a passionate friend or lover. He had one affair with Grindelwald when he was like 17 and then never allowed himself to feel that strong a romantic connection again, consistently wallowing in depression, and regret rather than expressing his grief through rage or acute despair.

Equally, he does not display the same kind of righteous, honourable anger that many other Gryffindor characters do in response to people and events. Dumbledore feels perfectly comfortable in the presence of Snape despite his disgust of Snape’s character, even choosing him as his personal confidant, and seems to exhibit no outward bursts of anger towards Voldemort, Umbridge or any death eater (instead he almost seems to pity them). Compared this to his occasional bursts of irritation/anger with characters like Harry, Sirius or Fudge, not because they are being immoral but because they are being incompetent or short-sighted. He also takes the majority of his anger out on himself for his own ‘failures’, again not because he lacked courage or integrity in those moments, but that he failed to foresee and prevent bad things from happening. This trait is more aligned with Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff.

Lastly, he is first and foremost an academic. He’s bookish, diligent, altruistic and highly eccentric, dedicating his life to the pursuit of knowledge and progressive ideals. His occupation is leading/teaching communities of other wizards to be kinder, fairer and greater than they believe they can be, all whilst displaying a highly individualised taste for various oddities without feeling self-conscious - on the contrary, he enjoys his oddness and has no desire for conventional popularity. All of this is very aligned Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff coded.

Albus Dumbledore fails to exhibit any of the major Gryffindor traits so overall I do think it’s a minor plot hole that he is one.

Addendum: I don’t think that any of these traits weaken the story or Dumbledore as a character (if anything the opposite) but he’s just not a Gryffindor. I can’t believe a true Gryffindor with that level of power would’ve been able to stay out of the action and get on with teaching whilst Voldemort was running around the place. He’d have been leading the OotP from the front and going around arresting Death Eaters the moment they popped up, and once he knew he was dying in HBP he’d have prioritised himself 1v1ing and smacking Voldemort back into spirit form to buy Harry more time before going on Horcrux hunts.

I’m trying to do a lesson plan and wish to include some quotes about what life under You Know Who was like the first time. I seem to remember that there is a quote about people being afraid and going into hiding, but cannot for the life of me remember which book it was. Any quotes would be greatly appreciated!

I haven't read the book, so please exuse my lack of information.

It can be anything creatures plotlines etc

I heard one abt Hermione having a younger sister and Arthur Weasley getting killed( I'm glad he didn't get killed)

In the first book we learn that Dumbledore can leave a card to visit another. But Ron hinted that Dumbledore is a really common card. So there probably are hundreds or even thousands of Dumbledore chocolate frog cards. But how many different Dumbledores are in those cards? And can they visit each other in one card so you have two Dumbledores in the card?

Sirius says that Voldemort is after a weapon. Something that he didn't have last time. But all he's looking for is the prophecy to gain clarity on the contents.. Is this knowledge meant to be the weapon?? Or is there some missing link to the hallows' elder wand foreshadowing that I haven't noticed?

The Order's headquarters is in a traditional pureblood family home. Some of the living paintings are enchanted with a sticking curse. The people in the paintings are most likely not only hanging in Death Eater houses, they would probably also be spies for Valdemort... has anyone noticed this??

EDIT: Thanks so much for all the replies, everyone! You’ve really helped me make up my mind. I appreciate all your replies :')

Hi, I hope you're all doing well.

I've been wanting to start reading the Harry Potter books for a while now, but recently I came across some criticisms videos that made me uncertain. They have pointed out that J.K. Rowling's beliefs are reflected in her books, and they also mention issues like fatphobia, support for slavery, and other problematic elements within the series.

With these concerns in mind, I'm conflicted and not sure whether I should read the books or not. For those of you who have read the books or are familiar with the criticisms, what are your thoughts on this? If you have any advice, please let me know what you think I should do. Thanks a lottt

Also, if this type of post isn't suitable for this subreddit or if it breaks any rules, I sincerely apologize. I understand if it needs to be removed or redirected :')

What are the most known characters in Hogwarts, who definitely appeared in the castle corridors, but were not described until they started to mean something important to the plot?

I mean situations where until Harry knew them by name and surname and they were not important to the events, they were not described. But they physically appeared somewhere, e.g. in the crowd in the corridor, in the Great Hall, they were there, they were studying or teaching.

Examples:

• Charity Burbage, quite important to the plot towards the end of the series, taught during all parts, but Harry did not meet her, and we learn about her in the seventh part
• Cedric Diggory or Cho Chang were already studying at school in the first and second book, but they were not important to Harry yet
• Luna Lovegood as well
• Sybill Trelawney taught Divination before the third year (but she did not integrate with people too much)

Please give me ideas of who important I could have missed

Always a struggle to avoid picking up book 1 again. Trying convince myself to read something different next. I'll probably watch the movies this weekend 😆

I am currently on my yearly re-read and I am reading the part in Chamber of Secrets where Harry and Ron confront Lockhart in his office. They find out he is a fraud and is taking credit for things other people have done and he tries to put a memory charm on Harry and Ron. Harry disarms him and then THROWS HIS WAND OUT OF THE WINDOW. So you’re telling me there’s just a random wand on the ground outside of the castle and they didn’t think to keep it? Ron’s wand is also broken and they didn’t think to keep it so he has an adequate wand to fight the basilisk with? I don’t know why it has taken me so long to wonder about this lol.

Honestly, how are people not seeing this 😭:

(Just kidding, everyone has their opinion obviously, and everyone sees things differently, but I don't know why people say there is absolutely, 100% nothing AT ALL in canon to support this pairing 🥲🥲. Nothing can be so absolute imo, there can always be subtleties)

Hermione fell asleep at the celebration party for Ron, and woke up when Harry arrived, and then discussed about Umbridge, Voldemort and Dumbledore with him,talking to no one else, asked him to make hats with her, (and forgot that she was sleepy- wasn't she having a hopeful gleam on her face at this idea now even though she'd yawned some time ago?) AND looked disappointed when he said no?!

EDIT: Not to mention, Harry asked where Hermione was almost immediately after arriving in the common room

I am on the umpteenth re-read / listen of the series. (This time it's the Stephen Fry version.) With knowledge of the power that the Deluminator gives the holder, I am paying attention to any time a character speaks Dumbledore's name. Harry states at the end of Book 1 that he reckons Dumbledore knows pretty much everything that happens at Hogwarts. I am imagining that much of the time that Dumbledore is alone in his office, the Deluminator is sitting out on his desk and he is able to listen to any conversation after someone says his name. I realize how impractical this could get as there could be hundreds of witches and wizards discussing him after an article comes out. However, on an normal day, it might only be a few individuals and their conversations could be very important. I think that although Albus is very wise, he is also not above spying on everyone for "the greater good."

One minor note: I realize that maybe I am misinterpreting how the Deluminator works. As Ron's family must have surely said his name while he, Hermione, and Harry were off on their own in Book 7. Ron doesn't discover this hidden power until he wants to return to Harry and Hermione.

"The Philosopher's Stone":

Ron and Hermione joined Neville, Seamus, and Dean the West Ham fan up in the top row. As a surprise for Harry, they had painted a large banner on one of the sheets Scabbers had ruined. It said Potter for President, and Dean, who was good at drawing, had done a large Gryffindor lion underneath. Then Hermione had performed a tricky little charm so that the paint flashed different colors.

But... how do wizards know who the president is? In the UK (the Muggle one too) there is no such institution. Soes such a saying function in everyday life? Who in the wizarding world in this case could propose such a text? I know it's overthinking and stupid, but still maybe someone has an interesting idea?

The gang, and especially Hagrid, have a lot of issues with this article and how "horrible" it was. But as I was reading it, I feel like nearly everything she reported was true. Really only Crabbe's flobberworm comment was falsified, but that's not Rita's fault. She does make a few insinuated connections, but they remain well within the realm of possibility, as we learn in later books.

Link to the article.

‘And here we have six missing Death Eaters ... three dead in my service. One, too cowardly to return ... he will pay. One, who I believe has left me forever ... he will be killed, of course ... and one, who remains my most faithful servant, and who has already re-entered my service.’ (Goblet of Fire)

I interpret Voldemort’s description of “one, too cowardly to return” as Karkaroff. Snape is the “One, who I believe has left me forever”. Karkaroff is certainly too cowardly to return. His growing fear is obvious throughout Goblet of Fire. Perhaps Voldemort is unaware of Karkaroff’s anxiety and his eventual flight. However, he could hardly fail to be aware of Karkaroff’s cowardice in grassing on other Death Eaters to secure his freedom. I don’t see any reason why Voldemort would call Snape a coward. Voldemort must either think Snape has remained loyally at his post to await Voldemort’s return or deserted Voldemort’s service. Voldemort has firsthand knowledge of Snape’s work to foil his plans in Harry’s first year. He doesn’t confide his plans to steal the Philosopher’s Stone to Snape, which indicats suspicion. Suspicion would probably verge on certainty when Snape threatens Quirrell and then thwarts Quirrell’s attempt to curse Harry’s broom. It’s also possible Voldemort has further reports from Barty Crouch, Jr. about Snape’s position within Hogwarts. Also, while Voldemort does, indeed, kill Karkaroff, I don’t necessarily see his promise to punish the Death Eater he feels is a coward as indicating less than lethal intentions.

Recently came out an illustrated book "Christmas at Hogwarts", showing the Christmas chapter from "The Philosopher's Stone" through many colorful illustrations made by Ziyi Gao.

Have you seen it? What do you think about the Hogwarts castle presented on the pages of this book? How do you like this layout, completely different from the one already established in the world of media? What do you think about the fact that books stubbornly go their own way, that Hogwarts does not necessarily have to (and is not even advisable) look the way everyone is used to. This is indicated by the images of the castle from “The Harry Potter Wizarding Almanac”, another official illustrated book from last year, presenting many more approaches to the castle.

Personally, I like the fact that each subsequent edition of the books shows a different version of the castle, which means that J.K. Rowing does not block the imagination of the illustrators and does not impose on them a castle from the media. I hope it stimulates the imagination of the readers and it makes them wonder if the known Hogwarts layout should be really the ultimate version.

Seriously I've been re-reading the books recently and I noticed several times it has been mentioned that Harry stuffed his invisibility cloak in his pockets. Now, from what I know, cloaks are pretty big, especially an invisibility cloak, which is supposed to cover your entire body from head to toe.

It is also mentioned couple of times that Harry keeps his wand (which is 11 inches long iirc) in his pocket. Which begs the question, how large are his pockets?

Harry/Ginny and Ron/Hermione

Do you like them? Are you mixed? Or do you dislike them?

I think Harry does lose him temper in the moment as an orphan it opens up wounds that Lupin would choose to leave his child behind and when Lupin says this is what James would have wanted that really sets him of. He feels guilty after he has calmed down but does hope it might make him go back though he can't be sure. He doesn't regret turning him away but is sorry about being so harsh

How cute is that moment in GoF when all the champion's families turn up the night before the third task and Harry doesn't go to greet them because he assumes no-one will be there to see him and then Molly and Bill turn up ♥️ Just wanted to share!