The Granger Model

I just thought I would toss in a word of explanation in case any readers think it odd that sometimes I /we are like "John Granger! .... Alchemical Symbolism! It's THE deal in HP!" and other times go off in directions more like modern/contemporary character-development based stuff (kind of like "John who? what are you saying? ... alka selzter?") Actually Granger himself does this. The Hidden Key to Harry Potter develops the alchemical symbolism as the main skeletal structure and primary "wallop" of meaning that really grips us readers (often without our even knowing that that is what it is); ... BUT in that book Granger also does a wonderful job of showing how JKR augments that primary mode of literature with many other congruous elements such as "Manner and Mores" (from one of her favorite authors, Jane Austen) and more contemporary psychological motifs such as depression and despair (i.e. the dementors). (Aside Note: "Psychology" is really another "mode" of developing what Alchemy is about, a more modern one. Alchemy is about the transformation/purification of the soul, or "psyche" [which comes from the Greek word psyche, which means soul, as distinct from the concept of "pneuma" or "spirit." The distinction flows into the Greek New Testament from the Hebrew distinction between "nephesh" for "soul" and "ruach" for "spirit" via the Septuagint, the pre-Christian translation of the Hebrew sCriptures into Greek, and from the Greek it flows into the Latin "anima" for soul and "spiritus" for spirit - in HP, DD is the element symbolic of pure spirit, whereas Harry is the "Golden soul"]. And of course you can see that "psychology" is the study of the psyche, focusing on more modern/contemporary classifications such as "depression," seen in the effects of the dementors on those such as Sirius and Hagrid in Azkaban or the continuing effects being a were-wolf has on Lupin. Rowling is really melding these two approaches, one from the classical era and one from the modern era, to thinking about the soul) Rowling is building a really rich story and Granger has a really rich exposition of it, so I just thought I would toss that explanatory note out there just in case it ever seems like I/we are sort of "hot and cold" with the alchemy/symbolist thing.

Family Tradition

Towards the end of a previous post ("Protego") I used the chess example, noting DD's praise of Ron's chess game in book 1. Voldemort, I think, also fancies himself a bit of a "chess master" and here I want to look briefly at a primary difference in the way Voldy and Dumbledore play their "game." The primary difference is that Voldy will never trust anyone. Even with this action of at least seeming to have killed the big man, I do not think Voldy will ever completely trust Snape the way Dumbledore trusts Harry ("I'm not worried, Harry," said Dumbledore, his voice a little stronger despite the freezing water. "I am with you." [HBP 578] - or the way Dumbledore trusts Snape himself, for that matter) Voldy's system is a bit like that of the Sith in Lucas' "Star Wars" world. You see some of it in the movies but you get a really good picture of it in some of the rp/strategy/adventure video games that have been written, especially "Knights of the Old Republic" (I personally suspect Georgey can't resist the money and popularity of the games but secretly hates the fact that these video games have much better written dialogue and plot than his movies ... but that is just my theory - [theory on Georgey hating it - is more than opinion that the games are better written than the movies, it's universally accepted fact]). The master and apprentice are never at real peace. It is a defining part of the Sith system that apprentice will someday challenge master and one will die. Either the master will prove he is still master by slaying this apprentice or the apprentice will rise to the level of Sith Lord by killing his master. This is exactly Voldy's kind of thinking - there is no "family," there are only masters and slaves. Dumbledore is exactly the opposite. In his game model tradition is a defining aspect. He is willing to have a son (figuratively) in Harry, a son to whom he will lovingly pass on his mantle. In fact, he is willing to die to do what is most beneficial for this son, what will most teach him how to do the right thing. Like Ron's foreshadowing of this theme all the way back in book one, he is willing to sacrifice himself for Harry to go on and do the right thing and "keep saving the wizarding world." Love and "familial" tradition are the defining characteristics of DD's "chess game."

The Lupin Within

Earlier I posted my defense of some of the additions to POA in the movie version. Another came to me in a conversation over the weekend. I also noted in another post that Granger reported Rowling's comments commending the insights of the movie makers. In conversation with our friend Nathan it struck me that she may have also meant this instance I am about to talk about. WhenI first saw (in the movie) Sirius run up to Lupin and say to him something to the effect of "the werewolf is not who you are, this heart inside is who you truly are" my first thought was "hmmm, a little canned." But the reason I now think it may have been on of the lines JKR was commending is because of the "Draco wolf-boy" theory (for those not familiar, it is the theory that Draco was bitten by Fenrus Greyback in punishment for Lucius' failing in book 5, and that what is on his arm that hurts is not a dark mark but a werewolf bite, which Bourgin would have recognized in connection with the mention of the name, and which would explains Draco's fatigued and gaunt look in HBP). In HBP we see some more of what it means to Lupin for him to be a werewolf (this would also involve the lines on the bridge to Harry in the POA movie if those were added in, "your mother had the ability to see the best in a person even when they could not see it themselves"). Lupin still has trouble not thinking of himself as somehow intrinsically wrong, as an abomination, as somehow too far gone for love (as we see in the interchange where we find out that it is him Tonks has been in love with). If Harry is to be reconciled with Draco, his being a were-wolf, combined with the sympathy Harry has built for Lupin's condition (another POA movie addition, "Professor Lupin isn't having a very good night") ... this could be a path for the sympathy Harry needs to find with/towards Draco. He needs to see that just as the outer monster is not the real Lupin (cf the POA "canned" addition), so the monster of insecurity and petty malice that Draco's family attitude has built does not have to be the real Draco.

Sever-Us Snape

In a conversation over the weekend Pauli had a very interesting hypothesis: That on the rooftop of the Astronomy tower, Dumbledore may not have been saying "Severus" but "Sever Us" ... in other words, separate us. I do not know if this is up her alley as far as things hidden in the mechanics of the dialogue (although it may be - it may be too mechanical for her but it also may be something she would do) but I do think that is could be an adaptation of the name (she is notorious for names with important meanings in them) that she might intend to be in there but leave implicit (as she does with many of the names, leaving it for avid literary sleuths like Granger to discover and have great conversations about) There are 2 things I would note about this. 1. It would be a symbol of the redemption that has happened for Snape (on the "good Snape" theory) or maybe will happen for him (or maybe happen further for him in the future, redemption in his reconciliation with Harry). The name means "severed" or separated or cut in two. I have standardly taken this to mean his divided character, the tension in him. If, however, Pauli's suggestion is right (and because of what will be said in the second point - the symbolic value of the severing) it is an instance of a positive meaning being given to the name because he is doing the good will of Dumbledore in severing, and thus it is a sort of redemption on the level of the name. As in all redemption, that which was bad is transformed (like the red lizard on the shade's shoulder in Lewis' The Great Divorce, that once the shade allows it to be killed is resurrected as a vibrant stallion on which the risen man rides further into heaven ... in redemption the good characteristic that has been perverted in a weakness, now becomes a strength) 2. It is well known that one of Rowling's central themes is the need for coming to grips with death, the need for right grieving. This involves the humble acceptance of a separation (hopefully just for a time, with reunification hoped for in the after-life ... maybe in the place beyond the veil through which Sirius falls, from whence Harry hears voices). If the "good Snape" theory is right, and if Pauli's suggestion is right (as I am hoping it is) I believe the name has been transformed to symbolize this theme. The Material Aspects Briefly, here are my thoughts on the "mechanics" of the "Sever-Us" theory. The death stopper magic might somehow involve not just Snape performing some magic that keeps Dumbledore alive, but Snape himself lending some of his own life itself to Dumbledore to keep him alive (his own nephesh, in Hebrew, psyche in Greek, or anima in Latin). Thus Snape would need to sever the connection and allow Dumbledore to die - this still necessitates some "ruse" magic, in which it appears he is using Avada Kedavra on Dumbledore.

Look Out

I glanced at Sarah's (Blondie's) newest post on her blog this morning and saw that she has started re-reading GOF for the release of the 4th movie coming up. This is a great idea - I re-read the whole Lord of the Rings trilogy the summer before the second movie came out, just to really get back into it, and I found tons of new things that excited me ... you can never read this stuff too many times - like the James Cole character played by Bruce Willis says in 12 Monkeys: "I've seen this film before, but it was different; it's like, every time you see it it is different because you're a different person.") So hopefully we'll be hearing some comments from Sarah in the future (she says book 4 is in a tie with book 3 for her favorite) ... I'm guessing she'll have some really good and intersting things to say - I'll be checking her blog to see what they are (and what all interesting is going on in Montreal.)

On the Way

I returned today from this past weekend celebrating my sister's b-day with her and Pauli and my two nephews Gilbert and Joe (and the "baby on the way") and my parents and Pauli's parents and our friends Nathan and Julie and their 7 kids (one of whom is Joshua, whom I have mentioned in here and posted excerpts from Potterial email conversations with him, and another of whom is his next youngest sister Elizabeth, who is a voracious reader and may have even outdone Sarah from Sarah and Beyond in how many times she has read each Potter book). I returned with a replenished arsenal of thoughts on things HP from conversations with Pauli and my sister and Nathan and Julie and Josh and Elizabeth. These thoughts will be appearing here soon (provided good ol' Pauli does not beat me to it). For today I have other things to accompplish so I'm just throwing this up as a teaser, but I am logging the post titles in a spreadheet of "posts to write" so I am sure not to forget any of the goodies. PS To whomever reads our blog ... these types of conversations are the life blood of a blog like this - so feel more than free to email Pauli or myself with anything that strikes you while reading any of the posts or other thoughts you have had that connect (we promise, you'll get credit - we're not into stealing people's ideas ... mainly we're more interested in the blog evidencing how many people are finding this type of stuff interesting and meaningful, and it being a meeting place for all these neat observations and ideas and showing how the diversity of people who enjoy it and the diversity of their thoughts on it show the really rich breadth of the works) ... or, if maybe its a brief thought, post a comment (we receive email notification of comments being posted, including the content, so we're sure to interact with comments as soon as we can!)

HP Merchandise story

One of the ads up at the top was for HP merchandise and it reminded me of sometime last year I was in a Sheetz (a mega-convenient store/gas station in these parts) and they had Bertie Bott's every flavor beans. I thought "that's interesting" so I picked up a few boxes, figuring that they would be all good flavors, thinking they were only going for the name but nobody would seriously carry through the "every flavor" thing in actual production/marketing ... But they did. There were dirt flavored that actually tasted like dirt and grass that actually tasted like grass .... there was even a vomit flavored one that had a very funky smell to it (we tossed that one.) I thought it was a cool thing in the books and thought it was cool they did it keeping accurate to the idea even though it probably made them sell very poorly ... but I'm not sure I would buy another box of them. (lol)

Protego

A mutual friend of mine and Pauli's was recently having a few beers at a bar with me and we were talking about (among others things) Harry Potter. He had a really good theory/observation: When DD freezes Harry on the rooftop there are a million and one other ways a master like DD could have handled that situation; he handled it that way for one simple reason - to Protect Harry. He is not primarily protecting Harry from whoever is coming up the stairs, he could have simply blocked the door. He is primarily protecting Harry from .... Harry. He knows what is about to transpire. He knows that although Harry was not able to use the Cruciatus on Belle in book 5, this was probably due to the fact that he did not know Bella well enough to have the grudge he has against Snape and Malfoy. If he sees Snape or Malfoy taking these actions that are possible, Harry could damage his own soul by committing murder or torture, by lashing out in hatred at SS or Malfoy. DD probably knows that Harry used Sectum Sempra on Malfoy, knows he is capable of lashing out (having indiscretionately used a very dangerous curse not knowing the results ... he may not have known what it was, like he knew what Crucio was, but his apathy toward the danger of an unknown result is plenty of evidence of enough antipathy to "want" the results howver bad they may be) (I have recently come to the conclusion that Snape was following DD's orders and that it was all planned, but I still have problems with Snape "pulling a trigger" and side with some version of the "stoppered death" theory. DD praised Ron's chess game in book 1 and I think he would be the best judge of that game. I think DD is probably a chess master in that he is able to think his moves out throughout the whole game, and plan for all contingencies ... it is highly unlikely he did not see any of what happened that night as a contingency. The timing may have surprised him a little, but DD is a master of adaptation ... The "planned appearance of murder" theory is now the one that seems to make the most sense. I still cannot buy Snape as "simply really good actor and spy," I still think he has a serious struggle with Harry that borders on hatred the same way Harry's issue with him does.)

Bookends

Here is another reason I think that Harry will be the 7th and lasting DADA (Defense Against the Dark Arts) teacher at Hogwarts: Using "bookends" is a common device - I noted it in the post on Religion and Love in Tolkien concerning his use of the midsummer's eve date to connect and contrast the attack of the Nazgul and the courtly love of Aragorn an Arwen. Thus, if I'm saying Harry is going to be the final DADA teacher, it would be good to see who the first DADA teacher in the series was and see if it makes sense as an opposing bookend. And who would that be? Actually ... it is Voldemort (from the back of Quirrels head). I am planning soon to go back and re-read the books quickly for the purpose of re-experiencing them through what I have learned since first reading, so I am not sure but from what I remember we do not get too much on Quirrel in book 1 - on his qualifications, teaching content etc - but by the end of the book we find out he has Voldy in him and has had him there all year. Combined with what we learned in HBP we know that Voldy did manage to "thwart" DD's authority by actaully teaching DADA "covertly" through Quirrel - as the opening "bookend" to the DADA class progression. By this time Voldy has much more important plans, like getting a body, but I think he probably saw a delicious irony in teaching DADA covertly onlong the way. So who would be a more fitting final bookend than Harry?

Interesting hints from the woman herself

Check out this page for some tasty crumbs. Rowling says that he last word of the last chapter of Book 7 is "scar." I was thinking that the scar has to play a big part, maybe in the "horcrux absorption" method which we have posited here. She also tells us that we will learn something very important about Lily Potter in book 7 as well. (Of course we know we have to learn more about Snape and her relationship to Lily... right?)

Hidden Humor

In looking for the passage of Harry kissing Ginny for the previous post, I came across this on HBP 417. "Personally I think there's a lot to be said for hexing him with that toenail thing of the Prince's." If you go to Rowling's site under the rumors section for the end of June 2004, one of the rumors she dispels is that book six would be called "HP and the Pillar of Storge" ... the next rumor she put up was that it would be called "Harry Potter and the Toenail of Icklibogg" - the second name was her own invention and her blurb on the side was "Well, if you believed the 'Storge' one ..." Hence, I think the line in HBP was an addition specifically refering to that interchange, simply for humor ... which I at least found it funny when I realized where it was from.

Riddles in Dark Chambers

I just wanted to briefly note the name Riddle. Rowling and Tolkien Note that in both Rowling and Tolkien we "meet" Riddle/s in dark chambers under the earth. It is in the Chamber of Secrets that we really "meet" Tom Riddle, really find out who is is. It is in the game of Riddles played by Bilbo and Gollum under the Misty Mountains that we first meet the One Ring (a bit like the ring Riddle wears to identify himself in visiting his uncle Morfin, the same ring which the "destruction" of which burned DD's hand irreparably, and, if the "stoppered death" theory is correct, cost him his life ... ie he died to undo the ring - just as Frodo and Sam had to be willing to die to undo Sauron's ring.) Riddles in the Dark I have stated before that my thoughts on "Elendil's Sword vs Isildur's Bane" (in Tolkien) center on Revelation. If you want a connection with Harry Potter before I get further down, simply look at the number of Christ Symbols Granger notes in Potter and then read the second article number (the first paragraph of the first "chapter," entitled "Revelation Itself," the first paragrph/article being the preface) of Dei Verbum from the Second Vatican Council - where Christ is called THE Revelation of the Father, neither Scripture nor Tradition is "sola", they both flow from the one Word ... this is central to the Medieval Theology that is the background structure for Medieval Alchemy and literature. The One Ring as a revealer is seen in something like the dream Boromir relates at the Council of Elrond (in Mythopoeic literature, including the Bible, dreams are often prophetic and revelatory - Boromir's dream being about the ring itself). This is, I believe, how Tolkien thought of myth as natural revelation. Myths are "riddles in the dark" that, like the light atop Gandalf's staff in the mines of Moria, can be a signpost to truth in a deep dark pit of a world. But, like Sauron's ring as a revealer, they can be perverted into evil. It is NECESSARY to uncover the ring, and so myth is necessary. But when it gets set up against supernatural revelation (as in Boromir's statement at the council that he did not come seeking a lost heir, only the answer to a riddle), then the discovery of the ring can be threatening. It must be done (Gandalf is adamant about this, that the ring should be discovered and destroyed, versus Saruman's complacent statements that the ring has probably already disappeared for good), but it brings with it danger. Danger that those such as Denethor and Boromir will want to use a perverted form of myth (idolatry) as a weapon, rather than seek the fulfillment of pagan myth in the truest form of myth, Christian revelation. The same is true for Rowling. When the Riddle (Tom) sets up its own person/identity as an idol, it becomes the evil that is Lord Voldemort. Love, Christian Charity, is central. Tom Riddle is really the power of myth without the heart of the Christian myth, i.e., myth in the sense of Lewis' "Myth Become Fact", i.e., Christ.

Rowling and Consecrated Virgins

Since most of my recent posts have been on things tangential to Harry Potter, I thought I would quickly throw up a post from my store of observations on the Potter books. This is the observation that first started me thinking of Rowling in the vein of a direct descendent of the Inklings because it is the first place I noticed what I saw as a concretely Biblical image used in the books and much of my thinking on the inklings has coincided with noting Tolkien's use of Biblical imagery and types. MOLECH There is a difference between the way the book and the movie portray the statue of Slytherin in the Chamber of Secrets. In the movie we see only the face but in the book there is the whole statue and, as Harry enters, he sees Ginny lying between the feet of the statue. There is a direct correlation with ancient pagan idol worship as evidenced in the Old Testament. Children were sacrificed in the arms of the idol of the god Molech. Hence, Rowling echoes the image of the innocence of youth and feminine youth in particular (what Riddle refers to in the movie a "a stupid girl") being sacrificed to the god (in this case the "idol" both Slytherin and Riddle have made out of their own identity as wizards). Rowling on the Matter On her site Rowling has definitively ruled against Ginny's name coming from "Virginia," stating that it comes from "Ginevra." (Extras - Characters - "Some Random Facts About the Weasley Family") I am not sure if there is some symbolic meaning behind the name "Ginevra" that makes Rowling prefer it but I think I can explain why she is against "Virginia" and how that does not cause a problem for my reading of Ginny as symbolic of feminine purity of youth. The name "Virginia" obviously comes from "virgin"/"virginity." In the Christian West the primary symbol of this has been the consecrated/celibate virgin. In a setting such as our present one, to use the name "Virginia" in a highly symbolic story such as Rowling is writing almost automatically calls to mind the consecrated virgin, the nun. For her to do this would not only cause problems with Ginny being Harry's "courtly love" counterpart, but would make the story allegorical in a bad way, in the way criticized by Tolkien. As I said, the consecrated virgin is the primary symbol of innocence/purity. But Rowling wants to appeal to is the core thing itself. The two are intrinsically connected, but this does not mean that Rowling is using the institution of consecrated celibacy as the image-source for her instantiation of her image of innocence/purity. I think sub-consciously Rowling does mean Virginia, but that she means it as the core idea of a vibrant innocence and purity of youth (as vibrant as Ginny's fiery attitude, infamous bat-bogey hexes, bright red hair and flaming eyes - "Harry looked around; there was Ginny running toward him; she had a hard blazing look in her face as she threw her arms around him".) But Rowling's aversion to what she knows would be the "polemical" results of her stating the same is a healthy aversion. In the end I have a hard time believing that somebody as well versed in ancient myth, in which there are common threads among several of children symbolizing purity in being sacrificed to a god, could use the image and not be cognizant that that is in there and part of the meaning of the picture she is painting. Post Script Some ascribe their own boorish thoughts on celibacy to the institution itself and give it a bad rap. To be sure, it has a unique and deservedly revered position in our world as a special symbol of Christian purity. But if you read about a Saint such as St Sir Thomas More you find that the "marriage is a second class state" mentality is precisely one of the things he had to battle against. Personally I have known at least one nun whom I consider to have more flare of personality than I will probably ever have. A young Dominican nun from Poland. Her order used to wear the full habit with everything short of the "wings." But in conversations in the library she could bust my chops and razz me about my occasional academic laziness as well as any [for one she was gutsier than most, my general appearance/disposition is a bit like Hagrid such that many sort of shy away] ... never in an inappropriate way, she was just always very much herself ... actually when I noticed her being more reserved was when her order decreased the habit they wear. Of course there are different valid forms of the practice as well. I have a friend who is an artist in Brooklyn and quite as loopy in the head as myself if not more. He has a sister who is a cloistered nun. If he visits her he has to talk to her through a screen ... but he and she think that is fine so I think it is fine - the seclusion is one particular way that that order lives out the symbolic speciality of consecrated celibacy, and that I know of they are not saying it is the way it has to be done everywhere, although it is good for it to exist in some orders. According to Carl his sister can still joke with him like sister with brother, even from behind a screen.

Cool Art

I just wanted to call attention to the link Paul put on the side to Mugglenet. When you go there check out the backgrounds you can choose from. I want to find out who does the drawings (I suppose I can look inside the jackets of the books, looks like the same artist). What I really want to find out is whether there is more that they have done in full color like the covers of Order and HBP (as it looks from those backgrounds like they have), and if so ... where you can get them. I like it when artists do well done illustrations. I went out and bought both the special edition Hobbit and Lord of the Rings that were done with Alan Lee's artwork illustrations (even though I already had the leatherbound boxed of each). (Lee also did the pencil and charcoil drawings used in David Day's Tolkien's Ring )

Bouncing Ferret Scene

Check it out here! (** requires QuickTime **) "We never use transfiguration as a punishment!" is one of my all-time favorite Minerva McGonagall quotes. I added some links over to the right, including the very informative HP Lexicon Site. My favorite part of the HP Lexicon is a section called "Strictly British" which should be a big help to us coloninsts reading the books.

Dante

I should note that in the "musical interlude" post the translation I used of the first line in Dante's Divine Comedy is that done by Dorothy L. Sayers, who is standardly counted among the Inklings. Her translation was the Penguin Classics choice for many years, then they went with John Ciardi's but I think they are on to somebody elses now. I am not sure if the Sayers translation is in print again or not, I know it was not when I went to get it after using the Ciardi translation for a class (I had to order used from Blackwell's-Oxford online) - but that was back in 1998-1999.

The "Order of the Phoenix"

Just in case anybody missed it because it is in the comments: Pauli asked if Joaquin Phoenix is in the Order of the Phoenix and the answer is yes. The "Order of the Phoenix" of which he is a member has 7 members (the magical number), his two parents, his four siblings (who were/are all actors, the most famous of which was his older brother, the deceased River Phoenix) and himself. See, the mention of the "Walk the Line" movie does connect with HP. Sorry for the puns!

Simon, Dante and Harry

Just in defence of my own digressive and erratic mind ... "call me Al" does have something to do with Potter. Granger notes the classical "descent into the underworld" as part of the central structure present in every Potter novel (it is worked into the alchemical structure of death and resurrection but it is in the specific image of the classical descent under the earth to the land of the dead ... every Potter novel involves descent into the earth except Goblet, which involves a graveyard, the land of the dead) Rowling gets it from Dante, who gets it from Virgil, who gets it from Homer. Simon writes using Dante ... what more can you ask for? heh heh

Movie News

Walk the Line has Joaquin Phoenix play the late Johnny Cash I like Phoenix as an actor and love Cash (cf former comments on Cash's song "flesh and blood" in relation to HP as "Incarnational" literature.) The Trailer looks dark, I hope they end it with at least hints of the redemption so evident in Cash's work in his last years of life.

Musical Interlude

Well, it is raining profusely on a Monday and I am off work and studying for the GRE, so I thought I would pop in briefly and write a post on musical interests. The first is a random incident as far as concerns things "mythopoeic" - simply that a friend of mine was in town (Pittsburgh) over the weekend to see U2, a fact for which I am very jealous of him (tickets sold out in 4 hours when they went on sale last May). He said it was an amazing show ... I guess they are closing their shows now with "Yahweh" into "40." Paul Simon: But on a more mythopoeic note, Dominic (friend/housemate) related to me that he figured out what he thinks (and I agree) is the primary image in Paul Simon's "Call Me Al" from the 1986 Graceland album. But before I say this, let me note - I'm saying this is the primary "image" not the primary identity. In other words I do not think the song to be a musical adaptation of the whole thing where every line of the song draws out to Dante in a tight correspondence. Simply put, an image struck Simon's imagination and he wrote a song from the experience of being struck by it, working in other aspects in following the song where it led him (especially imagery from the third world cultures of Africa, which he was drawing on musically.) One word ... "multivalence" (multiple layers/levels of meaning) Here it is: "Betty" = Beatrice "Al"= a shortened form of Dante's last name (Alighieri) "Bodyguard" = the fact that Beatrice leads Dante through Heaven as his guide up to the Mystical Rose, and it was she who sent Virgil to guide Dante through Hell. "a Man walks down the street" = Dante wakes "midway this way of life we're bound upon" ... i.e., midway down the "road" of life. "A Cartoon in a Cartoon graveyard" = Dante journeys through the underworld. "Dogs in the moonlight" = The most dangerous of the three beasts that block Dante's way up the hill and out of the woods, thus necessitating that he go to the gates of Hell ... is a she-wolf. "The third world" = Heaven in the Paradiso (simultaneous with being the third world cultures of Africa and, later, South/Latin America - see the final note below on "literary background".) "Angels in the architecture, spinning in infinity" = just look at the illustrations that have been done of the Mystical rose from the Paradiso. (the link is to the one from the book Dom put on the table in front of me while telling me. I think Dore's illustrations are pretty well known and standard. I think Blake and Dali also did famous illustrations) Literary background This is exactly up the line of the imaginary traditions Simon drew on for the Graceland and Rhythm of the Saints albums. the literary genre known as "Magical Realism" officially comes from Latin America but I believe that African folk literature fits the model as well. This genre is defined by the wonder of the magical combined with the nitty gritty details of realism (hence the third world being Dante's Heaven with angels, and at the same time a third world marketplace place with cattle, scatterlings and orphans). Simon's music has always struck me as "Magical Realism" - especially starting with the song "Hearts and Bones" (I think a primary image for that song was taken from My Name is Asher Lev. "One and One Half wondering Jews ... Traveling together, in the Sangre deChristo, the Blood of Christ Mountains" - I believe this to be based in the image of Asher joining his mythic ancestor in "wandering the world" after his painting the "Brooklyn Crucifixions" - a Jew wandering in a world of Christian imagination) When you think about it - this is what the sacramental is about (the Body, Blood, Soul and divinity of God in a common white wafer), or as my friend Smitty (the lucky jerk who got to see U2) put it yesterday morning over breakfast when I described this all to him, "well, sounds to me pretty much like it sums up real life."

Harry a Horcrux?

Pauli made a comment on Voldy saying that he "less than spirit" after the first night with Harry. this got me thinking to look at that passage. Unless Voldy was lying in his comments to the death eaters in the graveyard, I am wrong about him trying to make Harry a Horcrux. "You all know that on the night I lost my powers and my body, I tried to kill him." But I think Granger may be right that the scar is a Horcrux that voldy created by accident through murdering Lily. Oops ... oh well, back to the drawing board....

Movies

I was telling Pauli on the phone that I went to see Wallace and Gromit and the Curse of the Were-Rabbit. I liked it, a lot of fun. Should have seen the twist coming, seeing as how mush I have thought about Lupin ... that the monster is always the man transformed down rather than the beast transformed up. But I was in a sleepy mood that day. It's been a while since I watched the original 3 episodes from 1990 so it was a good dose of W&G, I thoroughly enjoyed it. (Interesting though that there were a few "adult"/adolescent jokes - such as Wallace naked when the female lead comes in [SPOILER: he had just transformed back from his huge rabbit mode, in which his clothes would not have him so they are shredded off: END SPOILER] and Gromit handing him a box to cover up with and the box was from some food item and has a red label "contains nuts" And a really odd one that I'm not sure if it was really there or not. In college for a course in 20th century American novel we read The Centaur by John Updike. Updike is a sort of gritty psychological surrealist, a number of the scenes deal in fairly erotic language with a woman's obsession with a man whom she visualizes/fantasizes about as a centaur. Another series by Updike along the same themes deals with a guy whose name is Rabbit. There are several in the series and I can only remember the name of one, Rabbit Run. The female lead in Were-Rabbit says this at one point ... not sure if it was a reference to Updike's Rabbit novel or not ... seems kind of out of place to me, probably just coincidence) Other Movie News: Harry Potter 4 on Nov 18th Batman Begins is out on DVD Charlie and the Chocolate Factory comes out on DVD Nov 8th Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is out on DVD

Ramblings on the Four Basic Elements

Granger quotes Rowling in answer to a question about Death Eater children in the four Hogwarts Houses. JKR: Probably. I hear you. It is the tradition to have four houses, but in this case, I wanted them to correspond roughly to the four elements. So Gryffindor is fire, Ravenclaw is air, Hufflepuff is earth, and Slytherin is water, hence the fact that their common room is under the lake. So, again it was this idea of harmony and balance, that you had four necessary components and by integrating them you would make a very strong place. But they remain fragmented, as we know. And then Granger points out that Harry has to be the "quintessence" - literally the "Fifth Element" - which is the spiritual harmony which needs to be restored to the 4 houses. Earlier in the piece he talks about the movie "the Incredibles", which is one of my favorite animated features of recent times, and how it also uses a theme of 4 elements. (Granger believes that the Incredibles is a derivation of the older "Fantasic 4" comic in which you can see the four elements defined a little more starkly - remember "the Thing" (earth) and the "Human Torch?") The discord which exists when the parents and kids are at odds or when the dad is sneaking off to fight evil by himself has to be eliminated and harmony restored before the villain can be defeated. The "spirit" or "quintessence" in this movie's case is that of family unity. I believe that is why the movie is so good. It does not rely on a vague notion of the "family values" variety superimposed upon it which is one of "we put up with each other's annoying diversity of gifts". Rather it puts forth a theme of "family spirit", the spiritual reality of a "fifth element", which inevitably conquers the villain. To go one step further, I believe that the baby, "Jack-Jack", is the embodiment or incarnation of the quintessence. Several times throughout the movie it is spoken or alluded that "we don't know what his powers are yet". AHA! Sound familiar? From the prophecy: "He will have powers the Dark Lord knows not." Of course, at the end of the film the villain, "Syndrome", meets his demise when attempting to steal the child. The baby surprises him by turning into a stone (Philosopher's Stone?) and a ball of fire (Heir of Gryffindor?) - I can't remember if there's anything else. The surprise that Syndrome receives is comical and it parallels Voldemort's continual underestimation of Harry's quintessential powers which derive from his spirit. Voldemort barely counts spirit as worthy of note - he turns even his own soul into something material via his horrible horcruxes and describes himself in Goblet of fire as having been "less than spirit" after his curse intending to kill Harry (also a baby at the time) backfires.... Phew, that's enough for know....

Inside joke

I should explain that when I revealed that I am going to a coffee shop to study for the GRE, to those who know me, such as Pauli, this is highly ironically humorous .... I'm the only one in my family who does not drink coffee - never have. I'm in good company though ... Robin Williams' "Perry" character in The Fisher King states twice in his conversation with Lydia (Amanda Plumber) that he doesn't drink coffee. Well ... he winds up being good company. Being as he is techincally "crazy" through most of the moive I'm not sure what that says ... I'll just choose not to think about that one.

Raiders of the Lost CD

I may try this evening studying to some of the music from my favorite movies. A good friend and housemate of mine is on a trip representing Duquesne University's Graduate programs at a graduate fair at another university (actually several - he is in the PhD Philosophy program at Duquesne and has this job as part of an assistantship). So, I raided his small CD collection. I was unable to find the one I was really looking for, a compilation called "Choral Moods" which contains the beautiful Sacred Choral piece used at the end of every episode of the BBC mini-series "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy" starring Alec Guiness, done at the end of the 1970, with the sequel "Smiley's people being done in 1982, so they are contemporaneous with the Star Wars movies ... the BBC mini-series were based on the 2 "George Smiley" novels written by John LeCarre and are a favorite of my fathers and of my own. But I did find the soundtrack to Raiders of the Lost Ark, Pirates of the Caribbean and Road to Perdition.

Introducing Avada Kedavra

Here is another thing that struck me in viewing the trailer for movie 4, and one of the reasons I still ride the fence on the Snape question and still have strong reservations about the use of Avada Kedavra. It seems to me quite possible that, when we the audience are introduced to the 3 unforgivable curses, Rowling gives a "tip-off" to something being wrong with Moody in the fact that "he" (the Barty Jr fake Moody) would even use the unforgivables at all, even on something as inconsequential as a spider, without real need . I know the arguments for Snape actually using it and still being good posit some form of real need, I'm just trying to make the point that it seems for her any use of it is cause for doubt, any material involvement with instigation or performance of the curse (as opposed to the simple removal of a protective magic once the effects were inevitable, and the removal inevitable as well ... at that point Dumbledore and Snape may very well have cause to choose the time and manner in which the stopper was removed and the "perception" those factors might help them with). Keep in mind that this is a point precisely on which Dumbledore disagreed with Durmstrang's philosophy. At Hogwarts they teach only defense against the dark arts, but Durmstrang teaches the dark art themselves ... but under the pretense of saying that this makes for a better ability to defend against them. Just a few thoughts to ponder ... now it is off to the land of triangles and pies. I have found it best to do this at a coffee shop, where my computer is not present ... to avoid the temptation to sit and endlessly type my thoughts and ponderings on all of ours favorite underage wizard.

Snapshot of Snape

This is from an email I sent in discussion with a young friend named Joshua, discussion on the whole Snape thing. The incident it refers to is one of my favorites in HBP and the type of thing that makes me love Rowling's writing so much. She creates such an intricate character in Snape. From Email: Just as an aside, here is one of the most fascinating things to me, maybe in all of book 6 ... when Harry hits Malfoy with Sectum Sempra, and Snape heals him ... she writes that Snapes healing incantations were "almost like a song" (HBP 523). She doesn't use music much in the series (that I can remember) and when she does I think it indicates something really important, maybe not to the plot but at least to the meaning. The only other place I can think of off the top of my head is the Phoenix song. The Phoenix is a very powerful but very mysterious and mystical image in the book. I think she is trying to give a hint to something very deep and mystical going on in Snape.

On the Road to Adventure

Yes, I have set myself upon the path to taking the GRE in hopes of gaining entrance into a Ph. D program for Biblical Studies, and I expect to courageously battle the monsters of "I don't remember how to do THAT from high school algebra!" and "WHAT does that word mean?" I may change my name for the next month to "Brettbo Baggins" (interestingly, I have the same birthday as Bilbo and Frodo Baggins, Sept. 22nd - the autumnal equinox) I am doing ok so far on preparing for the test ... figuring out more things on my own without asking my father (who has an MA in math) or a friend and housemate who tutored math in the summers for 3 or 4 years straight (after you finish the "general review" type books there is another stage of taking practice tests where you have to apply the mathematics in the specific format of GRE questions, which is another world altogether). Just last night after getting off the phone with Pauli there were a number of problems that had me stumped (probably because my brain was sore). Oneof them I figured out in the car on the way home from the coffee shop and another I figured out in the car on the way home from work today. ... but I don't think I have the funds to afford very much of this kind of studying at these gas prices, haha. I will try to make a few posts here and there, like the following one which I just have to cut and paste from an email to a beloved "nephew" of mine and Pauli's "It's a dangerous thing stepping out your door, Frodo my lad - you never know where the path may lead you ...." - Bilbo Baggins "The Road Goes Ever On and On Down from he door where it began. Now far ahead the road has gone, And I must follow if I can Pursuing it with weary feet, until it joins some larger way, Where many paths and errands meet. And whither then? I cannot say." -Bilbo Baggins, from "The Hobbit" by J.R.R Tolkien