Episode 176: DH 25 – Makers Keepers

The trio embrace Bill and Fleur’s hospitality in the weeks that follow Voldemort’s successful acquisition of the Elder Wand. Join hosts Alison and Eric, special guest host Megan Kelly (from MuggleNet’s Speak Beasty podcast!) and fan guest Meredith as they trodge pleasantly through Chapter 25 of Deathly Hallows, “Shell Cottage.”

On Episode 176 we discuss…

→ Episode 175 Recap: Harry tunes out Voldy with love; the Elder Wand’s soul mate; Voldemort’s hypocrisy
→ PQOTW Responses
→ JKR’s writing takes our breath away
→ The trio are all suddenly grown up
→ Moral grayness between wizards and goblins
→ Keeping up with the Weasleys
→ Dean Thomas, the real MVP
→ Teddy brings joy and Sirius questions
→ Question of the Week
→ Check out the Alohomora! store

To listen to the show, simply click the player below or direct download the episode. You can also subscribe to us on iTunes. For more information about the podcast and to find out how to be on the show, check out our Be On The Show! page.

Don’t forget to leave us a voicemail at our phone number: 1-206-GO-ALBUS (462-5287). Skype users can also send us a message to username AlohomoraMN. And as always, be sure to continue the discussion below or on our Forums!

Listen Now: | Download (Right Click, Save As)

  • Hi all! Listening to the episode right now but had to pause when I was stumped by Eric bringing up the fact that Jo had responded on twitter about Gryffindor’s Sword…so I did a little digging. While Jo may have also responded on twitter; there is a pretty extensive entry on Pottermore that debunks the Goblin’s side of the things once and for all.

    Here is the main excerpt:
    “The sword was made to Godric Gryffindor’s specifications by Ragnuk the First, finest of the goblin silversmiths, and therefore King (in goblin culture, the ruler does not work less than the others, but more skillfully). When it was finished, Ragnuk coveted it so much that he pretended that Gryffindor had stolen it from him, and sent minions to steal it back. Gryffindor defended himself with his wand, but did not kill his attackers. Instead he sent them back to their king bewitched, to deliver the threat that if he ever tried to steal from Gryffindor again, Gryffindor would unsheathe the sword against them all.” (c) J.K.R./Pottermore

    I am actually really glad Eric brought this up because although I am sure I have read this Pottermore tidbit before I must have since forgotten and each time I reread this chapter I get a funny twinge wondering whether or not the sword was really Gryffindor’s or not. I guess because it is not stated outright in the text which story is true, I always question it. Anyway, I’ll carry on with the episode now!

    • Hah, even the goblins have to bend to Pottermore. Even if they don’t like it.

  • Wait, now that I’m seeing SpeakBeasty and Alohomora together, I’m wondering how this’ll effect Alohomora’s post-Hallows idea of ‘dissecting the book’ when the former is already doing it.

    • I wondered this too…maybe their post-series plans don’t have anything to do with the other additional books…?

      • No, they definately said on their patreon they would be looking at the companion books. Look at the milestones.

        • Kat

          Please let’s keep in mind that Patreon information is for those who have supported the show, and is a privilege to have! We urge you to keep the information to yourself until it’s been made public, as information is always due to change. Thank you 🙂

          • But I’m not a patron. It says that on your milestones page.

          • But that information was on your ‘milestones’ widget on the left of your patron page. And I definitely haven’t donated.

          • Oh, great. You changed it. I was worried I had accidentally gained some sort of Patreon status.

      • Here, look;

        The Hogwarts Library
        ($30 per month)
        “Fund the show as we delve into JK Rowling’s Wizarding World companion books. Explore the world behind the new Wizarding World series as we discover the creatures of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Learn the history of Quidditch Through The Ages, a games with humble beginnings that has now transcended the page and become a Muggle sport. Sit comfortably by the fire and examine the lore behind Beedle the Bard, the Wizarding fairytales that children of all ages should know. We’ve loved exploring all seven novels, but we know there is much more to the Wizarding World than Harry’s tale. Help us expand the magical universe by casting Alohomora on these companion books”

      • Kat

        Our post series plans will be made public very, very soon – we promise! 🙂

        • No, seriously, they’ve been public since you launched Patreon and I figured out that I could click the milestones tab.

    • Kat

      The two podcasts are very different, and if our post-Hallows plans do indeed involve looking at FBAWTFT, I can assure you that the way the book is discussed will be individualized to each podcast.

  • Riddle: Hello, Proffessor Bins –
    Bins: Hello, Rabastan…

    I think it makes sense that Voldemort would pay attention in history classes. He would want to know where other Dark Wizards had gone wrong, more about the founders, etc.
    In fact, I would LOVE to see young Rabastan’s O.W.L. results. I feel like he’s the kind of person who would apply himself massively to a few choice subjects he deemed important, maybe DADA, History of Magic, Potions, Arithmancy (though we don’t know much about the applications of this) and just abandoned the rest.

    • In HBP, by no less a person than Albus Dumbledore, Tom Riddle is said to have achieved very high marks in his seventh year. Here is the passage:

      “[Tom] reached the seventh year of his schooling with, as you might have expected, top grades in every examination he had taken… …Nearly everybody expected spectacular things from Tom Riddle, prefect, Head Boy, winner of the Award for Special Services to the School.” HBP, pg 519, American E-Book

      From this, we can infer he got nearly all O’s, perhaps with an E sprinkled here or there. Something tells me though, that were he to get an E, he’d have been clever enough (and without any scruples,) to have ‘persuaded’ the examiner to change his mark. I also think he’d have been quite keen on Transfiguration and Charms, and possibly Herbology and Astronomy. I see Tom Riddle as the kind of student who would want to learn as much as he could about as many subjects as he could. He believed he was special and gifted and he believed being magical was his birthright. He’d have been hungry for more knowledge, in particular after being raised in the muggle world. I see him as a twisted, ill-meaning, entitled, Hermione while he was at school. Too bad he wasn’t interested in learning about HOW his experiments worked instead of just the fact that they did work, although as Dumbledore says: if he did, he couldn’t have been Lord Voldemort and may never have murdered at all.

      • This is a really good point, but it also says ‘that he had taken’ so that could mean any amount. Though I tend to agree with you.

  • DoraNympha

    I love this chapter, the calm before the storm! And we get to see and hear about so many other people this time, I feel like we’ve been positively starved for information about everyone else in the wizarding world by now.

    Don’t worry, we do see Lupin alive once more, when he’s showing around the pictures of Teddy in the Room of Requirement like five minutes before everyone we’ve ever known dies… He didn’t so much die because he was a father figure to Harry, rather than for the re-establishment of the orphans of war theme, though. I mean, he also had to be there in The Forest Again for it to be really complete, but Jo said something like she was writing DH and she was realising that he was going to have to go to show again what had happened to Harry. So I guess Tonks and Lupin were always going to go either together or not at all, since if one of them survives, Teddy’s not an orphan, obviously, and yeah good vote of confidence there in Harry… HOWEVER, which came first, Teddy or the literary death sentence? Because there really aren’t any alternatives to show the orphan theme again with parents we already really know and who would have left underage children behind (maybe the Delacours? There’s Gabrielle.). So this kinda makes me think that Teddy exists in the first place just so he can become an orphan, rather than the storyline having existed already and coming in handy when Rowling realised this should be shown again. (Ehh I’m going to need one of those glasses of wine too now oh noooo) Also, do wizards usually just give birth, like, just casually, at home, with like their mom to help maybe (??) or is it just an unfortunate situation in which it would be unwise to show up at St Mungo’s if you’re technically living outside the current regime’s law? Molly can’t have been there to help, she was at Muriel’s. I know, they’re wizards, they have magic, potions, etc, but it’s still a birth.

    Do we think Sirius would have been asked to be godfather, by the way? Or would Lupin still have asked Harry? Don’t godmothers exist in Harry Potter?

    I’m so sad they forgot Dean from the movies. Can’t anyone give him a wand all month? Poor child. But I feel like Luna would have been a terrific comfort in the cellar indeed. If she’s being serious about all her fantastical stories about creatures that don’t exist, it’s all the better in a grim situation like captivity, because it’s an escape. She’s very observant, she would have amplified her endless talk about all the magical beasts but I feel like she’s not consciously putting this on, she genuinely believes int hem and believes people are interested, but she would pick up on this being a great thing to listen to as escape for Ollivander in the cellar.

    And I agree, one of Jo’s most beautiful writing is in this chapter, plus that line about Lupin looking younger, ouch. I love that Sirius is mentioned, because it’s like we get a reminer of the Marauders, Lupin’s there, Harry’s becoming a father figure to Teddy, becoming like James just a tiny bit more as he’s becoming his adult self, and then Sirius’s name comes up, all this after Pettigrew’s death, it’s like a tiny bit of the Marauders for the last time before Harry comes face to face with Snape’s memories and uses the stone.

    • HowAmIGoingToTranslateThis

      I believe that witches who give birth have all the options available that muggle women have and some more magical help. Birth doesn’t have to be problematic, a peaceful place and mindful, capable assistance is most important as long as no complications arise. Tonks being a metamorphmagus would help the issue too, I believe. Also, a mother in labour showing up at St. Mungo’s would be treated as a mother in labour first, unless all the healing staff have stepped away from their healing principles after the fall of the ministry. Arresting Tonks would have taken place after Teddy was born and I believe Andromeda would have cursed everyone to pieces who came near her daughter and grandchild.

      Luna would always have been more aware of things beyond the everyday experiences, but I believe after the death of her mother she became used to focusing on them instead of the loss she suffered.

      Godmothers do exist, but we only see two examples of godparents being chosen, so there’s just nothing in the text. Maybe it’s godfathers for boys and godmothers for girls. I personally prefer the tradition of picking two persons as godparents, that way one of them can afford be reckless.

      • “Reckless”. Hah, Harry taught you one useful thing…

      • DoraNympha

        Right, I didn’t think they wouldn’t help a patient, but I’ve always thought it would be sort of unadvisable to go to the hospital if someone’s a Muggle-born in hiding or something, which leads me to something really cool about Fleur, the way she’s taken it on herself to nurse everyone back to health, skelegro in her apron and all, I think it’s really cool of her and also shows that this is probably out of necessity too: most of the Order members probably have to rely on healing that can be done at home. In case someone really has to go to the hospital, well, priorities: better go to prison than die. If someone’s in hiding but absolutely needs hospital treatment, for example, then obviously they would treat them as a normal patient but they’d be escorted to Azkaban from there. :/

        What if the trio had suffered some serious injury? I mean, the locket could easily have done something to any of them like the ring did to Dumbledore. What if someone gets attacked by a werewolf? Can they avoid the hospital with something as serious as that? All in all, Shell Cottage was a good place to go after the Manor, both Bill and Fleur seem to know what they’re doing – which is a long way from the start of the book, when Harry admitted to himself he couldn’t so much as heal a papercut!

  • DoraNympha

    How do owls find an unplottable house? Or are Fred and George just sending out the existing orders to tie up the open deals before taking a break so there are only outgoing owls? I hope they had time to pack up all the Pygmy Puffs before moving to Muriel’s or else I imagine the Pygmies taking over the closed shop, defending it when Death Eaters come snooping, setting the leftover fireworks on them… Or else forming their own community in the absence of human supervision in a sort of Lord of the Flies type situation, electing a Pygmy King and living on magical sweets and hunting for rats. What does a month of WWW diet does to the Pygmy genome? Are there mutant canary puffs to welcome George back? Or did they manage to take all the Pygmies to the safe house? And all those joke wands lying around, just like old times– Muriel’s has already probably excluded the twins from her will, not that they need it. Well, Fred won’t. (SORRY I’m just annoyed at the overhanging doom of all my favourite characters, can we stop now and not read on?)

    • HowAmIGoingToTranslateThis

      I believe the twins use another address to receive orders per owl and someone there – an employee like the one we see in the shop in HBP – sends them on, secretly, so that only the outgoing owls have to be conceiled. A disillusionment charm that wears off during the time the owl is flying to the customer would do the trick.

      Muriel would be furious about anything the twins do, she’s just the type of person who can’t stand anyone who is not exactly like she herself expects them to be.

      “Pygmypuff Overlord” goes on the list of T-Shirt slogans!

      • DoraNympha

        Oh that’s good, charm the owl, not just disguise the package. What if a Disillusioned owl wants to hunt and is still mostly invisible? Imagine an owl with an inflated sense of its hunting skills, not realising it’s because its prey can’t see it. And yes, Pygmypuff Overlord! Love it.

  • DoraNympha

    But what ARE the rare things that can destroy Horcruxes? Basilisk venom and Fiendfyre are the only things we know of. What else? Couldn’t they throw them beyond the Veil at the Ministry? Get a Dementor to swallow it? For real, what else kills Horcruxes and why aren’t they contemplating them at least?

    • Right, well for something to destroy a Horcrux, it needs to destroy it beyond repair. Fiendfyre and Basalisk Venom do that. Both of these are hard to create (or at least control – RIP Crabbe). And ways of destoying Horcruxes are probably quickly forgotten, since Horcruxes are so rare and so obscure. So even if there are a few more wsys, even Hermione or Dumbledore might not know them.

      • DoraNympha

        I think they knew a bit more than just two, though, Hermione and Dumbledore both read that book, it’s a shame we don’t get to know at least a couple more! :/

    • HowAmIGoingToTranslateThis

      I believe everything and everyone you throw behind the veil will disappear from this dimension and it’s impossible to say for sure where it will go, if it goes somewhere at all. If a horcrux would be disassembled into atoms by passing through the stone gate, it would be destroyed. If it simply re-appears somewhere in another dimension, still intact, there’s no chance to get it destroyed there. So if Voldemort would have wanted to hide his horcruxes forever somewhere out of reach for everyone, tossing them through the veil would be it.
      Can dementors swallow solid objects? Or suck the soul out of a horcrux?
      Erumpent horn explosive fluid isn’t destructive enough to be a threat to a horcrux, is it?

      • DoraNympha

        Maybe the veil would work even if it’s just another dimension on the other side. I mean, if it destroys the shell or body that houses a soul, like Sirius’s, then the Horcrux is no more, that’s easier, but if it isn’t destroyed, then Voldemort is still not tethered to earth, he would be tethered to existence, in the other dimension, so if they put Voldemort through the Veil after his Horcruxes… maybe it would work in a way he’d live forever on the other side, but he’d still be unable to come back, I guess. It would be stressful not to be sure, though, but I’d say the Horcruxes and people actually die. (Everytime I meta the veil I just feel like a scientist or an Unspeakable at the Ministry just throwing a random assortment of things through the veil just to see what happens. Is this what they do at work?)
        And no, I don’t think an rumpent horn would so much as scratch a Horcrux. Dragon fire, though? What if a Phoenix swallowd one? (Fawkes once swallowed that Killing Curse.) What could be too dangerous that Hermione wouldn’t even consider using them but is so magically destructive?

        • HowAmIGoingToTranslateThis

          Unspeakables maybe experiment with magical crazy stuff that no one else is allowed to touch, but I believe a large part of their work is to theorize before and after. So for each tossed object through the veil there are months of research and documentation.

          Dragon fire is fierce, but less dangerous than fiendfyre, so no luck for destroying horcruxes with it. A phoenix swallowing a horcrux – depends on the nature of the horcrux. The ring? Would just appear again in the phoenix poo. Nagini? Is destroyed beyond repair and digested. Yummy.

          For dangerous magical crazy stuff, go ask Bill, he’s seen some of it and is probably capable of handling it without dying or killing someone in the process.

          • Now I really want to know what would happen if you popped into the Potterverse and asked Bill “If you needed a way to destroy an object beyond any sort of magical repair, what would you do?”

          • HowAmIGoingToTranslateThis

            Now, if I appeared in sight of Shell Cottage, I’d have Fleur to answer to who I am and what the what I’m doing there. After she’s stunned me.

            But in a conversation about magical crazy stuff and not widely known methods of wrecking objects I imagine Bill talking about his work in Egypt:
            “You can always use fiendfyre if you really want to get rid of someting with nasty spells on it, but it’s difficult to handle in most environments. I’ve seen or rather heard of instruments that goblins use, but they never give those to humans, they’re just secretive like that. But with these instruments they can break almost everything open, no matter how heavily cursed, but then it’s unusable. A colleague of mine was experimenting to create a spell to replicate this effect, he managed to find something that you could use to turn a solid object to dust. It doesn’t work on liquids or things that are too soft, but stone or wood or metal. You point your want to the spot you want to destroy and say the incantation, there will be a spot of light that burns through the object and the longer you hold on the wider it spreads. I’ve seen her use that spell two or three times, it was mesmerizing, but I can’t tell you the incantation, professional secret. At least until she publishes an article about it in “magical archaeology today”.
            (muggleborns yell “magical lightsaber!”)

          • DoraNympha

            What if you don’t even have to destroy them? Is there another way? Can’t we just take the soul out of the object and let it go? Obviously with Voldemort we’d absolutely want to destroy him, seeing as he’s not likely to want to put himself back together, but the point is: could we? Could we extract the soul without destroying the Horcrux object? Could only the maker of the Horcrux do it?

          • I don’t quite understand what you mean by ‘extract’?

          • DoraNympha

            I mean that an object is just a shell that houses a piece of soul, right? So if we wanted to destroy a Horcrux, we’d have to magically destroy the object, beyond repair. But what if we didn’t have to destroy it, what if we could take the soul out of the object, therefore it is no longer a Horcrux but neither the object nor the soul is destroyed. This way, the object is preserved and there is still a chance that a person can put their soul pieces back together. We know it’s possible to undo soul splitting by remorse, but what if someone other than the Horcrux maker can also just take a soul piece out of an object? Harry is quite nice to try and get RIddle to feel some remorse in his final moments in The Flaw in the Plan, but since all the other Horcruxes have been destroyed, I don’t see how would even be possible for Riddle to put his soul back together. However, if Harry had just taken the soul pieces out of the objects, contained them somehow so they don’t float away into an Albanian forest, and then presented them to Voldemort like “here are all your other pieces of soul, how about some remorse to put them all back together?” – obviously, it’s Voldemort, so we want his soul pieces destroyed because he’d never want to put himself back together, but the point is, would it even be possible? I mean, could Harry take the soul out of an object instead of destroying them or does Voldemort have to do it? And IF Voldemrot ever wanted to put his souls back together, would be even be able to do it when his other pieces have already been destroyed? Aren’t the other pieces already in limbo or in “non-being, which is to say everything” or something? I suppose I’m just wondering how it’s possible to not ruin important magical artefacts like the diadem while also doing away with the soul. Dumbledore only cracked the ring but preserved the stone’s magical qualities.

          • HowAmIGoingToTranslateThis

            As far as I remember from the info Hermione gives from the horcrux books, the piece of soul depends on the container for survival. That’s the difference between a horcrux and a living being, whose soul would remain unharmed by the death/destruction of the body. So if pulling the soul-piece from it’s container would be possible, I don’t think the soul-piece would continue to exist.
            The remorse-glueing might work for a soul that has been split in two parts, but if parts are missing, they’re gone forever and the soul can’t be complete again.
            You asked about the artefacts, as far as we know I don’t think there’s a way to keep them intact and destroy the horcrux anyway. They will at least be damaged. But maybe you don’t have to destroy them completely, but just do damage that can’t be undone until the piece of soul is gone and then try to repair it the muggle way. For example the locket has not suffered much damage, the broken glass could be replaced and then it’s as good as new. If Ravenclaw’s diadem had been sliced in two with Gryffindor’s sword instead of melted by fiendfyre, the goblins would have been able to repair it. Same with Hufflepuff’s cup. The Resurrection Stone as a Hallow doesn’t need to be fixed, it’s still working, and I believe the other two founders-relics would still work if repaired by experts.

      • Well, if you made it so V would go into THAT horcrux that you had hurled beyond the veil.

    • MartinMiggs

      reading the twilight series to it will cause the horcrux to spontaneously burst into flames from which it can never be repaired. 100% true

      • You really are a mad muggle. As every wizard knows, the Toadstool Tales are so much worse.

    • Frodo Weasley

      I’ve wondered this- why is Harry the only horcrux that can be “destroyed” by a “common” spell, i.e. Avada Kadavra? Is it because, as a living person, the use of the spell against him can destroy the host beyond repair? Could the trio have used the AK spell against the locket and other horcruxes? Or perhaps did the use of the spell NOT destroy the host beyond repair which was why he was able to come back (combined with the blood tie)?

      • Yep, thats exactly it. It didn’t NEED to be the sword of Gryffindor that killed Nagini. Kreacher could’ve battered it with his frying pan and it wouldn’t have mattered. (though honestly I prefer Neville doing it with a sword. It redeems him, and a house-elf snake scrap would’ve diffused the tension.

      • DoraNympha

        Maybe that’s why Fawkes was needed in CoS, so that A) Harry doesn’t die before it’s time, though Dumbledore didn’t really know about the Horcruxes for sure at that point, and B) Horcrux-Harry would have been damaged beyond repair and Harry wouldn’t have come back, clean of a parasitic soul on his, but he would have died for real, as opposed to after having been hit with a Killing Curse, which doesn’t destroy Horcruxes.

      • Ravenpaw

        The fact is that living horcruxes can be killed by anything that a normal animal can be killed by.

        (BTW, spell checker thinks that horcruxes should be horseboxes 🙂 )

        • Frodo Weasley

          So, are we saying that Nagini could have been killed by any sword (or other weapon)? If so, then why are the other horcruxes any different? Why couldn’t the locket be destroyed by other means? Does it really matter that the “host” is a living object? You would think that if the possession of an inanimate object by a horcrux somehow gives that object some special power of protection (which is must do as seen by the example of the ring and locket) then why wouldn’t the same apply to an animate object?

          • HowAmIGoingToTranslateThis

            Assuming that Nagini can be killed by any means is plausible because Harry tells Neville to kill the snake, but not “kill it with Gryffindor’s sword or a basilisk fang”.
            there are spells that can only be placed or used on inanimate objects. Living beings require different protection, like the magical cage that Nagini was hovering in until Voldemort presumed Harry dead. Living, moving, sentient Horcrux vessels are more difficult to protect, but Voldemort doesn’t want easy, he wants impressive.

        • Frodo Weasley

          Spell checker was designed by a Slytherin

      • Kat

        Let’s remember that Harry isn’t a tradition Horcrux – he is only called as such for lack of a better term. Rules don’t apply to him!

  • Griff

    I think ultimately, Griphook only would have accepted the Sword of Gryffindor as payment– a chance to reclaim such a historied, infamous object must have been very enticing. But I do think it was an oversight on the trio’s part to not even think of Muriel’s tiara. We know Griphook made a similar face/comment about the tiara when Fleur was returning it to Muriel. “What other precious goblin made objects do we have?” Ahh! It’s right there, guys! And Griphook must have similarly seen it as stolen.

    • Yeah, but… ‘despicable’ right? And this IS a (probably) ancient family heirloom.

  • Happy Chinese New Year of the Newt!

  • Crimson Phoenix

    So I was listening to the episode on my way into work this morning and I had a thought about Harry’s maturity compared to the other characters in this chapter. In Psychology, we learn about how people develop cognitively relative to their growth or age and this whole discussion just reminded me of Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive Development. It starts with the Sensorimotor stage (birth-2 years) then moves along to the Pre-operational stage (2-7), Concrete Operational Stage (7-11) and finally, Formal Operational Stage (11+). The last two stages are the most important in this discussion so I’ll give a little background info.

    The definition of the Concrete Operational Stage from About.com is, “Kids at this point of development begin to think more logically, but their thinking can also be very rigid. They tend to struggle with abstract and hypothetical concepts. At this point, children also become less egocentric and begin to think about how other people might think and feel. Kids in the concrete operational stage also begin to understand that their thoughts are unique to them and that not everyone else necessarily shares their thoughts, feelings, and opinions.”
    And Formal Operations is, “The final stage of Piaget’s theory involves an increase in logic, the ability to use deductive reasoning, and an understanding of abstract ideas. At this point, people become capable of seeing multiple potential solutions to problems and think more scientifically about the world around them.”

    We have learned through studies that these stages do not always set store by the given ages. In fact, some people will probably never fully enter the Formal Operational Stage. My own hypothesis is that the stages rely more on the experiences of the person and how they interpret them rather than the person’s age. The way I see it, this would mean Harry has just fully entered Formal Operational thinking in this chapter. He mentions that he no longer just charges in without thinking about the consequences which means he is probably able to see more consequences of his actions than he was able to previously. Hermione seems to be floating somewhere between Concrete and Formal Operations as she is clearly intelligent enough to grasp abstract concepts (such as the existence of an all-powerful wand) but is not able to really apply those concepts to her own life and experiences. Ron, oh Ron, is still pretty firmly grounded in Concrete Operations. This is definitely shown by his slip-up with Griphook and the fact that he could not comprehend what Harry meant about Dumbledore going “on.”

    Hope I didn’t get too psychobabbley on that!

    • Slyvenpuffdor

      I think that Piagest’s stages speak to an individual’s cognitive capability and not necessarily how good or how logical a person is. All the characters use deductive logic and abstract ideas in their daily life. A person can be very unintelligent or irrational and still do these things. It’s interesting to reflect on though.

  • SpinnersEnd

    I think the difference between Harry and Sirius is that Sirius tended to be reckless just because; there wasn’t really a good reason for it.

    But Harry, while definitely still reckless, (mostly) has good reasons for his crazy ideas.

    And part of my wonders why Lupin asked Harry to be godfather to his child. Lupin had to know that Harry has a very real chance to dying, it is, in fact, a *very* likely outcome. Does Lupin feel like Harry, the single most wanted man in the Wizarding World, has a better chance of surviving a showdown with Voldemort than he does?

    • ISeeThestrals

      I feel like a while ago it was discussed why Sirius was reckless and much of it is attributed to what he’s been through; losing James but probably most of all getting locked up in Azkaban. I don’t recall how old Sirius was when he was locked away, but most likely young enough not to be stunted some here. I think Sirius would have always been the fun uncle type, but had he not spent 12 years there with such darkness hanging over him, he might have changed enough not to be so reckless.
      I always saw Lupin choosing Harry as plot device; a way to connect both Harry and Sirius as godfather. Off the top of my head, it’s a little tough to think of all the people in Lupin’s life that could have taken that role, besides the Weasleys.

      • SpinnersEnd

        I think Sirius would have been a reckless man, regardless of spending time in Azkaban, perhaps a little less so, but I definitely think recklessness is an inherent trait in his personality.

        I like connecting Harry and Sirius this way, but I always saw it as more of a way to bring Harry full circle: he lost his own parents, and now he has a chance to be a father in his own right.

        • ISeeThestrals

          I wonder if by the time she decided on making Harry godfather she had already planned for him to have his own kids. I think if we expected Harry to survive this whole thing, we knew he was going to have kids with Ginny. But Harry is provided for Teddy because Ted’s about to lose Remus and Tonks.

        • Yes, I agree – looking at his behaviour in Snapes memory is pretty similar to his behaviour at the time of his death, only difference being how happy he is in the memory.

  • The Half Blood Princess

    I actually liked the idea that Godric Gryffindor stole the sword, (and I know that JKR said he didn’t, but I wish she didn’t). I like that there’s a moral ambiguity added to all the Hogwarts founders (except hufflepuff. Hufflepuffs get braggin rights.) In the first book, it’s “Oh the founder of the evil house was evil”. In the 7th book, we learn that the founder of Ravenclaw sent a crazy guy after her daughter and even the founder of the ‘good’ house might have stolen the sword. Best of all, we just don’t know.

    • DoraNympha

      I agree, all three founders except Hufflepuff can potentially “have some dirt” on them, so to speak, and I like this too, but I think it’s automatically because they three were choosey about students, and that’s what puts them all in moral ambiguity, not necessarily their actions, or at least not in Rowena’s case, I think: Rowena didn’t send the Baron to spite or endanger Helena, I’m sure she didn’t expect the Baron to go all “murderous dudebro” on her in case Helena didn’t want to do what he says. She wasn’t even rejecting him, having already done that before, she was refusing to go back to his mother when she was dying. Rowena did pick him to go because she wanted someone who will insist, she had limited time left, after all, but I’m sure she didn’t tell the Baron to bring Helena to her own deathbed or else stab her. That said, Rowena was one of those founders who picked and chose whom they should teach, so that instantly puts her in the grey area for me, plus that statue shows her beatiful but intimidating, which I’m not sure I like (ha, pulling a Harry-contemplates-Ollivander here), because knowledge and creativity should be welcoming rather than accessible to only a select few. Then again, the whole house system wouldn’t work if everyone could go everywhere and that would be detrimental to those who’d do better if they were encouraged to pursue an education more fitting to their style and values and stuff. So anyway, she wasn’t 100% awesome like Hufflepuff, probably, but she didn’t set a crazy guy on Helena expecting him to get violent. I mean, if one has to resort to violence, it’s like admitting they weren’t clever enough to solve things by diplomacy and I think Rowena gave too much credit to the Baron, or something, because clearly violence wasn’t beneath the Baron. So yeah, Rowena was morally ambiguous, but not really for sending the Baron to convince Helena. I may be totally wrong, btw, I’m just guessing in the dark, but I’ll give Rowena the benefit of doubt that she didn’t want Helena to get hurt. In any case, I’m a proud Ravenclaw, and I wouldn’t want a founder who is absolutely flawless and perfect, I love that there’s this whole story around her full of mistakes made and showing how unpredictable humans can be, etc. It’s like the founder’s story already teaches some lessons! #RavenclawPride

      Also, when Harry says it changes how he feels about Godric and the sword, it’s PERFECT thinking time, Harry: think of all those random victims of your stunts while trying to defeat Voldemort, not just people like Moody or Ted but “collateral damage” like the goblins the Gringotts dragon killed – Harry’s story will be told as a victorious one, the way he’s described as their saviour when he suceeds in killing Voldemort, and he’s already a little hero when he even enters the wizarding world, but there will be so many families who’ll add that he’s also the reason someone dear is dead, because they were near Harry or just in the way or associated with him or something. This puts him in the same morally ambiguous place as Godric and that’s great because nobody can be perfect. Harry is a hero, but he’s also used a Cruciatus Curse on a Carrow. If his children hear about this, they’ll say the same, maybe it changes how they feel about their dad’s heroism. Which is great, because no one should be worshipped as if they were flawless and never did anything wrong. Maybe it’s a good thing Harry reevaluates his feelings about Godric!

      • The Half Blood Princess

        Yeah, I that was probably a stretch, but over the course of the last book, we see 2 people making cases against founders of houses that aren’t traditionally associated with evil like Slytherin is.

        I’m also a proud ravenclaw, but Hufflepuff is my favorite founder, because I would want everyone to be included in Hogwarts.

        • DoraNympha

          Yes Ravenclaw pride! 😀
          No I know it was meant to be a stretch of course, but you’ve raised such a good point I still kept thinking about this today: I mean there really isn’t any point where Hufflepuff is talked about in a way we think she wasn’t all that nice in every aspect. But Godric and Rowena, they did have their flaws. And, is there any moment where someone says somethign redeemig about Salazar at all? He can’t have been all evil, he contributed to the school after all, albeit admittedly overdoing it a bit with the whole secret chamber for his pet basilisk to set on children he didn’t think were worthy enough for the school… So Godric and Rowena feel much more like real characters as opposed to the always nicely depicted Helga Hufflepuff and the always vilified Salazar, and I so agree with you that it makes Godric much more interesting too. The fact that Harry chose NOT to act and that he now learned that Godric may not have been so awesome as everyone thinks, it’s a bit of a nudge for Gryffindors to get off the hypothetical high horse and I think the books really needed it at some point. I mean, nothing against Gryffindors, and houses don’t really matter that much at the end of the day, but the books are so blindly Gryffindor-centric sometimes, it’s just as dangerous to worship a hero type knight guy like Godric as it is to follow an ideology like that of Salazar’s. “Changes how I feel about it” – Critical thinking, Harry, well done.

    • I kinda wish she had at least left it ambiguous. Hey, instead of being unvirtous and deceitful, he could pulled a vigilante-dor and taken it from someone who could not escape the sins of their past.

  • The Half Blood Princess

    I ship Dean with Luna. Who’s with me?

    • HowAmIGoingToTranslateThis

      I ship Dean’s and Luna’s friendship, but when it comes to Dean’s heart there’s no other person who will ever take Seamus’s place.

  • ILoveLunaLoveGood

    I don’t think there’s something particularly important about the difference between godparents in the US or the UK. You see it in TV shows from the US regularly also.
    In the case of Harry Potter its not religious and I guess it just connects to Sirius Black where it was also just a convenient plot point.

    • Of course let’s not forget it could be Jo just overlooking a sort of now slightly less religious aspect of Christianity. (I’m looking at you, carol-singing armour)

  • ISeeThestrals

    aww, I wanna go to the Wizarding world so bad, so hearing about trips there is hard. How many of you guys on the forums have been lucky enough to go there? Just curious 🙂

    • Soc.forRescueofVanishedAnimals

      I went for the first time in November, and it really is as good as it seems. Listening to the episode definitely made me want to go back, too. But I feel very lucky that I was finally able to go even one time. Hope you have the chance to go soon!

    • DoraNympha

      Well, I live so far away it would cost so much for me that if I had that kind of money I would be using it to go to a better university and move out and all the stuff that’s sadly more important than a trip like that, no matter how amazing it would be. :/ I’m probably not going to see the Cursed Child or anything, either, so… yeah I’m resigned to it by now, but maybe one day. :/

      • ThatTimeRemusWaddiwasiedVoldy

        Yeah, I know people who are going to see The Cursed Child, and they are all ” What do you mean you can’t go?” and I’m like “umm, I don’t know what world you live in but I have bills and crap…” I’m just really hoping for eventual theater screenings ideally.

      • Anyway, with the script, I bet people’ll be putting on their own versions of it at conventions and such.

    • ThatTimeRemusWaddiwasiedVoldy

      I have a friend who has been like, 6 times (jealous!!!) and she says it is still amazing every time she’s gone. I want to go sooo badly. My husband and I haven’t been able to fo a real vacation in 6 years, so we are finally making saving up for ine a priority this year. We haven’t decided where we are going yet, but Isuper want it to be Universal. I feel guilty though because my husband is not into HP and I would feel bad dragging him around. He would totally go along with it but I wouldn’t want him to not get maximum enjoyment out of our vacation. Theme parks definitely are not top of his list.

    • Roonil Wazlib

      I just got back from my first time! It was so amazing, I wanted to stay there forever. I was really lucky in that the first day we were there wasn’t crowded at all. There was actually a minute or two when I was completely alone inside Gringotts–it was so quiet and really felt like I was in the movie.

    • Ravenpaw

      I live in Australia and I wanna go too and every time someone talks about the studio tour, or the Cursed Child or the WW I wanna go but I would have to convince my parents 🙁

      • Well, they happen to have announced a published version of the script, if you would like to see the MuggleNet article.

        • Ravenpaw

          Thank you!

    • I’m actually going with my family for Easter, and am currently exploding with excitement. 8’D

  • Soc.forRescueofVanishedAnimals

    I wanted to bring up something that wasn’t discussed on the episode: the lost diadem of Ravenclaw! It’s unfortunate that Lupin arrives right at the moment when Luna mentions it, because maybe if they hadn’t been interrupted, Harry would have picked up on it, or at least a seed would have been planted in his mind. But maybe not, since Luna mentions it in the context of her father’s whacky re-creation, and Harry and Ron are basically just laughing about it and probably thinking, “Here she goes again ..”

    Which brings me to, why oh why didn’t the trio think to ask Luna and Ollivander about significant items associated with Ravenclaw? They have been living for weeks with two members of that house and never once thought to ask? I know they’re focused on the Gringotts plan, but are they starting to lose sight of the forest for the trees? For all they know, this might be their last encounter with any Ravenclaws for a long time, so I feel like they should still be trying to use all of their resources during this time of contact with the wider wizarding world.

    • DoraNympha

      I want to vote up this comment ten more times. They had a MONTH with Luna and, for the most part of it, Ollivander, right there. And they talked to Ollivander once. And we know of no other meaningful conversations with either of them. Far all we know, Luna and Ollivander may have talked about things between themselves that would be useful. It’s tricky to confide in others for the trio, though, which is why they didn’t talk to Bill about Gringotts, either. But still, and maybe it’s just my Ravenclaw bias but… this is almost as disappointing as not seeing the common room in the movie. I understand that the right information has to come at the right time in the story but not talking to the Ravenclaws now is as much of an oversight as forgetting Snape was in the Order when Harry was trying to find out if Sirius was really in danger in OotP. The story is about Gryffindors to such an extent (though totally justifiably so) that whenever Ravenclaws show up, I have to throw a mug at the ground and shout “Another!”

      • Soc.forRescueofVanishedAnimals

        Hehe, I’m with you on this one – more Ravenclaw, please! Good point about how insular the trio has become. They have become so used to doing things on their own that they have a hard time confiding in others or seeking their help. It’s myopic, but I can understand how it would seem to them that working with Griphook and asking Ollivander vague questions about wandlore is already going pretty far toward involving others in their task. And of course, as you say, it works better narratively this way. Still … it frustrates me as a reader that they don’t use all of their resources to their fullest extent, including Luna, Ollivander, and Bill.

      • They only talked to Ollivander once… I know there’s a Dark Lord to be killed, but I wouldn’t be able to resist pummelling Olli for answers. Probably because of all the wand discussions we have, and end up repeating the same things to ourselves….

    • Ravenpaw

      JKR might have put the quick comments on the diadem/interruption in there to give readers a clue- and a way to stop it going anywhere- but as it is in the same book I don’t see why she would need to, apart from introducing something before it plays a big role. Thoughts?

      • Soc.forRescueofVanishedAnimals

        Oh, that’s definitely why she wrote it that way, I think you’re right. So that it would not come completely out of the blue, she started dropping clues in the Xenophilius Lovegood chapter, when he shows them his invention “modeled, fittingly, on the bust of Rowena Ravenclaw” and even (narratively) gives us a hint when the Lovegood’s home reminds Harry of the Room of Hidden Things. Now she literally tells us about a lost item of Ravenclaw’s, but then quickly distracts us with new action – it’s good writing, for sure. The first time I read the book, I was super curious about what the Ravenclaw item might be, so at this point, I thought, Aha! And I was actually surprised when it was the cup in the Gringotts vault, not the diadem, because I thought the whole tiara bit at Shell Cottage would be a set-up for them to find the diadem there (clearly I missed the Room of Hidden Things clues). But maybe that would be too soon after introducing the identity of the item, and I actually like the way she placed the diadem, which enhances the knowledge of the wearer, at Hogwarts, a place of education and learning. It’s perfect.

        So, yes, my question above is definitely more of a hypothetical, ‘what if this were happening in the real world and not on the page’ kind of question, because narratively, it works better this way.

      • Yeah, she does that SO MUCH, especially in GoF. I can;t remember where, but there’s an instant where Rosie points out how Crouch, Barty, Moody and (possibly) Voldemort are mentioned in the same line, while they’re talking about the third task. Genius.

    • Laurel Phoenix

      I agree that the trio should have thought to ask Luna, but I don’t think Ollivander would have come to mind for them to ask. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think the trio, and by extension we as readers, were ever privy to what house Ollivander was in during his Hogwarts days until Pottermore gave us his history. Without that information, Ollivander isn’t much more than an expert on wand lore to the trio. There’s a slight possibility he could have come across something of Ravenclaw’s during his research into wand lore, but logically, it’s not likely. Harry, Ron and Hermione questioned him on what they were positive he would know about and left it at that.

      • Soc.forRescueofVanishedAnimals

        Good point, they probably wouldn’t know that he’s a Ravenclaw (unless Luna mentioned that they were both in the same house, or Hermione read up on Ollivander, which doesn’t seem very likely, as she’s never shown much interest in wandlore). And to be fair, the trio might have felt that they’d questioned Mr. Ollivander enough given his current state of frailty (and the fact that Harry sort of made him feel guilty during their conversation about the wands), and felt they shouldn’t bother him further out of respect for his need to recover physically and mentally.

        • Would Ollivander’s house be mentioned in any books? Bagshot doesn’t cover anything after the 19th century, I’m pretty sure.

          • Soc.forRescueofVanishedAnimals

            I’m thinking that he would be profiled in books on wandlore (The Oxford Companion to Wandlore), given that he’s considered one of the best in the world, and possibly also mentioned in articles (“Who’s Who in Wizarding Britain,” “Notable Hogwarts Alums and Where They Are Today,” things of that nature), any of which might have mentioned his Hogwarts house — but then, I’m just inventing things like crazy here 🙂 We do know, however, that there are wizard biographers, like Rita Skeeter and the guy who offers to write Harry’s biography at Slughorn’s party, as well as scholarly journals and books. So I imagine that there is a wide world of writing and publishing on all subjects and persons magical.

          • To be completely honest, I don’t think Rita care for an interview with Olli. A lot of people probably avoid him, y’know. Crazy old man living in a wand shop.

          • But then again, you are right about the history books. Pottermore says that he (alone) discovered the worth of the three Supreme Cores. A bit like Steve Jobs and the iPhone.

    • Merlin’s droopy eye, you’re completely right. But I’ll try to offer some sort of idea as to why they didn’t, or couldn’t, or wouldn’t.
      Well, they don’t know that Olli’s a Ravenclaw, and I’m not all to sure on his historical knowledge, (“Does this have anything to do with wands?”) and they might well have dumped the diadem into the little space at the back of their heads with the Stubby, the Snorkack, the Nargle nest and Fudge’s fire army army when Xeno showed his knockoff to them.
      Anyway, you pointed out how the rio should be using their resources, and to be blunt, Ron and Harry aren’t the sharpest knives in the elf, so – wait a minute, where’s Hermione?! I… I… no. Sorry, goodbye.

      • Sorry about the elf, I had to.

      • Soc.forRescueofVanishedAnimals

        I always thought that the heads of houses would give their students some background on the history of the house, particularly the head of Ravenclaw, given our characteristic curiosity. Since both Luna and Cho (and seemingly all the other Ravenclaws present when they discuss the diadem in the RoR) know about it, I just assumed it was common knowledge among members of the house.

        As far as Hermione goes, she is understandably shaken up after her experience at Malfoy manner, and by the time she’s starting to recover, Harry is plowing ahead with plans to break into Gringotts and oh-by-the-way make a deal with a goblin which clearly no good can come of. So I think she’s just super focused on the task at hand and sort of losing sight of the overall mission. That’s my only explanation, but it definitely seems out of character for her not to think of sleuthing a bit more during this time.

        • Yes, it is out of character for her mione to act like that, and yes again, it does seem like Ravenclaws should know the basic history of the house…. If only they had told Luna. Hey, maybe this is Jo’s way of showing, yet again, the value of letting others help you. (and a Happy Birthday to her)

  • Laurel Phoenix

    A note on godparents: the function or nature of godparents ranges from an honorary title to one with actual responsibilities. Historically, godparents are chosen by the parents to be the child’s religious/spiritual guide, teaching and guiding their immersion into religious principles. They were chosen as the child’s sponsors and were present during their baptism. Today it is more used as an honorary title with little to no religious ties. It does however tend to create a special bond between godchild and godparent. In Harry/Sirius’s and Harry/Teddy’s case, I tend to think it’s the latter.

    While it is a nice sentiment, I don’t think Lupin and Tonks chose Harry to be godfather because they thought he would survive the war and be able to take care of Teddy. While Harry is of age in the Wizarding World, seventeen is still pretty young to take care of an orphaned child. Besides, Teddy still has his grandmother to take care of him. It might be my experience (I have 3 godmothers who were age fourteen or younger when I was baptized), but I think Lupin’s choice of Harry as godfather was an honorary one, to show his faith and love for Harry. It started the special bond between Harry and Teddy that Harry never really got with Sirius, and that appears to have lasted when we get our glimpse of it the epilogue of DH.

  • Slyvenpuffdor

    I think the discussion that Griphook brings up on ownership is a very interesting philosophical topic. Is the owner the person who creates the object? Who is gifted an object? Who trades currency for the object? There are a lot of questions here that I think tie well into wand ownership as well. There is a certain intent that is key in whether or not a wand switches ownership and I think to the Goblins there is an aspect of both cultural philosophy/history and intent in the ownership of their craft. To the Goblins since they created the sword they are it’s rightful owner, and the gifting or purchase of such sword is not a right to ownership but a right to essentially rent the object.
    There is also a very interesting question of what Goblins would do with wands if they were allowed them. In my head I immediately thought about literally would actions they would perform with wands and not necessarily “They would conquer wizards” or broad things like that. I ama very curious if wand magic would work essentially the same as it does for humans or if their is wand magic that only dwarves could perform. I like how Goblin magic is implemented through artefacts, humans through a catalyst, and elf magic is more embodied (they use not tools for it). I think these speaks to the nature of magic itself, that it can be channelled through different forms.

  • ThatTimeRemusWaddiwasiedVoldy

    I think it is significant that these discussions about ownership and the nature of bonds formed between a magical object have been carried through wands, Horcruxes, Hallows, and now, the Sword of Gryffindor. With all these items we’ve analyzed the nature of magical ownership and particularly, how physical possesion of an object doesn’t necessarily prove ownership.

    As to the debate over ownership of the Sword, how much does it’s own magic play a role? Whether it rightfully belongs to Goblins or Wizards seems sort of irrelevant considering the Sword is able to vanish and present itself to a worthy Gryffindor at any moment. So who does the Sword consider it’s true owner and does that matter, given what Jo has said on the subject?

  • Roonil Wazlib

    So has Bill guessed that they are going to break into Gringotts? At the end of the chapter he says, “It would be less dangerous to break into Gringotts than to renege on a promise to a goblin.” I suppose it’s not that hard for him to put two and two together given the amount of time the trio is spending with Griphook. Still, it’s very interesting (and is perhaps a testament to the seriousness of making deals with goblins) that he directly asks Harry about his deal with Griphook but just casually slips in that mention of breaking into Gringotts.

    • ThatTimeRemusWaddiwasiedVoldy

      I don’t think Bill knows for sure that they are trying to break into Gringotts, but I think he has reasonable suspicion. I think he does realize that Harry has definitely made some sort of deal with Griphook. I’ve always thought of it as Bill saying “of these two crazy things that you are probably considering, one is a lot more dangerous than you probably realize, so here is fair warning”.

      If we read Bill as knowing that Harry plans on breaking into Gringotts, it adds a different element of perception. In this case it seems more like he is saying “So I’m not even going to bother telling you how insane this plan is, because this other thing you might be doing is way worse”

  • HowAmIGoingToTranslateThis

    Eric mentioned that the Elder Wand was maybe bored being stuck in Dumbledore’s tomb. If we go with the assumption that wands are at least partly sentient, and some wands are described to get bored even when in use for not exciting tasks, then do other wands also get bored while being buried with their owners? If a wand’s sentience is gone when you break it, is breaking a wand before it goes into the grave a way to prevent this boredom? We don’t know if wands are usually broken when their owner is buried, but that question came to my mind during the discussion.

    I also like that Fleur was appreciated in the episode. She’s totally capable and strong and interesting as a character.
    I also think if there had been a Triwizard Tournament in his time at Hogwarts, Bill would have volunteered and been chosen, and most likely won the whole thing. Dragons? No problem, Bill got this, his lil brother talks about them all the time. Guessing clues and underwater quest? He’s been swimming in the lake before. And the maze would be a playground compared to his usual working environment, so I’m team Weasley in this!

    • The thing, is, the hosts mentioned how the goblet, must’ve sensed the potential in her, just like the hat. But unless you come into fruition as the tournament starts, that’s a pretty big waste of a champion.

  • The Half Blood Princess

    Did everyone see that there’s going to be a new HP book? I’m so excited! I got into HP after all the books came out, so I never got to wait for one.

    • Lisa

      I thought that was just the Cursed Child script being released? The press was blowing things out of proportion as usual. I could be wrong, but I didn’t see anything on Mugglenet about a new book. Just the script release. Which could count as a new book I guess.

    • The Eighth STORY. In book form, and definitely a script. It won’t be furnished in a any way by J.K., and it’ll be all

      Albus: (pleading) Please not Hufflepuff… please…
      Hat: (giggles, shouts) Hufflepuff!
      James roars and throws eggshells at his brother, waving Gryffindor socks above his head.
      Curtains close, exit stage left.

      Personally I think MuggleCast were being a bit too hopeful (no, I don’t think there’ll be midnight release parties for this, though I’m confident that’ll be the case for Fantastic Beasts.)

      • The Half Blood Princess

        Fine, but I’m still excited

      • ThatTimeRemusWaddiwasiedVoldy

        I think some stores will have release parties for sure. Whether it will be as widespread a thing as with the other books, hard to say. I would bet that pretty much every major city will have at least one store with a release party happening.

    • ThatTimeRemusWaddiwasiedVoldy

      I’m really glad they are publishing this since it will make it so much more accessible to those who can’t make it to a performance. I’m super excited. However, I’ve got a huge problem with it being marketed as “the eighth book”. It’s not. It’s something different, and that is exciting, but I feel like every clickbaity article title I see saying “New Harry Potter, the eighth book” is just insulting our collective intelligence as a fandom. We know what this is and what it isn’t, and we don’t need to be “convinced” to buy it by passing it off as a new novel. It’s a play, which automatically makes it a different sort of read, so anyone expecting it to be like reading the series is going to be disappointed. Plus, it isn’t purely Jo’s work. It will be canon certainly, but it isn’t an integral part of the series, merely a companion work.

      • Thing is, I NEED TO KNOW HOW MUCH IS JACK THORNE. If it’s his thing, which Jo added to and endorses and approves, I’m calling it the same as film canon.

    • SnapesManyButtons

      I’m excited, too, because I never got to wait for a book or movie either. I have seen this referred to as the 8th book, though, and I think at least some people are going to be disappointed to find out that it is a script and not a novel. You won’t have Rowling’s masterful prose and descriptions like in her novels but just stage directions and descriptions like Felix Scamander shows below. But I don’t care, I want the book and I really hope they put out a recording of the play so we can see that too.

    • @the_half_blood_princess:disqus Same! I know some people think I am lucky that I got to sit down with all seven books and devour them all at once but I have always been of the mindset that the journey is equally (if not more) important than the destination and I have kind of always felt a bit left out that I never got the chance for all of the waiting/fun leading up to a book’s release. Excited for this one! 😀

  • SocksAreImportant

    The story about the guest Meredith finding out she was gonna be on the show at the end of the podcast was cute. It made me smile.

  • thequeerweasleycousin

    So I know the discussion on this chapter is over since weeks, but still: I just listened to the episode and I was kind of shocked about the comparison between wizarding communtiy-goblin relations and western cultures-eastern cultures relations. I mean, really? That seems to be a really unfair comparison, to put it mildly. Goblins are an entirely different species, and they don’t seem to be very friendly, trustworthy creatures in general. Whereas different “cultures” are only that, cultures. Habits. Beliefes. But still we’re all humans, we have the same body, the same brain, the same emotions. And there has always been contact between cultures, it’s not like a completely unknown world. We’re not so different. If we try, we can even understand each other, even if we don’t always agree.