Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007 (NO SPOILERS) (1 Viewer)

[*Lozzie*]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

i dont think he will attend school but i think most of the order stuff will be at hogwarts -- also dumbuldore portrait is there so he will be talking to that alot

muggle net has a better quality image of the book cover you can read the blurbs and stuff

http://www.mugglenet.com/viewer/?image_location=/dhcovers/hp7childuk.jpg

 

[The_highwayman]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

Probably. The only one I've seen is a very small image and I have a few problems with colours ... but so much for the whole "I won't be going back" statement from Harry is it is the school on the back.

look at the link i posted for a better image.

It stretched the screen beyond belief so i removed the image tags.

 

[*Lozzie*]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

the adult cover is nice but im still going to get the kids one cause it will go with the rest of my books

 

[ObjectsInSpace]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

look at the link i posted for a better image.

It stretched the screen beyond belief so i removed the image tags.

I saw it elsewhere for the first time (not Mugglenet) and didn't look though this thread.

 

[munchybuddy]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

I cant wait for the book 2 cum out.....

Wen it does i thonk i will go into hiding to read it, cause last time i got told the ending and i was really pissed

I think harry might die
I also have a feeling that hagrid will aswell and voldermort will regain power

Dunno just a feeling

Wadda u think

 

[ObjectsInSpace]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

I just remember someone around here posting the page where the Headmaster was killed.




I'm just curious as to who RAB is (aren't we all?), but I'm hoping JK Rowling doesn't do the obvious and make it Regulus Black. It's too obvious; as soon as everyone saw it, they guessed it. I'm thinking it's the two kids he took down into the cave because A) they knew where the cave was and B) their combined initials are something like R A(nd) B ...

 

[jhakka]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

I cant wait for the book 2 cum out.....

Wen it does i thonk i will go into hiding to read it, cause last time i got told the ending and i was really pissed

I think harry might die
I also have a feeling that hagrid will aswell and voldermort will regain power

Dunno just a feeling

Wadda u think

I suggest that you read the entire thread in future before asking questions like this.

 

[bubz :D]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

For the first time, there's a cover that I don't like. The best was Half-Blood Prince, followed by Goblet of Fire, but Deathly Hallows is simply too busy. Also, the expressions on the characters' faces look stupid.

I agree - for once I prefer the American cover to ours.

And I think people will be surprised if it ISN'T Regulus Black - I posted something a while ago that said that HBP in other languages have hinted that he is RAB

 

[*Lozzie*]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

I'm thinking it's the two kids he took down into the cave because A) they knew where the cave was and B) their combined initials are something like R A(nd) B ...

i like this theory it would be awesome if it was this cause noone would be expecting it

 

[ObjectsInSpace]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

But it's just so ... obvious. There's been so much subterfuge going on - that Sirius was innocent, for instance - that to make his supposedly-dead brother sucha key character would just be a let-down. Then again, there's a whole sub-plot already built in; Mundungus has been "borrowing" things from Grimmauld Place, and the locekt was probably one of them.

People would only be disappointed because they figured they knew it all, but if it were done well enough - the entire Regulus Black thing being a red herring - I think people would be surprised.

 

[zangetsu.xo]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

For the first time, there's a cover that I don't like. The best was Half-Blood Prince, followed by Goblet of Fire, but Deathly Hallows is simply too busy. Also, the expressions on the characters' faces look stupid.

their faces look pudgy.

 

[MaNiElla]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

But it's just so ... obvious. There's been so much subterfuge going on - that Sirius was innocent, for instance - that to make his supposedly-dead brother sucha key character would just be a let-down. Then again, there's a whole sub-plot already built in; Mundungus has been "borrowing" things from Grimmauld Place, and the locekt was probably one of them.

People would only be disappointed because they figured they knew it all, but if it were done well enough - the entire Regulus Black thing being a red herring - I think people would be surprised.

It'l be very unlikely that Rowling would write Regulus Black as R.A.B.........becuase nearly everyone expects R.A.B to be him. She'd definatly introduce some new character, or if its not, it'l be some one who is very unexpected. She always surprises everyone.......it'd be lame, if Regulus turned to R.A.B.......i personally liked the books because they were surprising and they used to shock me at times. I never imagined the Half-blood-prince to be snape

 

[ObjectsInSpace]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

That's my point. Just when we figure we've got everything worked out, she drops something on us that we weren't expecting: Sirius' innocence, Moody-Crouch, stuff like that. For it to be Regulus Black would just cheapen the series a little. However, Rowling has pointed out in the past that all the major characters have been introduced (however, she didn't define 'introduced'), so anybody who has any bearing on the plot has already been mentioned.

I'm still hoping for the two kids he took to the cave. They'd be the only other people who not only knew of its existence, but where to find it. They may have been muggles, but who knows what Voldemort did to them? It could be possible that while they may not be in their right mind, they can identify witches and wizards or 'feel' magic (as Dumbledore put it). From Sirius' description, Regulus was a fool who only joined the Death Eaters to please his parents. It sounds to me like he didn't have the brains to pull off the journey to the cave (assuming he found it). Everyone just assumes it's Regulus because of the locket that was found in Grimmauld Place ... but insofar as I know (I haven't read them for ages), Regulus' middle name is never mentioned. People are just jumping to conclusions, which is probably exactly what Rowling wants. Remember the Vanishing Cabinet Peevs destroyed in book 2 and Fred and Geroge pushed Montague into in book 5? We never would have guessed it would become so important to the plot later on. As for RAB being Regulus, Rowling has said that it's "a good guess" (very non-commital of her, as usual). I'm hoping we're in for a surprise.

 

[P_Dilemma]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

I can imagine stella8h8chang at uni just complaining about HP withdrawl symptoms. =( Also, her freaky knowledge of Harry Potter scares me. She's going to rip through that Encyclopedia faster than... something.

faster than you can say "Avada Kedavra"!!!

-P_D

 

[$hiftyIceQueen]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

I think R.A.B. has to be Regulus, or some other Death Eater. On the letter it said "Dark Lord" only Death Eaters refer to Voldemort as the Dark Lord. Kreacher has to have a major role, meaning he may have gone with Regulus on the boat. It says "I" throughout the letter, meaning there was only ONE person. BUT as Dumbeldore said two have to go on the quest together, so that leaves us with the possiblity that this other "person' doesnt have such a high status. Kreacher. He has a huge role in the seventh book, so he is a likely possiblity. It says "R.A.B." not "R.a B." The a is in capiltal, so i dont think its "and" and there's the locket.

And i noticed all ^^^ after reading like 10 different websites about R.A.B. and why he is.isnt Regulus Black.

Hints from foreign edition translations of R.A.B. and Black
In several foreign-language versions of the series, the surname Black has been translated into the respective language to carry the same meaning. In those cases, the 'B' in R.A.B. has been changed accordingly. For example, the Dutch edition uses the initials R.A.Z. in the locket note, and the Black family name is Zwarts. In the Norwegian edition, the note has R.A.S. (corresponding to the Svaart family), and the Finnish edition has the letters R.A.M., (corresponding to the Musta family). In other editions where the Black family name is not translated to the local language, the initials remain "R.A.B.". For example, the Turkish translation keeps the family name as "Black", rather than translating it to the word for black ("siyah"), and the initials remain "R.A.B.".

The fact that the initials R.A.B. correspond to the Black family name consistently across various language editions gives fair support to Regulus Black being R.A.B., or at least it supports a member of the Black family.[5] There are, of course, other Black family members that could fit the identity of R.A.B. For example, Nymphadora Tonks's mother Andromeda, whose maiden name was Black, and whose given name is uncertain; he also had an uncle named Alphard Black (whose name was stricken from the Black Family Tree for giving support to the disowned Sirius Black). R.A.B. could therefore stand for R. Andromeda Black or R. Alphard Black.

Portugese translator "leak"
The translator of the Portuguese language editions of the Harry Potter books, Isabel Nuñes, stated that she asked Rowling the sex of the character, so she could translate all references to "R.A.B." correctly. Nuñes claims that Rowling told her the full identity of the character was "Regulus Arcturus Black."[6]. Rowling has not confirmed this revelation herself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.A.B.

I really dont want R.A.B. to be Regulus, same reason as everyone else, its too obvious. But theres soo much things which actually prove that Regulus Black is R.A.B.

But if its not him, and she did say that all the major characters have been introduced, then who is it? What if its a nickname? Like Snapes one?

The book cover is bad!!!

About the horcrux...There is said to be seven.

1- Tom Riddle's diary [destroyed]
2- Marvolo Gaunt's ring [destroyed]

[possible horcruxes]
3- Salazar Slytherin's locket
4- Helga Hufflepuff's cup
5- "An unknown relic belonging to either Godric Gryffindor or Rowena Ravenclaw"- i think its something from ravenclaw, since Voldemort didnt get the Gryffindor sword
6- The great snake Nagini

^^^Thats what Dumbledore said.

I think
7- Harry potter, from the night Voldemort tried to kill him, which also gives a good reason for the scar to be there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horcrux

 

[Silver Persian]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

The seventh part lives in Voldemort

 

[*Lozzie*]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

harry cant be a horcrux cause if he was voldemort wouldnt want him dead and also harry would have to die to get rid of voldemort

 

[$hiftyIceQueen]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

Noooo...you got me wrong!

He was aiming to kill harry [because of the prophecy, which would have made him the most powerful wizard] then make another horcrux, but he couldnt kill him, instead harry ended up with a scar, while voldemort lost his powers. I think that MAYBE in the process the final horcrux is in Harry. Also, there are things like, the scar, talking to snakes, the whole thing how harry and voldemort can go inside each others minds etc.

I think it was an accident. He wasnt planning for it to happen, and maybe he still doesnt know that it did happen. Also they have the same blood [he used his blood in the book 4]

I know its way off, but its just a guess.

And how could the seventh part live inside Voldemort, he is probably using something else, coz if it was inside him, then Dumbledore would have said it straight away, BUT he couldnt figure it out.

 

[ObjectsInSpace]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

Whether or not Harry was a Horcrux has been debated from the moment everyone finished Half-Blood Prince. Personally, I think it's not physically possible. Dumbledore suspected Voldemort intended to use Harry's death to separate his soul for the seventh time. He would then capture the piece of his soul and place it in an item to make the horcrux.

The problem is that Harry can't be a horcrux because his death was being used to make one. He would be dead before Voldemort would have a chance to stick his soul into Harry's body, and I doubt the Dark Lord would be stupid enough to do so. Plus, to Voldemort's mind, he was destroying the only person capable of defeating him, leaving him less reason to leave Harry lying around.

Secondly, the timing isn't possible. From the sounds of things, a horcrux has to be made almost immediately after the would-be caster makes his or her kill. When Voldemort attempted to Averda Kedavra Harry, the killing curse rebounded. Most importantly, it didn't kill Harry, so Voldemort's soul was never split. It also collected the Dark Lord when it rebounded, and technically, the curse did not kill him. In Voldemort's own words, it reduced him to "the meanest spirit". There wasn't much left of the Dark Lord, and while he body may have been destroyed, Voldemort was still alive (if it can be called that). Even if he had have succeeded in killing Harry and was not preoccupied with being torn from his own body, Voldemort was unable to hold a wand, and therefore unable to cast the neccessary magic to create a horcrux. He might be evil, but he isn't stupid: as soon as he realised what had happened, Voldemort had to know he had done something right to avoid death, and while he might have missed out on making the seventh horcrux, he has shown that he is incredibly patient and more than willing to wait for the opportune moment. Sure, there would have been symbolism in using Harry's death to make a horcrux, but since no-one died, no horcrux could have been made.

Therefore, if the seventh horcrux has been made, it isn't Harry.

 

[$hiftyIceQueen]

Re: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - 21 July 2007

Read:
http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/theburrow/aj01.shtml

When i say that HP might be a horcrux, he propbably isnt, but there is a possibility that he could be one.

Read this one :http://www.hp-lexicon.org/essays/essay-is-harry-a-horcrux.html and http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=94457

And ANYTHING is possible.