Help me figure something out. I'm re-reading The Order of the Phoenix and I've just come to the part where Ron and Hermione receive their Prefect badges from Hogwarts.
A big deal is made about the fact that Harry was not chosen instead of Ron -- everyone thought he would be -- and, if I recall correctly, Dumbledore will eventually explain to Harry, at the end of the book, that he didn't want to put any more pressure on our hero than he was already facing.
Good enough.
But tell me why Dumbledore would name Draco Malfoy a prefect for Slytherin. The headmaster is well aware that Draco's dad is a confirmed Death Eater. He knows that Draco is Harry's nemesis and that, with the powers of a Prefect, Draco would have a great deal more power to bother, upset and harass Harry throughout the year.
So why, if Dumbledore is worried about putting too much additional pressure on Harry, does he name Draco a Prefect? Why not someone else? Even Crabbe or Goyle would be a better choice, since they are too stupid to be really harmful to Harry. Even if Draco is telling them what to do, their thickness would provide something of a buffer and the fact that Dumbledore refused to recognize Draco as a Prefect should make Harry feel a little bit better about being passed over.
The only think I can think of is that the Ministry intervened in these choices as well. Maybe Lucius paid Fudge to force Dumbledore to name Draco as Prefect. We see Draco's dad and the Minister of Magic together at the start of the book -- perhaps that's when the demand was made and granted.
I simply cannot believe Dumbledore would make this choice on his own.
Showing posts with label Slytherin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Slytherin. Show all posts
Saturday, July 2, 2016
Monday, October 26, 2015
Potter It Forward, if you can
I have been struggling for the past two weeks with the writing of my next post for this blog. Why? Because I have been caught up in this whole "Potter It Forward" movement and decided that my next entry should be that message I would write if I ever decided to Potter It Forward and slip a message to new Harry Potter readers into new copies of the HP books at my local bookstores.
The problem is: the majesty of the idea has got me a little bit paralyzed.
What exactly could I write to express just how much of an impact these books have had on my life, how important I feel they are both as models for how children's and young adult novels should be written and as wonderful, exciting, intriguing stories in themselves, how significant they have been in bringing the excitement of reading to a whole new generation? How do I say all that without writing a message that actually turns out to be longer than the Harry Potter novel into which I slip it?
I don't know where to begin. And I certainly wouldn't know where to end.
I think the whole "Potter It Forward" idea to be quite remarkable. I have had to stop myself from going to Chapters just to go through all their copies of the Harry Potter books to collect any PIF messages I may find. I hope to goodness someone will (if they haven't already) create a website where we can post our messages and read other people's messages at our leisure.
The Harry Potter books have literally changed our world. They have infiltrated every aspect of our lives and they have created a common language that so many of us can speak, no matter where we live. They are a point of connection that helps us bridge the gaps between us in terms of age, gender identity, race, religion, cultural background, economic status, and any other aspect of our identity that you can imagine. And that might normally keep us apart.
If I wear my Gryffindor scarf, people smile at me on the street. People nod and point and smile and laugh and, sometimes even, tell me that they were sorted into Hufflepuff, or Ravenclaw or even Slytherin.
I have enjoyed Potter chats with strangers of many different races, of all ages, of every gender identity you can imagine. I'm an middle-aged white guy and yet I have been welcomed as a Harry Potter lover into so many situations by people from all kinds of backgrounds and identities.
How do you sum all that up in a single passage? And how do you deal with the fact that, even if you can sum all that up in a single passage, you've left out the quality of J.K.'s writing, the masterful way she constructs her stories, the living, breathing, incredible true characters she has created.
So, if you're wondering why I haven't posted in a while, that's why. Because there is simply too much to say.
The problem is: the majesty of the idea has got me a little bit paralyzed.
What exactly could I write to express just how much of an impact these books have had on my life, how important I feel they are both as models for how children's and young adult novels should be written and as wonderful, exciting, intriguing stories in themselves, how significant they have been in bringing the excitement of reading to a whole new generation? How do I say all that without writing a message that actually turns out to be longer than the Harry Potter novel into which I slip it?
I don't know where to begin. And I certainly wouldn't know where to end.
I think the whole "Potter It Forward" idea to be quite remarkable. I have had to stop myself from going to Chapters just to go through all their copies of the Harry Potter books to collect any PIF messages I may find. I hope to goodness someone will (if they haven't already) create a website where we can post our messages and read other people's messages at our leisure.
The Harry Potter books have literally changed our world. They have infiltrated every aspect of our lives and they have created a common language that so many of us can speak, no matter where we live. They are a point of connection that helps us bridge the gaps between us in terms of age, gender identity, race, religion, cultural background, economic status, and any other aspect of our identity that you can imagine. And that might normally keep us apart.
If I wear my Gryffindor scarf, people smile at me on the street. People nod and point and smile and laugh and, sometimes even, tell me that they were sorted into Hufflepuff, or Ravenclaw or even Slytherin.
I have enjoyed Potter chats with strangers of many different races, of all ages, of every gender identity you can imagine. I'm an middle-aged white guy and yet I have been welcomed as a Harry Potter lover into so many situations by people from all kinds of backgrounds and identities.
How do you sum all that up in a single passage? And how do you deal with the fact that, even if you can sum all that up in a single passage, you've left out the quality of J.K.'s writing, the masterful way she constructs her stories, the living, breathing, incredible true characters she has created.
So, if you're wondering why I haven't posted in a while, that's why. Because there is simply too much to say.
Friday, June 27, 2014
Dumbledore and the Diadem... Something got lost
Help me understand something.
In all of the time Dumbledore spends teaching Harry about Voldemort's past and the existence of the Horcruxes, why doesn't Dumbledore ever mention the lost Diadem of Ravenclaw?
Dumbledore takes great care to ensure that Harry learns two things that will help in his search for the Horcruxes: 1) that Voldemort will use important items to create his Horcruxes and 2) that Voldemort has a special affinity for relics related to the four founders of Hogwarts.
The Headmaster identifies three of relics related to the school's founders: Slytherin's locket; Hufflepuff's Cup; and Gryffindor's sword. Only the sword is still safe from Voldemort's clutches.
If there are six Horcruxes, Dumbledore and Harry agree, then they can deduce that they know the identity of five of them: the Diary (destroyed), the Gaunt ring (destroyed), Slytherin's locket, Hufflepuff's Cup; and Nagini. The identity of the sixth remains a mystery but they believe it must be associated with Rowena Ravenclaw, the school's fourth founder.
So why, at that point, does Dumbledore not say, "And I believe it likely to be Ravenclaw's lost diadem" or at least "I would suspect that it might be Ravenclaw's lost diadem if it weren't for the fact that it is, indeed, lost".
The way the scenes between Harry and the Headmaster in The Half-Blood Prince play out, it would appear that Dumbledore is unaware of the existence of, or the legend of, the lost diadem.
And that makes no sense to me. Dumbledore knew more about Hogwarts and its history than anyone. It is not possible that he would be unaware of the diadem and its story. And he was determined to give Harry as much information about the possible location of the Horcruxes as he could. It is also not possible that he forgot to mention the diadem to Harry at that point or chose not to so so.
The only possibility I can think of is that Rowling had not yet conceived of the lost diadem when she wrote the sixth book. That it was simply fortuitous that she had Harry use a tarnished tiara to mark the location in which he hid his potions book in The Half-Blood Prince and that then, when she came up with the idea of having a lost item of Ravenclaw's be the final Horcrux in order to add more suspense to the ending of The Deathly Hallows, she realised that she had already inserted just the thing in her story.
If that is actually what happened, I think it's awesome! I am in awe of Rowling's creativity and care in crafting these incredibly rich, detailed stories. I will be even more in awe if it is confirmed for me that, at the height of her writing, she was able to make such an amazing, inspired connection with an innocuous detail from her earlier novel to such dramatic effect.
But, if not, then Dumbledore should have mentioned the diadem to Harry.
In all of the time Dumbledore spends teaching Harry about Voldemort's past and the existence of the Horcruxes, why doesn't Dumbledore ever mention the lost Diadem of Ravenclaw?
Dumbledore takes great care to ensure that Harry learns two things that will help in his search for the Horcruxes: 1) that Voldemort will use important items to create his Horcruxes and 2) that Voldemort has a special affinity for relics related to the four founders of Hogwarts.
The Headmaster identifies three of relics related to the school's founders: Slytherin's locket; Hufflepuff's Cup; and Gryffindor's sword. Only the sword is still safe from Voldemort's clutches.
If there are six Horcruxes, Dumbledore and Harry agree, then they can deduce that they know the identity of five of them: the Diary (destroyed), the Gaunt ring (destroyed), Slytherin's locket, Hufflepuff's Cup; and Nagini. The identity of the sixth remains a mystery but they believe it must be associated with Rowena Ravenclaw, the school's fourth founder.
So why, at that point, does Dumbledore not say, "And I believe it likely to be Ravenclaw's lost diadem" or at least "I would suspect that it might be Ravenclaw's lost diadem if it weren't for the fact that it is, indeed, lost".
The way the scenes between Harry and the Headmaster in The Half-Blood Prince play out, it would appear that Dumbledore is unaware of the existence of, or the legend of, the lost diadem.
And that makes no sense to me. Dumbledore knew more about Hogwarts and its history than anyone. It is not possible that he would be unaware of the diadem and its story. And he was determined to give Harry as much information about the possible location of the Horcruxes as he could. It is also not possible that he forgot to mention the diadem to Harry at that point or chose not to so so.
The only possibility I can think of is that Rowling had not yet conceived of the lost diadem when she wrote the sixth book. That it was simply fortuitous that she had Harry use a tarnished tiara to mark the location in which he hid his potions book in The Half-Blood Prince and that then, when she came up with the idea of having a lost item of Ravenclaw's be the final Horcrux in order to add more suspense to the ending of The Deathly Hallows, she realised that she had already inserted just the thing in her story.
If that is actually what happened, I think it's awesome! I am in awe of Rowling's creativity and care in crafting these incredibly rich, detailed stories. I will be even more in awe if it is confirmed for me that, at the height of her writing, she was able to make such an amazing, inspired connection with an innocuous detail from her earlier novel to such dramatic effect.
But, if not, then Dumbledore should have mentioned the diadem to Harry.
Sunday, November 24, 2013
What did Lucius know about Tom Riddle's diary?
I have open before me two paperback books: the first, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets; the second, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.
Why?
Because I'm comparing passages dealing with Tom Riddle's purpose in re-opening the Chamber from each novel. I had thought I would find discrepancies and inconsistencies between the second book, in which Riddle (through Ginny Weasely and his diary) actually re-opens the Chamber, and the sixth book, in which Dumbledore explains to Harry Horcruxes and what information the Head Master was able to glean from the events from Harry's second year at Hogwarts.
What did I find?
Remarkable consistency.
In the second book, the memory of Tom Riddle tells Harry:
"I decided to leave behind a diary, preserving my sixteen-year-old self in its pages, so that one day, with luck, I would be able to lead another in my footsteps, and finish Salazar Slytherin's noble work."
In the sixth book, Dumbledore explains:
"[The diary] worked as a Horcrux is supposed to work -- in other words, the fragment of soul concealed inside it was kept safe and had undoubtedly played its part in preventing the death of its owner. But there could be no doubt that Riddle really wanted the diary read, wanted the piece of his soul to inhabit or possess somebody else, so that Slytherin's monster would be unleashed again."
Consistent and helpful.
Even more interesting to me is that these passages seem to hint at why Lucius Malfoy would choose the particular moment he did to pass the diary along to a Hogwarts student after holding on to it for 50 years: he recognized the threat Harry Potter himself posed to Voldemort's return and hoped, by slipping the diary into Ginny Weasley's text book, to give whatever evil force the diary contained the chance to deal with Harry before Harry grew up and grew strong.
It had always been a puzzle to me why Lucius chose that moment to re-introduce the diary and, of course, there is at least one moment in the stories where he is questioned for that decision, for disposing of a precious piece of Voldemort's soul so carelessly. We are led to believe, by Dumbledore's own comment at the end of Book Two, that Lucius chose to give the diary to Ginny so that the Weasley family's reputation would be tarnished and Mr. Weasley's Muggle Protection Act would be thwarted.
But I think it was deeper. I think Lucius Malfoy knew, at least to an extent, what the diary contained and was acting under instructions from Voldemort to place it at Hogwarts when things seemed most opportune or when an intervention of this nature was most needed.
Malfoy saw the danger Harry posed on an on-going basis to the Dark Lord's return -- Harry had, after all, defeated Voldemort once again at the end of The Philosopher's Stone -- and decided it was time to bring his Master back to deal with that threat.
I agree. There is no way Voldemort told Lucius Malfoy about his intention to create Horcruxes, nor that the diary he was entrusting to Malfoy was a Horcrux, but he must have explained to Malfoy that the diary contained a power that could open the Chamber of Secrets and wreak havoc at the school.
That's my theory, at least, but I have to admit that I'm not one-hundred per cent convinced of it even now. What do you think?
Why?
Because I'm comparing passages dealing with Tom Riddle's purpose in re-opening the Chamber from each novel. I had thought I would find discrepancies and inconsistencies between the second book, in which Riddle (through Ginny Weasely and his diary) actually re-opens the Chamber, and the sixth book, in which Dumbledore explains to Harry Horcruxes and what information the Head Master was able to glean from the events from Harry's second year at Hogwarts.
What did I find?
Remarkable consistency.
In the second book, the memory of Tom Riddle tells Harry:
"I decided to leave behind a diary, preserving my sixteen-year-old self in its pages, so that one day, with luck, I would be able to lead another in my footsteps, and finish Salazar Slytherin's noble work."
In the sixth book, Dumbledore explains:
"[The diary] worked as a Horcrux is supposed to work -- in other words, the fragment of soul concealed inside it was kept safe and had undoubtedly played its part in preventing the death of its owner. But there could be no doubt that Riddle really wanted the diary read, wanted the piece of his soul to inhabit or possess somebody else, so that Slytherin's monster would be unleashed again."
Consistent and helpful.
Even more interesting to me is that these passages seem to hint at why Lucius Malfoy would choose the particular moment he did to pass the diary along to a Hogwarts student after holding on to it for 50 years: he recognized the threat Harry Potter himself posed to Voldemort's return and hoped, by slipping the diary into Ginny Weasley's text book, to give whatever evil force the diary contained the chance to deal with Harry before Harry grew up and grew strong.
It had always been a puzzle to me why Lucius chose that moment to re-introduce the diary and, of course, there is at least one moment in the stories where he is questioned for that decision, for disposing of a precious piece of Voldemort's soul so carelessly. We are led to believe, by Dumbledore's own comment at the end of Book Two, that Lucius chose to give the diary to Ginny so that the Weasley family's reputation would be tarnished and Mr. Weasley's Muggle Protection Act would be thwarted.
But I think it was deeper. I think Lucius Malfoy knew, at least to an extent, what the diary contained and was acting under instructions from Voldemort to place it at Hogwarts when things seemed most opportune or when an intervention of this nature was most needed.
Malfoy saw the danger Harry posed on an on-going basis to the Dark Lord's return -- Harry had, after all, defeated Voldemort once again at the end of The Philosopher's Stone -- and decided it was time to bring his Master back to deal with that threat.
I agree. There is no way Voldemort told Lucius Malfoy about his intention to create Horcruxes, nor that the diary he was entrusting to Malfoy was a Horcrux, but he must have explained to Malfoy that the diary contained a power that could open the Chamber of Secrets and wreak havoc at the school.
That's my theory, at least, but I have to admit that I'm not one-hundred per cent convinced of it even now. What do you think?
Saturday, October 26, 2013
Enemies of Quidditch Beware...
Does it make you laugh too that, even as a crowd of Hogwarts teachers is gathered around a Petrified Mrs. Norris trying to figure out what happened to her in The Chamber of Secrets, Snape's first thought is how to use the situation to help Slytherin win at Quidditch?
I laugh out loud every time I read the scene.
Here they are, facing what is to that point one of the most significant, scariest threats ever to face Hogwarts and Professor Snape's only worry is how to gain an advantage for his Q-team. He suggests to Dumbledore, in his silkiest of voices, that Harry should be suspended from playing Quidditch until the mystery is resolved.
Love it.
Even better is the fact that Professor McGonagall, Deputy Head Mistress, immediately jumps to her team's defence.
Love it love it love it.
Further to the question, does it seem fair to you that 1) McGonagall was allowed to purchase the latest racing broom for her team's new Seeker in Book One, making it all but assured that Gryffindor's quidditch fortunes would improve significantly by giving its team a HUGE advantage over everyone else and 2) that Mr. Malfoy would be allowed to buy the entire Slytherin team even better brooms the following year?
I have to admit, I think it's kind of poetic justice that McGonagall's cheating is so effectively and overwhelming countered by the Malfoys in book two. If glorious, honourable Gryffindor can cheat, then certainly Slytherin can cheat too and do an even better job of it.
I laugh out loud every time I read the scene.
Here they are, facing what is to that point one of the most significant, scariest threats ever to face Hogwarts and Professor Snape's only worry is how to gain an advantage for his Q-team. He suggests to Dumbledore, in his silkiest of voices, that Harry should be suspended from playing Quidditch until the mystery is resolved.
Love it.
Even better is the fact that Professor McGonagall, Deputy Head Mistress, immediately jumps to her team's defence.
Love it love it love it.
Further to the question, does it seem fair to you that 1) McGonagall was allowed to purchase the latest racing broom for her team's new Seeker in Book One, making it all but assured that Gryffindor's quidditch fortunes would improve significantly by giving its team a HUGE advantage over everyone else and 2) that Mr. Malfoy would be allowed to buy the entire Slytherin team even better brooms the following year?
I have to admit, I think it's kind of poetic justice that McGonagall's cheating is so effectively and overwhelming countered by the Malfoys in book two. If glorious, honourable Gryffindor can cheat, then certainly Slytherin can cheat too and do an even better job of it.
Friday, August 19, 2011
A French Parselmouth is "un Forchelang"
I'm still working my way slowly through The Chamber of Secrets in French and quite enjoying it. I've just read the part where Harry first discovers that he is a Parselmouth (in French, that's "un Forchelang").
There's a scene where Harry has gone to the Library to try to find Justin Finch-Fletchley to explain to him what really happened at the Duelling Club. Instead, Harry overhears several Hufflepuffs talking about him. It's a nice little scene and our true introduction to Ernie MacMillan and Hannah Abbott.
This reminded me of the fact that they actually filmed this scene for the second movie, with Ernie explaining to the others why he thinks Harry is the son of Slytherin. It was edited from the theatrical release. It's included in the extras on the Blu Ray, however, almost word for word as it is presented in the book.
The funny thing is, this is one of the scenes that I was very happy they cut. As I said above, it's not a bad scene in the book but, in the film, the acting is so poor and mechanical that it really took away from the impact of the movie. I figure the young actors in the scene must have been pretty disappointed to find themselves on the cutting-room floor but I think it was a good decision to leave this scene out.
There's a scene where Harry has gone to the Library to try to find Justin Finch-Fletchley to explain to him what really happened at the Duelling Club. Instead, Harry overhears several Hufflepuffs talking about him. It's a nice little scene and our true introduction to Ernie MacMillan and Hannah Abbott.
This reminded me of the fact that they actually filmed this scene for the second movie, with Ernie explaining to the others why he thinks Harry is the son of Slytherin. It was edited from the theatrical release. It's included in the extras on the Blu Ray, however, almost word for word as it is presented in the book.
The funny thing is, this is one of the scenes that I was very happy they cut. As I said above, it's not a bad scene in the book but, in the film, the acting is so poor and mechanical that it really took away from the impact of the movie. I figure the young actors in the scene must have been pretty disappointed to find themselves on the cutting-room floor but I think it was a good decision to leave this scene out.
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Poor old Hufflepuff House
I often wonder about the fourth house at Hogwarts: Hufflepuff. With the Far Friar as its ghost and the non-descript Professor Sprout as its head, it often seems to me to be the forgotten house.
Certainly, Hufflepuff never seems to compete seriously for the House Cup (in The Philosopher's Stone, for example, Hufflepuff falls to fourth place when Dumbledore awards his year-end points to the hero trio and Neville) nor for the Quidditch Cup. In fact, when loyalties are tested, Hufflepuff members are less likely to support Harry than are Gryffindors and Ravenclaws.
In that first novel, the Sorting Hat describes the qualities valued by Hufflepuff as being loyalty, a sense of justice and a willingness to work hard. Very laudable characteristics, to be sure, but hardly up to the same calibre as Gryffindor (bravery, daring and nerve), Ravenclaw (a ready mind, wit and learning) or even Slytherin (cunning).
Now turn to The Order of the Phoenix and the Sorting Hat is almost dismissive of Hufflepuff. In describing the students each school founder wanted to accept into his or her house, the Hat says Slytherin wanted those of purest blood, Ravenclaw sought those who were the most intelligent and Gryffindor recruited those with brave deeds to their name. Hufflepuff? Well, she'll take what's left and "treat them all the same".
Wow. That's not a stirring recommendation for Hufflepuff, is it?
Few of Hufflepuff's members play prominent roles in the novels and even the Cup of Helga Hufflepuff, which is one of the Horcruxes, garners the least attention of all the Horcruxes in both the books and the films.
Being placed in Hufflepuff appears to be an assessment that there's nothing special about you. I find it odd that J.K. quite purposely creates this sort of magical netherworld of the mediocre. Other than Cedric Diggory, I had a hard time naming one of its members.
Basically, Hufflepuff includes a list of minor characters like Hannah Abbott, Susan Bones, Justin Finch-Fletchley and the detested Zacharias Smith. It turns out, of course, that Nymphadora Tonks was also a Hufflepuff, perhaps that House's most distinguished graduate. She and Cedric tend to carry the torch for this undervalued house, I guess.
I wonder if J.K. ever considered having just three houses at Hogwarts?
Certainly, Hufflepuff never seems to compete seriously for the House Cup (in The Philosopher's Stone, for example, Hufflepuff falls to fourth place when Dumbledore awards his year-end points to the hero trio and Neville) nor for the Quidditch Cup. In fact, when loyalties are tested, Hufflepuff members are less likely to support Harry than are Gryffindors and Ravenclaws.
In that first novel, the Sorting Hat describes the qualities valued by Hufflepuff as being loyalty, a sense of justice and a willingness to work hard. Very laudable characteristics, to be sure, but hardly up to the same calibre as Gryffindor (bravery, daring and nerve), Ravenclaw (a ready mind, wit and learning) or even Slytherin (cunning).
Now turn to The Order of the Phoenix and the Sorting Hat is almost dismissive of Hufflepuff. In describing the students each school founder wanted to accept into his or her house, the Hat says Slytherin wanted those of purest blood, Ravenclaw sought those who were the most intelligent and Gryffindor recruited those with brave deeds to their name. Hufflepuff? Well, she'll take what's left and "treat them all the same".
Wow. That's not a stirring recommendation for Hufflepuff, is it?
Few of Hufflepuff's members play prominent roles in the novels and even the Cup of Helga Hufflepuff, which is one of the Horcruxes, garners the least attention of all the Horcruxes in both the books and the films.
Being placed in Hufflepuff appears to be an assessment that there's nothing special about you. I find it odd that J.K. quite purposely creates this sort of magical netherworld of the mediocre. Other than Cedric Diggory, I had a hard time naming one of its members.
Basically, Hufflepuff includes a list of minor characters like Hannah Abbott, Susan Bones, Justin Finch-Fletchley and the detested Zacharias Smith. It turns out, of course, that Nymphadora Tonks was also a Hufflepuff, perhaps that House's most distinguished graduate. She and Cedric tend to carry the torch for this undervalued house, I guess.
I wonder if J.K. ever considered having just three houses at Hogwarts?
Saturday, June 25, 2011
Hogwarts House Points make me crazy
I have to admit: I've never liked the way points are awarded to (or deducted from) Houses at Hogwarts. It just seems so arbitrary, doesn't it? I mean, Snape favours his own House so he is constantly taking points from Gryffindors while McGonagall, who is more fair, refuses to favour the House she leads.
I've felt that the system for awarding points at Hogwarts is a problem ever since Dumbledore manipulated the points at the end of The Philosopher's Stone in order to take the House Cup from Slytherin and give it to Gryffindor. I don't argue with his decision to give Neville ten points for standing up to his friends but I think it's highly problematic that he happens to give the four first-year kids just enough for Gryffindor to overtake Slytherin.
Oh well. I guess you can't love everything about the Potter world, can you?
I've felt that the system for awarding points at Hogwarts is a problem ever since Dumbledore manipulated the points at the end of The Philosopher's Stone in order to take the House Cup from Slytherin and give it to Gryffindor. I don't argue with his decision to give Neville ten points for standing up to his friends but I think it's highly problematic that he happens to give the four first-year kids just enough for Gryffindor to overtake Slytherin.
Oh well. I guess you can't love everything about the Potter world, can you?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)