![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
innerslytherinSomeone here is complaining about wandless magic in PS, as well as the timing of Voldemort's rise to power. First of all, wandless magic is well-established in the world of HP. Dumbledore does it all the time, and it stands to reason that Voldemort can, as well. That means that, by extension, possessed!Quirrell should also be able to perform wandless magic. Regarding the timeline of Voldemort's rise to power, it makes sense to me that he wouldn't be able to start the war immediately upon leaving school. I mean, no matter how sneaky and powerful he was, I can't see him having enough resources to take over the world at 18.
Now there is a legitimate question posed there, wondering why Quirrell seems to have been in the Defence position for several years. I always figured that the curse on the position could be interpreted to be consecutive years. For instance, Quirrell works a year, takes a year off to go to Transylvania and get possessed, then comes back for a year. Not to mention that if Voldemort cursed the position and wanted to use Quirrell, I assume Voldemort would be able to manipulate the curse however he wanted.
More troubling to me is the fact that Dumbledore let Quirrell run around the castle and have access to Harry for an entire year without seeming to realize it. I appreciate that Snape was suspicious of Quirrell--but did he realize it was the Dark Lord he was defying? I wonder if he got flashes of burning where his Dark Mark is, the way Harry got flashes of pain from his scar.
Now, a rant.
I hate WalMart for a lot of reasons, but one of the most annoying is that even though I can avoid shopping there (and do), I cannot avoid the idiots that DO shop there mucking up my life. Specifically, I am talking about the RIDICULOUS and UNNECESSARY addition of THREE traffic signals in Lafayette. These signals aren't needed. Moreover, they annoy the piss out of me when I am trying to get to work on time and I end up having to stop because some loser pulls up to the light and it changes immediately. I'm sorry, why should we STOP EVERYTHING for WalMart shoppers? Make them wait for at least 30 seconds, or better yet, 60! Grar.
I also was highly annoyed by the fact that I had to check out not one, but TWO, customers after closing time today. One of them even asked Stacie, "What time do you close?"--and after being told we close at nine, which was five minutes earlier, proceeded to finish her shopping. Bitch.
Watched The Departed yesterday. I really enjoyed it, though the ending was quite a surprise to me. It's sort of like the book I read recently, Being Americana. (Though I felt like the book's plot wandered all over, which was not the case with The Departed.) That book also had an ending that was quite a slap in the face to me. The difference is that with the movie, it made sense--for one thing, Irish stories never have happy endings. But anyway, I was annoyed by the book, where I wasn't annoyed by the movie.
Now there is a legitimate question posed there, wondering why Quirrell seems to have been in the Defence position for several years. I always figured that the curse on the position could be interpreted to be consecutive years. For instance, Quirrell works a year, takes a year off to go to Transylvania and get possessed, then comes back for a year. Not to mention that if Voldemort cursed the position and wanted to use Quirrell, I assume Voldemort would be able to manipulate the curse however he wanted.
More troubling to me is the fact that Dumbledore let Quirrell run around the castle and have access to Harry for an entire year without seeming to realize it. I appreciate that Snape was suspicious of Quirrell--but did he realize it was the Dark Lord he was defying? I wonder if he got flashes of burning where his Dark Mark is, the way Harry got flashes of pain from his scar.
Now, a rant.
I hate WalMart for a lot of reasons, but one of the most annoying is that even though I can avoid shopping there (and do), I cannot avoid the idiots that DO shop there mucking up my life. Specifically, I am talking about the RIDICULOUS and UNNECESSARY addition of THREE traffic signals in Lafayette. These signals aren't needed. Moreover, they annoy the piss out of me when I am trying to get to work on time and I end up having to stop because some loser pulls up to the light and it changes immediately. I'm sorry, why should we STOP EVERYTHING for WalMart shoppers? Make them wait for at least 30 seconds, or better yet, 60! Grar.
I also was highly annoyed by the fact that I had to check out not one, but TWO, customers after closing time today. One of them even asked Stacie, "What time do you close?"--and after being told we close at nine, which was five minutes earlier, proceeded to finish her shopping. Bitch.
Watched The Departed yesterday. I really enjoyed it, though the ending was quite a surprise to me. It's sort of like the book I read recently, Being Americana. (Though I felt like the book's plot wandered all over, which was not the case with The Departed.) That book also had an ending that was quite a slap in the face to me. The difference is that with the movie, it made sense--for one thing, Irish stories never have happy endings. But anyway, I was annoyed by the book, where I wasn't annoyed by the movie.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-03-22 03:56 am (UTC)haha jk. But seriously, watch the original.
no subject
Date: 2007-03-22 04:08 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-22 04:13 am (UTC)And they combined a lot of characters in Departed... and even characters from later movies (Infernal Affairs has two sequels)
no subject
Date: 2007-03-22 05:02 am (UTC)recommending both movies (http://imwithharvey.livejournal.com/8814.html) to anyone who will listen. I don't consider the sequels worth watching.
no subject
Date: 2007-03-22 01:24 pm (UTC)This is definitely one of the inconsistencies in the HP books that really bothered me. Dumbledore is supposed to be the one Voldemort... well, not fears, but respects in a hateful sort of way, and yet Voldie lives on the back of the DADA teacher's head for a year and Dumbledore doesn't notice? Then with the Barty Crouch/Moody disaster... and all the other times he just lets Harry do his own thing.
I have to say that I don't see Dumbledore as much as a genial old man as a master manipulator. I think he allows Harry to be in a great deal of danger in order to prepare him for facing Voldemort when he reaches the age of 17 (adulthood in HP-verse). I'm not saying that Harry isn't capable - because he is amazingly powerful, especially as a teenager, but I think he is going to be seriously screwed up on an emotional level (not that JKR will likely address that), due to so many people relying on him and pushing him and the horrible things he has gone through.
I also do not like the fact that Dumbledore allowed the Dursleys to mistreat Harry. While it's been made clear that Harry was with them for blood protection, I don't think it impossible that Dumbledore could have stepped in to stop the abuse and let them know he was watching. It really disturbs me that he didn't, and I have to think that he did it on purpose to try and make Harry reliant on himself rather than trusting that adults were going to take care of things.
Interestingly, I get the impression that Snape, in the books, does not approve of this method, and despite the fact that he is verbally nastier to Harry than Dumbledore, it seems to me that he is kinder. All he requires of Harry is he be a child, and in his own twisted "our newest celebrity" way, Snape tries to teach Harry the dangers of being self-reliant.
Ok, enough rambling. *g*
no subject
Date: 2007-03-22 07:29 pm (UTC)Dumbledore: Well, I know that Voldemort's head is riding along under Quirrell's turban, of course, but I think Harry should handle it. Let's just drop some clues so an eleven-year-old will sort it out on his own. He's got to learn to be self-reliant sometime.
Snape: ... Right. *note to self: go stop Quirrell before the Potter kid gets himself murdered*
no subject
Date: 2007-03-22 08:09 pm (UTC)*snerk* No kidding...
I just find it unbelievable that Dumbledore had no clue, or that Snape wouldn't tell Dumbledore that something was up with the DADA teacher.
I mean, I know Dumbledore tells Harry at one point that he is only human and he makes bad decisions and errors, but since when does human frailty = complete blindness. I don't think that JKR meant Dumbledore to come off that badly - after all, Harry is the Hero and must deal with Bad Things in a hero-like manner - but couldn't she manage it so that Dumbledore doesn't come off looking like a complete idiot for someone who supposedly defeated Grindelwald? I feel like JKR contradicts herself unintentionally within canon with characterizations like this.
That's probably why I like Snape in canon. He might be a snarky bastard, but at least he's consistently a snarky bastard throughout.
no subject
Date: 2007-03-22 01:36 pm (UTC)That's funny. Usually the book is better. I've experinced that, as well, with only one instance and that was with Fried Green Tomatoes. That movie was superb to me. The book was only "eh".
Baby! You know Dumbleydore knew what was going on! He knows everything. I think that is exactly why Snape was up Quirrell's butt in the first place. He was being that extra pair of eyes and ears for Dumbley. X) That's a good question about the defying and his mark burning. He probably did know. He knew that he had already made that decision to be loyal to Dumbleydore, so he had to endure whatever came along. Hehe! I like this. I like talking about this. I never get tired of HP. That chick that was speaking WRONG about the wandless magic...I wish you'd copy and paste what you said up there, in her face. She's confused and needs your help. *cackles*
Wal-Mart. O.o Yes. Hate. I try hard not to hate. *mumbles about crazy people mucking up our lives* hehe! X)
no subject
Date: 2007-03-23 02:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-23 11:04 am (UTC)You're right, sadly, about all of that, but...people STILL make me grumble. *grin*
Keep guessing! Think "ghostly" and "flamboyantly". hehe! X)
no subject
Date: 2007-03-22 03:21 pm (UTC)In PS/SS, Snape confronts Quirrell about his loyalties while Voldemort is possessing Quirrell...so, wouldn't it stand to reason that Voldemort knew from that moment on that Snape was not loyal to him? I suppose it would depend on exactly how the conversations went, but...man. That is worrisome. Of course, I'm sure Snape thought of this himself as soon as it was discovered that Quirrell had been Voldemort's host body, but it just makes me wonder whether this did actually go on behind the scenes, or if it's an oversight. Perhaps it all plays into the reasons for Voldemort distrusting Snape and Snape needing to prove his "loyalties" beyond a shadow of a doubt by killing Dumbledore! YES.
no subject
Date: 2007-03-22 07:24 pm (UTC)Snape says something in HBP about telling the Dark Lord that he was trying to stop Quirrell -- here: "He did not dare reveal himself to a former ally if that ally might turn him over to Dumbledore. I deeply regret that he did not trust me. He would have returned to power three years sooner. As it was, I saw only greedy and unworthy Quirrell attempting to steal the stone and, I admit, I did all I could to thwart him." (HBP p28 American ed)
He could have said that Quirrell's loyalties referred to Dumbledore and the school or himself, and had nothing to do with the Dark Lord at all, as well, since he's going with the 'gee sorry, I didn't know you were back!' defense. Of course that's just speculation, but it seems like a pretty good excuse. After all, he wasn't the only former DE who had no idea what was up.
Not to argue or anything, but I totally love HP discussions and had to throw my two cents in.
no subject
Date: 2007-03-22 07:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-22 07:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-23 02:42 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-22 07:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-23 02:41 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-03-23 01:30 am (UTC)Plus, they, unlike some of their competitors realized that they don't have to be complete and utter assholes to those who have been called to duty while under their employment. They realized that some people lose a ridiculous amount of money when they get called up and WalMart helped cover those differences for their associates.
no subject
Date: 2007-03-23 02:41 am (UTC)