|
|
Post by ismaco on Jan 28, 2006 17:33:32 GMT -5
Hello! I found this site... and it gave me hope  It's very convincing!! www.dumbledoreisnotdead.com/Please, tell me what do you think about what it says! Isabel |
|
|
|
Post by EloquentPhoenix on Jan 28, 2006 18:05:27 GMT -5
Very, very, very convincing! Though i alreayd ha dmy doubts, it was all a mess in my head as I wondered what if. I'm inclinded to agree with him, he has very sound evidence. It's made me feel better. A lot of the Snape is not evil stuff I had already explored, it was easier than exploring his death. It's hopeful. One thing.
It's not important, a mistake like that would not be missed anyway. It's not a mistake because it's not relevant. The differences in the two versions are, as ever, more to do with the country for whihc they are bound. I think slight differences like that are because the two societies are different. No more, no less.
Futhermore, the added bit adds nothing to the quote that is not plainly obvious to the reader. It's not a necessity to explain how exactly Draco will be dead. it adds nothing because relatively it means nothing. It's an obvious and believable way for them to be dead. I can't see how it affects it at all. Maybe it just wasn't needed in the english version, though I can't see how it would be needed in the american one. The american one is always longer so maybe futher explanation was necessary for that book. Though it doesn't add anything really to his proof or to the story. Anyway I'm rambling.
If it was that important it would have been in both. End of.
|
|
|
|
Post by nemi on Jan 28, 2006 20:24:06 GMT -5
Very convincing. I never thought of it that way! But now I've read that, I'm beginning to think that perhaps there *was* a loophole...
As for the part missing from the UK edition, I *am* rather annoyed about that. They left it out! But perhaps, because Harry Potter is British, JKR thought people would expect important parts to be in the British version of the book. So she left it out. She knows that HP has fans in the US *and* UK, and therefore knows that people will point out the missing detail. It's peculiar because it's left out altogether, it's peculiar that it's left out of the version in the country in which it was written, it's peculiar because it raises questions. People will pay attention to it, and ask questions about it. Could that be what she wants? Could she actually want us to dwell on it, to show its significance?
We can only find out in the seventh book.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alesia on Jan 29, 2006 12:19:39 GMT -5
If you listen to Pottercast on Leaky they did an interview with Arthur Levine, the US editor. Basically what he said about the extra lines in the US reversion was that it was a mistake. The lines should have come out, they got removed from the UK version but they just got missed in the US version.
Now, what he wouldn't say was what the rational behind the removal was.
|
|
|
|
Post by EloquentPhoenix on Jan 29, 2006 13:44:50 GMT -5
Ohh really? I was wrong then. Too big a clue perhaps? I think Draco will turn good, so maybe it gave too much away.
|
|
|
|
Post by ismaco on Jan 29, 2006 23:39:36 GMT -5
If those lines don't mean anything, why was it so important to remove them? I think there's nothing behind them but... maybe, there actually is...  Who knows?? (Only JKR) |
|
|
|
Post by beMMADfabulous on Apr 1, 2006 11:35:18 GMT -5
Wow....
I'm so glad there are people more willing to search deep into these stories and are more skillful at it than I. ;D It is very convincing, and it made me feel much better after I read it.
Now, I just hope that these clues and such are not used by JK to keep up guessing and holding onto the hope of Dumbledore still being alive that we are so desperate for the 7th book. I hope she wouldn't do that to her fans.
|
|
|
|
Post by nicolerose on Jun 29, 2006 22:56:55 GMT -5
ok i didnt really read all of that.... a)im not in the mood b)im tiered. But I have to agree that dumbledore is not dead. how can he be?? how is harry going to learn the rest of the things that he needs to know.
But then, i think, maybe this is the last thing harry needs to give him the will to inflict pain on voldemort. Losing Dumbldore and Siruse is going to give him an extra push to win.
It reminds me of charmed.... they had to lose Leo in order to have the exra reason to win!
|
|
|
|
Post by DaBao on Dec 22, 2006 0:33:43 GMT -5
Everyone says he's not dead, and no matter how much I want to believe it's not true-- J.K. Rowling herself confirmed that he's dead.
J.K. Rowling confirmed on 2 August 2006 that Dumbledore is, in fact, dead, saying, "you shouldn't expect Dumbledore to do a Gandalf". She also said: "But I see that I need to be a little more explicit and say that Dumbledore is definitely...dead. And I do know - I do know that there is an entire website out there that says - that's name is DumbledoreIsNotDead.com so umm, I'd imagine they're not pretty happy right now. But I think I need - you need - all of you need to move through the five stages of grief, and I'm just helping you get past denial."
|
|
|
|
Post by StormAngel on Dec 27, 2006 18:02:05 GMT -5
sigh. everyone says that he ain't dead... but J.K.Rowling confimered it herself..
|
|
|
|
Post by DaBao on Dec 29, 2006 22:37:07 GMT -5
Just sad isn't it? I was hoping it was all just fake, but I can't go into denial about this. If he's dead, then he's dead... I'll only go into denial if she says they're not together.
|
|
|
|
Post by beMMADfabulous on Dec 30, 2006 9:34:12 GMT -5
I'll accept Albus's death (but not in my stories) if JK tells us they were married. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by childminerva on Dec 30, 2006 17:23:12 GMT -5
I'll accept Albus's death (but not in my stories) if JK tells us they were married. ;D That will more than make up for it, I agree. ;D ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by ismaco on Jan 2, 2007 21:06:08 GMT -5
I'll accept Albus's death (but not in my stories) if JK tells us they were married. ;D That seems fair...  |
|
|
|
Post by Katheryn Mae on Jul 29, 2008 21:29:56 GMT -5
I'll accept Albus's death (but not in my stories) if JK tells us they were married. ;D God...if only. I have accepted that Albus is dead (in my stories) but only that he and Min were married. |
|
|
|
Post by tabbyphoenix on Oct 12, 2008 8:33:09 GMT -5
I'll accept Albus's death (but not in my stories) if JK tells us they were married. ;D Yes! But she ruined that as well. *glares*  |
|
|
|
Post by Katheryn Mae on Dec 2, 2008 15:45:36 GMT -5
I'll accept Albus's death (but not in my stories) if JK tells us they were married. ;D Yes! But she ruined that as well. *glares* There's always non-canon dear.  |
|
|
|
Post by sylvadragon on Dec 4, 2008 9:11:01 GMT -5
I am in denial both about them not being married, and about Albus being dead, and I intend to remain in denial, even if it does make my feet wet.  I have long since rejected all that JKR has to say, and only consider books up to OOtP canon, at least in my mind. I am utterly convinced that they were secretly married, the clues are clear to see in book one, and in the first films, I believe they were so secretly married that even JKR didn't know, which explains her foolish notion that Albus is gay. It works for me. |
|
It's very convincing!!
