Don't know what to make of this. I'll process it and get back to you.

Later…Big discussion at Sword of Gryffindor. I'm still digesting.

Sunday, October 21: I'll be honest with you: I don't care about this. There's so much going on in my life right now, I can't summon the energy to say more than this: The fact that Rowling says character Dumbledore was attracted to men doesn't change how I feel about the Harry Potter series. I'm fond of the books, especially Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, and I will always highly recommend the series to anyone who asks. I can say this for JKR: she's got her finger on the pulse of the publicity machine.

So Much Stuff!

The amount of Harry Potter-related news and commentary is overwhelming. As we move closer to D-Day — July 21 — expect a lot more.

With “Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix” hitting theaters next week and Book 7 theories here, there, and everywhere, there’s plenty to satisfy even the most hardcore Harry fan and the most ardent Harry hater.

By the way, set your DVRs and TiVos for A&E's Harry Potter: The Hidden Secrets to see interviews with John Granger, Janet Batchler, and the Lexicon's Steve Vander Ark. The first airing is Sunday, July 8 at 10 p.m. EDT. And HP blogger and podcaster Travis Prinzi of Sword of Gryffindor will present papers at Prophecy 2007 in Toronto, Canada, on August 2-5.

Christian Symbolism

What’s been amazing to me throughout the Harry Potter hype is the way Christians have come out of the closet to openly discuss the series’ Christian themes. You’d have to be willfully obtuse to miss the Dumbledore-as-God, Harry-as-savior, and Voldemort-as-Satan symbolism. Or that Gryffindor House’s (Harry’s house) mascot is a Griffin, a mythical half-lion, half-eagle creature considered a symbol of Christ in medieval days. Slytherin, the house of Voldemort and Harry’s enemy Draco Malfoy, is symbolized by a snake, which symbolizes evil generally and Satan specifically.

And what about the place where Harry Potter’s parents lived and died, Godric’s Holllow, where Harry will return (or must return?) in Book 7, and Hogwarts co-founder’s name, Godric Gryffindor?

That's not even the tip of the iceberg. (See Harry Potter and the Charmed Christians Part I and Part II) The symbolism is deep and rich, and the series will keep fans and even haters busy for decades.

John Granger of HogwartsProfessor.com addressed the unicorn symbolism in Book 1. A Voldemort-possessed Professor Quirrell killed unicorns and drank their blood to sustain his master. Granger says that in medieval literature, the unicorn was a symbol of Christ. So is this the image of “Satan” Voldemort drinking the blood of “Christ” in communion?

More profound are overarching “Christian” themes that reverberate through every human alive, whether or not they’re Christ followers: salvation and redemption (to buy back or pay off). What’s been building across seven books is the culmination of sacrificial love, a love that conquers death. Harry will have to harness that power within himself if he’s to defeat Voldemort. We’ve gotten enough hints throughout the series that love will be Harry’s advantage over the Dark Lord, not expert spellcasting. How will that play out?

(Also see "Christian" Elements in Narnia)

Continue reading Harry Potter: Plenty of Stuff for Fans and Haters

The site contains links to must-see "60 Minutes" video clips of J.K. Rowling's 2002 interview with Leslie Stahl.

They visit one of the coffee shops where she used to write. We see her drawings of Harry Potter characters, a notebook filled with last names and how she plots the books, "Box #1″ of Harry Potter material, and more.

Enjoy!

Addendum: Late last year, Stephen Fry, who does the audio for the UK version of the books, interviewed JKR. Download the interview and read my notes here.

I love this stuff.

J.K. Rowling has updated her site and quashed a rumor about Book 7:

"Oh pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease. I haven't written 750 pages of book seven, and if I had, I'd be very worried, as I'm not close to finishing it yet."

More important is this MAJOR hint from JKR, a question that no one has asked her yet:

Why did Dumbledore have James' invisibility cloak at the time of James' death, given that Dumbledore could make himself invisible without a cloak?

Prior to posting this I had a quick look on-line, and realised that some fans have been speculating about this question. However, nobody has ever asked me about it, and they really should have done. Just to allay the fears of the justifiably suspicious, this isn't what we in the know call 'a Mark Evans situation.'* There IS a significant - even crucial - answer.

Significant? Crucial? Speculation is running high at The Leaky Cauldron. In Book 1, Dumbledore gives Harry his father's invisibility cloak at Christmas. I assumed that James had given it to Dumbledore for safekeeping. I never wondered why the cloak specifically. Obviously, I should have!

What is the cloak's significance? Someone in the Leaky thread suggested it belonged to Godric Gryffindor, one of Hogwarts's founders. I agree. Either it belonged to him or is connected to him in some way. Does it indicate that James was and now Harry is the heir of Gryffindor? Still, what does it all mean?

NO, I don't think the invisibility cloak is a horcrux.

Your theories?

Update: It looks like Travis got to it first. He says:

There has been speculation that it got to Dumbledore because someone (Snape?) was under the cloak in Godric’s Hollow when the murder happened. Snape might fit. He had “turned spy” by then…

I've thought about this possibility, too, that Snape may have been under the cloak at the Potter's house (or in the area?) that night. But if so, why didn't he do anything? And Dumbledore said James had given him the cloak. Again, why did James give it to him? Unless Voldemort can see through invisibility cloaks, James could have protected his family with it.

Update II (9/14): JKR updates her web site with a few comments, and it makes the news! Can you believe it?

More fan theories.

So says Ms. Rowling. (via The Leaky Cauldron - wait for the jump)

TLC also reports on JKR's press conference this week at Radio City Music Hall in New York City. There are transcripts and photos, so go check it out. (Once the post comes up, check the sidebar on the right for links to earlier stories and the photo gallery.)

Hear that, Dumbledore-is-faking-his-death theorists?

Harry Potter blogger extraordinare Travis Prinzi is on it. Be sure to read the following, too:

— Defending Dumbledore, Part I: Loyalty and Manipulation
— Is Dumbledore Dead?

Substantative blogging and more links later…

Update (8/4): Now this is really dumb. Do I have the credibility to tell someone to "Get a life!" if I run a Harry Potter blog? Hmmm…

(Hat tip: Travis Prinzi)

You don't say?

Of course we knew more characters would die, so this news isn't really news. WHO will die is news. My guesses:

1) Severus Snape - Sacrificial Lamb, Sr.
2) Harry Potter - Sacrifical Lamb, Jr.

Both will die to save others, probably at the hands of the Dark Lord. I believe Harry will take Voldemort with him. The Leaky Cauldron links to J.K. Rowling's interview (wait for the jump) on the Richard and Judy Show.

Your theories?

Update: I listened to the MP3s. From what I gathered, Rowling will kill off at least two characters, which means she may kill off more than two. Rowling said two people die in Book 7 that she didn't intend to die (the final chapter of Book 7 was written years ago), and she saved one character who was supposed to die. Can't wait for that book.

Update II (6/27): Soccer Dad's theory:

I'd be very surprised if Harry gets killed. I believe his destiny is to become the Defense of Dark Arts teacher at Hogwarts. But I can also understand her wish to "own" Harry Potter exclusively. Harry Potter, while it may be appreciated at a number of levels, is still a children's series. Having a children's series whose main character is killed just wouldn't work. If that happened Harry Potter would be deemed too dark for children younger than teens. I can't imagine that's something that Rowling seeks.

I've heard people say that killing Harry Potter would be bad for marketing. Why would you want to buy all that Scholastic and Warner Brothers merchandise with depictions of a dead character?

Blogger speculation: JustOneMinute, Sword of Gryffindor, Dean's World (advice for fiction writers)…

Funny man Laurence Simon says: "The question is not 'Will Harry Potter die?' but 'How will Harry Potter die?'"

I'm quick on the draw, Glenn. I live on the Net.

A critic says JKR is trying to generate publicity. True, and it worked!

The Leaky Caudron's Melissa Anelli appeared on radio and MSNBC to talk about Book 7. Go to the site (wait for the jump) to download the MSNBC video file and MP3 radio interview.

Update III (6/29): Stephen Bainbridge says Harry's toast.

When I first read J.K. Rowling's hard-luck story about being on welfare and writing Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone in longhand in a coffee shop, I thought it was a very effective selling point for the book, although the story is true.

Can you imagine the determination it took to write under those conditions? JKR was at a low point. I read that her ex-husband kicked her out of the house when their daughter was a few months old; the next day she came back with reinforcements to get the baby and leave the cad forever. She and the baby lived with her sister and brother-in-law for a while, then she lived in Scotland on welfare while she wrote her book, attended classes to earn a teaching certificate, and eventually taught classes. JKR said the story about writing in a coffee shop because her apartment was too cold isn't true; she just liked the coffee.

I was surprised to learn that JKR still writes in longhand. She's writing the final book on lined paper. How charming! On her site, she writes about running out of paper. From her "diary" (via the Scotsman):

"Why is it so difficult to buy paper in the middle of town? What is a writer who likes to write longhand supposed to do when she hits her stride and then realises to her horror she has covered every bit of blank paper in her bag? Forty-five minutes it took me, this morning, to find somewhere that would sell me some normal, lined paper."

Book 7 is being written (in longhand!) as I write this. Will all of John Granger's questions be answered, or will JKR leave us hanging? How will our theories pan out? How far off the mark are we? How close? Whether you love them or hate them, JKR and Harry Potter have changed the culture. Even if the "Boy Who Lived" dies in the book (Don't stone me!), he will live on.