gumshoe
16-11-2005, 19:16
Time for more foolishness from gumshoe. :eek:
I was horsing around on another forum a few months back, and ended up talking myself into considering that Molly Weasley is actually dead and has been replaced by who knows whom.
It was in the context of a discussion about Trelawney's superstition (can we make a distinction between her predictions and her superstitions, perhaps?): "When thirteen dine together, the first to rise is the first to die." There's been chatter here and there about who rose first at the Christmas dinner in PoA and in #12 Grimmauld Place in OoP.
I've read it argued that Dumbledore rose first in PoA while Scabbers was in Ron's pocket, or that it was Ron and Harry after Trelawney joined the group. I've also read posters remarking in amazement that Sirius rose first and since he's dead, Trelawney's superstition is right. But Molly rose first, not Sirius.
So when does the "first to rise" rule take effect -- once the meal has commenced with everyone seated? Or after the meal has concluded, dessert and all? If before dessert counts, it's Molly (in OoP). If it's after dessert, it's Ginny, as she was shown playing with Crookshanks on the floor before Sirius started to rise. In neither case, before or after dessert, does Sirius rise first. (Molly got up long before he did, to get dessert. (p. 86, Scholastic 1st ed.): "Mrs. Weasley threw a very nasty look at Sirius before getting to her feet and going to fetch a large rhubarb crumble for pudding.")
At the Christmas dinner, everyone is seated and the meal has commenced, then Trelawney walks in. Dumbledore rises to greet her. She finally sits after much fuss about the superstition. At the end of the meal, Harry and Ron rise first, simultaneously. Now, I examined the text pretty closely, and I didn't see that it was provable that Scabbers was in Ron's pocket, but I'll admit it looks pretty likely, as Ron had kept him in his pocket continuously for several weeks by then; plus, JK makes a point of showing Scabbers to the reader right before the dinner scene, as if reminding us of his presence. It is in this passage that we learn Ron's been carrying him around.
I'm going on the assumption that once thirteen sit down to dine, even if the meal isn't finished, the first to rise is the first to die -- the superstition doesn't specify "the first to rise afterward is the first to die."
We can look at this two ways.
If we assume Trelawney is right about the 13 to dine superstition, then we see evidence of this in Dumbledore being the first of that group to die, with the head count at the table already being at 13 when Trelawney entered the room (because of Scabbers). Taking this to the next dinner, first summer in OoP, Molly rises first, and Sirius dies at the Ministry the following spring. If Trelawney was right and we have proof of it with Dumbledore's death in HBP, then it means that Molly actually died before Sirius and was replaced. (I could almost make an argument for this, by the way, if it weren't for Crookshanks not batting an eyelash about her in HBP!)
So, nobody probably likes the fake-Molly theory. Trelawney is full of it. Sirius died first, even though Molly rose first. Could then the purpose of this whole incident be foreshadowing the fact that Dumbledore isn't actually dead? ;)
Couldn't resist.
gumshoe
I was horsing around on another forum a few months back, and ended up talking myself into considering that Molly Weasley is actually dead and has been replaced by who knows whom.
It was in the context of a discussion about Trelawney's superstition (can we make a distinction between her predictions and her superstitions, perhaps?): "When thirteen dine together, the first to rise is the first to die." There's been chatter here and there about who rose first at the Christmas dinner in PoA and in #12 Grimmauld Place in OoP.
I've read it argued that Dumbledore rose first in PoA while Scabbers was in Ron's pocket, or that it was Ron and Harry after Trelawney joined the group. I've also read posters remarking in amazement that Sirius rose first and since he's dead, Trelawney's superstition is right. But Molly rose first, not Sirius.
So when does the "first to rise" rule take effect -- once the meal has commenced with everyone seated? Or after the meal has concluded, dessert and all? If before dessert counts, it's Molly (in OoP). If it's after dessert, it's Ginny, as she was shown playing with Crookshanks on the floor before Sirius started to rise. In neither case, before or after dessert, does Sirius rise first. (Molly got up long before he did, to get dessert. (p. 86, Scholastic 1st ed.): "Mrs. Weasley threw a very nasty look at Sirius before getting to her feet and going to fetch a large rhubarb crumble for pudding.")
At the Christmas dinner, everyone is seated and the meal has commenced, then Trelawney walks in. Dumbledore rises to greet her. She finally sits after much fuss about the superstition. At the end of the meal, Harry and Ron rise first, simultaneously. Now, I examined the text pretty closely, and I didn't see that it was provable that Scabbers was in Ron's pocket, but I'll admit it looks pretty likely, as Ron had kept him in his pocket continuously for several weeks by then; plus, JK makes a point of showing Scabbers to the reader right before the dinner scene, as if reminding us of his presence. It is in this passage that we learn Ron's been carrying him around.
I'm going on the assumption that once thirteen sit down to dine, even if the meal isn't finished, the first to rise is the first to die -- the superstition doesn't specify "the first to rise afterward is the first to die."
We can look at this two ways.
If we assume Trelawney is right about the 13 to dine superstition, then we see evidence of this in Dumbledore being the first of that group to die, with the head count at the table already being at 13 when Trelawney entered the room (because of Scabbers). Taking this to the next dinner, first summer in OoP, Molly rises first, and Sirius dies at the Ministry the following spring. If Trelawney was right and we have proof of it with Dumbledore's death in HBP, then it means that Molly actually died before Sirius and was replaced. (I could almost make an argument for this, by the way, if it weren't for Crookshanks not batting an eyelash about her in HBP!)
So, nobody probably likes the fake-Molly theory. Trelawney is full of it. Sirius died first, even though Molly rose first. Could then the purpose of this whole incident be foreshadowing the fact that Dumbledore isn't actually dead? ;)
Couldn't resist.
gumshoe