Broomsticks And Owls

by **Mint** » Monday 14 July 2003 8:54:48pm

No, thats different. Thats just the whole country is in trouble, not you have a killer going after you watching your every move.

Like when Sirius died - Harry didn't care for Cho anymore or for anything really.... you know? He has this huuuge responsibility on him now. ..

by **Ju-DedoH** » Monday 14 July 2003 8:57:17pm

I suppose it just won't be mentioned, with no reason to justify their lack of interest in that domain.

by **highsorcerer** » Monday 14 July 2003 10:30:22pm

Actually, most baby booms occur AFTER a major war has ended. During a war, the men are on the battlefield, away from their wives and girlfriends. No chance for reproduction when the genders are separated geographically. Also, major wars produce shortages of consumer goods, and rationing comes into effect. With foodstuffs, clothing, gasoline, tires, etc. all in low supply, it's not a good idea to start a family, so it's usually deferred until after the war ends (another reason for the boom; delayed procreation, instead of spreading the numbers over a larger period of time).

by **Colin** » Monday 14 July 2003 10:42:28pm

Exactly Gwared. The best example of this is fromthe second film, the infamous hugging Harry but not Ron scene.

Listen to JKR's commentary on the second DVD (I think it's the second). She said when it came time to shoot the scene where Hermy hugs both of the boys, Emma refused, saying she was too embarrassed. So she hugged Harry, and not both of them.

by **Gypsy** » Tuesday 15 July 2003 9:50:32am

I know, but I still think it's significant that, when Emma said she wouldnt hug them both, JK decided to have her hug Harry and not Ron. Even it though it wasnt planned that way I still think it shows the tension between the two of them.

by **Phoenix** » Tuesday 15 July 2003 1:12:47pm

I think, this scene shows, that Harry and Hermione are good friends, and that she likes Ron more than only as a friend.

by **Fafnul Black** » Tuesday 15 July 2003 1:51:49pm

I would say Ron will fall for Hermione as soon as he will have grown up a bit on the matter. I mean, he is a bit childish regarding girls at the moment, for a 15 years old ...

Well, truly, Harry does seem a bit too childish too, but since the spotlights are mainly on him at the moment, girls do come into his way (Parvati, Cho, other to come ?).

I guess it only reflects the fact that boys are usually pretty slow on the uptake when it comes to romance. Silly age, they call it :grin:

by **Meg Boyd** » Thursday 17 July 2003 2:20:41pm

This goes back to ElijahRain's point on keeping the kids "innocent"...I mean during wartime morals usually are torn into pieces because no one really knows if they'll be alive the next day...if you don't believe me read "A Farewell to Arms" by Ernest Hemingway, the heroine, Catherine once had a boyfriend who was fighting in the trenches and they were together for years and they had never done anything, like most pre-war kids, but then at instant her boyfriend was "blown to bits" and she never got to show him how she loved him...so to make a long love story short she gets together with Fredrick Henry (or was is Henry Fredrick...lol) and well they "hmm hmm hmmm" and they make a vow to live life for a moment and disregard all voices of reason around them...love now while you still can...

I'd hate to see this school of thought be applied to the characters in Harry Potter, but it is a possiblity...I mean Harry can't be introverted and dark forever...I could just see one of the characters going: "$#%@ with Lord Voldemort, I love you!" and then the book skips ahead a couple minutes...lol

by **jared** » Friday 18 July 2003 2:29:25am

someone early on in this post said sumthing about Harry being over Cho.
I hope not. I think is why just think about Sirius dieing. anyhow rowling wouldn't put Cho in there for no reason, i mean maybe they get together in later books...hopefully

by **AccioNiffler** » Friday 18 July 2003 4:01:36am

I think that Cho is in there just to make Harry grow up in a non-life-threatening sort of way. I dont think that she'll play too big of a roll in future books, at least I hope not, because I cant stand her :eek:

!

by **Mint** » Friday 18 July 2003 2:42:28pm

Oh yey!! More peopel that cant stand Cho!!

Im right there with you!

by **Lolita Banana** » Saturday 19 July 2003 11:10:53pm

Especially in book 5 we see that Hermione and Ron come from different moral backgrounds, therefore it almost would be impossible to hit it off in a relationship. I do think that something might become of Harry and Hermione, and maybe Voldemort trying to get to Harry through her.

by **Friar Tuck** » Sunday 20 July 2003 2:43:31am

I could see Harry/Ginny and Hermione/Ron, although I want Hermione/Draco.

I could also see JK using LV as an excuse to hinder rampanging hormones. It wouldn't be realistic(I'm a year younger than they are ad I have rampant hormones).

by **Ju-DedoH** » Sunday 20 July 2003 3:35:43pm

lol for your rampant hormones ...
but the Harry/Ginny does'nt seem possible for me, since she is really over with him and the Draco/Hermione ...

by **Gypsy** » Sunday 20 July 2003 4:27:05pm

I think Hermione/Ron will definately happen some way or another, due to the obvious tension between the two of them. I think they'll carry on regardless of LVs actions, as Ron and Hermione are not affected as much as Harry by LV, as they don't have to experience his emotions or anything like that.

Broomsticks And Owls

Potter and Chang, Weasley and Granger...

Do you think Ron and Hermione will get together?

War and Population

Hermione likes Harry

Who is online