DH:29 - The Lost Diadem (Bloomsbury 2007)

Aug 29, 2007 00:00

Italics are impressions from my first read, when I did not yet know what was going to happen.

DH:29 - The Lost Diadem )

dh: 29

Leave a comment

Comments 5

sunihiroku August 29 2007, 13:52:20 UTC
So Aberforth's not living under a secret assumed identity; the Death Eaters are just stupid. Look! Look! Dumbledore's brother, right there in Hogsmeade! They suck.

You know, I always thought they knew who he was, especially after the Skeeter article. However, he's obviously known to be on BAD terms with Albus, since the last time the general public knows they were in the same vicinity Aberforth punched Albus in the nose. Plus that thing with the goats...the DEs might have just thought him too stupid to do much; anyway, he had been helping them by letting them trade in his bar and keeping quiet about it (not that, under the current regime, that would be much of a problem anymore).

So why the f*** is the proverb on it written in modern English?!OMG that grated my nerves as well. But the reader/Harry had to understand it easily, so the choice was either Modern English or some really cheesy Elisabethan English that would be just as inaccurate ( ... )

Reply

pica_scribit August 29 2007, 18:47:03 UTC
If I were a Death Eater I'd be suspicious that Albus often went for a drink in Aberforth's pub, and Snape was thrown out of the Hog's Head by Aberforth when he overheard the prophesy. I think they really are just idiots.

But the proverb is also on the diadem itself, which no one has seen in a thousand years. I would have been so chuffed to see something written on it in Old English, but I guess I'm the only one. *sigh*

Reply

sunihiroku August 29 2007, 19:11:44 UTC
Not to split hairs, but wouldn't it have been in Middle English? Then again, I'm placing the creation of the diadem after 1066.

I would have loved to see some linguistic action as well; don't feel bad. :)

Reply

sunihiroku August 29 2007, 19:13:40 UTC
Ah, I see now that you place the founders in the 10th century; JK Rowling probably clarified that on her site and I just didn't read it. :-P

Reply


Leave a comment

Up