Eponymuse comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 13, chapter 81 - Less Wrong

6 Post author: bogdanb 27 March 2012 06:07PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (1099)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Eponymuse 29 March 2012 01:25:34AM *  9 points [-]

There is one offhand remark, vengeance, and a practical cold-heartedness favoring Bones. "Why not Bones?" is only a little better than no argument at all.

Also there is the fact (mentioned by someone else, sorry I forget who) that Narcissa's sister, Bellatrix, murdered Bones' brother. Edit: I am an idiot, you already mentioned this.

Bringing in Aberforth is a really interesting idea. Now that I think about it, even given the wizarding wars, it is remarkable that so many siblings have died or nearly died:

  • Albus/Aberforth

  • Bellatrix/Narcissa

  • Bones/her brother (who, exactly?)

  • Petunia/Lily

The last one is interesting with the role of survivor exchanged as well, since there is a hint that Petunia may have threatened suicide in order to convince Lily to brew the beauty potion.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 29 March 2012 07:24:24AM 4 points [-]

Also there is the fact (mentioned by someone else, sorry I forget who) that Narcissa's sister, Bellatrix, murdered Bones' brother.

Also, Bones is the one who speaks up to stop Dumbledore from "confessing" to killing Narcissa.

I think it's Bones. Too many coincidences otherwise.

Comment author: loserthree 29 March 2012 03:39:43PM 1 point [-]

Eponymuse, I think I covered that with the word 'vengeance.'

Those coincidences are otherwise satisfied by the fact that Bones' motives are served by Narcissa's Immolation, whoever did it. Given what we know about her, she'd act the same way if Dumbledore or Moody were Narcissa's Immolator. Still, it does make some narrative sense for her be the one.

I am not at all confident that Aberforth was involved. I would like it very much, though, if someone could add something more to or take something away from the rickety scaffold propping this theory up.

Aberforth may have died just to emphasize the harshness of the war in ways the source did not. If that's the case, I'm making a red herring out of a pointless bit of the set. However, there was nothing in the text that tells us that Aberforth was a tragic casualty of a meaningless war or anything of the sort. For now he looks, to me, like a gun on the mantle.

Comment author: Eponymuse 02 April 2012 12:43:12AM 4 points [-]

Sorry, apparently I'm illiterate.

Also, I guess "siblings getting killed" isn't much of a pattern. Given that people were getting killed in the war, and that people have siblings, you can count the people getting killed as siblings.

Comment author: pedanterrific 29 March 2012 05:00:31AM 2 points [-]

Also there is the fact (mentioned by someone else, sorry I forget who) that Narcissa's sister, Bellatrix, murdered Bones' brother.

It was meee. Also there's the Bellatrix idea.

/shameless self-promotion

Comment author: loserthree 29 March 2012 03:35:36PM *  0 points [-]

No, it's Amelia herself in Chapter 56.

"That depends," Amelia said in a hard voice. "Are you here to help us catch criminals, or to protect them from the consequences of their actions?" Are you going to try to stop the killer of my brother from getting her well-deserved Kiss, old meddler?

Comment author: pedanterrific 29 March 2012 05:11:54PM 0 points [-]

I don't get it. Why did you quote my first link?