PS 1

[pauraque_bk]

Happy new year!

Some of you will recall last spring's chapter-by-chapter Prisoner of Azkaban re-read, followed a few months later by the Chamber of Secrets re-read. Keeping up our backwards progression (oxymoron?), today I'm starting Philosopher's Stone.

Everyone is welcome to participate in the chapter discussions -- neither knowing me nor agreeing with me is a prerequisite. Jump right in!

I hope to do a chapter every other day. I'll be reading the UK paperback edition, so that's what page numbers will refer to.


PS 1: The Boy Who Lived

Mr and Mrs Dursley, of number four, Privet Drive, were proud to say that they were perfectly normal, thank you very much. They were the last people you'd expect to be involved in anything strange or mysterious, because they just didn't hold with such nonsense. (7)

Throughout the series, this attitude is consistently presented as ridiculous and wrong. And perhaps the given reasoning is wrong... Petunia's only stated reason is jealousy, and Vernon has no textual reason at all... but it's certainly not a lie that the magical world is dangerous, especially if you're a Muggle. Why would a Muggle ever *want* to associate with wizards? At best, they're not using their powers to help you with your problems, and at worst, they'd like to see you dead.

This is a problem I have with the wizard=queer reading. Anti-queer prejudice *is* ridiculous -- anti-wizard prejudice is not.

When Mr and Mrs Dursley woke up on the dull, grey Tuesday our story starts[...] (7)

I laughed here. I think this is the only point where the series is framed as a tale told by J.K. Rowling to us, the readers -- the children sitting cross-legged in a circle.

After this, we spend several pages in Vernon's head, which I found rather delightful. There are only three limited-third POV characters in the series: Harry, Vernon, and Frank Bryce. (JKR also goes into omniscient-third twice more in this book: when McGonagall and Dumbledore are conversing at the end of this chapter, and then during the Quidditch game.)

At half past eight, Mr Dursley picked up his briefcase, pecked Mrs Dursley on the cheek and tried to kiss Dudley goodbye but missed, because Dudley has now having a tantrum and throwing his cereal at the walls. 'Little tyke,' chortled Mr Dursley as he left the house. (8)

Poor old Vernon. He's not *such* a bad guy, you know... Just a bit dull and blustery.

Mr Dursley, however, had a perfectly normal, owl-free morning. He yelled at five different people. He made several important telephone calls and shouted a bit more. He was in a very good mood until lunch-time, when he thought he'd stretch his legs and walk across the road to buy himself a bun from the baker's opposite. (9)

This is the only real indication in this chapter that Vernon is kind of a jerk. He's not nearly as excitable and draconian as he is ten years later. He's happy with his boring life, his job, his baby son... His narrative voice here isn't as judgmental as his later behavior indicates; his response to the odd events around him is worry (and even curiosity), not immediate rage.

There was no point in worrying Mrs Dursley, she always got so upset at any mention of her sister. He didn't blame her -- if he'd had a sister like that ... (9)

This is funny, now that we've met Vernon's sister, whom I don't think he likes.

'Sorry,' he grunted, as the tiny old man stumbled and almost fell. It was a few seconds before Mr Dursley realised that the man was wearing a violet cloak. He didn't seem at all upset at being almost knocked to the ground. On the contrary, his face split into a wide smile and he said in a squeaky voice that made passers-by stare: 'Don't be sorry, my dear sir, for nothing could upset me today! Rejoice, for You-Know-Who has gone at last! Even Muggles like yourself should be celebrating, this happy, happy day!' (9-10)

Flitwick?

Also, I sort of question the idea that upon V's apparent demise, celebration would break out all over Britain. For one thing, why are they so sure he's gone? For another, his followers are certainly still around to take revenge.

Mrs Dursley had had a nice, normal day. She told him over dinner all about Mrs Next Door's problems with her daughter and how Dudley had learnt a new word ('Shan't!'). (10)

I like how easily JKR sketches these personalities. She doesn't have to tell as much as she does; she's better at showing than she perhaps realizes.

'[...]Perhaps people have been celebrating Bonfire Night early -- it's not until next week, folks![...]' (10-11)

What's Bonfire Night?

'Funny stuff on the news,' Mr Dursley mumbled. 'Owls ... shooting stars ... and there were a lot of funny-looking people in town today ...'

'So?' snapped Mrs Dursley.

'Well, I just thought ... maybe ... it was something to do with ... you know .. her lot.'

Mrs Dursley sipped her tea through pursed lips. Mr Dursley wondered whether he dared tell her he'd heard the name 'Potter'. He decided he didn't dare. Instead he said, as casually as he could, 'Their son -- he'd be about Dudley's age now, wouldn't he?' (11)

The dynamic here is interesting. Later on, Vernon seems much more dominant in the household, but here's quite deferent to Petunia. Nonetheless, he does bring up what he's seen, and wants her take on it. I wonder what he'd want to do if he *did* let himself conclude that this would ultimately involve him.

'How did you know it was me?' [McGonagall] asked.

'My dear Professor, I've never seen a cat sit so stiffly.' (13)

He didn't know she was an Animagus?

'You can't blame them,' said Dumbledore gently. 'We've had precious little to celebrate for eleven years.' (13)

He says "eleven years" again a few paragraphs later. That seems oddly specific... not the last few years, not a decade, but *eleven years*. What happened eleven years ago?

'You flatter me,' said Dumbledore calmly. 'Voldemort had powers I will never have.'

'Only because you're too -- well -- noble to use them.' (14)

Oh really! I'm not entirely sure what this alludes to.

Dumbledore gave a great sniff as he took a golden watch from his pocket and examined it. It was a very odd watch. It had twelve hands but no numbers; instead, little planets were moving around the edge. (15)

An astrological instrument, I guess. I like that detail.

'I've come to bring Harry to his aunt and uncle. They're the only family he has left now.'

'You don't mean -- you can't mean the people who live here?' cried Professor McGonagall, jumping to her feet and pointing at number four. (15)

I guess, then, that she's been sitting here "all day" because Dumbledore told her to, but didn't tell her exactly why. Weird.

'Borrowed it, Professor Dumbledore, sir,' said the giant, climbing carefully off the motorbike as he spoke. 'Young Sirius Black lent it me[...]' (16)

I'm firmly of the opinion that JKR had her plot basically set when she started, and was not attempting back-continuity. I don't see a reason to think otherwise.

Comments

[malograntum.livejournal.com]

What's Bonfire Night?

Guy Fawkes Day (er, Night), perhaps?

[melpemone.livejournal.com]

Correct :-)

[gmth.livejournal.com]

She told him over dinner all about Mrs Next Door's problems with her daughter and how Dudley had learnt a new word ('Shan't!').

Argh. I assume you're quoting from the British version of the book? This is the kind of thing that makes me mad. The American versio of the book has Dudley learning the word "Won't."

Why did they make stupid changes like that?? Why, why, WHY? Is "won't" that much easier for our "dumb" American kids to understand than "shan't"??

[pauraque]

Yes, as I said, it's the UK paperback. I actually meant to go borrow the US edition from my brother, since when I read that "Shan't", I thought that would be just the sort of thing they'd change. Lucky for us, they've mostly stopped doing it now.

[undeadgoat.livejournal.com]

My greatest hope (bar a few) is that they'll come out with new American editions of books 1-4, with original Mary GrandPré illustrations, including cover, but with the right titles and the original words. If they want to run it through a US spellcheck, fine, if they want a glossary at the end fine, but I'd much rather have the real words.

[fluffyllama.livejournal.com]

Heh, th weird thing is I took the text version with me in the car to read this chapter just today, and that is the US version ;-) That's the one that I spotted, and wondered why that one was such a big deal to change

[melpemone.livejournal.com]

here are only three limited-third POV characters in the series: Harry, Vernon, and Frank Bryce.

Thank you for that detail. I would never have picked up on that alone. I don't know why I find that so interesting, but I'd always assumed we'd stuck with Harry for the whole series - forgetting, of course, that Harry couldn't have a POV as a baby. :-)

I'm firmly of the opinion that JKR had her plot basically set when she started, and was not attempting back-continuity.

Agreed. I picture JKR as the kind of writer with more story that can fit on the page, and several shoeboxes overflowing with notes. I'm similar in that I won't start any major writing without knowing all the details first, and the fact that she managed to stop planning and actually write it only makes me admire her more, as that's the bit I've failed to do. :-)

[mariagoner.livejournal.com]

Harry couldn't have a POV as a baby. :-)

Heee! Actually, I guess he could, since even babies must have some type of conciousness. Still, unless we wanted the earlier chapters deluged with mentions of poop and milk...

[snakeling]

Just a quick post to let you know what Bonfire Night is. I'll comment more extensively when I've had a few more hours' sleep in me :)

Secrets, secrets are no fun

[thatfangirl]

'How did you know it was me?' [McGonagall] asked.

This bothers me and I'd like to see a good fanwank for it ("fanwank" as in fans forcing the canon to fit together rather than fighting with each other). McGonagall's animagus form has specific markings, she's in the Ministry's registry, and don't we learn in CoS that Dumbledore taught transfiguration before her? There's no reason for him not to have seen her transform and for him not to recognize her. My own extremely weak explanation is that she had just gained the ability. Hmm, does this fit into Minerva McGonagall Is Ever So Evil (which I don't follow)?

Re: Secrets, secrets are no fun

[tekalynn.livejournal.com]

Perhaps she's teasing him?

[eponis.livejournal.com]

Also, I sort of question the idea that upon V's apparent demise, celebration would break out all over Britain. For one thing, why are they so sure he's gone? For another, his followers are certainly still around to take revenge.

I see this as a byproduct of Voldemort's extreme cult-of-personality tactics. He was "You-Know-Who," whereas the Mark of the Death Eaters wasn't even very popularly known. When he "died," then (and presumably there was some magical way to verify that), the menacing figure behind all the madness was gone, or so it might be perceived.

He didn't know she was an Animagus?

I thought she just meant that there were many cats in the neighborhood, and in near-darkness, all tabby cats look alike. Except Minerva, apparently. :-)

He says "eleven years" again a few paragraphs later. That seems oddly specific... not the last few years, not a decade, but *eleven years*. What happened eleven years ago?

Wow. This is the most interesting observation in the post. The only promising thing that the HP Lexicon reveals is that eleven years ago (possibly plus or minus a year), Dumbledore became Headmaster. So Dumbledore's line could mean that they did celebrate eleven years ago (presumably at having a powerful successor to the ineffectual Dippet). Or, if we want to take a shady!Dumbledore explanation, Voldemort might have strengthened his attacks because of fear over Dumbledore's increase in power.

I guess, then, that she's been sitting here "all day" because Dumbledore told her to, but didn't tell her exactly why. Weird.

Maybe she knew they were family and was guarding them against Death Eater revenge, not waiting for Harry?

So glad to see you're starting these again!

[pauraque]

The only promising thing that the HP Lexicon reveals is that eleven years ago (possibly plus or minus a year), Dumbledore became Headmaster.

Yes, right, because he became Headmaster shortly before Remus came to school. Very interesting!

[atdelphi.livejournal.com]

*rejoices* I'm pleased as punch that you're tackling another book - I love the discussion that these analyses have generated :-)

He didn't know she was an Animagus?

Maybe he knew she was, but had never seen her actual markings - though considering he's the former Transfigurations teacher, you'd think he would have an interest.

This chapter is one of the most tricky to try to pick apart, I think, because while JKR seems concrete from the start on where the plot was going, the characterisations do develop in different directions, as you pointed out with Vernon and Petunia. I find it hard to get a read on Dumbledore and McGonagall's relationship here. She calls him 'Albus' and he calls her 'my dear Professor', and yet she doesn't seem at all in the loop of what's going on pertaining to Harry or what we might assume in retrospect is Order business. Or maybe that's just my impression.

As to why she's been waiting at the Dursleys' all day without knowing that Harry was going to stay there - maybe she heard Dumbledore's destination from someone else (like Snape?) and staked it out. *shrug* All part of the mystery that is the missing 24 hours :-P

He says "eleven years" again a few paragraphs later. That seems oddly specific... not the last few years, not a decade, but *eleven years*. What happened eleven years ago?

Ooh, I'd forgotten about that. I like the idea that there was some great stand on Voldemort's part that we haven't heard about yet that launched the war in earnest. As for 'eleven years' in particular, it might not hold any more significance than Harry turning eleven - or maybe JKR not being all that comfortable with math. Lily and James were born in 1960, this mysterious turning point in 1970, and Harry born in 1980. Nice round numbers to work with :-P

[caesia390.livejournal.com]

Re: McGonagall

I think Dumbledore's mainly messing with her. He didn't tell her where Harry would be taken because she didn't need to know, but it doesn't bother him that she found out anyway, so he takes the opportunity to tease her a bit. Perhaps he's feeling especially playful because Voldemort has been knocked out, if only temporarily. And someone below mentioned that it would be too dark to see her markings clearly, so that explains why she thinks he wouldn't recognize her, especially if he's not the one who sent her there.

I read the whole exchange as McGonagall being serious ('Albus' to show that she want answers from him, not any official capacity) and Dumbledore both responding to her questions in a conveniently expositional way as well as hinting that she should lighten up ('my dear Professor' to playfully point out her own stiff-necked attitue).

...Or it could be that JKR was still finding her sea legs...

[http://users.livejournal.com/_hannelore/]

The thing I found interesting about early Vernon is that it appears Petunia clearly rules the roost. The way Vernon tiptoes around the subject of Harry, the way Petunia snaps at him. Then again, she continues to lay down the law all the way up to OOtP, when Dumbledore's Howler makes her allow Harry to stay.

Dumbledore is very careful to extinguish all the lights, but of course no one notices a half-giant roaring from the sky on a giant motorcycle. ;)

What happened eleven years ago?

I think the 1970s was the "First Rise of Voldemort," according to the HP Lexicon. This was supposedly when the witches and wizards were controlled by the Imperius Curse, Hogwarts once of the safer places in the Wizarding world, that sort of thing. Maybe that's what she meant?

[http://users.livejournal.com/_hannelore/]

Oops, I thought too slow. Lots of people beat me to it, re: eleven years.

[noblerot.livejournal.com]

JKR wrote: They were the last people you'd expect to be involved in anything strange or mysterious, because they just didn't hold with such nonsense. (7)

And Eo responded: Throughout the series, this attitude is consistently presented as ridiculous and wrong. And perhaps the given reasoning is wrong... He adds later: This is a problem I have with the wizard=queer reading. Anti-queer prejudice *is* ridiculous -- anti-wizard prejudice is not.

Ah, but JKR is writing from the point of view of mainstream -- i.e. culturally conservative -- society. And from that point of view, anything outside of the norm is unacceptable, whether or not it poses a real threat (anti-witch hysteria wasn't based on anything more concrete than fear of Other and need for a scapegoat). This would include minority sexualities.

Doesn't matter if you and I know the reasoning behind such assumptions is spurious/ridiculous/unneccessary. For the Eminently Average Citizen as Personified by Vernon Dursley (and many of those who voted for Bush in 2004), this reasoning is logical and right.

[caesia390.livejournal.com]

Yes but I think it becomes an issue when one is looking strictly at the wizarding, rather than muggle, world. The immediate sense one gets from this chapter is: muggle = close-minded and bad; wizard = open-minded and good. I think Rowling deliberately sets up these assumptions so that she can drag the audience through disillusionment right along with Harry.

I would also point out that lycanthropy could be seen as a metaphor for homosexuality (emphatically expressed in the third movie!!!!!! they played it to the hilt!), but, as others have pointed out, a more apt metaphor would be violent schizophrenia treatable with medication. Again, our assumptions are played with and played with again. Lupin is oppressed, yes, he is judged unfairly, yes, so we sympathise with him - but he is also dangerous. The world is NOT so simplistic as right and wrong. Rowling knows this, whether she chooses to act as if she knows it or not.

[likethemodel.livejournal.com]

I don't think that Dumbledore told McGonagall to wait for him, I think someone spilled the beans (Hagrid, probably) and McGonagall took it upon herself to see what was going to happen. Also, it seems like either animagi!McGonagall is a new thing, or that she and Dumbledore haven't seen each other in a while. Or both.

[psychic-serpent.livejournal.com]

Flitwick?

I assumed, based on later evidence, that this was Dedalus Diggle.

What's Bonfire Night?

November 5 is Guy Fawkes Day AKA Bonfire Night, when there are fireworks and bonfires all over Britain (the bonfires are to burn effigies of Guy Fawkes and sometimes the pope). This is one of JKR's first Flints. The first one was actually saying that the story started on a Tuesday although later Dumbledore and McGonagall say that the Potters were killed the previous night; we know from later information that they were killed 31 October, 1981, which was on a Saturday; if McGonagall was waiting all day the next day for Dumbledore it should have been a Sunday, not a Tuesday. However, there are other Flints involved in this. If McGonagall was waiting all day on the wall when would she have had time to see people walking around talking to Muggles about the fall of Voldemort? JKR could fix all of these problems in one fell swoop by simply having McGonagall and Dumbledore talk about the Potters being killed on Saturday night, not "last night." Then the Tuesday Flint would be gone and the issue of how McGonagall both sat on a wall all day (where nothing of note occurred except Dudley being a bratty little baby) and still seeing wizards misbehaving all over Britain would be solved as well. The other Flint that still needs to be fixed then is the Bonfire Night mistake; if the television news reader says this instead the problem would be solved (since the Tuesday the story begins is November 3): "...Bonfire Night is in a couple of days..." Problem(s) solved. (Time is not JKR's friend.)

He didn't know she was an Animagus?

Dumbledore clearly knew that McGonagall was an Animagus. Why would this statement mean that he didn't know? Her question, I think, concerned why he would assume, given the number of cats in Britain, that this particular cat was HER. And frankly, I think he was lying. I think he used a wee bit of Legilimancy to confirm his suspicions that the very still cat MIGHT be McGonagall. He detected human thoughts, not cat thoughts, and then knew for sure. (Of course we're not to know about Legilimancy yet in book 1.)

What happened eleven years ago?

It is very clear that this is the period of time for which Voldemort has been a powerful threat. And it isn't that specific; he doesn't say, "Eleven years, five months, a fortnight, two days, five hours and seventeen minutes."

Oh really! I'm not entirely sure what this alludes to.

I think we get a glimpse of this in the MoM battle in OotP but it may be even greater powers on which Dumbledore drew to defeat Grindelwald; it may also be that Dumbledore even had the chance to fill the Dark Lord void formerly occupied by Grindelwald but was too "noble" to do such a thing as to abuse his power that way.

I guess, then, that she's been sitting here "all day" because Dumbledore told her to, but didn't tell her exactly why. Weird.

No, he already said that he didn't expect to see her there. And she also says that Hagrid told her where to go to wait for Dumbledore. Hagrid probably didn't know a) how long it would take him to get from Godric's Hollow to Surrey and/or b) when Dumbledore might be arriving. So she "staked out" Privet Drive all day so she wouldn't miss him.

I'm firmly of the opinion that JKR had her plot basically set when she started, and was not attempting back-continuity. I don't see a reason to think otherwise.

What do you mean? Of course she had her plot set. Did Hagrid say something that you think conflicts with the backstory? It would seem that Hagrid still thinks that Sirius is the Potters' friend; he didn't seem to know about the Fidelius Charm and the original plan to make Sirius the Secret Keeper. What I do find perplexing in this scene is why Dumbledore, who told the Potters about the Charm, did not know that Sirius was intended to be the Secret Keeper (he offered to do it himself but they decided not to do that). But Dumbledore's reaction--no cry of alarm when Hagrid mentioned Sirius's name--makes more sense if he did not know at that time that Sirius was the person they first wanted to make their Secret Keeper.

[pauraque]

I assumed, based on later evidence, that this was Dedalus Diggle.

What evidence is that?

Dumbledore clearly knew that McGonagall was an Animagus. Why would this statement mean that he didn't know? Her question, I think, concerned why he would assume, given the number of cats in Britain, that this particular cat was HER. And frankly, I think he was lying. I think he used a wee bit of Legilimancy to confirm his suspicions that the very still cat MIGHT be McGonagall. He detected human thoughts, not cat thoughts, and then knew for sure. (Of course we're not to know about Legilimancy yet in book 1.)

As thatfangirl quite rightly points out above, McGonagall's distinctive markings are in the Animagus registry. That's why I was surprised she thought it odd that he'd recognize her.

It is very clear that this is the period of time for which Voldemort has been a powerful threat. And it isn't that specific; he doesn't say, "Eleven years, five months, a fortnight, two days, five hours and seventeen minutes."

Okay, then what event marked that year as the year when he first began to be considered such a threat? My point was that it seems there was *some* such event (a major massacre, something of that nature), rather than that Voldemort gained power very gradually.

And she also says that Hagrid told her where to go to wait for Dumbledore.

Ah, I missed that.

What do you mean? Of course she had her plot set.

It seems obvious to me as well, but not everyone believes it. That's what I was referring to.

I hope it's my imagination, but you seem irritated. Is there a problem?

[maidenjedi]

Re: wizarding world erupting in celebration upon Voldemort's demise. You've seen Return of the Jedi, yes? I'm thinking back to before the special editions (there's a lot in the SE version that Lucas has to explain to me someday, but different issue...), but basically, my take on the celebrating wizards is like the celebrating Ewoks/Rebels on Endor. The threat is Voldemort himself, and the thinking is that by cutting off the head, the body fell apart. Without a leader, the Death Eaters wouldn't know what to do, etc. In some respects it makes sense, because a great many Death Eaters retreated in fear, claiming Imperius if they were known, or simply remaining silent. We know that some Death Eaters weren't through - Bellatrix being the ringleader of a remaining group that attempts to discover Voldemort's whereabouts and tortures the Longbottoms regardless (and now I have *thoughts* about that!! Because of OotP! Damnit!!!). But by and large, the common wizarding population may feel much freer with the news that Voldemort's dead. It's also only been a very short time; the reality of the remaining situation hasn't sunk in, except to Dumbledore.

Hagrid's mention of Sirius is the most emotional moment for me in the entire series. A lot of people were pretty upset with Sirius' death, but once you've read PoA, this line twists like a dull knife. I'm going to be very anxious to sit down and reread the whole series once book 7 is released, and find out just how many sly little lines JKR threw in like that.

Re: Dumbledore's "powers" and being too noble to use them. Clearly Voldemort is as powerful a wizard as Dumbledore. I'm betting power that big means you walk a fine line between good and evil. There's a lot of what we know Dumbledore to be capable of that has a fuzzy moral connotation. In Voldemort's hands, with the intent of evil, those powers are more than merely dangerous. What I find curious is Dumbledore's modesty here. What exactly can Voldemort do that Dumbledore can't? Is it just that Dumbledore's scruples prevent him? Hmm.

So glad you're doing this one. :-)

[pauraque]

Maybe I just can't quite picture it. In the middle of a drawn-out war on home turf (a civil war, really) with many casualties, a terrorist leader is killed... I don't know, I feel like if I were in that situation, regardless of whether I thought this meant the war would end, I wouldn't think to celebrate. I mean, if someone was killed who'd killed my family and friends... I imagine I'd be relieved, but I wouldn't run out and party. It seems very strange to me.

[theatresm.livejournal.com]

*crams fist in mouth to avoid making obnoxious brain-storming post* Oh, what the hell. I'll cut the first bit where I go on about the eleven years and get right to it.

'Only because you're too -- well -- noble to use them.' (14)

An odd word, noble. She might have used "principled," or "ethical," or very simply, "good." But "noble" and set apart so drastically by the syntax? Alchemically (and metallurgically), you've got base and noble metals or substances, much like, oh, lead and gold. *Insert snarky reference to Philosopher's Stone here* So is it another clue to the PS angle (especially since we haven't seen the chocolate frog card yet, and know nothing of Dumbledore's involvement with Flamel?

Well, Brutus, thou art noble...

[pauraque]

...yet I see thy honorable mettle may be wrought from that it is disposed.

Good catch!

[fer-de-lance.livejournal.com]

He didn't know she was an Animagus?

Or perhaps the neighborhood has several cats, and she wants to know how he knew it was her. Knowing she's an Animagus doesn't mean he's actually seen her in cat form, so I assumed that her question was based upon the notion that he knew it was her and not, say, one of Mrs. Figg's horde out on a neighbourhood jaunt. :D

[tikigoddess8.livejournal.com]

I guess, then, that she's been sitting here "all day" because Dumbledore told her to, but didn't tell her exactly why. Weird.

Didn't it also say in that chapter that Hagrid told Minerva that Dumbledore would be there? Dammit, I can find the final four books, but not the first one! d'oh! Anyway, I found your journal through daily_snitch. :o)

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I came across this today and thought of you and this thread. It's Elkin's "Evil McGonagall" theory, and suggests that at this time Minerva wasn't registered as an animagus. It also analyzes her dealings with Dumbledore in a verrrry interesting way...

[akasha-lilian.livejournal.com]

Wow, I'm so glad I found your journal! =) *dashes off to read through your comments about the books*

[mneomosyne.livejournal.com]

Mr and Mrs Dursley, of number four, Privet Drive, were proud to say that they were perfectly normal, thank you very much. They were the last people you'd expect to be involved in anything strange or mysterious, because they just didn't hold with such nonsense. (7)

I always thought JK started her books with this line because she wants her readers to love the strange and mysterious 'nonsense'. She is about to write seven books about witches and wizards and wants her readers to be on the 'magic' side of the story. So she makes the decision for her readers by presenting the most revolting muggles which dislike the magical world. The hoped result being that any 'cool' person would love the mystery.

At least, in the more black and white world of the first book this came as a logical start for me. I never thought she made the link between 'queer' and being disgusted by it.

[mneomosyne.livejournal.com]

'You can't blame them,' said Dumbledore gently. 'We've had precious little to celebrate for eleven years.' (13)
He says "eleven years" again a few paragraphs later. That seems oddly specific... not the last few years, not a decade, but *eleven years*. What happened eleven years ago?

1970, the rise of Voldemort? Start of the war? James POtter is born 1960, so are lupin, black and Wormtail. Lucius is 7 years older, so Luicius came of age in 1970, is this the start of an organised DE terror in the magical world? Molly has the same age as Lucius.

[mneomosyne.livejournal.com]

'Borrowed it, Professor Dumbledore, sir,' said the giant, climbing carefully off the motorbike as he spoke. 'Young Sirius Black lent it me[...]' (16)
I'm firmly of the opinion that JKR had her plot basically set when she started, and was not attempting back-continuity. I don't see a reason to think otherwise.

Did it take Hagrid an entire day to get Harry from the ruins in Godric's Hollow to the Dursleys? That's almost 24 hours that Harry had no food, etc. And at age one children can crawl pretty fast and shout a lot. To hold one on your arm whilst flying over Britain, it sounds weird.