J.K. never totally answered all of our questions about the Harry Potter books did she? What about when Moaning Myrtle died in the bathroom because she saw the basilisk? Doesn't she wear glasses? How about when the thestral-drawn carriages carried the trio to the train at the end of the fourth year? By that point, Harry must have been able to see the thestrals because he had witnessed Cedric Diggory's death. If you have got any other questions, please list them!

Other. Like why she killed off Sirius!

And the Moaning Murtal thing: She was crying. Who leaves their glasses on when they cry? Seriusly?

Moaning Myrtle:

Haha, well...You can't say she really killed off Sirius.

ANyways, I chose the question of Moaning Mystle...did she??? I'm just curious.


P.S. I don't leave my glasses on when I cry. (Ahh. I hate glasses, so I treasure the moments where I don't need them)

Others..She didn't answer a lot of questions that I have.
Anyway, about the thestral thing, well, she already answered this. It's easy : Harry didn't saw them because it takes time to "realise", understand and accept someone's death which he obviously didn't have and second, she didn't want to introduce something knew that she won't be answering fastly.
About Myrtle, I dunno but I don't think it's a mistake. Why did she choose to put her glasses? She just want us to think that there's a mistake.

Well my question:


Why didn´t Dumbledore go back in time and kill the 8-year-old Voldemort ?

MOD EDIT: Please remember that one liners are not allowed on the forums..elaborate more in future posts please

I like the Moaning Mertle question - especially because does that mean that even in death she's still long/short sighted (thats just mean), and does that mean that ghosts that have lost a leg will wobble instead of float or what about ghosts in wheelchairs and blind ghosts?


I have no idea about the thestrals - I think she answered it on her website, that it would just take too long to explain at the end or something like that (I'm too sleepy and lazy to check)- maybe they were on strike that day (just got a wierd image of a thestral union meeting)

I wonder almost every day weather or not Snape is good or evil, and what are Voldemort's other threee horcruxes?

hmmm, well, to one of that questions... i think myrtle could have held her glasses in her hands, (because she was crying), when she died.

but why didn't harry actually see thestrals at the end of book4 ...that's a good question! i think i have loads of questions, but i'm too lazy to choose one, so i'll just say the thestral thingy

Well, maybe Myrtle died withe her glasses atop her head and they fell back on the second she hit the floor. She was wiping tears when she died so it would be a perfectly pheasable explanation.

What I am curious about would fall under the category "other" because it is kind of general. So, the wizarding world is a world and therefore extends into places like the US and China, although it is not really written about concerning those places. So my question is this: How does Voldemort affect the rest of the wizarding world? We hear about the UK, and even in places like Bulgaria and France the other schools are aware of him, yet his activities seem to be in the general UK bubble. If he's a threat to the whole wizarding world, then where is everyone else?

I am curious about Moaning Mrytle's death as well...shouldn't her glasses been used as a blockade or protection? I really want that explained in the next book.

There are many things that I am curious about... mostly the bigger things though... like whether snape is good or eveil, if Dumbledore and Sirius are really dead, etc. I think for the moaning Myrtle thing... she had probably taken her glasses off when she was crying, but when she heard the boys voice out in the bathroom, before she came out of her stall she would've most likely put them back on so that she was able to see who was in the bathroom. As for the thestrals, JK Rowling has explained on her website, that in order to see thestrals the death you have witnessed needs to sink in and you need to fully accept that the person had died. When Harry saw Cedric die, Voldemort had just come back and he didn't want to fully believe that he was back or that he had just killed Cedric. Over the summer he had more time to think about it and accept that Cedric was gone, therefor the thestrals appeared when he went back to school. As for Voldemort only targetting the UK... I think that right now, he is just trying to conquer the UK (being the place he is from, and also where Dumbledore is) but once he gains complete power over that, he would move his rein of terror to the rest of the world.

Well about Myrtle, I wondered this as well. Then it would've been impossible for Harry to die in the Chamber of Secrets, well of course he wouldn't want to, but still. Then I thought back a bit. Myrtle was crying, so is it possible that she took off her glasses and came out? She never says anything about seeing a snake, only that she saw yellow eyes. So is it possible that her vision without the glasses enabled her only to see the basilisk's eyes?

Another question. Why did no one ever question Myrtle about her death? Why didn't Dumbledore of Dippet ask Myrtle how she died to prove Tom Riddle's theory? They could've caught the dirty murderer then and there!

what is the reason for glasses? to see more clearly. so mertle was able to see the basalisk better, thus kiling her...maybe if she was not wearing them, she couldn't focus properly on it, and then it wouldn't have killed her!

about myrtle if she has glasses as a ghost wouldnt she have had them on while she was alive which would cause her to only be paralyzed that has to be explained

I don't understand why everyone is assuming just because she had glasses on she wouldn't be able to see the basilisks eyes properly. Glasses don't reflect things off of the person (which I'm assuming is the reason for this post, because all of the characters who were paralysed in the 2nd book had seen the basilisks eyes in a reflection). Like nwad00 said... glasses are simply for better eye sight... so if anything if myrtle didn't have her glasses on then maybe she would've been just paralysed seeing as she couldn't see the basilisk properly... but if she had her glasses on she would've been able to see it very well... therefore she died. Glasses don't reflect things.... I have glasses and I see everything the same way as everyone else... if I looked into a basilisks eyes... I would expect to die as well.

i do, i'm pretty blind without my glasses on, I can't see anything. I can understand how she died with them on, my friend feinted and her's didn't come off, why should hers?

I really have wondered about this-maybe a mistake, maybe not? I think it would have to be, because harry would have to have seen them, they're not exactly hard to spot, are they?

I'm most interested in finding out how many people go to Hogwarts. It sounds like there are around a 1000. But then there are only 10 Gryffindors in Harry's year - so i don't see how this could be possible.

As for the Moaning Mrytle, i guess she must of taken her glasses off to cry.

the question i have been wondering since i read the 2nd book was Moaning Myrtle died with glasses on possible? i think if you don't see the monster eye to eye then you don't die. so do you think myrtle died with her glasses off?

The Moaning Myrtle question. I assume that she just wasn't wearing her glasses at the time, maybe she was holding them. Ghosts are always wearing the same clothes as they died in, so why not have the same objects they were holding?
But it got me thinking... What about Harry wearing his glasses in COS, he was wearing them wasn't he? So, why did he have to be careful not to make eye contact with the Basilisk before it was blinded? Surely he wouldn't actually be making direct eye contact with the Basilisk anyway.

Well, Golden Pheonix, I belive that he did have something to worry about because, Myrtle died with her glasses on. When she saw the basilisk so obviously that does count as eye contact.

Fawkes

the thestral-drawn carriages bothers me. Not only could Harry not see them at the end of his forth year, why couldn't he see them before? He did see his mother die didn't he? maybe mrytle had a lanyard on here glasses? But i think to be killed by the basilisk you have to look it directly in the eye, so maybe it wouldn't matter if she had glasses on

Hi there, halfblood, and welcome to the forums!

I've sent you an owl, which you can check by clicking on the Owls Waiting link towards the top right portion of the screen.

If you have any questions, feel free to send me an owl.

I have also wondered about the fact that in PA Lupin gives Harry butterbeer and tells him it something "you probably havent seen before," but in that book and the ones that follow, they havehouse parties often which include butterbeer. Shouldn't, then, Harry have tried it in 2 1/2 years?
As a plausible answer to the myrtle question, as someone who has worn glasses I can tell you it is not hard to look around the glass. If she saw the basilisk through the corner of her eyes it would have been through nothing, aka (Also known as) directly at it.

lol, that is so funny, because one of those questions you asked, I also was explaining to my sisters! I was so puzzled on how he now saw the threshals!!! that made me mad! LOL but oh well, I'm glad others noticed that question too!!

I agree that she never really answered all of our questions in the books.I chose the question about Moaning Myrtle.I never really understood how Moaning Myrtle died with the glasses on.

well i dont remember exactly where i saw the explanation of these questions by Jo but i do remember that my fans sometimes surprise me by showing how much interest they take in everything i write ,, well the answers as by jo were

1. on moaning myrtyle she said ,, there was quite close to be a mistake ,, well i think with glasses on u have a better view so a better death ,, or she might not be wearing glasses that time ,,, there was something like this ,, but she accepted it as a flaw

2. on harry's return in fourth book ,, she said she didn't want to bother the readers with the confusion of what those things were at the end of the book ,,, and so she didn't mentioned them,, moreover she said you can assume on his return harry was so shocked that he was not observing anything around,


i think it clears the things,,, i think i saw them in her latest interview or on FAQ's section of Jo's official website,,,

well, mooglegirl..sometimes when you cry you have more important things on your mind then to 'take your glasses off when you cry' so she might've forgot to take her glasses off..i wear glasses..and i sometimes forget to take them off when i cry..it's not that hard teeheeeeee

Myrtle died with her glasses on, thing is, you dont reflect stuff off you glasses, its something to make you see better. Not a reflection.

JK has already answered the thestral thing, but as for the Moaning Myrtle thing, why would it make any difference if she wore glasses? I don't know about anyone else, but personally, my glasses are transparent, so if I were face-to-face with a basilisk, I would still be able to look in it's eye. But, if you don't buy that one, here are a couple of possibilities:
1. Nick tells us that a witch/wizard has to make a conscious decision to become a ghost after they are dead. Maybe the way you look as a ghost represents the way you looked when you made that conscious decision (In the case of Nick/Headless hunt, they are headless as ghosts because they made the decision in the split second before their death). So Myrtle may not have been wearing her glasses when she died (She was crying, and I don't wear my glasses when I am crying, it just isn't practical) but had them as a ghost.
2. As I think someone mentioned before, she may have pushed her glasses to top of her head, then they fell back on to her face when she fell down dead
3. They were the defining thing that made her want to haunt Olive, so she wanted to keep them as a way of saying "hey Olive, I still have my glasses, but look who has the upper hand now". I mean it's a magical world, and she is a ghost, so surely she can keep her glasses if she wants to.

***Yay...100th post...yay to me!!!***

i used to wonder about the thestrals at the end of book 4, but i think that he was still pretty pre-occupied with what had happened, so he wasnt really concentrating, or registering what was going around him, or what was pulling the carriage. also, it is possible that because he haddnt totally accepted it yet, he wasnt able to see them yet

The question I want to know is do Prophecys always have to come true.

How many prophecies are there in the department of mysteries.

Has every single one came true or could there be a chance that Harry and Voldermort survive.

Maybe a mortal Voldermort stripped on his wand ( The wand would have to be destroyed obviously) and powers will be able to live alongside other wizards.

Improbable but what do you think

Other.
The question I want answered is:
Why did Dumbledore have James' invisibility cloak, after Jame's death? Jo did say that this question has a significant answer!

Yeah, I had never even thought about that one, until JKR mentioned it, but now that she has, I'm kind of keen to find out what it's all about, too

But maybe it's just better to wait for the book? ooohhh... I can't wait

I wondered about James's cloak since 2003 (when I first read the books). I never thought it would be important. Since that answer is forthcoming, I am most interested in Harry's fate. Will he live or die?

After that I want to know exactly how Lily's love charm (or whatever it is) was made and worked.

lolli:how was dd seposed to go back in time to kill 8-year old voldemort but good Q

And about the threstral maybe harry was still in too much of a shock about cedric to notice anything at all?

We already have a question to the carriages one...I can post up the quote from Jo if you want me to.

But the Myrtle question is still an odd one. I specualte she looked over her glasses. The basilisk is undoubtedly taller, height (and obviously width ) -wise so Myrtle probably looked up.

I won't rule the fact that she just looked through her lenses either. But Colin Creevy looked through his camera, of which a similar lens is used. So I doubt the biology of a basilisk is that...odd...so I will say that she must've looked at the Basilisk some other way, not directly through her lenses.

i wonder about what side snape is on. i reread the books over and over again, but i still can't figure it out. i've also tried to figure out what the other horcruxes are, but i still can't figure that one out either.

and about the Myrtle questoin, thats a good one. i have no clue why she would leave her glasses on while she was crying and die with them on. i mean, i guess she could have put them back on while she went to see who was outside the stall, but otherwise, i have no clue.

I will choose another queston, although I don't know which one xD

I remember once I read an article where they asked Jo about the thestrals in GoF. She said that Harry couldn't see them because he hadn't accepted yet Cedric's death, but then he did because he accepted it, like he understood it. I think it was something like this xD.

xD

I want to know about james cloak but what I'd really like to know is what dudley heard when the dementors were near him

I chose the Thestals one . I think I read somewheres (JK's site I belive) that she didn't introduce the Threstals in book 4 , becuase she didn't want the readers to be left with any lingering thoughts, and she decided that Harry would see them when he fully understood that Cedric was gone or somthing . Which I think is very lame , she should have just not mentioned anything about the horseless carriges and we'd be fine .

I have tons of questions but i really never thought of the Moaning Myrtle one... That is a very interesting and good question. But as someone has said i think she wouldn't of been able to see the basilisk without them, so then she wouldn't of died, which her dying was J.K.'s plan.

my question is whether when snape saves harry in PS he is really doing it to repay the debt to harry's dad ...

let me explain in book 5 it says:
'a girl was laughing as a scrawny boy tried to mount a bucking broomstick' page 552 british version

so I thought maybe snape felt sorry for harry?

much as I hate snape I still believe he may be good ... him being bad is too predictable and I expect better of JKR to be honest.

Just my opinion, probably not a good theory but oh well...

I would like to make a comment about Myrtle, her crying at the time of her death, and her glasses being off, or on. You see, if she did take her glasses off, she still had a barrier between her retina<Back part of eye, which the lens focuses all images, and is connected to the optical nerve, which relays the image to the brain> and the Basilisk's stare. She was crying, and if she was doing so, she would have taken off her glasses, so the tears didnt oil up her lenses. Also, since she was crying, the tears would act as a barrier between the basilisk's stare, and her retina, therefore, prevent the death of her by staring into the basilisk's eyes. She should have not died, if she was crying at all, because, as we all know, when there is a translucent obstruction between the Basilisk's stare, and someones eyes, then, he or she is just petrified. There were 4 instances where this happened, and I do not think that I have to go into those explanations. If you wish to see what I am pointing out, then just read the chapters in CoS that have those petrifications. I hope this problemattic error that Jo has made, will become solved, by someone pointing some sort of loophole in the text in these parts of CoS.

Thanks,

~~~Prince~~~

I have a reply for you Prince. I have just read the passage in COS in which Harry and Ron ask Myrtle about her death and although she does say she was crying because Olive Horby was teasing her her about glasses it doesn't specify that she was crying as she opened the door. I'll type up the entire passage so no-one has to go searching for it:



In my opinion, I think the shock of having a male in the female bathrooms was enough to stop her crying. And if she was like any other girl, she would have wiped her eyes before opening the door so therefore there wouldn't have been any tears to interfere with the Basilisk's stare.

On the glasses now. It doesn't say if she was wearing them or not but we presume she was. But what if she wasn't? Who said that when a person becomes a ghost they project the same image of how they looked when they died? Sir Nick is of course an exception in this case but one could argue the fact that he hoped to join the Headless Hunt (but that is an entirely different matter for it would need discussion on how he knew about it before his death). What if Myrtle wanted to forever be seen with her glasses on to spite Olive? We know she haunted Olive after her death (by turning up at her brothers wedding if I'm not mistaken) so what's to say she didn't project the image of glasses as well when she decided to become a ghost? It might be impossible for a dead person to project a completely different image but since the glasses were part of who she was it seems only logical that they should be on her in her ghostly form.

Now Prince, you were talking about the other instances of petrification and why they didn't die. Well for Mrs Norris and Hermione that's easily explained - Reflection. The mirror and the water guarded them against death. Justin saw it through Nick as a distorted image so there was no way for the stare to kill him. And Colin, unless the flash of the camera rebounded off the Basilisk's eyes he should have died. So I'll go with the flash theory to save time. Since her glasses didn't reflect, distort or rebound the Basilisk's stare Myrtle died. But as you and many others have said, without knowing if she was crying or had her glasses on or off we can only guess, although I daresay I'm close to the truth. And hopefully (though I seriously doubt it) JKR will explain everything once the final book is out.

About threasles. I watched the third movie a few months ago and realized the carrages and how they had no horses. Threasles I know but i had never noticed that before. Had anyone else?

how can a ghost have glasses? i mean c'mon people

Mod Edit: C'mon man, read the Rules. Short posts aren't allowed. If you don't have anything intelligent to say don't say anything at all.

The ghost of Myrtle merely represents how she sees herself. In other words, if she closed her eyes and pictured herself, she'd see herself in glasses.

I agree with TraidofDarkness, when I'm crying, I tend to wipe my eyes a lot and get the tears off my face, especially if I'm behind a door and I come out. As for the glasses...

I have to go with 62442al_Man.