Heh, I find it quite amusing how my throw-away line about Blaise has led to a discussion. I don't give a damn about Blaise. For what I care, he might never ever get mentioned in canon. But the stringy Slytherin is the only Slytherin boy that ever got mentioned, and I thought how funny it'd be if he ended up being the enigmatic, hotly discussed, for many years genderless Blaise.
Also, I think Trelawney is full of crap, so I can't quite buy the Parvati=seer theory.
See, that's exactly why I like it. Trelawney herself has no idea that her conjection is right. No-one (students nor readers) pays any attention to what she says. The "makings of a true Seer" line has never attracted any attention. It'd be great if it turned out to be true, simply because it'd be quite unexpected.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2004-09-15 03:24 pm (UTC)Also, I think Trelawney is full of crap, so I can't quite buy the Parvati=seer theory.
See, that's exactly why I like it. Trelawney herself has no idea that her conjection is right. No-one (students nor readers) pays any attention to what she says. The "makings of a true Seer" line has never attracted any attention. It'd be great if it turned out to be true, simply because it'd be quite unexpected.
Plus, I like Parvati.