Timeline for What is the provenance of this Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets quote
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 25, 2021 at 10:10 | comment | added | BeginTheBeguine | It isn't in the 2018 Bloomsbury (20th anniversary/house) edition either. I wonder if newer American editions have it? | |
| Jan 25, 2018 at 10:35 | comment | added | The Dark Lord | @CandiedMango I have the 2014 Bloomsbury editions and the quote's not present. So no. | |
| Oct 26, 2017 at 20:40 | comment | added | Pryftan | @Randal'Thor Well back when you wrote that comment I'd be more willing to consider Rowling's approval as no problem whatsoever. But with CC? I'm not sure I am so lenient. But if you think about it another way.. the American editor/publisher/whomever thought the order of the former enemies of Voldemort appearing out of his wand during the battle at the graveyard and she went with that without thinking. And although she corrected that it does go to show that they might introduce things that aren't consistent to the story. And that are stupid in this case. Stupid and unnecessary. So not canon? | |
| Oct 26, 2017 at 20:37 | comment | added | Pryftan | @Randal'Thor You know I agree with DavidS. What about Sectumsempra? That's pretty impulsive to cast a spell with unknown effects labelled 'for enemies'. Yes, yes, in the heat of battle. But still. And the fact he had considered momentarily of trying it on someone as a prank? Even considering something labelled 'for enemies' as a prank is pretty impulsive (well and stupid and reckless also). That's only one example though; his idea of (funny as it may be) throwing ice/mud at Draco and his cronies whilst under his Invisibility Cloak is arguably impulsive too. As are many other things he did. | |
| Nov 6, 2015 at 20:48 | comment | added | James Thorpe | @CandiedMango Not sure what "newer editions" you may be referring to, but my Bloomsbury edition from 2004 doesn't have this quote in it if that helps! | |
| Nov 6, 2015 at 11:04 | comment | added | Rand al'Thor♦ | @DavidS IKR. Blame Lana A. Whited though, not me! | |
| Nov 6, 2015 at 11:03 | comment | added | DavidS | "Harry is more mature and less likely to act on impulse than Ron is". Citation needed :P | |
| Nov 6, 2015 at 2:10 | comment | added | Rand al'Thor♦ | @CandiedMango also known as Google. | |
| Nov 6, 2015 at 2:09 | vote | accept | Au101 | ||
| Nov 6, 2015 at 2:07 | comment | added | CandiedMango | @justhalf accio. | |
| Nov 6, 2015 at 2:06 | comment | added | justhalf | +1. How could you answer this question in 2 minutes? o.O | |
| Nov 6, 2015 at 2:04 | comment | added | Rand al'Thor♦ | @CandiedMango Dunno. | |
| Nov 6, 2015 at 2:02 | comment | added | CandiedMango | Do the inserts appear in newer versions of the bloomsbury edition? | |
| Nov 6, 2015 at 2:00 | comment | added | Rand al'Thor♦ | @CandiedMango Presumably they were all approved by JKR, therefore yes? | |
| Nov 6, 2015 at 1:59 | history | edited | Rand al'Thor♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1314 characters in body
|
| Nov 6, 2015 at 1:55 | comment | added | CandiedMango | Are inserts regarded as canon then? | |
| Nov 6, 2015 at 1:54 | comment | added | Au101 | Well that's that solved! Good work! (Off-topic: I really don't like the insertion ...) | |
| Nov 6, 2015 at 1:54 | history | answered | Rand al'Thor♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |