Jo's FAQ Update
"In what way is 'Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince' related to 'Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets'?
I have been engulfed by an avalanche of questions on the subject of 'Prince' having once been a title of 'Chamber'. I am therefore attempting to answer most of them under this heading, which I think just about covers all the answerable variations (the unanswerable ones include questions such as 'who's the Half-Blood Prince?' 'what happens in the Half-Blood Prince?' and 'what does Half-Blood Prince mean?')
The plot of 'Prince' bears no resemblance whatsoever to the plot of 'Chamber', nor is it an off-cut of 'Chamber'. The story of 'Prince' takes off where 'Phoenix' ended and does not hark back to four years previously. True, mention is made to events that happened in 'Chamber,' but of course, mention is also made of events that happened in 'Stone', 'Azkaban', 'Goblet' and 'Phoenix'.
'The Half-Blood Prince' might be described as a strand of the overall plot. That strand could be used in a whole variety of ways and back in 1997 I considered weaving it into the story of 'Chamber'. It really didn't fit there, though; it was not part of the story of the basilisk and Riddle's diary, and before long I accepted that it would be better to do it justice in book six. I clung to the title for a while, even though all trace of the 'Prince' storyline had disappeared, because I liked it so much (yes, I really like this title!). I re-christened book two 'Chamber of Secrets' when I started the second draft.
The link I mentioned between books two and six does not, in fact, relate to the 'Half-Blood Prince' (because there is no trace left of the HBP storyline in 'Chamber'.) Rather, it relates to a discovery Harry made in 'Chamber' that foreshadows something that he finds out in 'Prince'."
For God's sake woman. BUT WHAT DOES IT MEAN? She must enjoy the HELL out of this.. Making the fans squirm & go on rants & whatnot over what it must mean. Manipulative bitch.. =_= Anyways, other points of interest: Tom Riddle/Voldemort is NOT the HBP & Arthur Weasley will NOT be the new minister.
I predict: Dumbledore will be the new minister & once the war over Voldemort comes to an end, he will show us the truth. That bad, not-so-good secret of his that we've known about since Book One yet most fans deny it because they themselves are in denial of Dumbledore being bad in ANY way. Come on people, he is always gone when something happens.. he always knew what was going to happen.. he always knew how to stop whatever was happening.. he can see Harry under the cloak, yet he couldn't tell what was up with Quirell? He couldn't tell that Scabbers was an animagus? He couldn't tell that Moody was in fact Crouch Jr.? Another thing that doesn't add up: Jo said in a previous chat interview that Harry will indeed get MUCH stronger because she knows what he has to face in the next books. Well, if he had Dumbledore on his side at the end, why would he even need to do anything? OH, & another thing.. I'm sorry, but the Chamber of Secrets would of been found if you ask me. That just didn't add up, it wasn't that difficult to find. Wouldn't the Mauraders Map have shown it to Fred & George, anyways? I know it was made by those four back when, out of what THEY knew, blah blah.. but it just seems like it would of been on there. I don't know. But yes, something not right about Dumbledore. That is my ONLY theory of the series, & I stand by it 100%.
I have been engulfed by an avalanche of questions on the subject of 'Prince' having once been a title of 'Chamber'. I am therefore attempting to answer most of them under this heading, which I think just about covers all the answerable variations (the unanswerable ones include questions such as 'who's the Half-Blood Prince?' 'what happens in the Half-Blood Prince?' and 'what does Half-Blood Prince mean?')
The plot of 'Prince' bears no resemblance whatsoever to the plot of 'Chamber', nor is it an off-cut of 'Chamber'. The story of 'Prince' takes off where 'Phoenix' ended and does not hark back to four years previously. True, mention is made to events that happened in 'Chamber,' but of course, mention is also made of events that happened in 'Stone', 'Azkaban', 'Goblet' and 'Phoenix'.
'The Half-Blood Prince' might be described as a strand of the overall plot. That strand could be used in a whole variety of ways and back in 1997 I considered weaving it into the story of 'Chamber'. It really didn't fit there, though; it was not part of the story of the basilisk and Riddle's diary, and before long I accepted that it would be better to do it justice in book six. I clung to the title for a while, even though all trace of the 'Prince' storyline had disappeared, because I liked it so much (yes, I really like this title!). I re-christened book two 'Chamber of Secrets' when I started the second draft.
The link I mentioned between books two and six does not, in fact, relate to the 'Half-Blood Prince' (because there is no trace left of the HBP storyline in 'Chamber'.) Rather, it relates to a discovery Harry made in 'Chamber' that foreshadows something that he finds out in 'Prince'."
For God's sake woman. BUT WHAT DOES IT MEAN? She must enjoy the HELL out of this.. Making the fans squirm & go on rants & whatnot over what it must mean. Manipulative bitch.. =_= Anyways, other points of interest: Tom Riddle/Voldemort is NOT the HBP & Arthur Weasley will NOT be the new minister.
I predict: Dumbledore will be the new minister & once the war over Voldemort comes to an end, he will show us the truth. That bad, not-so-good secret of his that we've known about since Book One yet most fans deny it because they themselves are in denial of Dumbledore being bad in ANY way. Come on people, he is always gone when something happens.. he always knew what was going to happen.. he always knew how to stop whatever was happening.. he can see Harry under the cloak, yet he couldn't tell what was up with Quirell? He couldn't tell that Scabbers was an animagus? He couldn't tell that Moody was in fact Crouch Jr.? Another thing that doesn't add up: Jo said in a previous chat interview that Harry will indeed get MUCH stronger because she knows what he has to face in the next books. Well, if he had Dumbledore on his side at the end, why would he even need to do anything? OH, & another thing.. I'm sorry, but the Chamber of Secrets would of been found if you ask me. That just didn't add up, it wasn't that difficult to find. Wouldn't the Mauraders Map have shown it to Fred & George, anyways? I know it was made by those four back when, out of what THEY knew, blah blah.. but it just seems like it would of been on there. I don't know. But yes, something not right about Dumbledore. That is my ONLY theory of the series, & I stand by it 100%.