Yeah, I was thinking of them as henchmen myself, but I thought I'd throw them out for completeness's sake.

Of course, Goyle might very well be meant to imply a gargoyle, which would be another French image.

Are the French names meant to imply Frenchness or aristocratic/wealthy Britishness? Because I was thinking the latter but I don't know where I got that idea. Probably muddling up that beef vs chicken etymological business.

Peter Pettigrew?

Are the French names meant to imply Frenchness or aristocratic/wealthy Britishness? Because I was thinking the latter but I don't know where I got that idea.

I figured the latter. Plus, French and/or Latin names are good for making a family seem cleary evil without actually going so far as to name them Badfaith or something like that in English. Just about everybody who had name that connoted bad things in English ended up being on the right side.

You can also tell the people who are clearly on the right side by their salt-of-the-earth type English last names -- Potter, Granger, Weasley, Longbottom, Lovegood.

While we're on the topic of names, why all the flower names? Lily, Petunia, Lavender, Pansy, Rose, off the top of my head. I really can't think of any character traits that make those particular flowers appropriate names for those people.

Peter Pettigrew?

I did say really evil.

Why all the flower names?

Well, lily implies purity and royalty. Petunia and pansies are "common" flowers. And don't forget the literal flower, Fleur.

Albus Dumbledore = White Bumblebee; 'cause he's a white hat and 'cause he goes around humming to himself.

Rubeus Hagrid - Rubeus 'cause he's red-faced (from the drinking) and Hagrid because of hagridden, ie looking like you've got the worst hangover known to man (because a witch was using you as a means of transport).

Sybil Trelawney, Minerva McGonnegal, Argus Filch - pretty much ALL the names are purposeful. It's like reading Dickens, or something!

Well, I'm finally out of Snape's head. I liked that part, it was great to see snippets of the past events from Snape's perspective. Dumbledore's request to have Snape kill him makes a whole lot more sense now. It also makes sense that Snape would not damage his soul as his intent would be mercy and duty. The doe patronus also now makes sense. I didn't think that Snape's patronus would be a doe (I thought a bat), but the clue was right there in book six with Tonk's patronus. When Snape said 'always' I thought I could hear the distant sound of a thousand Snape fans all swooning at once. That sort of stuff plays well in books, but in real life I'd probably be thinking "Dude, you've got to get over it". Well, Snape did play in a role in Lily's death, so I'll give him a pass on the lifelong obsession.

Of course the memories are as much or more about Dumbledore. Aberforth's perception of Dumbledore comes into sharp focus in these events. Dumbledore appears to be using people like pieces on a chess board and Harry is the piece that has to be sacrificed in order to win.

The thing is I still don't think Harry will be dead at the end, but I'm not sure how that will work out. He has a piece of Voldemort's soul in him (I knew it!) so maybe the killing curse only rips one soul from the body and Voldemort's, the weaker soul, will be the one ripped away. That would make complete sense to me. Then Harry has to find a way to defeat the two pieces of Voldemort's soul left. Plus there's that thing about the wand that chose him being a bit fat symbol of rebirth.

Anyhow I'm leaving off with Harry still in the headmaster's study contemplating his impending death. Buck up buckaroo, you're going to be alive at the end of the book. At least I think so. I'm be pretty shocked if he wasn't.

When Snape said 'always' I thought I could hear the distant sound of a thousand Snape fans all swooning at once.

Nope, I was sobbing too hard to swoon. God. God, that chapter killed me.

Always.

Anything.

Severus, Severus, you poor, doomed, greasy bastard.

I wonder if Alan Rickman smirked in anticipation when he read this.