|NOTICE: If you wish to weigh an opinion on the subject of Lavender Brown's death, please take a few moments first to read through the many, many discussions on this issue already in the talk page archive. Before starting any new topics about this, please consider whether or not it would really add anything new to the debate, or whether it would simply be repeating what has already been discussed. Thank you.|
Her image in Herbology Class is wrong, this isn't Lavender. She is with a Hufflepuff tie, and she skin is Black and turned white after? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 18.104.22.168 (talk • contribs).
- It's not a Hufflepuff tie, that's the golden stripes in her Gryffindor tie (red and thick golden stripes). Either way, in Chamber of Secrets, Lavender Brown was played by Kathleen Cauley who is, indeed, a black actress (provoking a continuity error with later films). -- 21:46, August 29, 2012 (UTC)
- Watch it again. It's a Hufflepuff Tie. Also, in the Quidditch Game, she is with a Yellow Scarf, like the others Hufflepuff students. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 22.214.171.124 (talk • contribs).
- Actually, yes, sorry, I think you are quite right, that girl is definitely wearing a Hufflepuff tie. It was either another of the filmmakers' blunders or she has been misidentified. Is there any source that supports that that girl is Kathleen Cauley? Heck, is there any reliable sources that supports the fact that Lavender was played by Kathleen Cauley at all? (I've just Googled it and evidence was lacking... besides, the only references provided in our article are dubious at best). -- 01:29, September 10, 2012 (UTC)
Re-visiting the Lavender Brown death discussion
There are about 7 different topic sections all arguing about this on this page. I for one have just read a large number of compelling arguments for Lavender living to be the more canon fate. How is it the death is still listed on her page? Some solution needs to be found... and that solution should not be just listing her death as if it is completely canon. If this Wikia is to be a reputable source of HP information, some action needs to be taken on this matter.
The above was originally posted at the archived Lavender Brown talk page by 126.96.36.199 14:37, October 12, 2012 (UTC)
- Let's just nip this in the bud right here. Our canon policy states that information from the films and related materials is canon so long as it does not specifically contradict what is written in the book. Lavender is known to have died in the film, we were able to find nothing compelling in the book proving that she remained alive, therefore her death is unambiguously canon per our policy. Period. ProfessorTofty (talk) 14:42, October 12, 2012 (UTC)
- What is the proof that Lavender actually died in the film? She could have been unconscious. I mean, after being attacked by Greyback I wouldn't get up instantly. And is this really canon by our policy? The film clearly depicts the attack on Lavender by Greyback. In the book she survives this specifik attack, thus it contradict what is written in the boook - ƃuıuɹoɥʇ(Talk page) 16:23, December 3, 2012 (UTC)
- We're doing this again? The proof is that the filmmakers specifically stated in one of the tie-in books for the film that she was dead. Since there is nothing in the book that says specifically that she wasn't killed, we consider it canon under the policy. ProfessorTofty (talk) 17:35, December 3, 2012 (UTC)
- I always doubted Lavender actually DYING. I mean, where's the proof that she actually DIED. She could have just been unconscious in the film with Professor Trelawney and Parvati Patil. When Hermione saved her, I doubt that Fenrir Greyback even bit her. Evem if he did, she wouldn't exactly be a real werewolf, would she? She would just be like Bill. I don't care if you think she died, it's just my opinion. MsHarryPotterFreak 13:52, March 12, 2013 (UTC)
Rowling Clearly Had Lavender Brown Survive in the Book-Thus Film Contradicts Level 1 Canon
I understand your canon policy, and that's your business of course. I have an argument to make I haven't seen made in this discussion (I read through the archive) that, to me, speaks to the fact that JKR made Lavender's survival meaningful because it was revelatory about Hermione's character.
Having Hermione save Lavender, and showing it to us in such a dramatic fashion (she “shrieked” NO! before blasting Greyback), Rowling is showing us that Hermione, whatever she may have felt about Lavender, didn't allow any lingering resentment to stop her for a second from doing what was right. It's also a kind of feminist statement that, even though girls might be rivals in love, they have to stick together when it's a war. This was clear as a bell to me when I read it.
Why else would Rowling show Hermione fighting for Lavender Brown specifically, other than to demonstrate yet another of Hermione's strengths? Hermione might have even hated Lavender, or at least we wouldn't have blamed her -- a teenager in love -- for doing so, but she rose above those feelings and showed her true colors there, showed her unwavering goodness. Rowling would not have placed all the emotional weight on Hermione of having to save Lavender just to have her die later of her wounds, a death unmentioned no less.
Rowling is far too good a writer for that kind of carelessness, especially given the comments in the archive-cited NBC interview on not killing characters lightly. This was a serious test for Hermione, and, as always, she shone brilliantly.
I believe the significance of the action for Hermione's character, combined with the fact that the last mention of Lavender was of her still "feebly stirring” (thus alive), makes clear that JKR meant for Lavender to live and should encourage you to consider revising your stand that the clarity of the film death overrides the lack of clarity in the book. To me, the evidence I’ve presented here suggests strongly that she did in fact survive in the book.Nigel Tufnel (talk) 17:46, December 11, 2012 (UTC)
- I'm just going to spell this out, not only for you, but for anyone else that will bring this up again. Lavender Brown explicitly dies in the film. The actress says this, Harry Potter Page to Screen says this, it's explicit. Her death or survival in the novel is not explicit either way; she's left "feebly stirring" in the middle of a heated battle zone. Unless you can explicitly, definitely point to where Rowling has said Lavender is alive after Greyback's attack, the page will stay as is per wiki policy. No amount of opinions, speculation, or searching for a deeper meaning behind it all is going to change anything. So, please, no offense to you or the others who have argued this, but please stop. -- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 17:57, December 11, 2012 (UTC)
- By the canon policy on this wiki, the books are the highest tier of canon, where as the movies are a secondary tier of canon. In the book, Hermione arrives as Lavender falls from the balcony, and then proceeds to save her from Greyback and see her feebly stirring afterwards. In the movie, Hermione arrives after the death of Lavender as Greyback is feeding on her corpse, and proceeds to blast him away. So we have a clear contradiction between the chain of events in the book and the chain of events in the movie. Because the book is tier one canon, we should accept that chain of events over the one presented in the movie, and yet her death is presented on her wiki page as the only canon. Because there is a conflict, in order to claim her death is canon, a tier one canon source needs to be presented as evidence, because the validity of the second tier source is what is in question. --188.8.131.52 15:32, January 12, 2013 (UTC)
- Survival at least through the end of the story is assumed for any character in any story whose death is not explicitly mentioned. Survival is the default value. That's simple logic in any story. By not saying either "And then Lavender died," or including her in the list of the dead she offered after the battle, Rowling is having her survive in the book. There is no need for "proof" of her survival. And there is clearly no proof of her having died in the book. Your logic is simply flawed. Even without all the import Rowling clearly gave to Hermione having saved her (as I described above), import that makes it ridiculous (unless you think Rowling is a piss-poor writer) to have any doubt that Lavender survived the battle, the simple fact is that until Rowling says she died, Lavender survived. The burden of proof is on anyone who wants to say that Lavender died in the book. And there is no proof of that, as you've admitted. The film directly contradicts the book, and thus Lavender's death cannot be considered canon. 184.108.40.206 19:53, January 12, 2013 (UTC)
- If canon is 1) Book 2) Film, that's great. We should end this discussion with the only logical answer, and the only one that most of Harry Potter World will accept... she survived or we do not know what happened to her. In the book... she is not dead, in the movie... she is not dead. You can NOT use a manuscript written after the movie as canon on the death of a character. That was just the thoughts of a movie writer after the fact and to make money. At least 95% of the Harry Potter community is on the side of she is either alive or it is unknown, to go out on a limb because of this manuscript that can be purchased on Amazon and giving a definitive DEAD just makes everyone angry and this discussion and arguing will NEVER end. When a HP fan reads that is is definitively dead it puts them in an uproar. So, let's just do the only sensible thing and change the Lavender Brown profile back to the way it was... we do not know if she is dead or alive (which is the only fact there is). BNL78STEEL (talk) 08:19, January 19, 2013 (UTC)
- We already had a lengthy discussion about the matter (which you can read for yourself here. Basically, the argument is this: Lavender's fate in the book is indeterminate (Rowling does not provide any closure on her condition, and we can only speculate whether she lived or died). Any claim that she died in the book is putting words in Rowling's mouth -- she did not say she lived, she did not say she died; it's left ambiguous till the end. We cannot just infer that, as Lavender was "feebly stirring", she totally survived, as it could go either way (i.e. She was feebly stirring, thus showing that she had not been badly hurt, and could still move vs She was feebly stirring, thus showing that she was so badly hurt that she could do little more than that).
- In the movie, however, she is definitely killed -- and if the evidence in the film isn't enough (a dramatic shot of an unresponsive Lavender staring into nothingness; as well as her absence from all the subsequent scenes), there's also the outright statement of her death in Harry Potter Page to Screen: The Complete Filmmaking Journey (which is an official book from the makers of the film and, under our canon policy, a valid canon source). Under our canon policy, when the books leave things ambiguous, we can go by the events in the film to "fill up the gaps" as it were. So, Lavender's death would be categorised as canon (unless, that is, Rowling ever outright says "Nope, Lavender didn't die in the Battle of Hogwarts", which would of course supersede the film canon).
- "Survival at least through the end of the story is assumed for any character in any story whose death is not explicitly mentioned." Why? It would be nothing more than a presumption on our behalf. It's a clear logical fallacy, an argumentum ad ignorantiam, to presume she survived just because it isn't said that she died. All we do know is that we don't know what happened to her (in the books, at least; the films say she died).
- As for "When a HP fan reads that is is definitively dead it puts them in an uproar" -- that's just plain irrelevant for the matter at hand. To exemplify: if the majority of the fandom was outraged about Sirius's death, would that overrule Rowling? Never, of course. The same thing happens in this situation: the fandom simply does not have a voice as far as canon is concerned.
- Having said this, I repeat ProfessorTofty's words: "This particular argument has already been made in the archived comments and dismissed." Kindly present new premises, or refrain from repeating all the same old arguments. -- 12:12, January 19, 2013 (UTC)
- Seth, I think the best thing to do is agree that Lavender's death, per canon policy is in fact ambiguous because we cannot say a death is canon when the very cause, the core of the death is contradicted. That is a fact. Even per canon policy, it can be argued both ways. The fact of the matter is, there are many, many fans out there who will openly disagree with the idea that she died, and vice versa and the HP Wikia site is supposed to be reputable for its vast information and cannot state something forcefully contradictory to what half the fandom disagrees with. Even Rowling did not mention her in the final list of casualties after the war. In fact, even the actress of Lavender concedes that Rowling was not clear on the matter and so we don't know for sure. Which means that even within the film alone there is contradiction. Where Fred, Lupin, Tonks, and even Colin Creevey mentioned, surely a major character would be mentioned too, which makes it safe to assume that she did not die of her injuries just yet. And as she was injured a while before that partiicular moment, it stands to reason that either she lived or it is left unknown. We had Healers on the scene, you know. It's best to simply state 'as she was shown dead in the film but was not mentioned among the list of casualties, whether she survived the war or not is unknown.' Or something to that effect. Arculus Ambleway (talk) 18:58, February 26, 2013 (UTC)Arculus Ambleway
I have just found out that a character from the film Matilda in 1996 (possibly the book too, I haven't checked) was called Lavender Brown, and wondered if the Potter character was named after her. Any references? Or is it a coincidence? -- Supermorff (talk) 07:50, July 5, 2013 (UTC)