The AK curse - this also failed when Harry tried it on Bella because he didn't "mean" it enough. So, it's not some sure-fire thing - the user has to be trained to use it effectively or it will just knock someone over and they'll live to tell about it...
I have a question for all you guys...the Death Chamber where Sirius was killed -- do you know if that appears anywhere else, in a place unrelated to Harry Potter (i.e. Greek mythology)? Or did JK just come up with it herself?
Okay - you are right about the curse, but I did say he didn't "mean" it enough - MEAN, as in the two ways you can take it - with hate, and with meaning... plus, Bella says something about he hadn't been taught (trained) how to use it and she could really show him how it was done. - Remember there's Dark Arts training as well - and schools that specialize in it.
The Veil was foreshadowed at Nearly-Headless Nick's Deathday party in
Book 2. (This was left out of the movie.) Harry passed thru that veil
unharmed.
WW - How was this foreshadowed at the party... I forget?
As far as Sirus coming back... I sort of doubt it. Reason why - because of the conversation that Harry had with Nick after he lost Sirius. Harry also broke the mirror that he had been given by Sirus for communication with him - it was the same mirror that James Potter and Sirius had used to communicate - Harry had stuffed it in the back of his trunk and forgotten about it.
Thanks for answering my question. I think I might check a few books out of the library or something about that Death Chamber; it's been haunting me.
I don't think Sirius will come back, but I also can't understand why he would die in that particular way if he weren't coming back. Lupin, however, seemed very sure that Sirius was dead when Harry tried to get him from behind the veil.
Also, Dumbledore's painting appeared in the Headmaster's office. I'm wondering...would that portrait have all the knowledge Dumbledore possessed? If so, could Harry theoretically use it for advice/training, even though the real Dumbledore is dead?
The Veil was foreshadowed at Nearly-Headless Nick's Deathday party in
Book 2. (This was left out of the movie.) Harry passed thru that veil
unharmed.
WW - How was this foreshadowed at the party... I forget?
For the sake of a friend, Harry passes thru a heavy veil to interact with the dead.
(The Golden Trio are the only living people there.)
Harry returns unharmed.
quote:
As far as Sirus coming back... I sort of doubt it. Reason why - because of the conversation that Harry had with Nick after he lost Sirius. Harry also broke the mirror that he had been given by Sirus for communication with him - it was the same mirror that James Potter and Sirius had used to communicate - Harry had stuffed it in the back of his trunk and forgotten about it.
Harry asked Nick about GHOSTS.
I agree with Nick-Sirius will not become a GHOST.
In Egyptian mythology-where Isis' veil is connected with dead- the star Sirius leaves
It HAD to be a plan....why was Harry paralysed just before Draco entered?....Why did Dumbledor talk to Draco untill snape arrived? Why did Snape rush Draco away to safety?
Why didn`t they go back through the cabinent in the ror to b&b?
Thanks for answering my question. I think I might check a few books out of the library or something about that Death Chamber; it's been haunting me.
I don't think Sirius will come back, but I also can't understand why he would die in that particular way if he weren't coming back. Lupin, however, seemed very sure that Sirius was dead when Harry tried to get him from behind the veil.
Also, Dumbledore's painting appeared in the Headmaster's office. I'm wondering...would that portrait have all the knowledge Dumbledore possessed? If so, could Harry theoretically use it for advice/training, even though the real Dumbledore is dead?
For the sake of a friend, Harry passes thru a heavy veil to interact with the dead.
(The Golden Trio are the only living people there.)
Harry returns unharmed.
I know the account you're referring to, but are you certain that is the same veil? I know you're talking about Nearly Headless Nick's Deathday party on Halloween, where Harry, Ron, and Hermonie are the only "live ones!" there.... Could that veil, in fact, be a symbolic one?
Also, I know that Harry was talking to Nick about Sirius as a qhost... but still, from his conversation with him, I had the impression that Nick seemed to think Sirius had, "moved on".
By the way, I think that the portraits do have the memories/knowledge that they had in life, as Dumbledore would be heard talking with them (consulting, getting counsel, whatever) in his office. They had to have been able to carry more than just their personalities or essence of the person they were a painting of....
I haven't read the book or this thread yet, but to be on the safe side, I think every post should have the spoiler warning on top, just in case anyone clicks on the most recent post and doesn't realize this is a spoiler thread. I expect to be joining this conversation soon.
I began by clicking the link WordWolf generously offered, made my way through several different websites...and ended with the conclusion that Sirius is not returning.
From what I've gleaned off of the various websites, it appears JK killed Sirius in the manner that she did on purpose. She wanted him to die unexpectedly and...not on a whim, exactly, but...I'm not too good with words. She killed him in the manner she did to show how sudden and arbitrary death can seem. To bring him back would be to tell kids that when a person close to them dies, there's a chance he or she could return, and that's obviously not true.
Furthermore, JK stated that when she began the books, she promised herself that no one she killed would be coming back to life. I tend to think that apparent death, at least for the purposes of these books, denotes actual death.
I think this logic also applies to Dumbledore...in addition to the obvious fact that he was buried at the end of the book.
I do still wonder if Dumbledore knew what was going to happen to him. And even if Dumbledore knew...did Snape know Dumbledore knew?
For the sake of a friend, Harry passes thru a heavy veil to interact with the dead.
(The Golden Trio are the only living people there.)
Harry returns unharmed.
I know the account you're referring to, but are you certain that is the same veil?
Who said it was the SAME VEIL?
I said it FORESHADOWED Book 5.
quote:
I know you're talking about Nearly Headless Nick's Deathday party on Halloween, where Harry, Ron, and Hermonie are the only "live ones!" there.... Could that veil, in fact, be a symbolic one?
That veil was physical, the connection is symbolic.
quote:
Also, I know that Harry was talking to Nick about Sirius as a qhost... but still, from his conversation with him, I had the impression that Nick seemed to think Sirius had, "moved on".
Nick and the other characters think Sirius "moved on."
They also had the same impression of Peter Pettigrew for 12 years.
Might they be mistaken yet again?
quote:
By the way, I think that the portraits do have the memories/knowledge that they had in life, as Dumbledore would be heard talking with them (consulting, getting counsel, whatever) in his office. They had to have been able to carry more than just their personalities or essence of the person they were a painting of....
I think they may have SOME knowledge, but not MOST of a person's knowledge.
It is possible for someone to give advice and evaluate based on their own
personality and character, without any access to experience or extensive knowledge
on a subject. If you can find one place a portrait told Dumbledore some obscure
piece of information, I shall concede the issue. Until then...no.
I began by clicking the link WordWolf generously offered, made my way through several different websites...and ended with the conclusion that Sirius is not returning.
Most websites are run by people who think that. However, each seems to have had
errors at different points. For example, Mugglenet had (and still does, unless they
changed it) the excerpt JKR posted from Book 6, and says it is a description of the
Half-Blood Prince. I don't think it's much of a spoiler to say Scrimgeour isn't the
HBP. So, their opinion is not binding on JKR. (Neither is mine.)
quote:
From what I've gleaned off of the various websites, it appears JK killed Sirius in the manner that she did on purpose. She wanted him to die unexpectedly and...not on a whim, exactly, but...I'm not too good with words. She killed him in the manner she did to show how sudden and arbitrary death can seem.
To have done so with the Avada Kedavra-like Cedric Diggory-would have been MUCH more
effective at this and left no ambiguity. It would have had a LOT more pathos.
quote:
To bring him back would be to tell kids that when a person close to them dies, there's a chance he or she could return, and that's obviously not true.
Or, it's yet another time that appearances were deceiving.
Death being definitive is the case for James and Lily, Cedric Diggory, and the
fatalities in Book 6. It was NOT definitive, so far, for Voldy and Wormtail...
because they weren't actually killed off.
quote:
Furthermore, JK stated that when she began the books, she promised herself that no one she killed would be coming back to life.
Please use the direct quote. JKR has previously said that rumours were often very
false because they mixed what she said, what someone thought she said, and something
unrelated. Thus, third-hand reports are unreliable.
JKR said that she established that if you are
"properly dead"
in the story, then you're dead.
The question, therefore, is whether or not the Veil/Arch counts as a "proper death".
Some say no, many say yes.
quote:
I tend to think that apparent death, at least for the purposes of these books, denotes actual death.
Please note that Voldemort and Wormtail were considered apparently dead when Harry was
1 year old. One's body was destroyed, the other supposedly was destroyed except for a
finger. Barty Crouch Jr was even BURIED and he was alive.
quote:
I think this logic also applies to Dumbledore...in addition to the obvious fact that he was buried at the end of the book.
I can run a list of the things confirming that one. We had everything but a coroner's
report.
quote:
I do still wonder if Dumbledore knew what was going to happen to him. And even if Dumbledore knew...did Snape know Dumbledore knew?
In essence...Can Snape please not be evil??
All the events in Book 6 can be interpreted as Snape being good OR evil.
The event that indicates his allegiance is at the end of Book 5.
Snape is the one that sends the OotP to the MoM.
If not for that, Voldy would have gotten his hands on the Prophecy AND Harry.
All Snape would have had to do was sit on his hands, and things would have suited
Nick and the other characters think Sirius "moved on."
They also had the same impression of Peter Pettigrew for 12 years.
Might they be mistaken yet again?
-----------------------------------
I wasn't aware that Nick gave comment about Pettigrew being dead. There were comments made by several of the professors and Madam Roserta (sp?) in Hogsmead, there was discussion in the Shack when Lupin, Sirius, the "golden trio", Snape, etc. all have their confrontation, but I don't recall any comments by Nick. The reason why I think Nick is so relevent in this is because he is dead. He already knows what the "other side" is sort of like, although, in his own words, he chose an exsistance similar to what his was in life rather than to go on (again, this is paraphrased from his conversation with Harry when Harry first lost Sirius.) I had the impression that he wasn't "brave enough" (my words) to go to the "next level" but couldn't comment on it or explain it to Harry.
Back to the portraits having knowledge: Since Kreacher went back to Mrs. Black to be alone with her - taking joy in the fact that Sirius was dead - I would add tnat to my points of why I think they carry the knowledge that they had in "life" to their "painting". Additionally, Mrs. Black knew that there were "mudbloods" "traitors" and other less-than-desirables (in her opinion) in her house and wanted them OUT. Since she was limited to the confines of her painting, so it seems, she was unable to take any action on getting them out and could only make their lives hell with her screaming every chance she got.
I am of the belief that both Dumbledore and Sirius are actually dead, and won't be back. In fact, I'll be a bit disappointed if they do come back. Snape's betrayal seems entirely within character, and I hope it's not changed in book 7.
There's something in writing called "emotional investment," and I don't want to see such a powerful tool squandered. Sirius was killed. Dumbledore was killed. Bringing them back as flesh and blood could all too easily cheapen their sacrifice. The gravity of what Harry's gone through in the last two books has been established. Taking that away would be cheap.
Not saying it can't be done. I mean, Gandalf, Spock, even Kenobi, to an extent. But that's just the point: bringing them back would be a cliche, one that is best avoided.
Probably true raf.....but after re reading the final chapter I have to wonder about the strange things dumbledor said when he drank the potion.....the hallucinations or flash backs...whatever.....It sounded like he had betrayed someone....it sounded like he was very sorry. I know this is crazy but bear with me... is there ANY chance that that wasn`t really dumbledor at all?....(I am thinking Poly juice potion)
Maybe V needed to THINK D was dead....maybe snape n d switched..(there was a lot of p potion mentioned this book)...
How did D know what kind of potion it was in the cavern?...(snape was the potion master)...Wouldn`t it be more likely that snape as a death eater would know tound out about somehe secret of v`s hiding spot for the horcrux....narcissa said that he was v`s most trusted folllower....is that how d found out about some of the horcruxes?
WHY did D freeze Harry when Draco came...why did he keep talking....wasn`t it like he was WAITING for someone....How come Snape didn`t take Draco back through the room of requirements and through the vanishing cupboard to the Burgess n Bourkes?....surely that would have been quicker than to drag draco through the school and all the way across the grounds to aperate elsewhere?
Would that have been a way to get Draco off the hook with v and enable snape to honor oath to narcissa?
Where was Fawlkes? He appeared in two books to save Harry and Dumbledor....in the last one taking the direct blast of a spell...and being reborn...what prevented him from being at D`s side this time?
Even if they didn`t switch....Just a few things that have made me wonder if there wasn`t some sort of a deliberate plan in action...and that Snape was doing what waas required
Also....why did Dumbledor fly to THAT particular tower....directly on the OTHER side of the protective curse ...where the trap had been laid....the only place in the castle that it would have been effective? Was it also so that none of the order could get through and help/interfere?
How did they know that D would fly on a broom directly there instead of just going directly into the castle from the front entrance?
Why were the death eaters there...why was the curse already in place...how did Draco know that D was already in the tower?
Could it have been a prearranged meeting place for the act that d and s wanted to stage for v`s benefit?... later to be verified by the death eaters who witnessed both Draco AND Snape being loyal to Voldemort....eliminating any suspicion of either of them, thereby enabeling them closer access to V....they may both yet have roles to play in the vanquising of Voldemort.....
All true, and JK does have a habit of making Snape look like a villain until the last moment, when we find he was a hero all along. But this is the first time she's allowed Snape to remain a villain through the end of a book.
I agree that after finishing this book, it didn't feel satisfactorily ended.
Raf, I see what you mean about emotional investment, and it being potentially squandered if either Sirius or Dumbledore return. I also wonder...what would be the point of having Sirius return (I have no hope at all that Dumbledore will)? I could understand his return if the seventh book was not going to be the last book in the series, but it seems to me that at this point, Sirius' return would be an added plot twist that would be unnecessary and even cumbersome within a plot that's going to be full enough, what with Harry having four horcruxes to find and destroy...plus the Dark Lord himself.
Rascal, the suggestion about the Polyjuice Potion doesn't make too much sense to me. You're right that Polyjuice Potion comes up at lot in the Harry Potter books (second year for Harry, Ron, Hermione; fourth year for Mad-Eye Moody; fourth year flashback with Crouch Jr. switching with his mother in Azkaban). I think to use a Polyjuice Potion AGAIN would be some real overkill, and overkill isn't JK's style. Fawkes saving someone for another time also falls into the category of overkill for me. He already healed Harry's basilisk wounds in the second book, helped Harry fight Voldemort in the fourth book, and took a direct hit for Dumbledore in the fifth book. On the other hand, JK Rowling admittedly (sadly) did not write these books with my idea of overkill in mind.
It is true that Dumbledore switching places with Snape and proceeding as they did would not fall under the category of Snape breaking the promise he made in his Unbreakable Vow because although he promised to "carry out the deed the Dark Lord has ordered Draco to perform" if Draco appeared that he would fail...Dumbledore murdering him should allieve him of his duty. However, Snape doesn't seem like a very good actor. And would he really die for Dumbledore? He may not be evil, but he's no martyr. I don't think Snape would even die willingly for the Dark Lord. Besides, I don't think Dumbledore himself would have been able to kill Severus. And the bit at the end where Dumbledore begged for Severus...it just seemed too authentic to be forged.
It's been a while since I read the book, but what do you mean when you ask why Dumbledore flew to the tower on the "other side of the protective curse [...] the only place in the castle that it would have been effective"? The reason Dumbledore took Harry to that particular entrance was because a Dark Mark had been planted there to draw them to that particular tower. My theory about why Dumbledore froze Harry is so that Harry could not try to help him and potentially die in the process. In this most recent book, Harry and Dumbledore formed a son-father relationship, and Dumbledore acted on a fatherly impulse.
But while I've thoroughly exhausted my search for loopholes regarding Dumbledore...I can't pry my mind away from Snape. In my mind, he just cannot be evil because it's too much of a betrayal, within the book and for JK to her fans. I would never accuse her of being sensationalistic, but Sirius dead, Dumbledore dead, Snape a traitor: It's too much for me! Though again, at this point, why would she do it if it weren't for real? What would be the point of having Snape's apparent betrayal end up just a deception? I've said before that I think Harry needs to be alone in the end when he faces Voldemort, and that means no Snape to help him I suppose.... Oh, someone help me! What do you all think?
Oh yeah, and Steve! I know you said it a long time ago...but when did JK say we'd find out the reason Dumbledore thought he could trust Snape implicitly?
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
11
10
22
13
Popular Days
Jul 19
18
Jul 18
10
Jul 25
8
Jul 20
8
Top Posters In This Topic
ChasUFarley 11 posts
Steve! 10 posts
WordWolf 22 posts
padfoot806 13 posts
Popular Days
Jul 19 2005
18 posts
Jul 18 2005
10 posts
Jul 25 2005
8 posts
Jul 20 2005
8 posts
WordWolf
That was CRUCIO, not the Avada Kedavra.
The difference wasn't TRAINING, it was HATRED.
He had to HATE enough to fuel it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
padfoot806
I have a question for all you guys...the Death Chamber where Sirius was killed -- do you know if that appears anywhere else, in a place unrelated to Harry Potter (i.e. Greek mythology)? Or did JK just come up with it herself?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
*cracks knuckles*
Me and the "Sirius Isnt Dead" Guild have given this a lot of reading.
The Veil was foreshadowed at Nearly-Headless Nick's Deathday party in
Book 2. (This was left out of the movie.) Harry passed thru that veil
unharmed.
There's references to a Veil in Egyptian mythology, in legends concerning
Isis, and in Greek mythology concerning Persephone.
Both are in references to death.
I'm a little hazy on my Babylonian mythology, but it overlapped the
borders of Assyria, where the mimbulus mimbletonia came from.
The Veil/Arch is a gateway to the Lands of the Dead, it seems, in JKR's
Book 5. JKR has said that there's no returning from dead once you're
properly dead. Therefore, the question is:
Does passing thru the Veil/Arch count as becoming 'properly dead'?
If the answer is "yes", then we can just shove Voldy thru THAT and he can't
come back even if he left 856 horcruxes here and searching for them
is a waste of time.
If the answer is "yes", there's another problem.
Its usage made no sense.
If Sirius was supposed to be killed suddenly and we need to accept it,
Bellatrix just would have hit him with the Avada Kedavra like Cedric
Diggory. Then we-and Harry-know exactly what happened. We know that Bella
DIDN'T hit him with it because someone hit with the AK dies as if they're
switched off (like Cedric). Sirius had time to change his facial
expression, struggle, and SPEAK before vanishing thru the Veil. So, he was
alive when he went thru. Harry saw him hit and expected to see him come out.
Harry knows what the AK looks like, and saw Sirius hit. Therefore, Sirius
wasn't hit with the AK.
If you study Book 5, a LOT of things happened the way they did to force the story
towards the MoM fight, which happened THERE so Sirius could be pushed thru the Veil.
Apparently, it HAD to happen that way, which means that we haven't seen the last of
Sirius.
When asked how Sirius might return, JKR said she could possibly answer
that. She had JUST said outright that Regulus Black was dead.
"Will we be hearing from Regulus Black?
Well, he's dead, so he's pretty quiet these days."
Lots of portals into the Lands of the Dead have existed in mythology all over
the world, and in all sorts of myths. Heroes have gone thru them to
retrieve people, as well. Hercules did, Orpheus did, there have been others.
Joseph Campbell considers the descent to the Lands of the Dead a necessary
part of The Hero's Journey.
(Then again, it can be a symbolic journey.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChasUFarley
Okay - you are right about the curse, but I did say he didn't "mean" it enough - MEAN, as in the two ways you can take it - with hate, and with meaning... plus, Bella says something about he hadn't been taught (trained) how to use it and she could really show him how it was done. - Remember there's Dark Arts training as well - and schools that specialize in it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChasUFarley
WW - How was this foreshadowed at the party... I forget?
As far as Sirus coming back... I sort of doubt it. Reason why - because of the conversation that Harry had with Nick after he lost Sirius. Harry also broke the mirror that he had been given by Sirus for communication with him - it was the same mirror that James Potter and Sirius had used to communicate - Harry had stuffed it in the back of his trunk and forgotten about it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChasUFarley
The Celtic also talk of a veil when it comes to passing on to death - so, that too, could contribute to where the author got the idea from.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
padfoot806
Thanks for answering my question. I think I might check a few books out of the library or something about that Death Chamber; it's been haunting me.
I don't think Sirius will come back, but I also can't understand why he would die in that particular way if he weren't coming back. Lupin, however, seemed very sure that Sirius was dead when Harry tried to get him from behind the veil.
Also, Dumbledore's painting appeared in the Headmaster's office. I'm wondering...would that portrait have all the knowledge Dumbledore possessed? If so, could Harry theoretically use it for advice/training, even though the real Dumbledore is dead?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
For the sake of a friend, Harry passes thru a heavy veil to interact with the dead.
(The Golden Trio are the only living people there.)
Harry returns unharmed.
Harry asked Nick about GHOSTS.
I agree with Nick-Sirius will not become a GHOST.
In Egyptian mythology-where Isis' veil is connected with dead- the star Sirius leaves
and returns.
The mirror....
According to JKR,
http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=22
"The mirror might not have helped as much as you think, but on the other hand,
will help more than you think. You'll have to read the final books to understand that!"
The mirror did NOT appear in Book 6, therefore it
"will help more than you think."
A broken mirror has come in handy in mythology, apparently, in retrieving a soul.
If not, the mirror served NO purpose in the story.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
It HAD to be a plan....why was Harry paralysed just before Draco entered?....Why did Dumbledor talk to Draco untill snape arrived? Why did Snape rush Draco away to safety?
Why didn`t they go back through the cabinent in the ror to b&b?
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
According to JKR,
http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=103
"Wizards have ways of making sure their voices are heard after their death-
think of Bertha Jorkins rising out of the Pensieve in 'Goblet of Fire', the
Sorting Hat continuing to spout the wisdom of the Founders hundreds of years after
their deaths, the ghosts walking around Hogwarts,
the portraits of dead headmasters and mistresses in Dumbledore's office,
not to mention Mrs. Black's portrait in number 12, Grimmauld Place...there are
other examples, too, of which the Marauder's Map is merely one. It is not really
Prongs writing the insult to Snape, it is as though he left a magical recording
of his voice within the map."
As I understand it, the portraits are like computer programs simulating the
former headmasters/mistresses.
I doubt they have all the KNOWLEDGE of the person, just all their PERSONALITY.
===
Lupin was sure?
I don't care.
Lupin does not work in the Department of MYSTERIES, where they STUDY the
Veil/Arch. They STUDY it because THEY don't understand it, and THEY don't know
everything about it either (otherwise it would no longer be STUDIED.)
The only Unspeakable in the Order of the Phoenix was Bode, and he was killed
before Sirius was, so he could not give us an answer. Outside the Dept of
Mysteries, only Voldy was said to know Death magic. So, Lupin would not know,
Dumbledore would not know.
Dumbledore is supposed to know just about everything, but he has made more than
a few mistakes.
Book 1. All the teachers are trustworthy, including Quirrell.
Book 2. Lockheart is competent.
Book 3. Pettigrew's been dead for a dozen years, killed by Sirius Black.
Book 4. New professor is constantly vigilant.
Book 5. No comment.
So, what the characters "know" is not guaranteed to be true.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChasUFarley
I know the account you're referring to, but are you certain that is the same veil? I know you're talking about Nearly Headless Nick's Deathday party on Halloween, where Harry, Ron, and Hermonie are the only "live ones!" there.... Could that veil, in fact, be a symbolic one?
Also, I know that Harry was talking to Nick about Sirius as a qhost... but still, from his conversation with him, I had the impression that Nick seemed to think Sirius had, "moved on".
By the way, I think that the portraits do have the memories/knowledge that they had in life, as Dumbledore would be heard talking with them (consulting, getting counsel, whatever) in his office. They had to have been able to carry more than just their personalities or essence of the person they were a painting of....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I haven't read the book or this thread yet, but to be on the safe side, I think every post should have the spoiler warning on top, just in case anyone clicks on the most recent post and doesn't realize this is a spoiler thread. I expect to be joining this conversation soon.
Raf
Link to comment
Share on other sites
padfoot806
I began by clicking the link WordWolf generously offered, made my way through several different websites...and ended with the conclusion that Sirius is not returning.
From what I've gleaned off of the various websites, it appears JK killed Sirius in the manner that she did on purpose. She wanted him to die unexpectedly and...not on a whim, exactly, but...I'm not too good with words. She killed him in the manner she did to show how sudden and arbitrary death can seem. To bring him back would be to tell kids that when a person close to them dies, there's a chance he or she could return, and that's obviously not true.
Furthermore, JK stated that when she began the books, she promised herself that no one she killed would be coming back to life. I tend to think that apparent death, at least for the purposes of these books, denotes actual death.
I think this logic also applies to Dumbledore...in addition to the obvious fact that he was buried at the end of the book.
I do still wonder if Dumbledore knew what was going to happen to him. And even if Dumbledore knew...did Snape know Dumbledore knew?
In essence...Can Snape please not be evil??
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Who said it was the SAME VEIL?
I said it FORESHADOWED Book 5.
That veil was physical, the connection is symbolic.
Nick and the other characters think Sirius "moved on."
They also had the same impression of Peter Pettigrew for 12 years.
Might they be mistaken yet again?
I think they may have SOME knowledge, but not MOST of a person's knowledge.
It is possible for someone to give advice and evaluate based on their own
personality and character, without any access to experience or extensive knowledge
on a subject. If you can find one place a portrait told Dumbledore some obscure
piece of information, I shall concede the issue. Until then...no.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Most websites are run by people who think that. However, each seems to have had
errors at different points. For example, Mugglenet had (and still does, unless they
changed it) the excerpt JKR posted from Book 6, and says it is a description of the
Half-Blood Prince. I don't think it's much of a spoiler to say Scrimgeour isn't the
HBP. So, their opinion is not binding on JKR. (Neither is mine.)
To have done so with the Avada Kedavra-like Cedric Diggory-would have been MUCH more
effective at this and left no ambiguity. It would have had a LOT more pathos.
Or, it's yet another time that appearances were deceiving.
Death being definitive is the case for James and Lily, Cedric Diggory, and the
fatalities in Book 6. It was NOT definitive, so far, for Voldy and Wormtail...
because they weren't actually killed off.
Please use the direct quote. JKR has previously said that rumours were often very
false because they mixed what she said, what someone thought she said, and something
unrelated. Thus, third-hand reports are unreliable.
JKR said that she established that if you are
"properly dead"
in the story, then you're dead.
The question, therefore, is whether or not the Veil/Arch counts as a "proper death".
Some say no, many say yes.
Please note that Voldemort and Wormtail were considered apparently dead when Harry was
1 year old. One's body was destroyed, the other supposedly was destroyed except for a
finger. Barty Crouch Jr was even BURIED and he was alive.
I can run a list of the things confirming that one. We had everything but a coroner's
report.
All the events in Book 6 can be interpreted as Snape being good OR evil.
The event that indicates his allegiance is at the end of Book 5.
Snape is the one that sends the OotP to the MoM.
If not for that, Voldy would have gotten his hands on the Prophecy AND Harry.
All Snape would have had to do was sit on his hands, and things would have suited
Voldemort's plans.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChasUFarley
quote:
Nick and the other characters think Sirius "moved on."
They also had the same impression of Peter Pettigrew for 12 years.
Might they be mistaken yet again?
-----------------------------------
I wasn't aware that Nick gave comment about Pettigrew being dead. There were comments made by several of the professors and Madam Roserta (sp?) in Hogsmead, there was discussion in the Shack when Lupin, Sirius, the "golden trio", Snape, etc. all have their confrontation, but I don't recall any comments by Nick. The reason why I think Nick is so relevent in this is because he is dead. He already knows what the "other side" is sort of like, although, in his own words, he chose an exsistance similar to what his was in life rather than to go on (again, this is paraphrased from his conversation with Harry when Harry first lost Sirius.) I had the impression that he wasn't "brave enough" (my words) to go to the "next level" but couldn't comment on it or explain it to Harry.
Back to the portraits having knowledge: Since Kreacher went back to Mrs. Black to be alone with her - taking joy in the fact that Sirius was dead - I would add tnat to my points of why I think they carry the knowledge that they had in "life" to their "painting". Additionally, Mrs. Black knew that there were "mudbloods" "traitors" and other less-than-desirables (in her opinion) in her house and wanted them OUT. Since she was limited to the confines of her painting, so it seems, she was unable to take any action on getting them out and could only make their lives hell with her screaming every chance she got.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Overall, very well done.
I am of the belief that both Dumbledore and Sirius are actually dead, and won't be back. In fact, I'll be a bit disappointed if they do come back. Snape's betrayal seems entirely within character, and I hope it's not changed in book 7.
There's something in writing called "emotional investment," and I don't want to see such a powerful tool squandered. Sirius was killed. Dumbledore was killed. Bringing them back as flesh and blood could all too easily cheapen their sacrifice. The gravity of what Harry's gone through in the last two books has been established. Taking that away would be cheap.
Not saying it can't be done. I mean, Gandalf, Spock, even Kenobi, to an extent. But that's just the point: bringing them back would be a cliche, one that is best avoided.
Oh, and marry Ginny, for goodness' sake.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Probably true raf.....but after re reading the final chapter I have to wonder about the strange things dumbledor said when he drank the potion.....the hallucinations or flash backs...whatever.....It sounded like he had betrayed someone....it sounded like he was very sorry. I know this is crazy but bear with me... is there ANY chance that that wasn`t really dumbledor at all?....(I am thinking Poly juice potion)
Maybe V needed to THINK D was dead....maybe snape n d switched..(there was a lot of p potion mentioned this book)...
How did D know what kind of potion it was in the cavern?...(snape was the potion master)...Wouldn`t it be more likely that snape as a death eater would know tound out about somehe secret of v`s hiding spot for the horcrux....narcissa said that he was v`s most trusted folllower....is that how d found out about some of the horcruxes?
WHY did D freeze Harry when Draco came...why did he keep talking....wasn`t it like he was WAITING for someone....How come Snape didn`t take Draco back through the room of requirements and through the vanishing cupboard to the Burgess n Bourkes?....surely that would have been quicker than to drag draco through the school and all the way across the grounds to aperate elsewhere?
Would that have been a way to get Draco off the hook with v and enable snape to honor oath to narcissa?
Where was Fawlkes? He appeared in two books to save Harry and Dumbledor....in the last one taking the direct blast of a spell...and being reborn...what prevented him from being at D`s side this time?
Even if they didn`t switch....Just a few things that have made me wonder if there wasn`t some sort of a deliberate plan in action...and that Snape was doing what waas required
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Also....why did Dumbledor fly to THAT particular tower....directly on the OTHER side of the protective curse ...where the trap had been laid....the only place in the castle that it would have been effective? Was it also so that none of the order could get through and help/interfere?
How did they know that D would fly on a broom directly there instead of just going directly into the castle from the front entrance?
Why were the death eaters there...why was the curse already in place...how did Draco know that D was already in the tower?
Could it have been a prearranged meeting place for the act that d and s wanted to stage for v`s benefit?... later to be verified by the death eaters who witnessed both Draco AND Snape being loyal to Voldemort....eliminating any suspicion of either of them, thereby enabeling them closer access to V....they may both yet have roles to play in the vanquising of Voldemort.....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
All true, and JK does have a habit of making Snape look like a villain until the last moment, when we find he was a hero all along. But this is the first time she's allowed Snape to remain a villain through the end of a book.
Which proves nothing, of course.
:)-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve!
JKRowling has also stated that books 6 and 7 can almost be considered 2 halves of one book.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I got that feeling. This is the first time I've finished a Potter book that didn't feel finished.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
padfoot806
I agree that after finishing this book, it didn't feel satisfactorily ended.
Raf, I see what you mean about emotional investment, and it being potentially squandered if either Sirius or Dumbledore return. I also wonder...what would be the point of having Sirius return (I have no hope at all that Dumbledore will)? I could understand his return if the seventh book was not going to be the last book in the series, but it seems to me that at this point, Sirius' return would be an added plot twist that would be unnecessary and even cumbersome within a plot that's going to be full enough, what with Harry having four horcruxes to find and destroy...plus the Dark Lord himself.
Rascal, the suggestion about the Polyjuice Potion doesn't make too much sense to me. You're right that Polyjuice Potion comes up at lot in the Harry Potter books (second year for Harry, Ron, Hermione; fourth year for Mad-Eye Moody; fourth year flashback with Crouch Jr. switching with his mother in Azkaban). I think to use a Polyjuice Potion AGAIN would be some real overkill, and overkill isn't JK's style. Fawkes saving someone for another time also falls into the category of overkill for me. He already healed Harry's basilisk wounds in the second book, helped Harry fight Voldemort in the fourth book, and took a direct hit for Dumbledore in the fifth book. On the other hand, JK Rowling admittedly (sadly) did not write these books with my idea of overkill in mind.
It is true that Dumbledore switching places with Snape and proceeding as they did would not fall under the category of Snape breaking the promise he made in his Unbreakable Vow because although he promised to "carry out the deed the Dark Lord has ordered Draco to perform" if Draco appeared that he would fail...Dumbledore murdering him should allieve him of his duty. However, Snape doesn't seem like a very good actor. And would he really die for Dumbledore? He may not be evil, but he's no martyr. I don't think Snape would even die willingly for the Dark Lord. Besides, I don't think Dumbledore himself would have been able to kill Severus. And the bit at the end where Dumbledore begged for Severus...it just seemed too authentic to be forged.
It's been a while since I read the book, but what do you mean when you ask why Dumbledore flew to the tower on the "other side of the protective curse [...] the only place in the castle that it would have been effective"? The reason Dumbledore took Harry to that particular entrance was because a Dark Mark had been planted there to draw them to that particular tower. My theory about why Dumbledore froze Harry is so that Harry could not try to help him and potentially die in the process. In this most recent book, Harry and Dumbledore formed a son-father relationship, and Dumbledore acted on a fatherly impulse.
But while I've thoroughly exhausted my search for loopholes regarding Dumbledore...I can't pry my mind away from Snape. In my mind, he just cannot be evil because it's too much of a betrayal, within the book and for JK to her fans. I would never accuse her of being sensationalistic, but Sirius dead, Dumbledore dead, Snape a traitor: It's too much for me! Though again, at this point, why would she do it if it weren't for real? What would be the point of having Snape's apparent betrayal end up just a deception? I've said before that I think Harry needs to be alone in the end when he faces Voldemort, and that means no Snape to help him I suppose.... Oh, someone help me! What do you all think?
Oh yeah, and Steve! I know you said it a long time ago...but when did JK say we'd find out the reason Dumbledore thought he could trust Snape implicitly?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
padfoot806
Oh, and Raf...Harry and Ginny...it was one of my worst fears realized.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.