|
Search Beyond Hogwarts:
|
|
|
|
Dumbledore Is Not !
by David Haber
Well... maybe not. At least, I don't think he is. Snape's betrayal and the of Dumbledore caught me completely by surprise. Dumbledore was , and on top of that, Snape had done it. And all of the clues point to two possibilities, that Dumbledore's not really , or at the very least, that Snape's not really a Eater, and he Dumbledore because Dumbledore ordered him to, as part of a grand plan.
> Read the full articlePages: << < 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ... > >> Reader Comments: (Page 13) Mistral, I guess what you're trying to say is DD thinks Voldemort is already destroyed as he has made Horcruxes. He mentions somewhere in the HBP that LV was in such a hurry to mutilate his own soul that he did not understand the power of a whole, untarnished soul.
Maybe DD was trying to convey to Voldemort that Harry one day is bound to destroy him as his soul is pure and innocent. That's why LV possessed Harry and asked DD to them. Like DD said, LV hoped that he would destroy Harry as well in hopes of ing LV.
Am I making sense or does it sound weird? Posted by Aditi from Nagpur, India on November 19, 2006 11:49 AM
What if dumbledore was an animagus.
That is he could transform himself into a phoenix.
He might have escaped during the ,when his body caught fire.
Read the last chapter of HBP. It is mentioned that harry saw a phoenix fly joyfully into the blue. Posted by Shreyas from Secunderabad,Andhra Pradesh,India on November 19, 2006 10:49 PM
DD IS NOT
As you know there are many different ideas that poeple have come up with about DD not being . The one that i belive is true (i have read this entire site, took me a long time) is that snape did not use avada kedavra on DD as in the other books when someone is ed by AK they do not fly backwards they fall to the ground in a pile. I belive that snape had said a different spell under his breath (presumibly expelliarmus) because in COS when snape and lockhart duel snape uses expelliarnus and lochart flies backwards in the same way DD did.
Also there may have been a mix of people's ideas such as the one about DD making someone else take some polyjuice potion and snape expelliarmused him?
Oh well ive typed a bit too much
PS: You guys should get a medal or something for this absoulutly fasinating site Posted by Tom from Australia on November 22, 2006 01:22 AM
No one every saw DD's body after it was laying on the rocks. Hagrid was carrying a body that was covered in a shrowd.
Does anyone find it odd that the greatest wizard of all time who does not have any "serious" bodily harm not have a public-like viewing? Posted by Michael from Philadelphia, PA on November 22, 2006 06:45 AM
Dumbledore would never make a Horcrux because he's not afraid of . Posted by Josh on November 22, 2006 11:36 AM
Hmm, I dont know if anone's mentioned this, but I was interested by Snape telling Harry he needed to improve legilmency or whatever it is. Perhaps he really is double doubling?! Posted by Ben from Coventry on November 24, 2006 10:11 PM
|
I've read about 2/3 of these comments, and I think you are all brilliant! (As is the website author). There are mysteries, unexplained, and mysteriese that have been explained in the books. I have no idea what Rowling pull out of her magic hat, but I think the following:
1) Love is the key. This shows up in all the books. I was so impressed in the GOF, when Harry's first question is about the Diggorys.
2) I don't know, but it seems to me weird that Harry is a horcrux. He is the one who is free, because of his ability to love, though he had never been given any, of Voldemort's curses. It is true he has a strange connection with Voldemore, but I think it is different than being a horcrux. They both had deprived childhoods, but Riddle learned to hate while Harry learned to love. And also:
3) Forgive me if someone else brought it up here, but I read 14 pages of comments and didn't see any reference to the fact that both Voldemort and Harry had a phoenix feather in their wands, and it was from the same phoenix, and that phoenix was Fawlkes.
4) I have finally accepted that "Dumbledore" is , and I don't think he has stayed somehow alive via a horcrux. It's against his principles, and it's against the morals expressed in the book.
5) That doesn't mean he won't be back in some form, even if he doesn't "do a Gandalf." Dumbledore lives in all those who are faithful to him; we were told that. Harry is faithful to him. We know that. this is true in our muggle lives too. is not the worst thing (Dumbledore said that too). The desire to defeat is evil, it's Voldemort's plan.
6)In the past, in fact in more than one instance, when Harry has faced Voldemort alone, supporters from his past appeared and helped him. In our own lives, it's like our memories of what our loved ones would do can save us. this stuff about the magic of love is JK Rowling's main theme.
7)Rowling has systematically taken away everyone who might help Harry emotionally, which is not unusual in "coming of age" novels. The main characters are usually orphans, and come across some who help them, and some who hurt them. The main character has to face the evil alone. Harry has done this a multitude of times.
8) The people Harry helps or befriends are always the key to his success. Dobby, Moaning Myrtle, Hermione, Ron, etc.
9) The ending of Half-Blood Prince leaves Snape ambiguous. If you read it one way, Snape is betraying Harry. If you read it another way, he saves him. His nasty words re "you can't control your mind yet" or whatever can be read as a warning. He seems to keep Harry from being ed by out-of-control Eaters.
10) The Phoenix is key, because it resurrects. But Dumbledore is not a phoenix. STill, there's a thread that runs through these books that nothing really s.
I don't know what Rowling intends. I do look forward to it. Posted by Jane from San Francisco, ca on November 25, 2006 8:06 PM
This site is fantastic and I must admit I was sad when I got to the end of all the comments... All of the theories are very intriguing and I love just hearing some of them.
One of the bigger questions (or reasons for proving Dumbledore is alive I should say) that I speculate about is why did Dumbledore chose to freeze Harry instead of blocking Draco's disarming spell? Harry was already under the invisibility cloak and if Dumbledore hadn't frozen him, they both could've handled Draco and perhaps many of the eaters. If I were Harry, I would be wondering this myself... Harry could've been invisible and silently used the Levicorpus spell on everyone and still no one except Dumbledore would no he was there at all...
Ugh... How frustrating! On to book 7! Posted by Anthony from United States on November 26, 2006 7:48 PM
I have my own doubts about Dumbledore using the freezing charm on harry. It could have been any one else. Harry neither looked at Malfoy nor Dumbledore, while he was backing away from the door. He only assumed that dumbledore had immobilised him. Why would dumbledore do such a thing?
Harry could have escaped easily for help, after malfoy's unexpected entry.
I think there was someone else on the tower that nite. (but was he an enemy or friend?) Posted by Shreyas.G.S. from Secunderabad,AP,India. on November 27, 2006 02:32 AM
sorry if someone has already said this, but there was alot of comments to get through i gave up on page 6 hehe.
but yes, i feel that dumbledore is ...i mean its tragic and all but lets face it, if dumbledore is always alive then harry always have a place to hide, and never confront voldemort, dumbledore's is crucial to the development of the text...think about it, harry cant spend all of his next year doing the same things, with dumbledores it brings about the fact that something needs to be done and that it cant be put off any longer...
even so, i wont lie, im hopping theres some conspiracy and dumbledores just having a nap or something... Posted by Duggan from Wangaratta on November 27, 2006 05:42 AM
I understand what Duggan is trying to say. It does make sense... But at the same time, are we to believe that all these clues that Rowling left behind are unintentional? I think not! I would be very disappointed if all these clues ended up being just a coincidence and I think Rowling would of thought about that. No, there is definetly something going on... Posted by Anthony from United States on November 27, 2006 11:20 AM
|
One of our local TV stations has just started re-playing the movies, and in COS, when Harry confronts Tom Riddle, Fawkes arrives with the sorting hat. Later, in DD's office, he tells Harry that only someone extremely loyal to him could call Fawkes to his side, and that Harry's identity is sure, as only a true Gryffindor could have pulled the sword from the hat...
Perhaps, by Harry's loyalty, he be able to summon Dumbledore to his side, alive OR , due to his continuing and unswerving loyalty, even after DD's apparent ? (For instance, after the , on the lake's edge, and the MoM is still trying to finagle details of the confrontatation at the ministry out of Harry, but he is still "Dumbledore's man through and through")
I am a little worried though that with Hermione and Ron sticking with Harry after he leaves Hogwarts, that the next book could turn into an Enid Blyton type "Fabulous 4" episode. I truely hope not...
But I digress - Harry is I fear, is certain to in the last book, as we have been told often enough that one defeat the other, and it seems most unlikely that JKR would allow Voldemort to win out over her (and our) hero. Harry, does, after all, have the only weapon that can defeat Voldermort - love. Posted by Juli from Croydon, Australia on November 28, 2006 6:20 PM
Pages: << < 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ... > >>
|
