document.write(flat('daeD'));! - Page 28">
Beyond Hogwarts

<Latest Articles
Comments Index
Save Last On

Search Beyond Hogwarts:

Reference Desk:
Beyond Hogwarts FAQ
Wizard to Muggle Currency Converter
Harry Potter Spelling Reference

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 article

Pages:  <<  <  18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 ...  >  >>

Reader Comments: (Page 28)

When Jo is annoyed by a question, she says "No comment". When she is positive, then we have to trust her. But as stated in this forum, there are many ways to see Dumbledore again: memories, portraits, time-turning.

Posted by herve from strasbourg on March 6, 2007 08:50 AM

I think that Dumbledore become a ghost to help Harry, because a ghost is , it cannot again. In the 5th book it says that only people that are very unhappy when they become ghosts...that potion made Dumbledore VERY unhappy. Maybe he wanted that to happen so he could assist Harry without the chance that he could happy and no ghost or maybe he just be a ghost no questions asked...but who knows? also...Dumledore cant ! But if he did...MAYBE maybe he could give Harry motivation to be strong when fighting Voldemort

Posted by HPobsessed on March 6, 2007 7:46 PM

ghosts are "afraid of so they choose to not completely , or move on." Dumbledore was not afraid of and he never has been.

Posted by Dvin from Glendale, CA on March 7, 2007 4:14 PM

I agree with most of people who say that Harry must now go on by himself. The saga looks like a quest, in which the novice has to face and danger, in order to climb the steps of initiation. In each of the first four books, Harry has to face . He shows unselfishness in PS (refusing to see glory and power in the stone), loyalty in CoS (Fawkes goes for him), sense of justice in PoA ("you can save more than one innocent"), strength of in GoF (in front of Voldemort, driving back the curse). In HBP, he has to understand humility (being useless to Dumbledore in the climactic scene). Maybe, he is now initiated, able to decide on his own.

Dumbledore isn't going to lead him anymore. Moreover, Harry have to decide on his own if he faces Voldemort, and assume all the consequences related to the fall of Voldemort.

Besides that, I still think Dumbledore be present and visible, but in a totally different shape (we won't recognize him), during the whole book 7, and appear at the end to help Harry finish the work. He is and won't be living again (that would be too much like Gandalf), but time-turning provides another way of seeing Dumbledore.

Posted by herve from strasbourg on March 8, 2007 09:41 AM

Very well stated, I like your description of Harry's character traits, and his journey to become a hero. Combined, they show a picture of someone who could look at absolute power and walk away, unlike Voldemort.

What if Dumbledore bequeathed to Harry some of his possessions -- the Pensieve, the watch (of unknown uses), and other objects necessary for fighting Voldemort. I think Dumbledore's legacy play a role in book 7, but I don't think he himself .

Posted by Patty from Quincy,Massachusetts on March 9, 2007 05:59 AM

i just had a thought about if dumbledore had fell off the tower and hit the floor he would have obviously d, but in the 3rd book when harry falls off his broom dumbledore uses a speel to slow him down and eventually stop him form hitting the ground, so i guess dumbledore may have used this as he fell.

just a thought.

Posted by David on March 9, 2007 06:54 AM

The first time I read the book, I thought Snape had actually ed Dumbledore and I was just in shock. But by the fourth time I read the scene; the idea came to me, "He *didn't* him; Dumbledore's still alive somewhere!"
I have a strong belief that Dumbledore's still alive and that Snape's still on the Light Side. Why do I think this?

I know from the books and the movies that the ing Curse *doesn't* throw its victim backwards; it just hits a victim and they drop . But "Expelliarmus" throws the target backwards off their feet! In "Chamber Of Secrets" Snape cast Expelliarmus on Lockhart and blasted him off his feet, throwing him backwards.
In "Goblet of Fire," Mad-Eye Moody says to his class, "Avada Kedavra's a spell that needs a powerful bit of magic behind it. You could all get your wands out now, point them at me and say the words and I doubt I'd get so much as a nosebleed." You have to *mean* the ing Curse to be able to use it. While it looks like Snape cast the ing Curse here, it's obvious that he cast Expelliarmus instead!

The "revulsion and hatred" on Snape's face isn't because he hates Dumbledore; he hates what Dumbledore's asking him to do.

There's no doubt in my mind that Dumbledore's still alive somewhere and in hiding. Snape's still working for the Light. He's in hiding with the Eaters, true, but he's working for the Light.

Posted by Kelly Crutcher from Melbourne, Florida on March 9, 2007 2:34 PM

David, I would agree with you, but it does say that in HBP that when Harry finally sees Dumbledore's body, it appears broken...still could be a fake...

Posted by Jennie from Beachwood NJ on March 9, 2007 4:19 PM

Broken bones? Madame Pomfrey can mend broken bones in a second! She can even grow them completely back, if there's some Skele-Grow (tm) around...

Posted by Dave Haber from Los Angeles, CA on March 9, 2007 4:24 PM

So Dave wait Im confused. Your saying that... Madam Pomfrey regrew Dumbledores broken bones in a second? Is that it? Cause if thats the case Id like to bring up my brilliant Phoenix Theory...

Posted by Ashley from Missouri on March 9, 2007 4:40 PM

No, that's not what I said. I said, she COULD mend them in a second, we know that because she says so when Harry loses his bones (thanks to Lockhart) in Chamber of Secrets. So, the fact that Dumbledore is laying there at the base of the tower appearing to have a "broken body" does not necessarily mean he is .

Posted by Dave Haber from Los Angeles, CA on March 9, 2007 4:46 PM

OOOOH! My bad Dave i didn't know you were making a point there. But you basically if you break every bone in your body, despite what Madam Pomfrey can do.
And I think when it said Dumbledore had a "broken body" that he just looked broken because there was no life in him.
but then at his when his tomb burst into flames...

Posted by Ashley from Missouri on March 9, 2007 6:07 PM

Pages:  <<  <  18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 ...  >  >>

Latest Discussions | Comments | The Septology | Harry's World | Harry Potter Movies | FAQ is not affiliated with or approved by
Scholastic Books, Bloomsbury, Warner Bros., or J.K. Rowling
Original Content Copyright © 2006-2009 David Haber, All Rights Reserved