Search Beyond Hogwarts:
by David Haber
On August 2, 2006, at the second night of the Harry, Carrie, and Garp event at Radio City Music Hall in New York City, J.K. Rowling says Dumbledore is . But is that the whole story? How does what J.K. has said relate to all of the clues and theories on this site?
> Read the full article
Pages: << < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ... > >>
Reader Comments: (Page 2)
I was very disappointed jk choose not to tell us the ironclad reason why Dumbledore
trusts Snape, o well more for book 7. I think the writers in this site have it right and that Snape really is still good, everything from the conversation Hagrid overheard to Snape saving Harry�s life seems to point to it. Is Dumbledore ? Well I think yes and no. He did in the tower but has a horcruxes somewhere(maybe phoenix). I forget the exact quote, but I remember Dumbledore telling Harry he knew for a fact that no wizard had ever split his soul in more than 2. My question is how could he know this unless he himself had done it. I find it hard to believe Dumbledore would sacrifice himself, unless he knew of a way to still communicate with Harry(the portrait or maybe even something to do with the 2 way mirror Sirius gave Harry). I mean Dumbledore�s supposed to be the all good, hes supposed to be the only one voldemort ever feared, how could he do the wizarding world this disservice and leave everything for Harry to do.
Posted by Iago de Venus on September 10, 2006 10:24 PM
Fern and I both think that Dumbley dore is alive and kicking!
I also think that the idea of the two way mirror of Sirius' play a very big part in the next book. It seems a litle pointless to mention in such an un detailed way.
We also agree with the idea of AD being a animagus phoenix, and I love the idea of Fawkes being a Horcrux!
Furthermore, in relation to the Dobby quote (I'd throw myself off the topmost tower bit.) it is odd, (if memory serves) that Dobby is not mentioned after Dumbledore's "."
Perhaps Dobby was transformed into Dumbledore by a transfiguration spell and then disapparated as he fell. Before you all start yelling that one cannot apparate or dis apparate in the grounds of Hogwarts, you remember that in book 2, Dobby "cracks" away from the Hospital Wing as Madame Pomfrey approaches.
I hope our thoughts help!
Long live AD! (If he's alive of course...)
Also, we were shocked to see pictures of Hermione and Malfoy getting all close on Google. It would be a great twist though if they loved each other after all (although poor old ron would be broken hearted!)
THank you! Bye x
Posted by Tim and Fern from Hastings! on September 11, 2006 09:01 AM
To the previous poster, Gandalf in fact, did after his battle with the Balrog. That information can be found in the Silmarillion.
JKR has also stated in that interview that she wants us to get through the 5 stages of grief. I'd be a little surprised if she purposely lied to her aunce (to adults, that might be possible, but there were several children present, and not being honest with them goes against several themes in her books.)
Posted by Michael from LA, CA on September 11, 2006 10:03 AM
Well, JK said two things in her interview:
1. Dumbledore is .
2. Snape is good.
How do these to things fit together?
The answer is simple, if you remember, what JK said about hidden clues in movie 3.
What was in movie 3?
- Pettigrew faked his and continued living as rat.
If Dumbledore tried to use the animagus trick, he would not be not . If he came back with Fawkes' help, he did the Gandalf. So faking this way isn't it.
Dumbledore live several decades and fall ill and weak. In about 2050, he say: I'll soon anyway, so it doesn't matter, if I put my to good use in the past.
He haad 50 years to make or have made a new timeturner. He returnes to Harry's sixth year and makes the ruse with Snape to fake the of his present body to Voldemort.
But today, Dumbledore is still secretely alive and join Harry in Book 7.
Anyway, Harry, Ron and Hermine have no other chance to success than help from Dumbledore or themselves from the future. At present, they're simply to weak to overcome VOldemort's guardwork for his other horcruxes or duel with him, look at Harry's battles at the ends of the two last books.
Posted by Andre Ay from Leipzig, Germany on September 11, 2006 11:02 AM
I don't think JK said Snape is good. I believe what she said was that she agreed, everything hinges upon whether Snape is good or not.
Posted by Dave Haber from Los Angeles, CA on September 11, 2006 11:08 AM
I'm very happy to see others suggesting a Dumbledore switch (with Aberforth) and actually analyzing Jo's comments, because they (and their context) are very fishy. I wish this website had gone the other direction and reasserted that Albus Dumbledore still is not , but it wasn't to be. The loyal 'lifers' be proven right when book 7 arrives!
Posted by hyogoetophile from Kent, OH on September 11, 2006 11:39 AM
About Dumbledore's :
I have a theory: In all first 6 books, Dumbledore was always one of those that never lost a single battle and always protected Harry. Maybe JK just wants to make Harry do everything himself in book 7, so it won't be a total "Dumbledore saves the day"-book series.
I believe that his body is , but that there is a way to communicate with his soul (the portrait, his Phoenix, a magical item that makes Harry to some kind of World of Souls?)
But on the other hand, it's rather odd JK is giving all clues to the readers. I think she wants us to be confused so book seven is a must-read. Commercial plot? Or just trying to make the book series go out with a bang? (if the HP series end after book 7)
And now slightly off-topic (it DOES have some thoughts on Snape!):
One other thing I sonder about: what happen to Malfoy? Will he get absorbed into Voldemort's minion collection? Or Snape take him to a place (when things get too dangerous) where he is safe until they can undertake action to destroy Voldemort?
Just some thoughts...
Posted by Aerendyll on September 13, 2006 05:54 AM
We agree with the whole RAB business, in thinking that it is Regulus.
Also, the bit commented on by Lunar Lovegood, suggests that there is more behind tyhe veil and we hope that this is elaborated on in the next book.
If you see Harry Potter cards that you can play with and collect, do buy them because it be our invention!
Long Live Dumbledore!
Posted by Tim and Fern again! from Hastings (Chav City : ( on September 13, 2006 06:09 AM
I think quite a few people have overlooked a major point!
Dumbledore's patronus was a Phoenix, was it not? And as such, don't phoenixes rise from the ashes?
So JK would be right in saying "he is " but she didn't say anything about him not coming back from the ! (There may be no _spell_ to bring back the , but Fawkes was born again!)
Posted by Spoons from Gold Coast, Australia on September 13, 2006 06:53 AM
"I, too, didn't want to believe that Dumbledore was . My friend kept asking me after I read the book, "Was Dobby still following Draco Malfoy as Harry told him and Kreacher to do?" She kept reminding me how Dobby had said he would throw himself off the tower if he failed in his mission."
Wow! What if Snape really did cast the ing Curse and Dobby (still tracking Draco) did a Expellimarus charm to move Dumbledore out of the way? That would explain a lot.
Posted by Saint Cad from Los Angeles, CA on September 13, 2006 1:43 PM
Hey, on the subject of Aberforth, in book 4 pg 454 when Hagrid is found out to be 1/2 giant and he wants to resign Dumbledore says this "An excellent point" said Professor Dumbledore. "My own brother, Aberforth, was prosecuted for practicing inappropriate charms on a goat. It was all over the papers, but did Aberforth hide? No, he did not! He held his head high and went about his business as usual! Of course, I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE HE CAN READ, SO THAT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN BRAVERY..."
This means Aberforth (if he did in Albus' place) didn't realize the horcrux was fake since he couldnt read it. My theory is probably just dumb, but i think it is possible.
Posted by Mark on September 14, 2006 2:45 PM
One thing that we must not forget about the craft of writing, is that one doesn't introduce a whole new character, name it, describe it, unless it serves a purpose.
Posted by blondeknoise from Vancouver, WA on September 14, 2006 4:54 PM
Pages: << < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ... > >>