Why did Dumbledore have James' cloak?
by David Haber
On a new post on her official web site, J.K. Rowling admitted she made a mistake in New York when she was asked, what question have you never been asked that you ought to have been asked? She now says the question should have been, Why did Dumbledore have James' invisibility cloak at the time of James' death, given that Dumbledore could make himself invisible without a cloak?
> Read the full articlePages: << < 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 ... > >> Reader Comments: (Page 35) I don't think that Petunia could have been there when Voldemort stepped in, for a lot of good reasons, including the fact the house was Unplottable.
But she might have been called by Voldemort after Lily was ed, if it served Voldemort's purpose for later on. In that case, she would have been asked to perform an Unbreakable Vow, including not telling anyone about what she saw. That would explain her frightened attitude (the way she doesn't want to speak about wizardry, how she is scared when she hears that Voldemort is back). Posted by herve from strasbourg on January 18, 2007 01:14 AM
so Dudley finds out he's a wizard, realizes Harry's ok, and winds up wuppin' Crab and Goyle.
I know...not going to happen.. but if would be fun;-) Posted by Kevin from Wisconsin on January 18, 2007 05:51 AM
You mentioned that the invisiability cloak may be a James horucrux, however, when Harry and Voldy fight in GoF, James comes out of the wand, along with other people that are certainly .:-( Posted by Ruairi on January 18, 2007 08:31 AM
Dudley could be a wizard that never got called to Hogwarts. The way he eats too much would deprive him from his magical powers. But I can't figure out why this would be useful for Petunia to feed him up for this reason.
So up to now, I considered this was part of the caricatural way of living at the Dursley's. Same thing for the thirty something gifts he gets at every opportunity. But there might be something behind. Posted by herve from strasbourg on January 18, 2007 1:37 PM
If overeating deprives one of their magical powers, than Professor Slughorn would be powerless too... Posted by Dave Haber from Los Angeles, CA on January 18, 2007 2:21 PM
I really don't think that the invisibilbity cloak is a horcrux of James, or DD or anyone.
It is possible that it was given to DD so that certain interactions w/ Petunia could take place. Petunia may have been sent to retreive something from Lily or James before that fatal night.
She may in fact be hiding something from her husband (and us) under that creaky stair. Maybe a Horcrux? Or maybe a portkey to Godric Hollow? to Hogwarts? Posted by Heather from NJ on January 18, 2007 8:06 PM
|
OK.. I do like the idea that the cloak might be a relic of Godric's. There must be something extraordinarily important about that piece of cloth.
James is hiding his family for their very lives. Parents would do ANYthing to keep their children safe.. spouses too. Sure, they were under Fidelius.. but I think I would have kept a cloak like that. Hide the wife and baby under it.. a quick 'silencio' to the child,.. and there would be a safer way to try to escape.
For James to give up a tool like that in the face of mortal danger, means that the cloak was used to hide someone more important than his family.. and hence he 'left it with Dumbledore'. Now, I have been really having trouble with this. Who is more important than your own wife and child?
OR.. the cloak itself is more valuable than the safety of the Chosen One. There must have been a valid reason for the cloak to have been kept seperate from Harry. So if it was a Founder's relic.. it might make sense that it ought to be kept in a seperate, secure location. Did they have intelligence reports even then, to indicate that Tom was "collecting" Founder's relics?
Probably no.. it isn't Godric's. We already have his sword in Dumbledore's office. Likely, if it is a Founder Relic at all, it'd be Rowena's... as we don't have anything of hers listed at all.
If the cloak was not used to spirit someone away.. who was as important, if not more important than Harry... (here come the twin theories).. then it stands to reason that the cloak itself must be inherently valuable, in a way that made James want to keep it away from his family.. regardless of its uses in a time of crisis. Posted by karlii on January 18, 2007 10:21 PM
karlii, I do think that it isn't goderics's cloak. But I just think it is an invisibility cloak and not from any of the founders. And what you said about harry and lilly hiding under it, I don't think that'll work. Maybe Voldemort can see trough it as I think dumbledore can too. Or he would sense it. And even if he didn't notice it, they have to be on the run always. Eventually Voldemort find them. Posted by Clauda from Netherlands on January 19, 2007 09:36 AM
I do not agree with this information.
I think Godric or James aren't evil enough to make a horcrux, and if the cloak was that important, Dumbledore wouldn't have trusted an eleven-year-old wizard to keep it Posted by cecilia from argentina on January 19, 2007 11:03 PM
the cloak can't be godric's relic because Dumbledore told Harry (in HBP) that the only relic left by Godric was his sword and if James had wanted to keep it safe because it was a valuable relic, Dumbledore would know what it was and wouldn't have told Harry something which wasn't true. Posted by cecilia from argentina on January 19, 2007 11:16 PM
|
You know, there IS another Gryffindor relic apart from the sword. And the darned thing has been right under our noses - the Sorting Hat. Its song in GoF has the following lines:
"Yet how to pick the worthy ones
When they[the founders] were and gone?
'Twas Gryffindor that found the way,
He whipped me off his head
The founders put some brains in me
So I could choose instead!"
[Square brackets are my interpolation in case people wondered who "they" might be. Blame my years of academia]
So the hat belonged to Gryffindor and it has already responded to Harry's need by bringing the sword in CoS.
And it was Fawkes who actually brought the Sorting Hat to Harry. I'm starting a hare here. One of my sons is itching to have a atoo. One of those lovely sulphur crested ones. Only thing is; they can live to about 80! You provide for them in your . It strikes me that having a phoenix might be an even bigger responsibility. Who is responsible for Fawkes now? Can they be owned as such? And WHO was it before Dumbledore? Could Fawkes have some connection with Gryffindor?Posted by Elizabeth from Australia on January 20, 2007 05:37 AM
Elizabeth
While I am still agonizing what were the relics of each of the Founders - you come up with this awesome answer!
Mega-cool, as we say in Switzerland. How could we have forgotten the Sorting Hat! This is inasmuch thrilling for my coming comment on Horcruxes;-) Posted by Mistral from Switzerland on January 20, 2007 10:00 AM
Pages: << < 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 ... > >>
| 
