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: << < 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 ... > >> Reader Comments: (Page 37) OK - hold on! How do we know Harry DIDN'T intervene?
(I personally love this theory! Thanks Glorfindel!)
How do we know that Hermione wasn't there too? What about the time turners, surely they can't have all been destroyed. I have a hunch that Fred & George have gotten hold of one (Krum gets the snitch but Ireland wins?)
Maybe in order for Harry to truely understand what has happened he must actually go back and witness it. Posted by tracy on January 25, 2007 07:43 AM
|
To Glorfindel and Tracy
First of all I just love the ideas of a "Time-Turner" and before "OotP" came out I always thought: no problem, Harry be able to "snatch" somehow a Time-Turner one of these days - To go back like you suggest to Godric's Hollow and change the course of the action!
Though we should not forget what Hermione said to Harry in PoA Quote:
"Professor McGonagall told me what awful things have happened when wizards have meddled with time...loads of them ended up ing their past or future selves by mistake!"
I still wonder if there is a hidden meaning behind that sentence, apart from stopping Harry catching Scabbers!
After the battle in the Ministry of Magic, Hermione informs Harry (us) that all the Time-Turner's had been destroyed that night. We have learned to understand that when Hermione says something it is always true...except when she gets mad..!
During reading GoF I was also so sure that Fred and George had got hold of a Time-Turner..but here is what Jo had to say on that subject:
Fred and George did not have foreknowledge of the Quidditch World Cup outcome; they simply gambled on a hunch and won. They “were prepared to risk everything.”
Like Tracy, I still hope that Harry, while visiting Godric's Hollow, find out the truth what exactly happened on that Halloween's night in 1981. My guess is that he may meet someone there,either a "Ghost" or a "Memory" waiting to be released by the "boy who lived" Posted by Mistral from Switzerland on January 25, 2007 09:03 AM
I don't think Harry went back with a time turner. In the third book, he didn't know what a time turner was until Hermione used it, so he couldn't have gone back before his third year at Hogwarts, and after that, in OOTP, the time turners got smashed. I think this theory is really unlikely. We (the readers) would have known if Harry went back in time because the book is kind of written from Harry's point of view. We see everything that Harry sees. Another point is, like someone else said, Harry couldn't have sat back and watched his parents . He would have jumped up and tried to save them. Posted by Dumbledore's Fan on January 25, 2007 09:20 AM
Dumbledore's Fan, But we wouldn't know yet if Harry does go back. Harry was just a baby and wouldn't have a clue if he had seen himself as a 17 year old, and current Harry hasn't made such a journey yet...make sense? Posted by tracy on January 25, 2007 10:41 AM
Mistral, Hmmm...I haven't heard that comment from Jo...bummer, I thought that was going somewhere. Posted by tracy on January 25, 2007 10:49 AM
Jeez, do you always assume every unclear object to be a Horcrux? The cloak is just an invisibility cloak. And maybe dumbledore did not get given it. Just because the note says so, he might have written that to shorten it and/or not give himself away. Posted by Micool from Brisbane, Queensland on January 25, 2007 12:13 PM
Glorfindel, Tracy, Mistral,
O.K., you've got me thinking about traveling back to the scene of the crime. So it's Halloween, 1981 and Dumbledore finds out Voldemort ed Harry's parents, then met his match while trying to little baby Harry.
I think Dumbledore would want to go back in time to see exactly what transpired. Also I'm sure he would have access to a time turner. Don't forget all the instruments in his office and the fact that he has a twelve handed watch [perfect for time travel?]. He would have the prudence to not tamper with the past and would make himself invisible.
Now wouldn't a memory like this be worthy for storage in a vile ready for the pensieve? Posted by Mikey from New Jersey on January 25, 2007 3:01 PM
Mikey from New Jersey,
I like the pensieve theory but wouldn't dumbledore have already showed him the memory if he had it, i see no reason for him to hold it back unless he did so that harry would t have had to see his parents ed. Unless he doesn t have the memory someone else does, like pertunia has a memory phial under the creaky floorboard. (only a cheeky guess) Posted by glorfindel from aberdeen uk on January 26, 2007 04:31 AM
|
Dumbledore was a great Legilimens. Could he have extracted Harry's memory of the event? Just a thought. I have no idea whether or not it would be possible to extract a memory from a 15 month old baby. Anyone here with a bit of clinical psychology? Children that age can certainly remember things and respond to quite sophisticated - for them - language. I can recall ripping the house apart looking for a shoe one day and finally said aloud; "Where is that dratted shoe?" My elder child was about 13 months old and trotted off and fetched it for me! (At that point I knew I was in trouble.) My point is that the kid knew what I was talking about and obviously recalled where the shoe was. So why not Harry's memory? We know it's buried deep inside him because it came out during the Dementor attacks in PoA.
Also, I think Dumbledore would hesitate to show Harry that memory, simply because he loves him and would not want to cause him that much pain. Posted by Elizabeth from Australia on January 26, 2007 07:55 AM
Glorfindel,
Dumbledore has a history of holding back information to Harry (J.K has a history of holding back information to us). We really don't know what happened that night; who was there. Maybe there's something that happened that Dumbledore wouldn't want Harry to know.
Also who would want to show a teenager a memory of how his parents were ed.
A memory phial (not vile, thanks) under the creaky floor board...I love it Posted by Mikey from New Jersey on January 26, 2007 08:10 AM
Mikey, Glorfindel, there would be an obvious reason for Dumbledore not to show anything to Harry: how could Harry accept that Dumbledore was there and didn't do anything to save his parents? Harry would be awfully angry at Dumbledore. Posted by herve from strasbourg on January 26, 2007 09:54 AM
|
Mikey
Your superb comments about Dumbledore's silvery instruments and his twelve handed watch, let me have one of my more brilliant inspirations;-)
I am sure that most of you know Jo Website www.jkrowling.com and that on her desk is a ordinary “watch“. Now before the Site opens properly, that watch doesn’t have a pointer and any numbers!
Until today I never paid any attention to that, but now the thought struck me – what if this “watch” has something to do with Dumbledore’s ability, to make himself invisible or practical disappearances…?
It says in OotP Chapter Twenty-Seven the “Centaur and the Sneak:”
“Dumbledore released Harry, raised his hand and grasped the phoenix’s long golden tail. There was a flash of fire and the pair of them were gone.” “Where is he yelled Fudge, pushing himself up from the floor.” “Well he can’t have disappeared, cried Umbridge. “You can’t do it from inside this school –“
A soft touch on his watch – and Dumbledore was able to either stay in the room and watch what was going on – or walk comfortably out of his own office!
Was that how Dumbledore and his Phoenix vanished in OotP when Minister Fudge wanted him arrested in his office? Would it not be so like Jo, to give us a skilfully open clue, right before our eyes! Posted by Mistral from Switzerland on January 26, 2007 10:56 AM
Pages: << < 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 ... > >>
| 
