Search Beyond Hogwarts:
by Jan-Marie Spanard
How does a wizard learn about the existence and properties of Horcruxes? Who knows what they are, how to make them, what they can do? What wizard would make a Horcrux? Under what circumstances? And for what reasons? And why are they so evil? Hermione is working very hard to answer these questions. As Hogwarts virtual library search-engine, she is coming up empty. But Tom Riddle did it, somehow.
> 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 11)
Ok, I have a question. If Dumbledore really split his soul, it would certainly reflect on his physical appearance, wouldn't it? Yes, I've read the comment that claims that his nose being crooked is proof, but i don't think a change like that would manifest itself in something as seemingly benign as a crooked nose. I think it would be something more ghastly - a stretching of the skin, a blurring of the features. Not to the extent that Voldemort changed, but I'm sure there would have been at least something noticeable that someone would had noticed. How did Dumbledore intend to mask that change? Voldemort simply stayed out of the limelight until he was ready. But Dumbledore was always a highly public figure...he even headed the Wizengamot. Also, Harry saw Dumbledore at close proximity in different lights tons of times. Wouldn't he have ever noticed if there was anything in the slightest bit unnatural about Dumbledore?
Also, I understand if Dumbledore would have had to Whats-His-Name to 'defeat' him, but the idea that he would use this ing to further his goals ( however noble they may be) does sound rather perverted to me. Its one thing to be pragmatic but quite another to use a 's impact on your soul to cold-bloodedly rip it into pieces. I think Dumbledore is above that.
But I have to admit that using Fawkes as a Horcrux does seem like a rather tempting idea
Posted by Joyeeta from New Delhi/Singapore on December 3, 2006 02:08 AM
I would like to add some different perspective about immortality. The dark version is the Horcrux which actually symbolizes that you get immortal through humilating your own soul. That is also symbolized through the Ouroboros which is the snake which feeds on itself(eats its tail).
Dumbledore always emphasized how important loyality is in his kind of magic and that is symbolized by the phoenix. So maybe Dumbledore/Harry's saying that he always be at Hogwarts as long somebody is loyal to him is the real key. It's the exact opposite to the dark way to immortality. You get immortal by the loyalty/love of others and in Dumbledore's case not only in people's memory but physical.
If you remember the scene where the Heads of the Houses and Harry discussed the burial of Dumbledore, Harry asked him to be buried at Hogwarts which has not happened before. In my opinion this loyality to Dumbledore sealed the magic of Dumbledore's rebirth.
You shouldn't also forget when Dumbledore said in the first book to McGonnagal that he would trust Hagrid with his life. Hagrid was the one which handled Dumbledore's body. If all these signs don't mean something it would be a break to the patterns Rowling used in her book writings.
Posted by Ralph from Germany on December 3, 2006 8:29 PM
In every HP book,people have believed in what Dumbledore has believed.So when Dumbledore's story has come to an apparent end,i am sure that Snape is on the bright side.And if Snape is on the bright side then Dumbledore is surely not .So there are only two ways for this to be true,
1)He had created a Horcrux
2)The person ed was not Dumbledore
3)The curse was not Avada Kedavra and the covered body in the was not a body at all.
The second possibility is not convincing,unless the "Dumbledore" ed was someone who was under Imperius curse and had a swig of Polyjuice Potion.
So for Dumbledore to have a Horcrux there are two possibilities,
a)He ed Grindelwald in his famous defeat and concealed a Horcrux in Fawkes or Gryffindor's sword.(If anyone has some argument over it,read my third comment on Page.No.9)
b)As we all we all know Dumbledore has destroyed some of Riddle's Horcruxes,that is an indirect form of ing,it is the most likely way to create a Horcrux without actually ing someone.
The "other curse" theory does not seems to me as "realiable" as J.K.Rowling said that Dumbledore is for sure in an interview,she surely not lie,so Dumbledore is '' for sure,still i know he come back by some means.
Maybe the moment he return he wil not be "less human" like Tom Riddle as he has actually not ed anyone.
A part of me is saying that Dumbledore is as J.K.Rowling mentioned Dumbledore's brother Aberforth in HP 5th(Moody tells Potter in Order's HQ),that is not a extra information,most likely he would be as good and powerfull as Dumbledore and come to the aid now when Dumbledore is .
Or J.K.Rowling pull her out some time later out of the arch,Sirius's is too doubted,as all we know that he was hit by a "Jet of Light",& not a green Jet of Light(Avada Kedavra is green),maybe he was just stunned and fell through the veil into the other world.
Posted by Akshat from Jaipur,India on December 4, 2006 06:06 AM
ok, if dumbledore was godric gryffindor, it could explain why he is more attatched to hogwarts than any other headmaster ever has been; he helped create it! it could also explain why he knows so much about it. also why he had so much power at hogwarts before he was even headmaster. dumbledore might not actually be fawkes, but just like him in the fact that he can't , like a pheonix can't. wow. i just thought of something: when harry takes his o.w.l.s, the tester says he tested dumbledore himself when he went through the tests. imagine how old he must be! ok, that was sorta random. when mcgonnagal says dumbledore's to noble to use voldemort's powers, it could be he's not using them because he has used them before, and knows how bad they can be. if dumbledore had used time turners to get information, would he have to wait for however long he had gone back in time, or can you turn the time turners the other way and go into the future, or go back to your original time faster? that would suck: going back five years, and having to relive those five years, only in hiding! hmmm......
Posted by angie from nampa, idaho on December 4, 2006 11:16 AM
What's most interesting about the interchange between Dumbledore and McGonagall in Chapter One, Book One, is that McGonagall says that Dumbledore is too noble to use the dark arts and Dumbledore... changes the subject. He jokes about not having blushed so much since Madame Pomfrey admired bis new ear muffs.
I think this is a diversion. I think Dumbledore has used some bits of the Dark Magic that he knows, but doesn't want to talk about it.
Another thought about that conversation with McGonagall. McGonagall has, at this point, been a teacher at Hogwarts for decades. Why does Dumbledore need to tell her, his second in command at Hogwarts -- who must know him well by now, that he would trust Hagrid with his life. Why wouldn't McGonagall know this by now? It's a small school, staff-wise, and she should easily have picked up on this over the years.
Is Dumbledore saying this for McGonagall's information, or does Dumbledore say this for our (the readers') benefit? If McGonagall would already know this, it is said for our benefit. And if it is for our benefit, why is it important that we know that Dumbledore would trust Hargid with his life?
Posted by Jan-Marie from New York on December 4, 2006 4:38 PM
I dont know why are you all just trying to proove that Dumbledore ed Grindelwald and made a Horcrux when he has destroyed Tom Riddle's Horcruxes,that is for sure an indirect form of ing and still it is not something bad as he has destroyed some intensely dark magical objects.
Posted by Akshat from Jaipur,India on December 5, 2006 03:09 AM
DD has a reputation for trusting people who others do not, or trusting more than perhaps he should...
I think he has just grown accostom to defending his trust and most likely just makes the comment in an off hand manner....or it could be his way of just ending or redirecting the conversation..
as if to say,"I've made up my mind and not even you can talk me out of it, my dear."
Posted by Kevin from Wisconsin on December 5, 2006 05:47 AM
Kevin - We are told that Dumbledore trusts others more than he should, but do we know this to be true? Who has Dumbledore trusted who wasn't trustworthy? Which wizard, witch or muggle did Dumbledore trust wrongly?
Not Tom Riddle. Dumbledore gave him a second chance, but he never trusted him. Both Professor Dumbledore (Transfiguration teacher at the time) and Tom Riddle admitted that Dumbledore never really trusted Tom.
What about Snape? But Dumbledore gave Snape a second chance, just like he did Tom Riddle. And perhaps Snape did what Tom Riddle did not and proved himself trustworthy through that new opportunity to do so. We don't know yet if Snape is someone who should have been trusted, although most readers on this site fall into the camp of trusting Snape on their own, with or without Dumbledore's trusting him.
Observation of what Dumbldedore does and says -- not what others say about him -- shows that he gives others a second chance. But no where does he show blind trust in someone who is not trustworthy.
An interesting aspect of this is Dumbeldore's instruction to Harry about sharing information on their search for the Horcruxes. Who does Dumbledore tell about this? Perhaps Snape. Maybe Hagrid? But certainly not Minerva McGonagall or any other Hogwarts teachers. No one from the Ministry knows. No one in the Order of the Phoenix knows. D suggets that Harry tell "Miss Granger and Mr Weasley" because they have earned Harry's trust and Harry needs their friendship.
Everyone says Dumbledore trusts too much. But I don't see any evidence of that in any of the six books so far. I think it's a red herring.
Posted by Jan-Marie from New York on December 5, 2006 12:49 PM
I said he had the reputation for trusting to freely....
I didn't say he deserved it....;-}
Posted by Kevin from Wisconsin on December 5, 2006 1:20 PM
A D did not Grindelwald. He defeated him, but as he said to Voldemort in the OotP, "we both know that there are other ways of destroying a man, Tom". And Voldemort also knows "You do not seek to me?... above such brutality are you?" Why would D Grindelwald and not Voldemort? Dumbledore is so powerfull he does not need to use the dark arts. If he would, why not Voldemort. I am affraid he is . But not without reason, it is not the horcrux. D clearly sacrificed his life to safe Malfoy. As we know with Harry and his mother, this leaves a protection. And D saved Malfoys life. Now together with wormtail there are allready two eaters that have bond to Harry or D. The dark arts are never used by D, he has allways trusted in love.
Posted by Bryan Goodfellow from Germany on December 6, 2006 3:42 PM
Dumbledore's physical appearance wouldn't change because he made a horcrux. Making a horcrux isn't evil, ing someone is the evil part. Dumbledore's appearance didn't change because he ed for the sake of the wizarding world, not just for the sake of ing, someone like Voldemort did.
Posted by Neil from Fort Dodge, IA on December 6, 2006 6:23 PM
Okay, this is out of the track here but I thought I should say it. I think the day that DD 'seemingly' d, the Bloody Baron had some role up in the Astronomy tower.
I don't remember exactly which page but after the Felix episode with Sluggy, the Fat Lady tells Harry the password changed at midnight. Nearly Headless Nick comes along and tells Harry he's off to complain to the Baron about Peeves and that DD is back. Harry asks where and Nick tells him that "he's up groaning and clanking up on the Astronomy tower. Its a favorite pastime of his."
I think the Avada Kedavra went through the Baron. Maybe like Casper he can make himself invisible. Since he was already , he couldn't again but DD was blasted back coz it made a significant impact but did not him. Deja Vu. Chamber of secrets?
Posted by Aditi from Nagpur, India on December 6, 2006 11:26 PM
Pages: << < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ... > >>