Harry Potter #7: (SPOILERS APLENTY): Now that you've read it...

Cafe Society
781

[QUOTE=sciurophobic]

  1. Was it just pure luck that Harry happened to be nearby when Snape died so that he could get Snape’s memories and learn he had to die?
    [/quote]

That argument supposes Harry wouldn’t have gone off to fight Voldemort. Dumbledore had every reason to suppose that Harry would — he primed him for that purpose, actually. I think Dumbledore assumed Harry would have taken care of all the Horcruxes first, then faced Voldemort. It was in Harry’s nature to do things thoroughly; Dumbledore comments on that in the very first book.

If it’s true that the Elder Wand says that “you can’t be defeated” … well, how does one interpret that? Either, “it is not possible to defeat you by any means because the Wand will save you,” or “it is unwise to allow yourself to be defeated lest the Wand desert you.”

Chances are, it’s probably just a very powerful wand without the power attributed to it.

782

[QUOTE=Quartz]
He didn’t. He just managed to replicate the sounds. Kind of like singers in a chorus singing a foreign-language song - they don’t actually learn to speak the language, just the meaning of and how to pronounce the words they sing. IIRC Ron only needed to manage one word, ‘Open’.
[/QUOTE]

I am not sure I buy that. In the previous books, Parseltongue is described by other students as just “hissing noise” and there are few instances when Ron has heard Parseltongue enough to recognize which word means what. If anyone can just pick up the language, then what is all that hoo ha about Slytherin’s descendants being able to speak it?

783

I can say “Klatuu verada nicto.” That doesn’t mean I can speak an alien tongue.

Tris

784

[QUOTE=Fish]
That argument supposes Harry wouldn’t have gone off to fight Voldemort. Dumbledore had every reason to suppose that Harry would — he primed him for that purpose, actually. I think Dumbledore assumed Harry would have taken care of all the Horcruxes first, then faced Voldemort. It was in Harry’s nature to do things thoroughly; Dumbledore comments on that in the very first book.

[/QUOTE]

Of course he would have fought Voldemort; that’s the problem. Without Snape’s memory Harry wouldn’t have known he was the 8th Horcrux and had to willingly die. He might have died anyway, but would have gone down fighting, thus not giving his friends the protection his mother gave him.

785

[QUOTE=sciurophobic]
Of course he would have fought Voldemort; that’s the problem. Without Snape’s memory Harry wouldn’t have known he was the 8th Horcrux and had to willingly die. He might have died anyway, but would have gone down fighting, thus not giving his friends the protection his mother gave him.
[/QUOTE]

That was an added bonus. I don’t think Dumbledore had planned that.

Originally the plan seemed to be:

  1. Harry destroys the horcruxes.
  2. Harry fights Voldemort and dies.
  3. Someone else finishes Voldemort off.

Once Dumbledore found out about the Great Blood Switcheroo in Book Four, the plan became:

  1. Harry destroys the horcruxes.
  2. Harry fights Voldemort and dies.
  3. Harry comes back and finishes Voldemort off.

The mother-protection was just an added bonus that likely saved a lot of lives in that last battle in Hogwarts. Harry would have killed Voldemort anyway.

786

I do love the Harry Potter books, but all of them are full of blind, dumb luck. Half of what we learn we learn because Harry just happens to overhear some important conversations. I could go my entire life and never overhear an important conversation that concerns me but Harry’s heard dozens of them over the course of the books.

787

Drat! Missed the edit window.

What I said in my previous post notwithstanding, I do agree that it was strangely fortuitous that Harry was there when Snape died. It wasn’t necessary for Harry to kill Voldemort, I don’t think (except that Harry had to know that Voldemort had to hit him with an AK, I suppose Harry would have defended himself otherwise). It was, however, necessary for the reader to understand Snape’s motivations and his allegiance. So yeah, strangely lucky, but not necessarily crucial to Voldemort’s downfall.

788

So, do we Selected Few win cookies for being right about Snape, or what?

789

Select few? I’d say the fandom was split 50-50 on whether Snape was good.

790

[QUOTE=sciurophobic]
Without Snape’s memory Harry wouldn’t have known he was the 8th Horcrux and had to willingly die. He might have died anyway, but would have gone down fighting, thus not giving his friends the protection his mother gave him.
[/QUOTE]

Why must that necessarily have been part of the plan?

Harry goes to kill Voldemort; Voldemort aims a killing curse at Harry, as that is his somewhat predictable style; Voldemort destroys his own Horcrux but both he and Harry subsequently survive. That puts Harry first in line for taking down Voldemort, though by that time, anybody could have done it.

791

It seems that I was pretty much the only one that thought it would make a better story if Harry just died.

My thoughts:

Why don’t they just disapparate out of dangerous situations? They can disapparate while jumping from a window at Godric’s Hollow, but can’t seem to manage to do it when they are stuck at the Lovegoods’?

I do like the fact that they don’t have a clue what they are doing when looking for the Horcruxes, and everywhere they go is essentially a disaster.

Definitely called it that Snape was good-and figured out pretty quickly that the doe had to be his petronus.

Hated the nebulous afterlife thing. My preference would have been for Harry to sacrifice himself as a Horcrux and then have Voldy essentially kill himself by killing Harry because the initial spell at Godric’s Hallow had made them each Horcruxes of each other. Then Voldie could have survived only as Nagini, and Neville would be able to save the day by killing her. For an added bonus, bring back Trelawney for an addendum to the prophecy indicating that there were really two parts and that Neville was the one prophecied to kill Voldy. (I should really be the one writing this :P)

I predicted that the spider venom would be used to destroy Horcruxes and that Slughorn would have to sacrifice one of his treasures for the cause.

I also thought that Ariana would turn out to be a werewolf. I thought that she was bitten as a child, killed the muggles on a full moon and her father took the rap. Then she killed her mother, and Dumbledore killed her to protect the family and the world and that is why they wouldn’t let her go to Hogwarts, why she was kept hidden, and why Dumbledore went to such lengths to get Lupin admitted as a student.

I still don’t understand wizard wardrobes. If they wear robes, then why did Fleur wear a wedding dress and why did Hermione wear a dress to the wedding?

I thought the Deathly Hallows stuff seemed like an afterthought and pretty worthless.

792

[QUOTE=psychobunny]
It seems that I was pretty much the only one that thought it would make a better story if Harry just died.
[/quote]

FWIW, I agree with you on this. I went into this book hoping that JKR wouldn’t pull the old “Hero-dies-but-is-resurrected” cliche but sure enough, there it was.

Before I give this book to any hypothetical children of mine, I think that I’ll remove all the chapters from “King’s Cross” on. Sure, the ending would be a bit abrupt, but the series is from Harry’s POV, after all.

They couldn’t just disapparate because then the Death Eaters would have thought that Mr. Lovegood was making it up when he said that Harry Potter was at his home, and he and Luna would have suffered for that.

793

just watch chamber of secrets and you can learn to say “open” in parceltongue. according to the book ron had to try out a few different hisses and haaaaaahs and heeeeeeeees to get the right combo.

speaking it was very rare and had to have a connection to slytherin. not many left to learn parceltongue from. the gaunts and voldy didn’t leave “learn snake in 3 easy lessons” tapes around. the ones who could speak it kept to themselves.

luck is an important factor in life. timing is everything. just one of those things. people do all sorts of things to bring luck and blessings into their lives. why would the wizarding world be any different.

794

[QUOTE=Rysto]
Select few? I’d say the fandom was split 50-50 on whether Snape was good.
[/QUOTE]

Perhaps I missed a few Potter threads. :rolleyes:

795

[QUOTE=Rysto]
FWIW, I agree with you on this. I went into this book hoping that JKR wouldn’t pull the old “Hero-dies-but-is-resurrected” cliche but sure enough, there it was.
[/QUOTE]
But then, wouldn’t “our hero dies a noble death” also be a cliche? As someone said in one of our earlier threads on the topic, any fate for Harry that you can think of has probably be done dozens of times already.
I’m in the camp that believes that it would have been logical for Harry to remain dead, from what we know of the wizard world and what the author herself has said. But I also have argued before that I never believed J.K. Rowling would kill Harry Potter. And personally I’m happy that the poor guy got to survive and enjoy life after all he went through.

796

[QUOTE=oft wears hats]
Originally the plan seemed to be:

  1. Harry destroys the horcruxes.
  2. Harry fights Voldemort and dies.
  3. Someone else finishes Voldemort off.
    [/QUOTE]
    I know Dumbledore can seem like a cold-hearted S.O.B., but I sincerely hope that his original plan (before the end of Goblet of Fire, when Albus learns that Voldemort uses Harry’s blood to reincorporate) was more like this:
    [ol]
    [li]I (Albus) find and destory all the horcruxes[/li][li]I find a clever way to destroy the fragment of Voldemort’s soul inside Harry without killing Harry[/li][*]I capture Voldemort myself and lock him up the cell next to Grindelwald, waiting for Tom Riddle to die of old age, and proving once and for all that prophecies don’t necessarily need to come true if you decide to take your destiny in your own hands.[/ol]
797

[QUOTE=Arnold Winkelried]
I know Dumbledore can seem like a cold-hearted S.O.B., but I sincerely hope that his original plan (before the end of Goblet of Fire, when Albus learns that Voldemort uses Harry’s blood to reincorporate) was more like this:
[ol]
[li]I (Albus) find and destory all the horcruxes[/li][li]I find a clever way to destroy the fragment of Voldemort’s soul inside Harry without killing Harry[/li][li]I capture Voldemort myself and lock him up the cell next to Grindelwald, waiting for Tom Riddle to die of old age, and proving once and for all that prophecies don’t necessarily need to come true if you decide to take your destiny in your own hands.[/ol][/li][/QUOTE]

Dumbledore is nothing if not practical. I maintain that once he knew all the factors as they were, his original plan (sadly) involved Harry’s sacrifice. I’m sure he busted his ass looking for alternatives, but all the while remained aware that Harry was still going to have to sacrifice himself if none could be found.

798

[QUOTE=Arnold Winkelried]
But then, wouldn’t “our hero dies a noble death” also be a cliche? As someone said in one of our earlier threads on the topic, any fate for Harry that you can think of has probably be done dozens of times already.
I’m in the camp that believes that it would have been logical for Harry to remain dead, from what we know of the wizard world and what the author herself has said. But I also have argued before that I never believed J.K. Rowling would kill Harry Potter. And personally I’m happy that the poor guy got to survive and enjoy life after all he went through.
[/QUOTE]

I would submit that Harry didn’t die in the forest at all, any more than Voldemort did. He came close, certainly, and had a vision while he was unconscious. Two things:

Harry: “Then…I’m dead, too?”
“Ah,” said Dumbledore, smiling still more broadly. “That is the question, isn’t it? On the whole, dear boy, I think not.”

and

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?”

The killing curse failed, if only because it was shared between Harry and Voldemort. The backlash knocked them both out, even to death’s door, but didn’t kill either of them. In this state, Harry had a vision of a limbo of sorts–maybe he was literally at death’s door, and Dumbledore managed to linger at the threshold long enough for one last talk. Another possibility is that at some point while they were diving into one pool of thought/memory-juice after another, Dumbledore managed to slip a sort of recording of his thoughts and personality into Harry’s head, where it would lie dormant until Harry was in just such a state. Either way, Harry chose to fight on, and woke up at about the same time as Voldemort.

My own interpretation is that Rowling stuck to her guns: No one came back from the dead. Not Harry, who never died. Not Dumbledore, who was quite an articulate memory–rather like the portraits. Not the shades of Lily, James, Sirius, and Remus, who were “part of [Harry]” and “acted like Patronuses to him”, harkening back to Dumbledore’s words in PoA, “You think the dead we loved ever truly leave us?..Your father is alive in you, Harry…”

799

Well, Balance, yes, I agree with you that it is clear from the books that Harry did not actually die, he was at a “way station” between life and death, with the choice to continue (and find peace) or go back and face more pain but have a chance to win the final battle.

Still, it seems awfully close to dying and coming back.

800

I just read the book today so I’m still catching up on this thread. Forgive me if this has already been discussed but did anybody ever remember to take the stinging curse off of Harry? I’ve been through that section and the section at Bill & Fleurs’ but I can’t find any mention of his face and hair being put back to normal. So was he uggo for the rest of his days?