I thought that, too. And Rowling sort of underlines it with the “Dumbledore’s man” comment.
Dumbledore was completely startled, and really didn’t know what was going to be coming through the door. He might’ve been too sick and injured to perform powerful magic. For all he knew, and army of Death Eaters was coming – probably not just Draco.
And Harry’s a loose cannon. He’d probably defend Dumbledore to the death. Dumbledore could either have taken his chances fighting whatever was coming, or protect Harry. By the time he’d finished protecting Harry, he’d lost his wand.
A very Dumbledore thing to do, choosing Harry’s protection over his own safety.
The first thing that came to mind was Patrick Stewart at the Stonecutters’ meeting telling Homer “You are the Chosen One, whom the ancients prophesied would lead us to glory!” Just as Homer was wiping his mouth with the scroll.
I was a little disappointed that neither Fudge, Umbridge, or Scrimgeour would apologize to Harry for their or the Ministry’s actions. More realistic grownups would have, before asking him humbly to let them work together. Harry should now swallow his pride and let them too, but with no misunderstandings as to who’s in charge.
What an ending! It resets the entire situation for JKR to take HP7 in any direction she wants to. No school next year, but I’d still bet on the Final Battle being in Hogwarts, maybe in the headmaster’s office with Dumbledore’s portrait helping Harry out - and, yes, with Godric Gryffindor’s sword being the last Horcrux (never mind that Harry used it to kill the Basilisk).
Oh, and I’m picturing Alan Rickman reading this book and thinking “Holy shit! These Snape scenes totally rawk! And I get to play 'em!” Same for Michael Gambon and the Dumbledore scenes.
Since it seems fairly clear that Dumbledore couldn’t magically detect the Horcruxes it might be possible that there’s been one in Hogwarts all along. I wouldn’t be surprised for it to be something that’s either in all the books or just something that was a throwaway mention in the first book.
I’d bet on Ron and Hermione being forced to go after the final Horcrux while Harry is left to hold back Voldemort. Of course it could work the other way with the kids and other assorted good guys left to hold back the Death Eaters while Harry searches for the final Horcrux.
But I reckon you’re right about the finale being in the school either way.
BTW, did anyone else think it odd that, after so much attention was paid to teaching the youngsters how to throw spells silently, Harry didn’t even try it in the tower scene? Sure, he was under a paralysis hex, but wouldn’t that be the perfect time to actually *use * that technique undetected? Either he wasn’t holding his wand, or the kid just froze. Either way, it’s going to prey on him forever.
Well remember, after the tower scene and Harry is chasing Snape, he’s still yelling out his spells verbally, and Snape keeps trying to tell him to practice the silent spells. He either wasn’t very good at it yet or was too much in a panic to think of it.
While I’m replying, I have another question. Apparently the ministry can send letters almost instantaneously, like whenever Harry performs magic in the Dursley’s. Especially in OotP, letters are coming in by owl at almost the pace of a conversation. Yet a lot of times Harry has to wait several days for a response from Sirius. Are there special teleporting owls or what?
Well, Gryffindor’s sword has been seen since book two.
Sure, it doesn’t fit the pattern, but wouldnt Voldy just loooove the thought of having one of those Horcruxes stashed in Dumbledore’s office? It couldn’t be safer and it would be right under his greatest enemy’s nose…
Does anybody think that when Dumbledore was drinking the potion he was somehow living Snape’s memories (Snape’s remorse over turning over the Potters)? It would make sense for Snape to have made the potion somehow.
Even if Snape does kill Voldemort or prove to be one of the good guys, he still has a lot of ‘splainin’ to do for his treatment of Potter. He clearly detested Harry. While Harry’s father may have been a total jerk, you’d think he’d have a soft spot for him because he also belonged to Lily.
What’s the deal with the portraits? Do they contain the souls of the people they portray? They are able to interact with others, keep up with current events, think, etc., but they’re not horcruxes.
I think it’s because a spell includes two pieces: the word or phrase, and the movement of the wand. Based on all the descriptions of how spells are cast, the spell won’t work if you don’t move the wand correctly. Look at all the times in Charms and Transfigurations that Hermione has had to correct Harry or Ron’s wand movement. If this is true, then someone who is paralyzed can move their wand, and therefore can’t perform magic.
I thought the same thing. Even back in book 2, when they introduced dueling, non-verbal spells were never mentioned, although they would obviously be extremely useful in a duel.
I think this depends a lot on the known address of the recipient. It’s fast if you know exactly where the recipient is, like when the Ministry and Dumbledore send owls to the Dursley house. In book 4, Sirius is wandering around a bit, so it probably takes Hedwig a while to find him. In book 5, owls aren’t used much at all because they are too easy to track.
While I realize that it’s part of the charm, a lot of the wizarding world doesn’t really seem to be able to take advantage of 20th (much less 21st) century conveniences. Owls are better than snail mail, obviously, but you would think that they would have something at least as useful as a phone, too. (The mirrors seem to be rare, so they don’t really count.) After all, wouldn’t wizards want to have an actual conversation with someone at a long distance, sometimes, without having to kneel in a fireplace?
And every time the books talk about Hermione spending hours looking through books in the library, I wonder why there isn’t a wizarding equivalent of Google…
Here’s my understanding of portraits and ghosts (which are tangentially related), as pieced together from the books, interviews, and a bit of interpolation:
It is possible for magical individuals to create an imprint of themselves on places or things, sort of etching it into the place or object with magical energy.
The easiest way is through the wizardly version of photography, which seems to only capture a simplistic version of the person’s nature and feelings (I don’t recall ever hearing a photographic portrait speak, for instance), and which requires the addition of a special potion to unlock.
Portraits are more detailed, possibly because of the increased exposure time, or possibly because a deliberate effort is made to capture the essence of the person. They have the memories of the person, and a good portion of their personality. As a result, they can speak and act with some independence. They’re not the same as the real person, however. Left to themselves, they tend to return to particular habits, topics, and catchphrases, and not do anything terribly original. There is no portion of a soul in a typical magical portrait.
The extreme version of this is a ghost. For whatever reason, at the moment of death, some magical individuals are unwilling to let go of this world. It’s a fairly common idea in fantasy that death (especially violent death) releases a great deal of magical energy. A dying wizard can, either with such a surge of energy or with his own power, etch a sufficiently detailed image of himself into a place that his soul can inhabit the image and cause it to move and speak when the body is gone. Thus, ghosts actually are the people they appear to be, while portraits are merely simulacra.
It’d have to be a pretty sneaky potion if it included his innermost feelings of guilt and horror but not the fact that he was a double agent, especially given that the only person who would be intended to drink it and live would be Lord V himself when he came back for his Horcrux (for some reason).
I haven’t read this whole thread, but two things I gotta get out:
[ul][li]That scene between Dumbledore and Malfoy, where Dumbledore is simply telling Malfoy, “If you were going to kill me, you would have done it already…” Incredible. Perfect. Don’t know if this has been posted to the thread yet, butThe elixer that Dumbledore drank is one of Voldemort’s Horcruxes. That’s why Snape had to kill Dumbledore. [/ul][/li]Much more later, after I read the rest of the thread.
Snape is AD and AD is Snape in book 6-agreed upon by them to (unbreakable vow?) so as to fool Voldy and protect HP and the wizarding world. That is why “Snape” is willing to take the UV with Narcissa… And it is AD(as Snape) that has to kill off Snape (as AD)–the anger on the face if because AD then realizes that his thinking the best of everyone is so horribly, horribly wrong.
(But I don’t want this to be it! I want more Snape, but I also want AD back.)
Thoughts?
and, upthread–whoever 'splained about the portraits, I think you’re spot on–and very nicely elucidated. I always thought that the portraits had some of the personality of the person, but very limited in scope and unable to grow or change.
Sir Cadogan will always be looking for a fight etc.
I’m thinking Gryffindor’s sword can’t be one of the h’s. If it is, then Dumbledore is a moron. He says he can’t detect them, but he obviously has some way to tell once he has it in his posession (He didn’t lose his hand to the ring on a guess, or he’s an even bigger moron). He knows V is trying to make them out of some of the items that are very important to the houses. He has the sword. He’d test the sword if he wasn’t incredibly dumb / niave.
Beyond this, I was thinking about the book in general last night, and I realized that, really, this book was about the minor characters of the plot. In this case, those minor characters included Harry! The ‘real’ plot that was going on was Dumbledore, Snape, and Malfoy, and yet we only get what’s going on there peripherally. Very interresting stuff.
I have to wonder how Malfoy is going to handle this now. He’s obviously regretting his decision, or at least second-guessing it, and now he’s with the death-eaters and he -didn’t- complete his mission. shudder
Oh, and one other thing that bugged me (once a friend pointed it out). Dumbledore is dying. Slowly. The only one who’s guarding him is Malfoy. Why the hell did Fawkes not come to help him? Fawkes can, theoretically, heal anything with its tears, is fanatically loyal to Dumbledore, and has been known to leave his perch on his own volition. The only explaination I can possibly come up with is that Dumbledore knew rather in advance that he was going to die, and ‘needed’ it to happen somehow, which, considering his views on divination, seems iffy.
