Ah, but she does: right before Harry reports to Dumbledore for the Horcrux mission, Harry is hiding behind a statue when Trelawney walks by doing a reading. She mutters something about “Ten of Swords… a dark young man, possibly who dislikes the questioner. No, that can’t be right…”
But it is right: Harry’s right there, though she doesn’t know it. Trelawney may actually be better at some of her prophecies than we know.
Even if Trelawney isn’t very good at it, Rowling is: the name of the chapter where Dumbledore dies is called “The Lightning Struck Tower,” which is … um, card 14 of the Major Arcana, symbolizing disaster.
Sorry for the double post, I should’ve answered this earlier.
Or identify it to recover it, if the wand had been (like Riddle’s diary) sold by some fumble-fingered Death Eater who wasn’t aware of its significance.
Ollivander doesn’t strike me as a very likely ally to Voldemort, and the only reason why not is that his presence in the story has been so minimal. There’s been no evidence to date that Ollivander has been anything but a particularly good wand-maker — he has been touted not as a skilled Dark wizard, but as a craftsman.
The only other significance I can see to the capture (if capture it was) of Ollivander is to replace Voldemort’s wand, the twin of Harry’s. Voldemort appeared surprised that his wand failed him in the duel against Harry in Book 5 — he may have captured Ollivander to find out why that had happened.
Neither explanation seems good to me. Surely You-Know-Who had two years to replace the wand since the Priori Incantatem effect in “Goblet of Fire.” Why would he wait so long to procure a replacement, and procure it by capturing the wand-maker himself? If it were to research the Priori Incantatem effect, why can Voldemort only learn that with Ollivander’s capture?
No, I think Ollivander was captured to perform some service: and it would have to be a service he could do in private, as the wizarding world knows he disappeared. Ollivander is therefore probably not combing used wand shops for Ravenclaw’s wand, but he may be in a house somewhere, examining likely candidates.
I don’t remember it having an image of a serpent. I recall it was described as a heavy locket that none of them could open.
That makes me suspect it’s not the locket, but something inside it.
Having just finished #5, I would like to state that for the movie transition, Luna Lovegood could be completely written out and have any info/help she gives ( which really is the assistance with her father’s newspaper, AFAIR.) written out.
Kinda like how Dobby was written out in #4 and replaced by Neville’s help, instead.
Thoughts.
Good idea. Perhaps the wand has come into the possesion of an eccentric wand collector, and they need an expert to identify it from amonst all the other more common wands.
Fish: I doubt Lord Voldemort would want to replace his wands. Much is made in Philosopher’s Stone of the process wherein the wand chooses the wizard. Once you get an Ollivander’s wand, I doubt you would want to change it unless you absolutely have to.
I don’t think either that Ollivander would be needed to find Ravenclaw’s wand. Presumably, Voldemort has already made his six horcruxes, has hidden them well, and does not go around looking for them. Otherwise he would be aware that Dumbledore et al. are slowly destroying his horcruxes, and Tom (I think we should call him that way to irritate him) would be making more if he knew some of them were being destroyed (unless Tom thinks that having exactly seven soul parts had some magic to it and didn’t want to split his soul further.)
It is possible that Ollivander’s disappearance has no further significance; it, like the death of Susan Bones or Emmeline Vance, is just to show how the wizarding world is becoming a more dangerous place.
Not going to happen. Luna Lovegood’s character was very popular with the readers, Warner Brothers had a public talent search for the actress to play Luna Lovegood, and the actress chosen to play the role already has a website dedicated to her ( http://www.evannalynchfans.com/ )! J. K. Rowling has mentioned having met the actress on the set.
I’m glad you said this, because it made me remember that there’s something that’s always rung false to me in the books. Why do people like (especially) Dumbledore–the one wizard that Tommy fears, but also the one wizard who actually remembers him when he was an obnoxious bully brat–call him “*Lord * Voldemort”? He’s not really “lord” of anything–it’s a self-styled title. Why give him the respect of using it when referring to him? I can see calling him “Voldemort,” but every time Dumbledore calls him “Lord Voldemort” in the books, I cringe a little. It seems to me like Dumbledore of all people should call him “Tom,” just to piss him off–especially since he seems to make more mistakes when he’s pissed off.
Since I am certain that Dumbledore is dead and not coming back I am suprised there hasn’t been more speculation about what role his brother Aberforth will play. He has always been on the margins of the story and often mentioned in a vague way.
[ul]
[li]In OotP he is tending bar when the DA has the first meeting at The Hog’s Head.[/li][li]Mention is made of him shaming the family because of using improper charms on a goat.[/li][li]We know also from OotP that he was a member of the Order the first time around so he still may be, right?[/li][li]He is seen walking hurriedly away from Mundungus in HBP just before the confrontation with Harry.[/li][li]We know, also from HBP, that Dumbledore goes to The Hog’s Head at times. Is Dumbledore sharing information with him and if so why?[/li][li]He shows up at Dumbledore’s funeral so it would seem they have remained close.[/li][/ul]
I think there are other veiled references to him which makes me think he is more involved in things than we realize. Could the plan be for him to stay in the background until he is needed? Could he be a very powerful wizard who is in hiding?
I won’t be suprised if he plays a very significant role in the last book and that this is part of Dumbledore’s plan to help Harry now that he is gone.
Or if I can propose a crazy theory: The only way I could see Dumbledore not being dead is if Dumbledore and Aberforth switched places in HBP and it was Aberforth disguised as Dumbledore who was killed on top of the tower and Dumbledore is still alive disguised as Aberforth.
I don’t think this works. Remember, as “Dumbledore” and Harry are flying back to the castle, Dumbledore is undoing the protective wards as they fly, so they’ll be able to get it past them. The wards have to have been set up by Dumbledore (because even if Aberforth is more powerful than him, only Dumbledore had the authority to put them in place), and only Dumbledore would have the authority to take them down again. They could, I suppose, have been attuned to Aberforth and various trusted others, but that would only allow those others to bypass them, not to deactivate them, nor to allow others through them. It’s like the headmaster’s office: The headmaster can let anyone he (or she) chooses into the office, but nobody other than the rightful headmaster can enter the office without the headmaster (the fact that McGonagal can enter the office on her own at the end of HBP, I take as proof positive that Dumbledore is, indeed, genuinely dead).
This is true: I said I was suspicious of the idea that the Big V was replacing his wand, although for other reasons. Two years is a long time to wait to replace something so important — and in the meantime use that same old wand to invade the Ministry of Magic! How was Voldemort to know (at that time) that there was not another brother wand out there, wielded by Dumbledore?
To me, the obvious reasons to capture Ollivander don’t make sense:
a) Ollivander is asked to make wands for your side
b) Ollivander is prevented from making wands for the other side
Most of the new wands sold are probably to up-and-coming students, whom the V-man would not fear. Most of the wizards who could make trouble — for your side and theirs — already have them, and if they couldn’t get Ollivander’s, would go elsewhere.
That’s why I guess that Ollivander is wanted for some other reason. Ollivander’s was established 382 BC. If anybody knew the details of Rowena Ravenclaw’s original wand — or knew who’d purchased it — it’d be him.
The thought occurs that Ravenclaw’s wand would have long rotted — but we still have Gryffindor’s hat, and his non-rusted sword, so why not?
Assuming that Lord Vole doesn’t know his Horcruxes are in danger, he may be seeking that wand because he intends it — a famous and powerful relic — to replace his old one, which proved to fail against Harry Potter’s. Heck, maybe he’s looking to replace his old wand with Slytherin’s old wand — meaning he may or may not have made a Horcrux of Ravenclaw’s wand, but that by rescuing Ollivander, Harry Potter learns about… ah, well. Wild speculation.
“Aberforth, Voldemort appears to be dead, but I think he might be alive in some form and just in case he is, I want you to pretend you’re not a great and talented wizard and be a bartender for the foreseeable future. That way, when Voldemort returns, we’ll have a secret weapon.”
All the information we’re given on Aberforth points to him being rather dull if not mildly retarded. The bit about the goat I thought was obviously a hint for the grownups at the old bumpkin/zoophilia joke. Also, it’s followed up with something to the effect of:“but did he hide in shame? No, he did not. Of course I think that may be because he wasn’t aware that he had anything to be ashamed of…” Or something.
That scene in GoF (the movie) irritated me. Not during the priori incantatem, but when Harry tells Dumbledore about it. In the book Dumbledore explains what caused that effect, whereas movie Dumbledore just muttered “ah, Priori Incantatem” and moved on. Come on, would it have killed them to give him 5 seconds to briefly describe what that even meant?? Just a thing that bugged me. Carry on with the speculations.
You may very well be correct, but he was a member of the Order the first time around so he must have had something to contribute. We know he has continued to have dealings with Dumbledore and Mundungus. That makes me wonder if he might still be involved behind the scenes in some way. It isn’t until Book 5 that he appears, so he may still have something important to do.
Oh I don’t think the idea of them switching places works either. I really do think Dumbledore is dead. I just offered that as a way JKR could keep him alive.
I doubt she would do it tho.
Perhaps, but I didn’t get that impression. I was thinking more of someone along the lines of Hagrid or Luna Lovegood - eccentric, and doesn’t care what people think. I agree with Kolak of Twilo that we will see more of Aberforth in Book 7.
P.S. Rysto - Thank you for the correction. I got Susan Bones and Amelia Bones mixed up.
That and the fact that Dumbledore’s portrait is present in the office. I still wonder about Dumbledore being thrown off the tower by the Death Curse, which, as many have pointed out, is not the usual effect. The only explanation I can come up with is that the author wanted to keep the momentum, and give Harry a good excuse to chase after the escaping Death Eaters (and Snape). If Dumbledore’s body had remained on the tower, then Harry’s natural reaction would have been to try to revive him.
Anyone wanting to read more about the possibilities of book 7 should take a look at Mugglenet’s page about Book 7, in particular the “Confirmed information” and “Popular theories” sections.
Anyone wanting to read more about the possibilities of book 7 should take a look at Mugglenet’s page about Book 7, in particular the “Confirmed information” and “Popular theories” sections.
[/QUOTE]
Isn’t there a passage in one book where Harry, knowing that Dumbledore uses names of candy as passwords, just starts reciting candies until the door opens?
