Rowling's questions: your answers

Can’t be. Voldemort’s rage comes from having a muggle father–it was a big deal in book 2.

Who say’s Voldemort knows of the relationship? After all, Harry was left on the doorstep of a muggle family too…by Dumbledore…hmmmm…

Has anybody ever wondered if James Potter may have been a Death Eater? Or why Harry has no relationship with his father’s family? (It happens but it’s rare for a person even in the Potterverse to have absolutely no living relatives.)

Somehow Harry has a part of Voldemort’s Essence in him, thus when Voldemort attacked him it was (unknowingly) a near suicide. The essence is captured in the scar, which links Harry to him (pain when he’s near, for example) and gives them such similarities as the wand. Perhaps the scar was there BEFORE the attack, or if the scar on Harry’s head and the fact that Voldemort survived by being attached to Quirrel’s head is connected (sort of like Ardelia Lortz’s attachment to the CNS of her hosts’ in Stephen King). I’m also guessing Snape had something to do with Harry’s surivival in infancy as well and perhaps his hatred of Potter has less to do with the fact James was a jerk than he blames Harry for Lily’s death.

Or, that the seventh book will end with Harry waking up in Neverland Ranch to find out that being the prey of an all powerful dark wizard was just a pleasant dream.

Then Dumbledore would be morally responsible for the deaths of the Mr. Riddle and the elder Riddles, all killed by Tom. I can’t believe that Rowling would do that.

LOL Yes. Dumbledore – playboy extraordinaire of the wizarding world. Leaving a trail of heartbroken witches and not a few ovened buns, Headmaster Dumbledore is actually fighting a war against forces who want to reveal the true ancestry of half the wizarding world. Will he be able to stop them in time to save his reputation . . . and, perhaps, his heart?

There is no Gilderoy – only Dumbledore. Albus Dumbledore.

Anyway, re: the OP, I think that Dumbledore has difficulties stepping outside the role as nurturer/guardian. Has he actually ever killed anyone? I mean, they say that he defeated Grindelwald, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that he killed him. What if killing is fundamentally opposed to Dumbledore’s character.

Actually, that’s just crazy, isn’t it? It would set Dumbledore up as a perfect character, and he’s definitely imperfect. I mean, “his only fault was not that he loved too little, but that he loved too much”? Meh.


Re: the register for Animagi: Hermione says that she looked up the seven registered Animagi from this century, so if Dumbledore (who is 150) became an Animagus in the last century, she might have missed him. (Besides, we already know of four unregistered Animagi from the twentieth century, so the unregistered-to-registered Animagus ratio seems to be alarmingly high.)

I’m hoping she won’t use the unregistered-Animagus plot again, though. (Besides, what animal could Dumbledore be? Not Fawkes the Phoenix, since Harry’s seen him and Fawkes at the same time. Mrs. Norris? Hmm…)

[spoiler]“Bone of the father, unknowingly given, you will renew your son.” quoth one Peter “Wormtail” Pettigrew. I gotta believe that the osseous matter that came from Tom Riddle’s grave was the component parts of Tom Riddle’s bones, and not Albus Dumbledore’s bones.

Be a pretty weird situation if it could have been anybody’s bone all along. Thus, I can’t see Dumbledore being Tom (Voldemort) Riddle’s father. I can see him being his godfather, though, or possibly even maternal great-grandfather (less likely). Either way, Dumbledore could be in a position to blame himself for the way Riddle turned out.

Kinda too much Lucas in that speculation, though.[/spoiler]

I’ve never seen Dumbledore and Hedwig in the same room…

Except that we have NO REASON to believe that Snape had any sort of attachment to Harry’s mother. Sure, in the pensive we see her chastise James for picking on Snape, but it’s a giant leap from that scene (in which Snape calls her a filthy mudblood or words to that effect) to taking for granted that Snape was in love with her and that is why he hates Harry so much.

It’s fun to speculate on things, but this whole Snape/Lily fascination is pure fanwankery. It’s an insubstantial foundation to build further speculation upon. If you read the interview linked to above, Rowling herself expresses surprise at some readers’ misplaced affection for the Snape character.

One of the things that I really like about Snape is that even though he can be really mean, he is trustworthy.
The interview here though seems to hint that Snape isn’t really trustworthy though and actually is a bad guy. I’m kind of disappointed if it’s going to be like that.

Rowling handed us a new clue on her website, for anyone who’s interested. You have to play a dart game to get at it:

It’s a single sentence, describing a character who’s obviously being introduced for the first time. A physical description, which suggests the character is “lion-like” in both personality and appearance. Everyone’s assuming it’s Godric Gryffindor and he’s the half-blood prince, but there’s no name attached to the description – no identity at all

As for the two question, my answer is Whatever I guess, it will be wrong. Really, I’ve been so bad at predicting the outcomes of the books that I’m now tossing out completely random answers on the principle that “even a stopped clock is right twice a day.”

My current random theory is that the Half Blood Prince is a potted plant in Dumbledore’s Office, and that Draco will defeat Voldemort and marry Tonks. It’ll probably be as accurate as anything I could come up with.

Still, I do find it interesting that this is the one time avada kedavra has been blocked. Perhaps the curse needs to kill a person or obliterate an object, and the fact that two people walked away from it means the curse is still active. You could think of it like Harry got one-quarter of the curse and Voldemort got three-quarters. One or the other has to get the full thing, and so Dumbledore has to keep Voldemort alive, or Harry will never be free of his one-quarter of the curse – the two parts have to be rejoined, and then kill one or the other.

But now that I’ve said it out loud, it definitely won’t be true :slight_smile:

Oh, more things from Harry Potterland.

A while back, Rowling complained that she’d logged onto the Mugglenet chatroom, and no one seemed interested in her theories so she started talking about Spngebob Squarepants instead. Well, a couple of Mugglenet moderators were logging a conversation they’re pretty sure (they say 98%) is the one she’s talking about.

It’s a very fun read – but even if it is Rowling, who knows whether or not she was throwing out red herrings (I think that’s the kind of thing I’d do, if I were a famous author, incognito in an internet chatroom about my books)? But if it was her, and she was tossing out real clues, then Remus Lupin is the Half Blood Prince, playing “prince and the pauper;” Dumbledore’s full name is some kind of anagram, Percy is under the imperius curse, and Harry and Ginny will wind up together.

Also, the “bubble gum conspiracy theory” seems to be gaining currency with fans – that’s the theory that bubble gum wrappers the Longbottoms keep giving Neville actually mean something critical. Frankly, I wouldn’t put it past Rowling – that seems like her kind of thing.

Isn’t it obvious? The Half-Blood Prince isVincent, from the old Beauty and the Beast TV series.

Question #1: Why didn’t Voldemort die? I like Askia’s speculation that perhaps he did die, at least in some sense. So he’s sort of like Zombie Voldemort now, I suppose … perhaps some of the black arts he had dabbled in before his rise to power gave him some bizarre resistance to bodily death. If Dumbledore suspects/knows this, that could also answer Question #2 – he doesn’t attempt to kill him because he knows that it would be pointless to kill someone who is already dead, and that the solution to the “Voldemort problem” lies somewhere else.

More on Question #2: my first thought is that killing Voldemort will also kill Harry, although one thinks that if this is true, perhaps Dumbledore should get that info around a little more so that no one else tries to kill him. Could he be that secure in the belief that no one else is powerful enough to do the deed? This also goes back to #1 – if killing him is not the solution, and something else is, again, shouldn’t more people be armed with this information?

It could be that Dumbledore has more of a personal reason for not attacking Voldemort. I’m not sure, for Dumbledore, that a blood relation would be enough to stand in his way. I’m thinking that Dumbledore is the kind of guy who would believe that at some point, you have to judge people as individuals instead of bloodlines. For example, Malfoy is obviously from a jerky family, but just as Harry chose Gryffindor as his house, I’m pretty sure Dumbledore (if asked) would say that Malfoy has the exact same options of choosing good as anyone else. It seems to go against Dumbledore’s character that he would cut anyone, much less Voldemort, any more slack than anyone else just because he was a relative.

However, I would believe that a more personal link might be the cause – could Dumbledore, in the role of Tom Riddle’s teacher, have failed him in some profound way that leaves him feeling responsible or guilty about what Tom eventually became? Heh, I don’t mean failed as in “failed an exam,” but rather somehow failed to protect him or offered him terrible advice while he was a student? It would be nice to see Dumbledore make a mistake once in a while. From CoS, we know that Tom was a pretty yucky kid even before the whole Voldemort thing, but that scene where he begs not to be sent home breaks my heart, it really does.

And, on the Why didn’t Voldemort kill Lily? question … I never read this as factual. It seemed to me like the kind of nasty thing you say to make someone feel badly. You know, the old scenario where the villian says “give me the money, and I’ll give you the hostage” and you give him the money and he shoots the hostage and runs off with your cash. And it strikes me as very Voldemort-esque to play into Harry’s worst fear – that he was the cause of his mother’s death. Maybe it is true in a literal sense, he wasn’t going to bother to kill Lily, maybe the ol’ Avada sucks a lot of energy out of a person and he didn’t want to expend it if he didn’t have to, but I don’t think he’d hesitate to off her out of sentiment.

IIRC, though, Dumbledore would have had no say in this matter at the time. He was not Headmaster then, he was the Transfiguration teacher.

In practical temrs they certainly are, but they’re simply not very closely related. Given the nature of pureblood families in HP, Voldemort is probably a 6th cousin to every pureblood and probably hlf-blood family in England if not Europe.

I suspect that their lives are mystically bound. If this is true, Voldemort can’t allow anyone else to kill Harry as it might do him in as well. Voldemort’s manner of ressurection could only have reinforced this magic. Its also possible that since Voldemort and Harry are bound so they are not truly separate individuals.

This could be quite amusing. Is Harry, in fact, Voldemort’s own strange method of salvation? The synthesis of all his regrets? Meh, probably not, but it is how I would write the series. Contiuing in the vein we’ve had before, even Voldemort had to have some tiny peice of good in him. Perhaps for him it was that he felt some scrap of kinship, pity, or envy of Harry. Harry, after all, was just like Voldemort save that he had everything Tom Riddle could ever have wanted.

Lets face it: there really isn’t anything to stop anyone from learning how to do it and never telling anyone. I mean, if you sometimes turn into a mouse and scury around the house, who’s going to know?

Of course he’s a bastard. That’s why I like him!

No, but if Hary’s not put into danger the situation will never be resolved. Voldemort might be defeated by Harry but if he knows or suspects that killing Harry is pointless, he’ll simply avoid the kid, and Voldemort’s organization has the upper hand if there is no direct confrontation between the two.

Oh, right! I didn’t mean that particular incident was Dumbledore’s personal responsibility – just that I liked how Rowling showed that Voldemort (I guess Tom, at the time) was not always a completely loathsome character, at least to me. As to what mishap may have occured that Dumbledore was more directly involved in, I have no idea.

How about this?

Lily is a charms specialist. V has heard something of the prophecy (or is there another reason he would be targeting Harry?) and is looking for Harry. They go into hiding. Lily is desperate to keep Harry safe. The kind of charm Lily would try to develop for Harry would be one to keep him alive, not one to kill V. Thus, I’m not entirely surprised V didn’t die when he met Harry–Lily only cared about having Harry survive. (The blood protection Lily gave Harry when she died may or may not have anything to do with my posited charm.) What would such a charm be like? It may well not have been intended to cause a ricochet effect, but rather to keep everyone in the room alive. (Fred and George enchanted their fireworks so that attempting to vanish them instead made them multiply–something like that? Or possibly a phoenix charm? You die long enough for advada kedavra to dissipate, and then you regenerate?)

I like the ghost theory too.

Or maybe Harry and V don’t share life so much as share magical powers. That ending might work–in order to defeat V, Harry must choose life over magic–V does the opposite and dies–so Harry lives but must live the rest of his life as a muggle?

Harry as bait?

I like the way you think!

Seems to me that the answer to # 1 is pretty simple. Dumbledore has stressed that one thing Voldemort can’t quite grasp is that there are things worse than dying. Nearly Headless Nick said that the reason some wizards become ghosts rather than moving on after death is because they are too afraid of death to move on. Ergo…Voldemort is more afraid of death than anything else, and when his curse on Harry backfire, he didn’t move on to the hereafter…he became a ghost, but unlike most other ghosts (Nearly Headless Nick, Moaning Myrtle, the Bloody Baron, etc) he remained focused on his future rather than reflective of his past life, which is why he did all those machinations to return to life and the others didn’t/don’t.

As for the second question, I agree with those who say that Dumbledore knows, because of the prophecy, that only Harry can possibly kill Voldemort (or at least until Voldemort kills Harry, which would also fulfill the prophecy and then open Voldemort’s death to other avenues).