Prince of Lies/Talisman/Neville

[Talisman]

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" 
<carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:

Talisman takes the bait,

You are an agent provocateur, aren't you, Carolyn? Well, lets get 
the party started... 
 
> --- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "elfundeb" <elfundeb at c...> 
> wrote:
>It's from a source that JKR herself has stated that she deems 
>reliable enough to use to convey information that the reader needs 
>to know, so I doubt he's the HBP. 

Hmmm, without regard to the HBP part of it, I believe you are 
referring to the Mzimba interview (Kloves and Rowling) from February 
2003.  Take another look at the actual exchange:

   Steve: Yeah, I mean, I like writing all three, but I've always   
   loved writing Hermione. Because, I just, one, she's a 
   tremendous character for a lot of reasons for a writer, which 
   also is she can carry exposition in a wonderful way because you 
   just assume she read it in a book. If I need to tell the audience
   something...

   JKR: Absolutely right, I find that all the time in the book, if 
   you need to tell your readers something just put it in her. There 
   are only two characters that you can put it convincingly into 
   their dialogue. One is Hermione, the other is Dumbledore. In both 
   cases you accept, it's plausible that they have, well Dumbledore 
   knows pretty much everything anyway, but that Hermione has read 
   it somewhere. So, she's handy.

The word "reliable" is conspicuously missing. This passage has to do 
with how much explaining must accompany information the author wants 
to introduce, not whether the conduit is mistaken or dissembling. 

If you had some other quote in mind, steer me to it.  Not that I'd 
necessarily believe it, considering the source (JKR).

Deb continues:
>Actually, I agree with most of this. Everything except the notion
>that DD lied to Harry, as it's inconsistent with the rules of
>engagement -- that is, the rules of the engagement between JKR and
>her readers. And the rule, as I see it, is that Dumbledore does not
>lie to those on his side. He withholds information, yes, but he does
>not outright lie, especially when he's having those end-of-book 
tete-a-tetes with Harry. From PS/SS ch. 17: "'I shall answer your
>questions unless I have a very good reason not to, in which case I
>beg you'll forgive me. I shall not, of course, lie.'"

Does this mean you believe Dumbledore's deepest heart's desire is a 
pair of socks?

And, I have to agree with Carolyn's "dancing on a pin" comment here. 
Not only is lying by ommission equivalent to lying by assertion, but 
Dumbledore does plenty of both, to Harry or otherwise.

Rules that can't be broken and truth that must be told? Regarding a 
series that demonstrates, book after book, not only the necessity, 
but the desirability, of breaking rules and telling lies?  A bit too 
much irony for me.

Lovely people though they are, Rowling Obviously Lies Like An 
Inveterate Dumbledore (R.O.L.L.A.I.D.) and Dumbledore Obviously Lies 
Like A Rug (D.O.L.L.A.R.).

Talisman