Snape and DD in GoF/missing scene/setup for OOTP

[cubfanbudwoman]

Lupinlore:
> Well, there is also the factor of the "missing scene" mentioned by 
> artslynda in post# 11476.

Artslynda:
> One scene that didn't make it into the final cut of the movie that 
> I think should have been kept was the one (shown on the "making of" 
> specials, etc.) where DD tells Harry he can no longer protect him, 
> and Harry said, "If you can't, then who can?" (or words to that 
> effect). That bit explains DD's actions in the trophy room and his 
> uneasiness at other times -- he was terrified because Harry was 
> being made a pawn in some kind of game.

Lupinlore:
> This is a very interesting point.  I wonder where that scene was 
> supposed to go?  If it went sometime BEFORE the "decision" scene 
> with Snape, McGonagall, and Dumbledore ...then it might indicate 
> that Dumbledore, in addition to talking things over with Snape, had 
> also talked things over with *Harry*.  Dumbledore could easily have 
> had such a talk with Harry at any point between the arrival of the 
> Hogwarts Express and the name coming out of the goblet, i.e. he 
> could have been warning Harry that Voldemort and his followers were 
> accelerating their plans and that events might well slip out of 
> Dumbledore's control.  That would reduce the level of manipulation 
> involved, since he would not be using Harry as a pawn but would be 
> going ahead, very reluctantly, with a policy he had already warned 
> Harry he might have to pursue.

SSSusan:
Hmmmm.  "Where was this scene supposed to go?" is a good question.  
Lynda, if you're around, could you tell from the context when you saw 
the "Making of" special at what point in the story this would have 
come?

When I read Lynda's description earlier, I know that I *imagined* it 
as at some point *into* the tournament, or even after the graveyard 
scene -- you know, once Voldy was BACK.  But now that I think about 
it, that latter possibility wouldn't make sense, because of the 
dormitory speech, when DD told Harry he was *not* alone, that his 
friends were with him.  (Ack, I'm paraphrasing badly, but hopefully 
you know what I mean.)  

I wonder if that bit wasn't part of the immediate aftermath of the 
GoF name-spitting?  I'm trying to imagine how the scene could have 
fit *before* that happened, and I just can't think of how the topic 
of his safety would've come up logically before then.  The GENERAL 
issue of safety, because of the QWC events, yes, but not Harry 
specifically.


Lupinlore:
> I would point out that the "decision" scene also contrasts somewhat 
> with the later scene where Harry overhears Dumbledore trying to 
> browbeat Fudge into calling off the tournament.  I mean, if letting 
> Harry compete is totally a ploy by Dumbledore, why is he trying to 
> get the tournament called off?  I understand that he wants to 
> protect all of the participants, but if he has control over Harry's 
> (and for that matter, Cedric's) participation why would he not just 
> defy the rules as Minerva wishes him to and announce that things 
> have become much too dangerous and murky and that he is withdrawing 
> the Hogwarts participants and urging Karkaroff and Madam Maxime to 
> follow suit?

SSSusan:
I definitely saw DD's decision to go with Snape's suggestion as 
a "Let's *see* how it goes" kind of thing, as opposed to a ploy to 
see that Harry would stick out the whole tournament.  (Didn't Snape 
phrase it in such a way that it would be a "for the time being" kind 
of thing?)  But yet, you make a good point when you ask why DD didn't 
just PULL Cedric & Harry if he thought the whole thing should be 
called off after BCS's death?  Unless we're back to the idea that it 
really *is* a bindng magical contract and DD really couldn't have 
pulled Harry even if he wanted to.  But why wouldn't he have answered 
thusly to Minerva??  See?  It's muddled!


Lupinlore: 
> Maybe (and I'm spinning my wheels wildly here) we are supposed to 
> believe that Dumbledore is concerned about Harry's (and Cedric's) 
> feelings and he's worried that if he just forbids Harry to 
> participate without providing some face-saving device that Harry 
> will be permanently ostracized from the student body (i.e. he'll 
> forever afterwards be the big baby who snuck his name into the 
> Goblet and then had to be rescued by Dumbledore overriding the 
> rules).  He may also be concerned that if the ministry insists upon 
> the "binding contract" they might try to persecute Harry for 
> embarassing them if some face-saving device can't be found (and 
> after all subsequent events prove he would be right in his reading 
> of the Ministry's likely reaction).

SSSusan:
I do like that first possibility, of DD's thinking what the effect 
would be upon Harry if he did let him withdraw before even starting --
 how much he'd be ostracized and made fun of and all.  That would 
make me feel a little better about DD's decision to have Harry 
participate, but I still have to admit that I think a part of him 
appeared to want to let Harry serve as a "sussing out" agent for 
whoever might be behind the nastiness which was occurring.


Lupinlore:
> And maybe Kloves and Newell, in a tradition to which JKR herself is 
> not a stranger, just weren't being completely coherent.

SSSusan:
I'm thinking this just might be part of it.  I mean, *is* it a 
binding contract or not?  If it is, then DD didn't HAVE any decision 
he could make.  If Minerva was right that "the hell with Barty" was 
an option, then DD was manipulating some, I think.  Frustrating.  I 
think I need to get back to the BOOK and see what actually occurred 
there, because this movie scene (while fascinating to watch) doesn't 
mesh very well with canon.

 
Lupinlore:
> I think the rather tentative caress he gives Harry at the end of 
> the scene is also meant to convey an awkward sense of apology.

SSSusan:
Agreed.  An apology and an attempt to comfort a little, as well, I 
think.

Lupinlore: 
> But the other reason I think the "I'm sorry" is an awkward apology 
> is that it sets things up so nicely for OOTP.  Taking Dumbledore 
> altogether as he's presented in GoF (the puzzling matter of 
> the "decision" scene aside), we have a man who has watched, 
> fearfully, as Harry has been put in danger.  By the end of the 
> movie he is unnerved by events and sorry for his decisions.  The 
> stage is now set for fifth year, where Dumbledore will be fiercely 
> determined to keep Harry safe (i.e. NOT to have a repeat of last 
> year, thank you very much) and to protect Harry from emotional 
> burdens (i.e. to make up for letting him bear so much last year).  
<snip> In that sense, I think Kloves has helped JKR out quite a bit, 
> in that he has prepared the way for OOTP!Dumbledore much better 
> than JKR herself did.

SSSusan:
It *is* a nice lead-in to why DD tried to hard to keep Harry out of 
the (in his mind too dangerous) loop in OOTP.  OTOH, the OOTP!DD we 
see in canon is also *distant* from Harry, and I think the movie left 
me thinking that the DD we saw at the end of Harry's 4th year would 
try hard to be there for Harry.

I don't have any answers or insights (obviously!), but I do think 
this whole discussion of what these two or three scenes might have 
been about, might have been trying to convey, is a fascinating way of 
looking at what a screenwriter does.  I just wish I knew more of 
the "why" of what Kloves did with that "decision" scene and what he & 
Newell were trying to tell us concerning what DD is all about.

Or is this just one of those times when it's easier to take the movie 
at face value if you're not a huge fan of the books?

Siriusly Snapey Susan