Dumbledore, the wizard world, Harry's Quidditch skill, veritaserum

[Elizabeth Dalton]

No: HPFGUIDX 30840

Phil wrote:

> Has anyone named Dumbledore as a candidate in the "Who Will Die?" 
> discussions? Several times in _Goblet of Fire_, Harry notices how old 
> Dumbledore is -- when Harry's in his office (first time), and later 
> in the novel, too.

I noticed this, too, and instantly started wondering how soon we're 
going to lose Dumbledore. I think it could even be before book 7. 
Probably not earlier than late book 6, though. But that would leave an 
interesting tension between McGonnagal and Snape as his deputies-- not 
just for control of Hogwarts, but for the overall battle against 
Voldemort.

Dana suggested:

> ...I believe Dumbledore will 
> be able to speak to the trio - Harry, Ron, and Hermione - through 
> Professor Trelawney, after he passes on.  

Hm. That would make a good use of Trelawney, who's a bit of an enigma 
at present. But I'm not sure there's a precedent for this. Rowling 
seems to feel that the dead don't come back, except as ghosts, and even 
then only if they were unhappy in life.

Which reminds me: is there a way for ghosts to stop being ghosts? Maybe 
this will come up in OoP. Rowling has said that we'll find out more 
about ghosts. (Hm. A fanfic about a ghost therapist comes to mind... 
like I have time to be writing fanfics....)

Catlady wrote:

> ...I also would not 
> be surprised if the entirely wizarding world and all the magic 
> people except Hermione were destroyed...

I've wondered myself if this is where JKR is headed. Partly because the 
wizard world is so flawed-- riddled with prejudice, wracked by 
factional infighting, and heavily dependent on slavery and oppression 
of other intelligent species-- is it really worth saving? But then I 
remember the Weasleys, and it's difficult to think of them all getting 
killed. Whatever flaws the wizard world has, it also produced the 
Weasleys. It would be a shame to have it all go away. I wonder if it 
will end up getting exposed though, and maybe magic getting weakened 
somehow. Possibly part of the reason the wizard world is secret is that 
magic is stronger that way, less diluted or something.

> Harry loves Quidditch as the only thing he believes he's 
> good at, his Cinderella glory, that makes him popular with the other 
> kids... think how awful he would feel if he learned that it wasn't 
> really HIS talent at all?

Ooh, nice twist of the knife. Even if Harry survives, this would make 
an interesting thing for him to have to give up.

Actually, I'd go even further and ask, what if *all* Harry's wizard 
abilities come from Voldemort, without which he wouldn't have been a 
wizard at all? Except that that would have made him a Squib, and we 
know they're not common, even in "mixed blood" marriages. But it would 
make a pretty powerful alternate sacrifice (rather than just having him 
die defeating Voldemort). "Ok, Harry, if Voldemort dies you won't be a 
wizard any more. Ready?"

finwitch wrote all the stuff I was going to write about veritaserum, 
plus this one:

> And um.. Would Veritaserum prevent choosing words carefully so that 
> you give an impression other than the truth (but your *words* would 
> still be true)?

Barty Crouch, Jr. seemed to have little choice over what he said. I 
think it works the way fictional "Truth Serum" is supposed to work 
(which isn't how it works in real life, but never mind). Someone 
especially devious and used to bending the truth might be able to hold 
out for a bit, but I suspect any extended questioning would get at the 
truth (as the questionee perceives it) fairly quickly.

Elizabeth

(Now I *really* need to get some work done! No more digests until after 
lunch!)