[HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's interference

[swimminwoman86 at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 40942

In a message dated 7/8/2002 4:02:31 PM US Eastern Standard Time, 
autryld at earthlink.net writes:


> I don't know if anyone has brought this up before, 
> but didn't Harry hinder the safety of the Stone by attempting to 'help'? 
> After all, the 
> Stone was supposedly safe in the Mirror of Erised. Dumbledore stated that 
> only 
> someone who wanted the Stone but not use the Stone could get it. If Harry 
> didn't show 
> up, wouldn't the Stone have remained in the Mirror? Is this one of those 
> plot-holes that 
> we must ignore?
> 
> 

I was just thinking of this myself not too long ago. Actually, in most cases, 
if Harry hadn't interefered there never would have been a problem in the 
first place. In the third book if he had just let Sirius kill Peter then 
Voldemort would have never come back to power. But, like Dumbledore says, 
that would only be delaying his return until another time. But, Harry did 
help save Sirius and Buckbeak with Hermione, and he did conjure up the 
patronus. Still, I think Harry is right in saying that Dumbledore is just 
trying to give Harry a chance to get back at Voldemort. And we will never 
know if they had figured out how to get the stone out of the mirror without 
Harry anyway, and Harry was the one who killed Quirrell. Hermione, Ron, and 
Harry had no idea what was protecting the stone when they first went to 
rescue it the first place. What Harry, Ron, and Hermione did was heroic, 
considering they willingly risked their lives not knowing what they were up 
against just to save the stone. 
~Cindy~


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]