Time-Turner

[Amy Z]

No: HPFGUIDX 39807

Eloise wrote:

>It's a wonderful bluff. Worthy of Crouch Jr, in fact. He presents the 
>answer on a plate in such a way that no-one would possibly consider >it. Of 
>*course* they couldn't be in two places at once - they'd need a 
> >Time-Turner for that! And where could school children have got hold of 
> >such a restricted item?

That works well for Fudge, since I agree that he probably has no knowledge 
of the decision to permit Hermione a Time Turner.  But Snape?  Snape has 
been teaching Hermione all year.  Surely it is running a very great risk to 
imagine that in a year of shooting bull in the staffroom, none of the 
teachers have ever noticed that two of them have Hermione Granger at the 
same time?

Uh oh.  I'm making a good case for the Snape/Dumbledore tag team, aren't I?  
<g>

OK, on to the dizziness-inducing aspect of Time Turners, where I very 
possibly have no clue what I'm talking about.

Eloise wrote:

> >But again, I have
> > the
> > problem that the Dumbledore who sent them on their mission belongs to 
>the
> > world where Buckbeak *was* executed. If they are creating a simultaneous
> > history, then that implies that there is a history where Sirius *is*
> > kissed..... Doesn't it? ....genuine question, because I start to get
> > confused
> > when I think about this too long. ;-)

And Naama responded:

> > No, it doesn't create simultaneous histories. What happened in PoA is
> > that Buckbeak had never been executed. Ever.

I can't agree with the statement "Buckbeak was never executed" unless it is 
paired with its paradoxical partner:  Buckbeak WAS executed.  Both realities 
are true.  Otherwise, what is the point of using a Time Turner?  Just to 
gain yourself a few extra hours each day?  But why would you even have to do 
that?  Hermione "already was" in both Muggle Studies and Divination (or 
whatever classes met at the same time).  If her using the Time Turner 
doesn't change anything, why use it?

I know it goes round in circles, but the fact is that life with a TT is not 
the same as life without one.  Something *has* been changed, though we can't 
say *when* it was changed because time as we usually speak of it has lost 
its meaning.  Otherwise, in that first scene in the hospital wing, 
Dumbledore would just smile at Harry and Hermione and say "Don't worry, you 
already fixed everything."

>I think a lot of the confusion about the Time-Turner arises because of
>Hermione's reference to changing time.  It's hard to decipher exactly what
>she means, but it could simply refer to the fact that every time Hermione
>uses the Time-Turner, she changes what time it is for herself.  However,
>there's nothing about the Time-Turner's actual use that suggests it can be
>used to change events that have already occurred.

I think there is.  One, there is the warning--in saving Buckbeak and Sirius, 
Harry and Hermione are doing exactly what they are not supposed to do, and 
so they need to make the change as narrow as possible.  No fooling around 
with Pettigrew or the Invisibility Cloak or anything else Harry's tempted to 
do, because this is already a risky business.

Two, we are mistaken when we think of "change events" as referring only to 
BIG things:  saving someone who would have died, removing an Invisibility 
Cloak that someone would have used.  Really, *any* overlapping of time 
changes the way things were.  The second Harry and Hermione flip over the 
Time Turner, they have changed things.  Different atoms are now swirling 
around the Entrance Hall.  Most of the changes won't bear visible fruit, but 
that doesn't mean they aren't real, and we have no way of knowing which ones 
will be important and which will be unimportant.

Amy Z

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com