Spying Game Part II / Magic Dishwasher

[bluesqueak]

No: HPFGUIDX 40056

Elkins writes:
           <Snip>

>  I do have one tiny quibble, though, that perhaps Pip or her, er,  
> enforcer Grey Wolf might be able to...um, help me out a bit with   
> here. Preferably without recourse to Cruciatus.

>  Pip wrote, after an impassioned defense of the notion that many   
> of  the DEs in that graveyard hadn't really been disloyal to       
> Voldemort at all:

> > Another, final point on the supposedly disloyal DE's. 

> > Voldemort: "... I had given up hope, now, that any of my Death 
> > Eaters cared what had become of me."
> > 'One or two of the masked wizards in the circle moved            
> > uncomfortably, ..'

> > Only one or two?

> Thus implying that only those "one or two" of the Death Eaters had 
> really been disloyal at all.

>  Erm. Um. The problem here is that, well, there are just far too   
> many indications elsewhere in the scene that the majority of these 
> guys really are profoundly uncomfortable in that graveyard.

> The behavior of the entire group when they first appear, for       
> example:

>  "And one by one they moved forward...slowly, cautiously, as       
> though  they could hardly believe their eyes."

> Then they all shudder as one when Voldemort looks around at them.

> And then, when Voldemort sniffs at them and declares that he smells 
> guilt:

>  "A second shiver ran around the circle, as though each member of  
> it longed, but did not dare, to step back from him."

> They surely can't *all* be great actors just doing their bit to    
> help feed Harry misinformation, can they?

I think they may well be nervous when they come face to face with 
Voldemort in the graveyard. The fact that they are 'basically loyal 
to Voldemort and did work for him in the Stalemate' is probably not 
the same thing at all as 'having a completely clear concience that 
everything done in the Stalemate was something Voldemort would have 
approved of.'

My mental image to date of the Death Eaters is of an organisation 
with the same 'pack of hyenas'  feel as the inner circle of the Nazi 
Party during the Hitler Era. While basically loyal to their dear 
leader, the jockeying for position included trying to downgrade all 
the other Inner Circle. Occasionally the power struggle ended with 
the loser getting executed. 

It probably didn't make for calm repose when the Leader announces 
he's going to make examples of some of the 'disloyalists' - YOU may 
know you're loyal, but suppose Malfoy wants to get rid of you, and 
has planted doubts in Voldemort's mind...

>  I am willing to entertain the notion that Lucius Malfoy may be in 
> on the Big Plan(if only because imagining his stammering there as   
> evidence that he had forgotten his *lines* made me laugh so hard   
> that my housemate ran into the room asking "What? WHAT?"), but I'm 
> afraid that I'm just not quite up for a plateful of "all but one or 
> two of  the DEs were loyal." There's just far too much canon       
> opposing that one. 

>  But that's okay, right? Voldemort can have just a couple of       
> loyalists, while the rest of them can still be treacherous disloyal 
> slime, right? 

My definite loyalists would include Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle (whose sons 
are Draco's 'bodyguards', implying the fathers are remaining loyal), 
MacNair (who practically gets a pat on the head from Voldemort, and 
helped Malfoy out with the Buckbeak incident), *possibly* Nott (who 
has a tendency to sycophancy), and of course the Lestranges in 
Azkaban (we hope they're in Azkaban, anyway). 

Beyond that, I'm open to argument about the exact numbers of 
the 'loyalists' versus the 'treacherous disloyal slime'. 

It may be more of a difference between 'completely trusted during the 
Stalemate' and 'not completely trusted, so any attempts to hint we 
might try to find Voldemort during the Stalemate were slapped down by 
the Inner Circle. So you don't get a Crucio, but Voldemort is 
watching you...'


----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Richelle writes:
> This may be an incredibly stupid question, however, I'll ask it    
> anyway, to get it out of my system if nothing else. What exactly do 
> we know about the potion that Voldemort used to resurrect himself? 
> Is this listed in potion books for anyone to look up? Do           
> vapours/ugly baby creatures often resurrect
> themselves using this potion? If not, how does Voldemort know about 
> this?
> If so, why wasn't the elder Riddle's tomb more closely guarded? Or 
> bones removed entirely? If, however, this is something             
> Voldemort "thought up" himself, could he have needed Harry's blood 
> for another reason? A reason,say, he didn't want even his followers 
> to know about? Is this possible? Or has my imagination gotten      
> carried away?

Not a stupid question at all, and in the 100 or so posts about the 
Magic Dishwasher theory it's hardly surprising you missed some of the 
answers.

All we know about the potion is what's given in GoF. I have no idea 
(not having a copy of, say, 'Evene Moore Potente Potions' to hand 
[grin]) whether the instructions include things like 'ingredients 
must be absolutely FRESH', or 'best performed in a graveyard' - but 
Voldemort describes it as: 
"an old piece of Dark Magic, the potion that revived me tonight " 
(GoF p.569)

So it's not a Voldemort invention; but a potion whose instructions 
must be in SOME book, or scroll, or something that could be 
accessible to *both* Voldemort, and Snape the Potions Master. The 
crux of the Magic Dishwasher theory is that both sides know about 
this potion.

Another point in the Magic Dishwasher theory (see # 39662 for the 
original post, and # 39854 for Grey Wolf's excellent summary of 
arguments and counterarguments in the discussion) is that Dumbledore 
WANTS Voldemort to resurrect using the potion, because Snape the 
Potions Master has discovered a flaw which could help Harry destroy 
Voldemort for ever...

This is why the Riddle graveyard wasn't guarded, or the Riddle bones 
respectfully removed to an top-secret-and-equally-consecrated 
destination.

______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________

Alexander writes:
> *** If "Spying Games" theory is true, then Voldemort had made a BIG 
> mistake ***

> A mistake I had never forgiven to my enemies (in games, of         
> course ;).

> He has put a lot of effort into organization of this duel.         
> Everything was properly planned, Harry was stripped of all those   
> who could help him. Harry was > weakened. Harry was handled the    
> most inappropriate weapon possible.

> In this situation battle had to go to the end.

You might well end up being absolutely right. But isn't it a key 
point in military strategies that 'wars are not won by the side who 
makes no mistakes; because all sides always make mistakes. Wars are 
won by the side who makes the LEAST mistakes.' [grin]

I would argue against Voldemort believing that THIS was the decisive 
battle that has to go to an end. He's just resurrected, he has his 
human body back, but he's had to pay a  price for that. 

"I was willing to embrace mortal life again, before chasing immortal. 
I set my sights lower..." (Voldemort, GoF p. 569)

So he's got his body back, but has lost his 'cannot be killed' 
quality. He has researched immortality extensively, and believes 
that, given time, he can get it back. 

In short, given time, he can become even stronger, he may be able to 
negotiate with Giants, Dementors etc and gain powerful allies. So if 
he has to make a strategic withdrawal from this battle, he probably 
feels some consolidation will then allow him to make an even stronger 
attack later.

This is not a 'Fight to the end' situation (In Voldemort's view). 
It's an 'allow yourself a line of retreat situation' - which the 
majority of battles are. Truly decisive battles are very rare.

Hitler's Luftwaffe probably made exactly the same mistake when they 
decided that the Battle of Britain/Invasion of Britain didn't have to 
be fought to the end, and that they could afford to retreat and leave 
an isolated Britain to stew. In hindsight, that mistake was one of 
the decisive mistakes of WW2 - only surpassed in stupidity by the 
other decisive mistake of deciding to invade Russia.

Pip