[HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore's role in Priori Incantatem

[Edblanning at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 36732

In a message dated 20/03/02 07:40:32 GMT Standard Time, 
ecuamerican at hotmail.com writes:


> Sorry for the jumbled quotes up top but I've been waiting for a 
> discussion about the great wands for sometime now.  First thing is 
> that Sirius knew about PI also.  I believe it was he who mentioned it 
> first by name and Dumbledore agreed.  

The other way around, actually (GoF, 605). Dumbledore mentions it by name, 
Sirius translates ( with a question mark).

<snip>
> Yes, its very odd that the pet of the best wizard of the time should 
> give away *2* feathers: one being evil and one being good.  I say one 
> being evil and the other good because their natures would have to be 
> like that.  One choosing the up and coming Dark Lord and the other 
> helping the hand to over throw it.  But why 2?  Even Dumbldore 
> sounded quite astounded when he told Harry that Fawkes gave 2 
> feathers.  It seemed like an oddity that that should happen.  
> Dumbledore even calls the wands/feathers (I forget which one) 
> brothers. 

I don't think we have evidence that the feathers themselves are bad/good.
'It is the wand that chooses the wizard'.
Now the similarity which Ollivander points out is that Harry, he believes, is 
destined *to do* great things whilst Voldy has *done* great things - 
terrible, but great, I think he says.
The wand is a *tool*. I don't believe that wands are good or bad, or have any 
moral sense. But they seem to have some kind of  resonance with a wizard who 
will make them work to their greatest potential. It is up to the wizard 
whether the wand performs good or evil acts. I think it is quite possible 
that Voldy and Harry could use each other's wands pretty effectively ( 
although the wood difference might affect things). We don't know what would 
have happened if Harry had had the choice of *both* wands, do we?

<snip speculation about Greek myth brother parallels>
> 
> Several things have popped in my mind about this flammable bird and 
> his owner.  They are more than what they appear to be.  I think that 
> either or both Fawkes and Dumbledore may be Animagus.  Fawkes is just 
> way too special to be just a bird (just like Scabbers was just way 
> too ordinary to be a magical rat).  He may have another magical 
> aspect that we have not been introduced to yet.  

He's not just a bird he's a *phoenix*. How special can you get?  In fact, 
according to myth, well, western myth at least ( I know they occur in 
Chinese/Japanese myth too) there is only one. Not just special, * unique*. 
This is not to deny that we may learn more of his special powers.


> Animagus purely because Dumbledore taught Transfiguration 
> "back in the day" when we learn that he taught Tom Riddle in CoS.  With 
> Dumbledore teaching Transfiguration, there is no doubt that he has 
> the knowledge and power to be an Animagus.  And he may be an 
> unliscensed Animagus, or else our dear Hermione would have informed 
> us in PoA.

It has been speculated before that he is an animagus. I should say it was 
highly likely. But there is no need for him to be unregistered: Hermione only 
checked the animagi registered that century, Dumbledore is about 150, isn't 
he, so he could have been registered in the previous century.

Eloise


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