Time-Travel- it's Narrative Function

[sevenhundredandthirteen]

No: HPFGUIDX 79043

The narrative function of Time-Travel in Harry Potter. 


There are really two theories as to how time-travel in HP works.
Neither can be proved without a doubt, nor can either be disproved.

The choice we all make as to which theory we support comes mostly 
from the narrative function that that style of time-travel would play 
in further books.

On one hand there is the internally consistent singular time-line 
theory. This theory says that time occurs only once and that Harry 
really did see himself across the lake casting the Patronus.

The impact of this theory is that it wraps up the events of PoA 
without any gaps. Every occurrence can be explained.  It also useful 
as a metaphor in portraying themes found in the series. 
The downside of this theory is that it can be seen as too simple, as 
it doesn't really open up any doors for future plot twists.

On the other hand there is the multi-occurring time-line theory (also 
known as the `it happened twice' theory). This theory states that 
time occurs many times, the first time without the time-travellers or 
their actions in it, the second time with them.

The impact of this theory is that it opens up huge possibilities for 
future twists in the plot- mostly centred around the question of "Who 
cast the Patronus that saved Harry et al the first time?" It also 
opens up an infinite number of future uses for time-travel in the 
series.

The downside of this theory is that it presents many questions, 
which, at this point in the text, cannot be answered with much except 
speculation.

Most people understand how both theories work and accept the 
existence of alternate theories. The choice they make about which one 
to support is based , then, on the narrative role that Time-Travel 
will play in the series. Do you want Harry to discover that Snape 
actually saved his life again in PoA when he was close to being soul-
sucked by a Dementor? Or, do you want Harry to find his father in 
himself and come to terms with the theme that he can't control time, 
on both a literal and metaphorical level?

The multi-occurrence theory creates the potential for massive shocks. 
It bangs. It bangs hugely- because, as far as we are aware, Harry 
himself believes that he cast the Patronus all along. How devastating 
would it be to find out that it was (for example) Snape saving him 
neck all along and that he was actually not needed to cast the 
Patronus at all??? Big issues- Harry suffers shock, then feel 
redundant, then incredibly stupid for thinking that he was actually 
being important. He has huge issues with Snape anyway, this would top 
the lot. Other bangs could be that he literally saw James Potter-
 `Your father is alive, Harry!' BANG! That is was Lupin or Dumbledore 
any host of other people... The possibilities are endless- the bang 
is the limit. Of note: the Time-Turner ending in PoA pretty much 
bangs in either version of the events- that is, it bangs the same 
with the `it happened once theory' or the `it only happened once' 
theory.

The `it happened twice' theory also makes the future use of time-
travel highly exciting. That is, if you can go back in time and 
change how events unfold, then we could have Harry going back to stop 
Voldemort being born as a baby. We could have Harry going back to 
Godric's Hollow to stop Voldemort killing his parents. We could have 
Harry go back and stopping Sirius falling through the veil. These are 
all big bangs, and they would change the course of the books 
suddenly, unexpectedly and dramatically.

Then, on the other hand, a singular-occurrence theory opens up a door 
for all kinds of thematic symbolism. Such as: the idea that Harry 
will ultimately have to realise that only he can ever save himself 
and that he is alone in the world. The concept of finding his father 
alive in himself. The idea that he will have to accept that there are 
always things out of your control and that he must choose how to face 
them. That is every bad experience there may always be a tiny bit of 
good, and in every good experience there is always a bit of bad. 

Most of these themes can already be seen reflected in other parts of 
the book- especially the end of GoF and OoP. Harry accepting that 
only he can save himself is reflected in the prophecy and Harry's 
responsibility to defeat Voldemort. The theme of his father is 
reflected in OoP where he finds out that having James inside himself 
might not be necessarily a good thing. Also, Harry begins to question 
whether he is arrogant (Ron and the prefect badge) which is how we 
see James portrayed, and the development of the relationship between 
Sirius and Harry which centres mostly on Sirius projecting James onto 
Harry. The idea of things always being out of his control is 
reflected in Sirius's tragic demise, and the Daily Prophet's anti-
Potter campaign. The prophecy and its affects show how other people 
choices impact uncontrollably on Harry. The whole idea of good and 
bad being simultaneous in every situation has always been a major 
theme throughout the book- see these posts 78529,78532, 78533, for a 
wonderful exploration of the ideas of the shades of grey.

So, there are essentially two options as to which version of time-
travcel to accept. (I know that there are many more theories, but 
they can generlally be grouped by association with one of the ones I 
have described above). Both impact on the story, although in entirely 
different ways.

* * *

I made this post so that I can continually refer to it as the 'agree 
to disagree post.' So that in all future time-travel 
discussions/blood-baths I can always look back and think that the 
choice of which time-travel theory you support is really just a 
personal choice in how you would like to see the story evolve.

Although, I have the "and why I support the 'it happened once' post" 
in the works... :-)

~<(Laurasia)>~