What's annoying about Harry (WAS: Characters you hate)

[Grey Wolf <greywolf1@jazzfree.com>]

No: HPFGUIDX 51393

Tom Wall wrote:
> Exactly - he could have told Dumbledore at any time after the attack 
> on Mrs. Norris, starting with the scene in Lockhart's office, when 
> Snappe correctly points out that Harry is not being totally honest.

But my main point still holds: telling Dumbledore about the voice in 
the walls would've been useless. (I'm tired of repeating myself - fetch 
my arguments from my previous post). 

> GREY WOLF WROTE:
> I'm pretty sure that all the teachers had realised that 
> the monster was a basilisk by now (OK, all except Lockhart). 
>  
> I REPLY:
> There's no canon to support that. Is that just a MD thing?
> 
> GREY WOLF REPLIED TO MY REPLY: 
> It has nothing to do with MD (little of CoS has). Let me expose the 
> facts:
> 1) the creature is the pet of Salazar Slytherin, famous parseltongue, 
> whose heraldic symbol is a snake
> 2) the creature paralizes.
>  
> I had figured myself that the creature was a basilisk after the 
> attack on Mrs Norris, and I didn't even know point 1 at the time. 
> Dumbledore has been through one series of attacks already. It would 
> take an idiot not to know by then that the creature was a basilisk, 
> after all the details Dumbledore has, and Dumbledore is *NOT* an 
> idiot.
> END QUOTE.
> 
> I REPLY:
> I'm not sure I agree with you on that. 
> 
> 1) The Chamber of Secrets is a legend that Binns disputes in 
> the "present" day: 
> 
> "It is a myth! It does not exist! There is not a shred of evidence 
> that Slytherin ever built so much as a secret broom cupboard!"  
> Professor Binns, CoS 152.
> 
> Even after Riddle's attacks, Binns denies that the Chamber exists. 
> Which means that it is far from established fact in the WW that any 
> of the teachers knew anything. It is definitely not in canon.

Binns doesn't seem to be able to learn. Whatever he knew when he died 
is what he still believes, and it seems he never changes opinion. 
Consider my statement revised: the teachers I'm referring to are the 
heads of the houses (i.e. the ones that were talking toghether just 
after Ginny's disapearance, and the ones Dumbledore would inform of the 
situation). 
 
> 2) Hagrid is booted as a result of the first attacks, and returned as 
> gamekeeper only because of Dumbledore, who argues Hagrid's case to 
> Dippet. But does that mean that Dippet and the previous staff (sans 
> Dumbledore) thought an acromantula could have caused the attack on 
> Myrtle? Doubtful, as an acromantula can't paralyze. 
>
> Therefore, there was and is (until the end of CoS) serious debate 
> within the WW over the existence of the Chamber, it's nature, AND its 
> contents as well.
> 
> You're inferring from the facts that we, as readers, know, that THEY 
> as teachers must've also known what was going on. And that inference 
> is not backed up by canon at all.

The acromantula was never captured. They cannot know what sort of 
spider it was (or even if it *was* a spider). So Dippet might have 
assumed that they had captured the correct person. YOU are the one who 
is using outside information (i.e. that the creature Hagrid had was an 
acromantula) to draw conclusions.

The people who really matter - Dumbledore and the heads of house - knew 
that the creature was a basilisk, and that the chamber existed (as you 
point out yourself on point three - or do you think that Dumbledore 
would've kept the information from Snape and mcGonagall?). I am ready 
to admit that *maybe* the only ones that really knew where those three, 
but then my perception of the intelligence of Sprout and Flitwick would 
be diminished if they cannot put the facts toghether.
 
> 3) Dumbledore, it would appear, knows, at least, that the 
> Chamber exists:
> 
> "It means," said Dumbledore," that the Chamber of Secrets is indeed 
> open again." (CoS 180) 
> 
> But never in canon is it indicated that Dumbledore knew what was 
> inside the chamber.

There are many things that are never spelled out in the books, and 
nevertheless can be inferred without making big leaps of faith. 
Dumbledore's knowledge of the creature is one of those, in my eyes- 
after all, it is *very* obvious. Dipplet didn't *want* to believe that 
the Chamber of Secrets existed, but once you accept that the chamber 
exists and that Slytherin's creature is inside, a creature that turns 
people into statues, it really takes an idiot not to make the final 
connection, as I said.

The rest of the WW might not want to believe in the chamber, but 
Dumbledore does and, him being quite intelligent, *had* to know what 
the creature was.

> "No second year could have done this," said Dumbledore firmly. "It 
> would take Dark Magic of the most advanced -" (Cos 142)
> 
> In fact, Dumbledore's suggestion that dark magic could have been 
> involved indicates that, far from being certain as to the contents of 
> the chamber, he and the rest of the staff only have guesses.
> 
> -Tom

NO, he means every word. What sort of spell would *you* use to 
*imitate* the *gaze of the basilisk*? Answer: "Dark Magic of the most 
advanced...". Thus, the conclusion: no second year could've done it.

But the Basilisk comes pre-enchanted, so to speak. Dumbledore works on 
need-to-know basis, and he didn't want to tell to the world at large at 
that point "only Voldemort's kind knows that spell, but it's besides 
the point because I know that what attacked this cat was a basilisk - 
yes, you heard me well, there is a basilisk, the king of snakes, 
he-of-killing-stare free on the school, it's roaming and hasn't had 
anything to eat for the last 1000 years".

That wouldn't have been a good idea, IMO.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf