House points and Dumbledore

[Grey Wolf <greywolf1@jazzfree.com>]

No: HPFGUIDX 51168

Tom Wall wrote:
> 
> GREY WOLF WROTE:
> I don't assume anything about Quirrels abilities. 
> I assume that he cheated all the way. 
> 
> I REPLY:
> Fair enough. Your ideas about how he cheated 
> were excellent, re: back door! Heidi also had 
> some creative thoughts too. Accio? Didn't cross 
> my mind at all. And bypassing the chessboard, 
> you know, it never occurred to me that somehow 
> Dumbledore had to do that? ;-)

Well, he *was* in a hurry to save Harry. He didn't have time to play a 
full chess game, after all (unless he played the check in three, that 
is - but I hope not!)
 
> GREY WOLF WROTE:
> Then it is your problem, but I can accept that 
> Ron is a good enough chess player. It is not 
> contrived, unless you consider the whole books 
> in that light (a love spell that saves the child 
> from certain death? Harry a natural on a broom? 
> Hermione being the best student of the year?).
>   
> I REPLY:
> Considering JKR to have taken the "deus ex machina" 
> (ie Fawkes is the best example of this) approach says 
> nothing about my appreciation for the books. 

OK, we could debate endlessly about Deus Ex Machina in Harry Potter 
books. In my main theory, there is NO Deus Ex Machina whatsoever. I am 
speaking, of course, of Magic Dishwasher. More on that later, though.

<snip>
> 
> GREY WOLF WROTE:
> And yet you're still missing the point. Read my words again: I didn't 
> say that Voldemort was powerful enough, I said *Quirrelmort* was 
> powerful enough.
>
> I REPLY:
> No point to miss. There is zero canon to support your assumptions 
> about Quirrellmort's abilities. I'm asking a legitimate question.

He's a DADA teacher confident of his powers enough to go looking for 
Vampires in a forgotten forest in Albania. That indicates that he is 
something to be taken into account. But the point was (and is) that you 
don't have to be Voldemort to defeat Harry in a magical duel. Harry 
himself, four years later, knows enough spells to defeat himself when 
he was eleven (note of caution, I have been known to revolt stomachs 
with my non-regular use of spells). This is how it could have been 
done:

Quirrell casts a Expeliarmo, just to make sure. Then, accio heart (if 
it's possible). Else, wingardium leviosa to Harry's clothes. Drops him 
from the height of the room. Accio to Harry, directing him towards one 
of the walls. Repeat accios and wingardiums ad nauseam until Harry 
cracks his head open. Accio brain. End of fight, by anhilation of the 
rival. And all spells that a third-year can cast (and I assume Quirrel 
went all the way in Hogwarts, and I think you won't discuss that, will 
you?)
 
> I WROTE:
> Unless we're working from different texts, that's not the case.
> 
> "...for the best-played game of chess Hogwarts has seen in many 
> years..." (PS/SS 305)
>  
> No mention of self-sacrifice there.
> 
> GREY WOLF WROTE:
> We are reading the same text, but we are interpreting differently.

> I REPLY:
> I'm not interpreting anything. That's verbatim. No mention of self-
> sacrifice. I appreciate your metaphor for the value of pieces and 
> self-sacrifice in the interest of the greater good, I do, but they're 
> all unrelated. Dumbledore gave Ron the points for a well played game 
> of chess. Nothing more. I contest that an eleven year old could have 
> played chess that well.  It seemed too easy.

No, you *are* interpreting, just as I am. You asume that a game is 
played "best" for some reason (as yet unspecified) and I asume it is 
because Ron demonstrated the ultimate chess ability to sacrifice 
pieces. Ron demonstrated that ability beyond any other player in 
Hogwarts ever by self-sacrify, but the point is that what he 
demonstratd was chess ability. I'd like to hear your views (i.e. 
interpretation) on what "the best-played game" means because, as I said 
in my previous post, it *has* to be interpreted, and the three most 
obvious ones are: 1) Ron demonstrated kasparov-like abilities, 
steamrolling over the white pieces (doubtful, since Ron probably had no 
queen and whites did), 2) because he won in the end after a very close 
match (doubtful, too, since all they did was sacrifice a knight - not a 
particularly important piece, except at the start) and 3) he 
demonstrated having the soul of a chess player, by demonstrating the 
qualities a chess player should have (my point).

> I REPLY:
> But if you could see the sizes, it's a super easy 
> puzzle. No lateral thinking involved at all.

Which is exactly the point: straight, clear logic is a rare gift in the 
WW, and Hermione is awarded points for having it. The fact that she's 
muggle born (and thus, that she *does* have the logical training) has 
to be ignored (or are you a racist? No, of course not). Hermione hasn't 
given in to the WW - she has kept her own mind, and points should be 
awarded because she's a role to be followed (in the logic department, 
if nothing else).

> There's no canon for McGonagall's chess 
> skills, correct. But whatever the case, I think it's 
> too easy, if an eleven year old can get through. 
> 
> You know, was I the only one who thought that the protections for the 
> stone were too simplistic? I'm encountering way more resistance on 
> that comment than I thought I would. It seemed completely obvious to 
> me that the protections were too simplistic. That was my first 
> objection to PS/SS, was that if three eleven year olds could get 
> through, then the stone must not have been well protected. Sans, of 
> course, the Mirror of Erised, which, IMHO, *was* a brilliant way to 
> keep it safe.
> 
> -Tom

Ah, NOW, we're getting somewhere. Yes, The task seem too easy, don't 
they? But that is because they have been engineered *specifically* for 
Harry and his friends. [Grey Wolf goes into MDDT mode]. The story is 
long and convoluted (as all MD related business; it *is* some 200 post 
long, at the very least), but lest say that it was all part of a 
"training excercise" for Harry and co, to test both their courage and 
their determination (as well as to give Harry the oportunity to face 
Voldemort, and thus grow, and maybe even finish him off with his love 
protection).

And since I'm in MDDT mode, I might as well tackle Deus Ex Machina. The 
way I (we) see it, the events at the end of PS have been planned by 
Dumbledore (he was even close enough to arrive "just in time" to save 
Harry - coincidence my foot). Same can be said about CoS: Dumbledore 
made sure that Harry knew about the Fawkes, in case he needed it (I'm 
pretty sure Dumbledore knew the monster was a basilisk, and thus that 
Harry would need the bird). What you call Deus Ex Machinas are just 
Dumbledore's plans. As you yourself noted, there is less of them in the 
following books - Dumbledore's envoy in PoA is Snape, which manages to 
get himself knocked out, and in GoF Dumbledore doesn't even see the 
Portkey!Cup twist, so there is no back-up ready for Harry at the GG 
(Graveyard Gathering) (unless you count Cedric "Spare" Diggory, which I 
don't).

Check the archives - I don't have the numbers of the posts handy, but 
you might want to give a try at MD. It might help you make more sense 
of many things.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf, that couldn't end the night's posting without a mention to 
Magic Dishwasher