book 7: back to the future theory

[Fred Waldrop <fredwaldrop@yahoo.com>]

No: HPFGUIDX 53118

Tanya wrote:

"My theory is that Harry is actually "the stranger. The teenage boy, 
dark-haired and pale" that Frank Bryce sees on the day of the Riddle 
Murders." 
"If Harry, on the other hand, were to use the time-turner in his 5th 
or 6th year, he would not yet be able to apparate. He'd have to break 
into the Riddle house, using traditional methods (handy-dandy multi-
purpose pen-knife, anyone)?" 
"Why would Harry go-back in time to this particular event? Riddle 
killing his family could be more important than we know yet. Perhaps 
Harry is trying to stop it."

Now me:
Hello all, Fred Waldrop here.
When I read what Tanya said, I couldn't help but wonder about 
that "twinkle" in Dumbledore's eyes as Harry tells him his story of 
how Voldemort has returned in GoF.
Now we all know that for V to come back, he needs 3 things, in 
reverse order to make a point:(chap.22 US, page641-642)
3)"Blood of the enemy....forcibly taken....you will....resurrect your 
foe"
2)Flesh of the servant - willingly given - you will - revive - your 
master" 
1)Bone of the father, unknowingly given, you will renew your son"

Did you catch it? 

"UNKNOWINGLY GIVEN"? What would happen if before he Mr Riddle, the 
father, knew his son was coming back for the bone? 
Well, it is no longer "unknown" if the person knows about it in 
advance, is it? And, Harry really doesn't have to change anything, 
have to worry about having the future altered in any way by doing 
this. 

And this would sort of help Stacy out.
Stacy writes:
"I don't want to be the wet blanket theory here because I really am 
intrigued by Tanya's idea especially that there may be clues in the 
past that Harry has gone back and changed very specific things, but 
as far as killing Voldemort off in the past I am skeptical. First of 
all, plot-wise it's a cop-out way to solve the problem of Voldemort. 
Secondly, canon states that the time-turner can only be used for 
specific purposes with finite results. (Hermione tells Harry that 
they can't save Sirius because they don't know what chain of events 
that would set into motion, they must only do as Dumbledore asks for 
which they already have clues of what has been done.)"

Me again; 
With my theory, you do have a very specific thing happening, "go tell 
Mr. Riddle that his son, Tom, is going to use your bones in a spell 
after he is dead". Then, leave. Nothing harmed, no time line 
changed, Voldemort wouldn't know about it, and the spell would be 
done wrong.
And, as I said in the beginning of my statement, it would also 
explain the twinkle in Dumbledore's eyes after seeing the cut on 
Harry's arm. Because, I'm sure he knows exactly how that spell works, 
and when he is sure of which spell it is, he has an extremely odd 
thought. 
"What if Harry can change one thing in the events that preceded all 
of this? What if Harry goes back before 'V' kills Mr Riddle,  and 
told him of the coming situation? Could this act, would this act, 
change things still to come?" 
And that, IMO, is what the "twinkle" was, an idea.

Fred Waldrop