Conspiracies and re-assessments

[snow15145]

No: HPFGUIDX 111656

Kneasy (snipped)
I quite often get castigated for thinking along these lines - "Not
everything is a conspiracy" True, but I tend to specifically target
those bits that *could* be explained by such thinking. "Sometimes a
cigar is only a cigar." (The latter are fine words from someone who
built a career on seeing what he wanted to see and ignoring
inconvenient facts.) These days I rarely bother responding to posts
containing this phrase; usually (though admittedly not always) it's an
indication that the poster has been challenged with an idea that
they're not comfortable with but is unable find contrary canon with
which to counter it.

An unwillingness to even consider the merits of a theory that has an
arguable canonical base (even though it may eventually turn out to be
wrong) shows a deplorable lack of intellectual curiosity IMO. What's
the point of entering a discussion with pre-formed,
never-to-be-modified-under-any-circumstances-I-don't-care-what-can-be-
derived-from-canon conclusions clutched firmly to the bosom?

Posters propose theories and they expect them to be dissected,
challenged, rejected or modified. Dismissal with nothing but a trite
phrase is not an honest option; it's a flaunting of personal 
prejudices
in an attempt to by-pass discussion - and discussion is what this site
is supposed to be about.

Snow:
I really hate to agree with you when you obviously are willing, 
wanting and waiting for a very good disagreeing rival to ruffle your 
feathers. I am anything but a worthy opponent especially when I agree 
with you that some posters refuse to bend to a theory or proposal 
that their character could possibly be someone different than what 
they have convinced themselves they definitely are. It's not as much 
a "lack of intellectual curiosity" but a refusal to accept an 
inevitability that could be JKR's, not mine. If you become so 
transfixed to an ideal that you are not willing to see another 
possibility, you are cheating yourself out of the enjoyment of the 
amazing puzzlement of the whole scope. These books are not about one 
specific character but a host of characters, that good, bad or 
indifferent have their own part in the master plan. 

Kneasy (again snipped)

And DD - he first appears as the saviour/mentor/guardian figure to the
putative hero. A nice, comfortable, traditional role. Slowly over the
books this has been modified. He has much more important things on his
plate than Harry. He has a society to save, a war to fight - and Harry
has a pre-destined part to play in the outcome. And that's something 
DD
has known for as long as Harry has been alive. So, is his interest in
Harry altruistic, or is Harry a means to an end? DD's motivations are
nicely complex - and to a certain extent conflicting. Given the
choice which will turn out to be more important, Harry or the entire
WW? That is, assuming DD is around to make the choice; my bet is that
he won't be, that someone else will have to choose.




Snow:
I don't know about the Dumbledore appearing as the holier than thou 
scenario from the get-go concerning Harry. Dumbledore from the first 
encounter in the first book appears to be aloof to what had just 
transpired to close friends less than 24 hours before, let alone his 
self appointed guardianship to their child who was placed in the 
hands of in-laws who had to be bribed in some manner to even take 
him. Also the bit too celebrating attitude for what had just happened 
to the very people he asked to be secret keeper for. (This so reminds 
me of Dumbledore's unusual behavior of Pettigrew's escape, an almost 
identical response to what should have been anything but the relaxed, 
calm attitude that was displayed by him) It seems Dumbledore was 
celebrating something different than everyone else that night after 
Godric's Hollow. This was the very first instance that alerted me to 
the possibility that Dumbledore has a "for the greater good" idealism 
that is not Harry but involves Harry. 

This pre-destined Harry is just a part of a pre-destined overall 
plan. Everyone had a choice but Dumbledore was ready and prepared for 
the inevitable choice they made.
Just take a look at the wands created for not only Tom 
Riddle/Voldemort but also the eventuality of Harry. The wand chooses 
the wizard, how clever of Dumbledore!  The wizard does not in this 
case have a choice does he, but I think Dumbledore does. Too curious 
indeed that Harry's wand chose to choose him after the many that he 
had tried unsuccessfully. Not really that curious since the prophecy 
pre-empted the decision of who should be destined for that wand. 
Dumbledore supplied Olivander with not one but two feathers from his 
own phoenix Fawkes with a preordained destiny in mind. Whether this 
plan that was devised, most likely since the birth of Tom Riddle, 
will succeed is in the choices made by Harry but very closely watched 
and nurtured in a positive direction by Dumbledore and company in 
order to proceed to the plan that had been created long before the 
prophecy. Of course this is all in my opinion but I think that is 
what this site is all about
take it or leave, claim it or use it
for 
the actual outcome is not up to me but JKR who I am open hearted to 
whatever destiny awaits any character to her ultimate climatic 
ending. 

Kneasy:
Conspiracy and betrayal; people or things not being as anticipated.
Nice, knotty problems. Who to trust, why did he do that, what will
he/she do under those circumstances, who is hiding what and why?
Expect the unexpected. That's what HP is all about.

Snow:
Yes! Isn't it lovely! I particularly like the self-satisfaction to go 
head-to-head with the magnificence of JKR and possibly beat her to 
the punch, so-to-speak, it can be very exhilarating considering the 
lack of information given in over a half a million words.