Royal Albert Hall Appearance

[dzeytoun]

No: HPFGUIDX 106350

> SSSusan:

> Dzeytoun, I thank you for contributing your recollection of the 
> context of the quote Vmonte sent in.  It will keep me from getting 
my 
> hopes up *too* high.
> 
> **BUT STILL!!**   I think, in particular, the phrase "[DD] allows 
> Harry to do an awful lot of things he maybe wouldn't allow another 
> pupil to do" fits very nicely with all those dangerous encounters, 
> task-related & skill-testing & ability-advancing "adventures," and 
> Harry's "I must save the day" actions.  In fact, I think the phrase 
> fits better with those things--*and* with the possibility of the 
> SS "obstacle course" as being set up for Harry--than it does w/ 
> describing DD's allowing Harry to encounter DE kids & a sadistic 
> Snape.

I really think that the idea of Dumbledore "testing" Harry through 
these trials just doesn't hold water for two reasons:

1)  In the case of SS/PS, in order for Dumbledore to have set up 
the "test" with Quirrell, he would have had to have known that 
Quirrell would go for the stone the moment he (Dumbledore) left 
Hogwarts.  He would have had to have known that Harry, et. al., would 
choose that moment to approach Hagrid, and to have known what Hagrid 
would say.  He would have to have known how Harry and company would 
react to what Hagrid said.  In short, he would have had to have 
knowledge available only to Jehovah - or J.K. Rowling.  Now, the 
events in the movie and in the book differ somewhat in detail, 
however as JKR was intimately involved in the movie process, both 
versions have her approval and can be considered canonical.

In addition, this presumes that Dumbledore is cold-hearted enough to 
expose his students to a year of Voldemort's presence, as well as 
stupid enough to risk Voldemort getting his hands on the stone just 
so he (Dumbledore) could gain some very uncertain benefits 
in "testing" Harry.  In short, in strains credulity much more than 
the idea that Harry and company could have fought their way alone 
through the stone's protections.

We might say that Dumbledore did not know that Quirrell was hosting 
Voldemort, but in that case what was the purpose of setting up 
the "obstacle course" for Harry? Without Voldemort's presence, why 
would Harry try to reach the stone?  Unless Dumbledore intended to 
manufacture a fake crisis and Voldemort just happened to stumble into 
the middle of things.  Once again this strains credulity more than 
the idea that they got past the protections unaided.

2)  Heroes do unrealistic things and fantasy heroes do extremely 
unrealistic things.  It is unrealistic that three first years got to 
the stone without help or a previous set-up.  But if realism had been 
invoked and they had been shut out, there would have been no story.  
As has been said before, JKR is a puppetmaster, the story needs no 
other.  It is unrealistic in second year that Harry finds the Chamber 
when the adults cannot, and that he defeats the basilisk.  But 
realism would have left Harry dead - end of series.  JKR conceived 
these events, there is no need to hypothesize a manipulative 
Dumbledore.  Realism in third year would have left Harry a gibbering 
idiot, his soul sucked by Dementors.  Realism in fourth year would 
have left him defeated in the tri-wizard tournament, or dead at 
Voldemort's hand.  But his adventures were not carefully orchestrated 
by Dumbledore, but by a very real person named J.K. Rowling.

Fifth year is the ultimate test.  No one that I know of argues that 
Dumbledore manipulated Harry into going to the MoM.  Yet, the events 
there are the most unrealistic of all.  A group of fourteen and 
fifteen year old students walk in past the defenses of the center of 
government and into the heart of classified research.  Realism would 
have left them shut out at the door.  This same group then proceeds 
to hold off a group of experienced murderers and the Dark Lord 
himself, sustaining only relatively minor injuries until help 
arrives.  Realism would have left them dead.  Like I say, no one 
argues that these events were orchestrated by Dumbledore, yet they 
are the most testing, and the most unrealistic, of all.  They have 
been orchestrated, but by the author, not the Headmaster.

It is understandable when faced with seeming contradictions of logic 
to hypothesize hidden factors and even conspiracies.  But that 
ignores the basic conventions of heroic fantasy fiction.  Harry is 
the hero.  He does unrealistic things.  That's the way things are in 
heroic fantasy fiction.  Otherwise, we are not dealing with a story 
by J.K. Rowling, but one by Oliver Stone (just rent JFK if you want 
to see a master of conspiracy theory at work).  Of course, I suppose 
J.K. Rowling COULD be Oliver Stone in disguise.  Now that would be a 
conspiracy!

Dzeytoun