GH re-re-revisited

[dungrollin]

No: HPFGUIDX 115305


I can't seem to preview this for some reason, so hope it doesn't end 
up with tortuously unpleasant paragraphing.
 
> Kneasy:
> You mean you actually found something you were looking for by
> using Yahoo!Mort?
> Now there's a novelty.

Dungrollin:
Beginners luck, I'm sure - I certainly can't find the same post 
again now.

> Kneasy:
> That Prophecy. What a pain. 
<snip>
> The wondering about whether it has already been fulfilled in its 
> entirety was sparked by my natural suspicions and incipient 
> paranoia - was JKR pulling a fast one? Giving us something 
> deliberately obscure (but basically unhelpful for future 
> theorising) to worry over and to concentrate on while she stacked 
> the deck elsewhere.
> 
> I don't trust DD to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing 
but 
> the truth. 
<snip>
> And he'd be a right mug to 
> disclose anything truly significant to Harry when Harry has Voldy 
> trolling around inside his mind.
> He has this plan,  he's working to an agenda we wot not of. He's 
> done some very odd things for an omniscient, world number one 
> wizard. One of my first major posts was a performance review and 
> job evaluation of A.P.W.B. Dumbledore - 65696 'FLOOZY No.1 - The 
> Dumbledore Papers' 
> For someone reputedly so smart he's been remarkably inept -  unless
> it's deliberate.

Dungrollin:
Ha!  Just read it, and loved it.

Dungrollin previously: 
> > If DD's right *and* telling the truth, then all is as it seems.  
> > Voldy hears about the boy born at the end of July to those who 
> > thrice defied him, Lily unwittingly saves Harry by dying, 
> > Voldemort tries to AK Harry, curse rebounds and Voldy's gas. DD 
> > guesses why Harry survived, and uses Lily's sacrifice to protect 
> > Harry at the Dursley's, he also guesses at the time that there 
> > may be a connection between Harry and Voldy.
> > 
> Kneasy:
> Except... Voldy had not achieved immortality. Unless DD possesses 
> info we don't have, how could he know that Voldy would survive an 
> AK? Many posters also think that for the 'sacrifice' to be truly 
> that, then Lily did not defend herself or Harry other than 
verbally 
> and by standing in Voldy's way. She didn't fight, she offered her 
> own life - not an easy or natural thing to do in the 
circumstances. 
> How could DD be so sure that would be or was the actual case?

Dungrollin:
That's a verrry good question.  How the hell was DD so sure?  Sorry 
to quote the barmy old codger again, but: 
`You were in more danger than perhaps anyone but I realised.  
Voldemort had been vanquished [`vanquished' - noted] hours before, 
but his supporters – and many of them are almost as terrible as he – 
were still at large, angry, desperate and violent. And I had to make 
my decision, too, with regard to the years ahead.  Did I believe 
that Voldemort was gone for ever? No.  I knew not whether it would 
be ten, twenty or fifty years before he returned, but I was sure he 
would do so, and I was sure, too, knowing him as I have done, that 
he would not rest until he killed you.'

`Knowing him as I have done'? What's that all about? Is this his way 
of saying that he knows exactly what steps Voldemort took to protect 
himself from death?  But then... the answers to the two questions 
JKR said we *should* be wondering about might be the same... And she 
didn't think anyone would guess them. Well, perhaps I'll come back 
to that later, once we've figured out what happened at GH. (Ahem - 
nothing like naïve optimism, is there?) 

By the way, Kneasy, I'm in agreement that DD's not ESE, but 
unquestionably somewhat selective when it comes to the truth (he 
says something to this effect at the end of PS – `I will not, of 
course, lie').  Do you think he *does* lie, or do you think he's 
super-careful with his phraseology?  I keep coming back to JKR's 
words about him being the epitome of goodness, so I'm somewhat loath 
to think he lies directly.  
Caveat: Or, at least, that he *frequently* lies directly without a 
very good reason.  Any ideas (even if it's only in one or two 
instances from canon) how we can distinguish between the two?  

Dungrollin previously:
> > My idea (which I may not have made entirely clear) was that it 
> > was Voldy's attempt to incorporate the `power that the Dark Lord 
> > knows not' into himself that made the somethingorotherus spell 
> > backfire, rather than Lily's sacrifice.  That there's something 
> > about Voldy that means not only that he doesn't have this power 
> > and despises it, but also that in trying to fill himself with it 
> > (without reading the label first), he nearly destroyed himself.
> > 
> Kneasy:
> That's a possibility. I have a hankering for a failed possession 
> attempt. It wouldn't show on the wand replay and it gives some 
sort 
> of explanation for Voldy leaving bits of himself behind. But what 
> do I know?
> 

Dungrollin:
Too modest, dear sir. Yes...
*But*...
Why possess a toddler?  My understanding (limited though it may be) 
of possession, is that it's about forcing someone to do something 
they don't want to do.  Or forcing them to do something that the 
possessor can't do themselves. Or else, forcing them to do something 
that's a smidge dangerous, and the possessor would rather someone 
else snuffed it if the plan goes pear-shaped.

What could he gain from possessing baby Harry?  15 month-old Harry 
was filling nappies and gurgling in his cot, he can't have been in a 
position to do anything useful. And what was there to do? Voldy's 
already knocked off James and Lily. If he wants to read Harry's mind 
to check whether he's a potential competitor for the 
EvilBastardoftheMillenium cup, he should use Legithingy, shouldn't 
he?  Can you read a wizard's powers like that?  What could he gain 
from *possessing* Harry?  Means and opportunity granted in spades, 
but where's the motive? 

Which reminds me of the post I was originally going to write when I 
got sidetracked by all this.  I don't have time to do it now, maybe 
later.  I was going to check out all the instances we have of 
possession in the books and compare and contrast, because it smells 
a bit fishy to me.  What we learn about the wee beasties in the 
Albanian forest, Quirrell, Ginny, and then Harry in the MoM seem to 
me to be wildly different experiences.  (If someone else has the 
time, please do; or point me to where it's already been done...)

And magical larceny wouldn't show up on the wand replay either, 
would it?

Kneasy:
> But don't forget that the very first line of the Prophecy says 
that 
> Harry has power – sufficient to knock off Voldy, even though at 
> that point it doesn't classify it as 'unknown by Voldy'. He'd 
still 
> be interested in having a peek, and accessing it if he could, I  
> think. What he wouldn't expect is for some snotty brat in Pampers 
> to bite back. There are times when I despair at the ineptitude of 
> villains, I really do. Why mess around
> when he could've fed Harry to Nagini? Problem solved.
 
Dungrollin:
Of course, you're right. Voldy could well have assumed the first 
line meant magical power, and it doesn't knock the idea down.  I 
just originally thought that hearing `power the D.L. knows not' 
would give him a little extra... encouragement, to explore/pinch 
powers, rather than just AK Harry asap.

But that doesn't necessarily mean that it's what whoever was 
speaking through Sybill meant.  I can play at twisting that prophecy 
too... 

The first `power' mentioned, `the power to vanquish the Dark Lord', 
can be read as potential, opportunity, capability, or even 
authority, and not just as skill or ability, or magical power. 

Not that that changes much for the present discussion, I suppose.

If we're right about it not being an AK (I say `we' but ... well, 
anyway -) then either Voldy heard only the first line and assumed 
that it meant magical power, or he heard more and *knew* it, and 
DD's lying or mistaken (again).

Or perhaps - Oh dear. I just had a thought that will take a lot of 
chocolate to work through.  But won't post it now, as bed beckons.

Ta-ra,
Dungrollin.

PS – I like SSSusan's idea that the eyewitness to the GH incident 
was a painting.  Remember reading something (though have absolutely 
no recollection of when or where) about the possibility of there 
being a painting of Godric Griffindor in DD's study.  Could have 
been You Know What contamination, though.