Another question about HBP in russian translation/Heroes or not

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 145160

Alla:
Hmmmm, I am reading "Horcruxes" chapter in Russian translation and 
wondering again whether translator makes too many assumptions here 
again. I mean, at first sight it again seemed to me as logical 
assumption to make, but then I wondered.

Here is the quote in English:

"Ah, poor Lucius.... what with Voldemort's fury about the fact that 
he threw away the Horcrux for his own gain, and the fiasco at the 
Ministry last year, I would not be surprised if he is not secretly 
glad to be safe in Azkaban at the moment" - HBP, p.508 

So, I wonder, do you guys get the sense out of this excerpt that 
Dumbledore was informed about Voldemort's reactions to Diary 
destructions? Because when I read it initially, I thought that 
Dumbledore was simply hypothesizing about Voldie's reactions with 
certainty so to speak, but I probably misread it. After all, how 
else Dumbledore would learn about Voldemort's reactions unless being 
informed by somebody.

In any event, basically in Russian it translated as Dumbledore 
saying that " I was told that Voldemort was being furious when the 
diary was destroyed".

Hmmmm, who told him? Snape or another spy? Does it mean that whoever 
told him does know about Horcruxes or was Voldemort simply furious 
without telling the real reason for his fury except destruction of 
the diary?



Betsy Hp:
> So the redemptive story line for Snape, as seen by the DDM!Snape 
> folks, doesn't have such a large burden on its shoulders as the 
ESE!
> Snape story line would have.  Snape doesn't have to pay for events 
> on the tower.  He probably doesn't even have to pay for his 
actions 
> as a teacher.  (My personal take is that he's *already* paying for 
> his negative interactions with Harry.)  So all book 7 has to cover 
> is his actions as a Death Eater, his role in Lily's and James' 
death.


Alla:

Yes, I understand. DD!M Snape does not really have to pay for 
anything except what he already paid for and that is what would make 
DD!M Snape significantly less interesting to me. I should have 
phrased myself clearer in my previous post. I DO think that 
redemption is possible for OFH!Snape or ESE!Snape, I just hope that 
it is handled very carefully


Betsy Hp: 
<SNIP>
> So book 7 won't *introduce* the redemption of Snape.  It will 
> *reveal* a redemption well under way.  
<SNIP>


Alla:

Yes, I understand that. And here I think lies my answer to Jen Reese.
( if she will read this post of course :-)) She asked in one of her 
posts why ESE! or OFH!version of Snape is more interesting. To me  
it is because it allows Snape to change during the story, not in the 
distant past - Snape was DE , saw the error of his ways, came to 
Dumbledore, boom, his story is done. No, to me Snape who commits 
evil deeds or good deeds in front of us and struggles with 
consequences is more interesting that static Snape.




> Betsy Hp:
> And yet, without Hermione, Harry (and Ron) would never have 
survived 
> PS/SS.  They'd have both died in the devil's snare plant.  Without 
> the Order, Harry would have died in OotP.  Without Fawks, Harry 
> would have been killed by the basilisk in CoS.  Without 
Dumbledore, 
> Harry, Sirius, and Buckbeak would have died in PoA.  
> 
> Harry has had crucial help, without which he would have failed, in 
> every single book in the series. 

Alla:

I should retract my statement as to Ron and Hermione, but only about 
them. I do believe that JKR intends Trio to triumph together and 
while Harry will defeat Voldemort, Ron and Hermione WILL help him at 
the end as they did in PS/SS, IMO. As to everything else - I 
disagree - Fawkes came to Harry BECAUSE of Harry's loyalty. Order 
did  NOT save Harry from possession, Harry's heart did.

As to PoA, I don't want to get into time travel mechanics, but all 
that Dumbledore did IMO was to recognize that time travel already 
occurred and then everything else was to Harry and Hermione .


JMO,

Alla