Chapter Discussions: Chapter 37 - The lost prophecy

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 124090


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214"
<dumbledore11214 at y...> wrote:

> 
> Discussion questions:
> 
> 1. Do you think we will ever meet Phineas again? What do you think 
> about the possibility of the network of portraits playing even 
> larger role in the later battles?
>

bboyminn:

I'm sure we will meet Phineas again, I'm sure he is outraged that the
last remaining Black was murdered, and worse than that he was murdered
by a combination of another Black (Bellatrix) and Voldemort. 

I also feel, pure intuision, that Phineas will play a role in helping
resolve the Black Family Estate in Harry's favor. 

As far as the Portrait Network playing a future role, I'm sure it
will. Now that Harry knows the portraits can be used as a means of
communication, it opens many possibilities. 

For example, consider when Crouch Sr was found on the grounds and
Harry desperately needed to see the headmaster, instead of wasting his
time with Snape, Harry could have sent one of the portraits to the
headmaster's office to summon him. If he had known that in advance, he
wouldn't have even had to run to the entrance to the headmasters
office, he could have spoke to the first portrait he saw, sent him
after the headmaster, and rushed back to Crouch. I know that's not how
the story needed to go, but it's a good illustration of how the
protraits can be used for communication.

Another example, Harry needs to contact 12 Grimmauld Place, he could
have any portrait he trusts, like the Fat Lady, run to Dumbledore's
office and have Phineus relay a message to headquarters

The portraits open tremendous opportunities not only for communication
but for spying too.
 
> 2. Harry blames himself for Sirius's death. Do you?
> 
> 5. Dumbledore blames himself for Sirius death. Do you?
> 

bboyminn:

Harry may blame himself, and Dumbledore may blame himself, to some
degree, and, feeling empathy for them, I too feel their pain. But as
others have pointed out, Sirus was killed by Bellatrix LeStrange, and
no blame falls anywhere but on her.

We can all look at our lives and say '...what if...' '...if only...',
but what's done is done. The what-if's and if-only's are infinite, you
might as well be saying 'if only' I would win the lottery.


> 3. Dumbledore is sure that Harry IS the person the prophecy talks 
> about. Are you? 
> 
> 7.  Do you agree with the possibility that Neville may turn out to 
> be the real prophecy child? 
> 

bboyminn:

I'm convinced there is room for Dumbledore to have misinterpreted the
Prophecy; that's the very nature of Prophecy's, they are mysterious
and unclear.

It could very well be that, in the end, it will be something that
Neville does that is the key to defeating Voldemort, or maybe a
combination of Harry and Neville. We certainly know that Neville has a
much bigger role in this story that was first implied, and I can't
believe he is in this story for no good reason.

Without a doubt, Harry is vitally important, but I don't believe
/Harry/ is the whole story.


> 4. Harry complains to Dumbledore that Occlumency lessons were 
> weakening him. Dumbledore replies with his usual vow of trust for 
> Snape. Do you trust Snape? 
> 

bboyminn:

Trust is a funny word. Do I trust Snape in the grand broad arc of the
story, yes. Would I trust him in the moment, no. I think Snape is
truly on the good side, but I also believe that Snape will be force to
do some bad things in order to protect himself and continue to hide
his true allegiance.

Hypothetical - Harry is captured by Voldemort while Snape is at
Voldemort's headquaters spying. In order to prove his allegiance to
Voldemort, Snape must torture Harry. Snape will certainly do that, and
 he will make Harry think he is taking great joy in it. In the end,
Snape will redeem himself and show without question that he is aligned
with Dumbledore.


> 6. Voldemort did not choose the pureblood wizard like Neville 
> ...edited... Does this quote make a difference in your view on 
> whether Voldemort himself is sufficiently interested in promoting 
> "purebloodism" or just in grabbing power, no matter who helps him 
> achieve it?
> 

bboyminn:

All fanatical causes need an enemy; Hitler had the Jews, the Islamic
extremists have the United States. But these people were not
interesting in ideology; ideology is merely propaganda used to keep
the masses in line. It's all about money and power. Remember,
according to Voldemort there is no good and evil, which is like saying
there is no difference between muggles and wizards, there is only
power and those unafraid to seek it. 


> 8. Do you think that there is a possibility that the prophecy does 
> not speak about either Harry or Neville? Can you offer completely 
> new and unexpected interpretation of it?
> 

bboyminn:

People have speculated in the extreme on this point. Since by the
ancient calendar, September (which is why it start with 'Sept') is the
seventh month. So maybe that means Hermione is the Prophecy Child, but
I serously doubt it. There is only so much JKR can hide in the subtext
without muddying the whole story.

I think it's very likely that we can expect a new and unforeseen
interpretation, but I don't think it will stray far from Harry and
Neville.


> 9. Dumbledore tells us that Sibyll is the great granddaughter of 
> Cassandra Trelawney. As we know from mythology, nobody believed 
> Cassandra's predictions which turned out to be true. Do you think 
> that JKR is hinting that Sibyll is a more gifted seer that 
> Dumbledore thinks? ...
> 

bboyminn:

I'm curious why you say mythology indicates no one believes Casandra's
predictions, what predictions you heard, and how you know whether or
not they turned out to be true? I think Cassandra was well respected
in the wizard world. So, reasonably, if she was respected, her
predictions were respected.

As far as Sibyll, I think we have ample evidence that she does have
psychic powers. The problem is, she is a trance psychic, which means
she has no way of know when or if she's made a predictions. Since she
speds all her time alone, she could be making predictions all the time
and no one would know. 

This type of psychic is actually very common. Some of the greatest
psychics in the real world have been trance psychics. Note, there is
an obvious difference between psychic who can put themselves in a
trance, and those who spontaneously go into trances. Sibyll would be
the second type.

As far as her more general, psychic skill (note: skills more than
abilities) like tea reading and crystal gazing, she seems reasonably
functional, and more than able to teach others. Her problem is that
she is not too good at interpreting what she sees. For example, she,
on  several occassions, saw portends of Sirius and mistook them for a
Grim, which when you think about it, is a fair mistake.

Conclusion, I don't Sibyll is a great psychic, but she is not without
psychic ability.



> 10.  Who is the infamous eavesdropper?
> 

bboyminn: I really don't have a clue. Pretty rare when I can't invent
an answer.


> 11. Dumbledore tells Harry, "In the end, it mattered not that you 
> could not close your mind.  It was your heart that saved you."  Does 
> this mean that occlumency lessons were unnecessary in the first 
> place? Was Dumbledore aware that Harry has plenty of that power in 
> that room BEFORE possession occurred?
> 

bboyminn:

No, the Occlumency lessons were not unnecessary. Harry at least
learned that he has the power to close his mind. Troubled as the
lessons were, that one bit of knowledge will be worth it's weight in
gold (figuratively speaking). In addition, I think the introduction of
Harry Occlumens ability, foreshadows his need for it at some critical
point in the future. In other words, we haven't seen the last of it.

Not sure what you mean by the second question. Are you referring to
Harry ability to expell Voldemort? Actually, Harry didn't expell him,
Voldemort left because he couldn't stand to face the emotions Harry
was feeling. In addition, Harry was unafraid to die, and more so
actually eager to die in that moment. I'm sure that was a very
vulnerable feeling for Voldemort. Certainly, in that one particular
moment, he possessed Harry assuming Harry would be desperate to stay
alive. It's incomprehensible to him that someone would not fear death.
I'm worried that Harry's lack of fear of death is some unwelcome
foreshadowing.

Are you saying that this event represents a small sample of Harry's
secret power which the Dark Lord knows not? Perhaps, but I'm not sure
JKR has drop the most critical hints to this 'secret unknown power'.

As far as what Dumbledore knew, well he knew the Prophecy foretells
that Harry will have some special power. But I think, for the most
part, the full manifestation of that power is latent, unrealized, in
Harry, so, No, I don't think Dumbledore was aware of its presence or
its extent.


> 12.  Do you think that this chapter was well done "plot wise"? 
> 

bboyminn:

To some extent, I am a 'stream of consciousness' reader. I just let it
flow, and take it as it comes. As long as the writing is sufficiently
well done that I am not drawn out of the book, I'm satisfied.

So, when I read that, there was nothing that forced me out of the
story or out of the moment to stop and think. I was completely
absorbed and eager to find out where the story was going next.

So, given that I remained absorbed, I would have to say it was well done.

I did find this book a little more tedious and less captivating than
the other books, but beyond that statement, I'm going to reserve
judgement until I've read the next book(s). Later events may prove the
depth and importance of things in OotP that seemed less interesting in
the moment.


> 13. We see Dumbledore crying in this chapter for the first time in 
> the books. ... What did you feel when you read about Dumbledore's 
>tear?
>

bboyminn:

Dumbledore has just had to inform a sweet innocent boy of his dark,
terrible, and sadly, inescapable destiny. This was the death of
innocences. Harry can never be the same after this; the child in him
is gone forever. From now on, until Voldemort is vanguished, Harry's
life must be deadly serious. It's very easy to see the foundation of
Dumbledore's sadness, and understand that tear.

Unfortunately, the whole emotional impact of that sad moment was
blunted by Sirius's unsatisfactory death. It was such an empty hollow
death, that I couldn't bring myself to feel the sadness of his loss. 

I certainly understand that sadness, and intellectually, know the
great sense of loss that Harry must feel. I too feel a great sense of
loss, I would have thought that Sirius should have been the last
person to die, since I believed Harry needed him so very very much. 

It's almost like Harry's parents dying again. Having Sirius in his
life opened the door for Harry to, in a sense, have his own parent
back again. Sirius was a foundtain of knowledge and memories about
Harry's parents. Having Sirius was as close as he could get to having
his parent back again. Sadly for all, Sirius was an untapped fountain;
that great bank of knowledge lost forever.

So, while I didn't feel the sadness, I did feel the emptiness and how
unsatisfactory and unresolved that death was. Reading the back post in
this group will clearly establish that we can't even really determine
if Sirius is truly dead and gone, or just hiding behind curtain number
two. 

Speaking of curtain number two, I can't believe we have seen the last
of the Veiled Archway. An icon, a plot device, of that magnitude can't
be mention only to never be seen again. Somehow, it will come into
play again, and I believe in a very significant way.

Just a few thoughts.

Steve/bboyminn