*MY* confusion about the Time Turner

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 124116


SSSusan wrote:
> > > JKR actually muddies the waters a bit when she "allows" Hermione
> > > to say, "There must be something that happened around now that 
> > > [DD] wants us to change." Similarly, Hermione's comment about 
> > > lots of witches & wizards having killed their past AND FUTURE 
> > > selves did a disservice to people's understanding.

Debbie/elfundeb:
> > Clearly these statements, and the one that "we're breaking one of 
> > the most important wizarding laws!  Nobody's supposed to change 
> > time, nobody!" that cast so much doubt about what's really 
> > happening.  It makes me wonder whether JKR fully understands the 
> > principles she uses.
 
bboyminn:
> This is a common fandom trap; one we all fall into. We are so
> desperate the make sense of things that we take general statements,
> and try to make them absolute. But people rarely if ever speak in
> absolute statements. Much of what we get from what people say to us,
> we draw from context.
> 
> So, when Hermione wonders what they are suppose to 'change', she is
> simply choosing the simpliest and most direct way of making her
> meaning known within the context of the moment. 
> 
> She is simply wondering out loud what it is that Dumbledore wants 
> them to DO, and 'change' is a simple, shorthand, in context way of 
> saying it. Much easier to say 'change' in a general context, and 
> get on with it, than to sit for half an hour trying to determine 
> what would be the exactly correct and perfect word to use.
> 
> There is no inconsistancy between Hermione's use of the 
> word 'change' in 'what are we suppose to change', and her use of 
> the word 'change' in 'we aren't suppose to change anything, it's 
> against the law'. The context is very different in those two 
> statements; one is general, the other is specific.


SSSusan:
I agree.  In the part of my post which was snipped, I went on to say 
this:

>>Rather similarly to the recent discussion of "willingly"
vs. "unwillingly" in regards to Petunia, and how she could have
unwillingly [grudgingly] but still willingly [voluntarily] taken
Harry in, I think JKR is letting Hermione use a more "vernacular"
definition of "change" [meaning, to cause something to be different
than it would have been IF no TTing had happened], as opposed to the
more standard sense in which most people would think of it [to cause
something which DID happen to be REDONE in a different way].<<

What I was "complaining" about when I said it was unfortunate the JKR 
had "muddied the waters" was that it would've been *easier* for 
people who do struggle with TT if she had found a word or term other 
than "change" for Hermione to have used.  I can speak from experience 
that I had a hard time getting my mind wrapped around TTing, and much 
of the "You can--" "No, you can't--" "But she said--" disagreements 
we've seen over this topic might've been easier to have worked 
through if Hermione [JKR] had chosen a different word.  

I agree with you, Steve, about one use being general and one being 
more specific; I'm just saying it would've made things *easier* for 
the reader trying to figure out JKR's version of TT if she'd not 
used "change" in both senses.


Finally, Betsy wrote:
> > > The big question I've had was how Dumbledore was aware of the
> > > possibility that Buckbeak escaped through time manipulation.  I
> > > wonder if one of his many office gadgets alerts him to Time-
> > > Turner use (handy to regulate a student's use of such a device) 
> > > and that cued him in to keep an eye out for irregularities.
 
Debbie/elfundeb:
> > Dumbledore knew that Buckbeak had escaped because he had gone 
> > with Macnair to Hagrid's hut for the execution.  He also knew 
> > that Sirius' only avenue of escape from the locked room was 
> > through the window, which meant he had to escape by air.  And he 
> > knew Hermione had a time-turner.  Dumbledore simply put two and 
> > two together ...

bboyminn: 
> On this last point, I agree with Debbie/elfundeb. I really don't buy
> the idea that all-wise all-knowing Dumbledore had this planned from
> the very beginning. I think Dumbledore is very preceptive and very
> wise; enlightened, but not all-knowing.

SSSusan:
Moi, aussi.  I know that I've argued that DD *did* plan the whole 
first year SS obstacle course, but I don't believe he had this kind 
of plan in effect during third year.  I think Debbie's right that DD 
simply fit together the pieces he saw.

Siriusly Snapey Susan