Dumbledore and Gandalf... COME ON HE IS NOT DEAD! not for long! ;)

[kiricat4001]

No: HPFGUIDX 135526

Dilia:
> Nevertheless, here is another question for you guys. Don't you 
think 
> that we are not giving Dumbledore the credit he disserves? For 
> example, maybe he was right about Snape, maybe just maybe 
> Dumbledore´s down fall was Snape´s promise to protect Malfoy.
> 
> I mean, think about it! Snape had to make that promise, or else, 
the 
> death eaters would know he was really on Dumbledore´s side. Not 
with 
> standing, Snape could have died if Malfoy did not complete the 
task; 
> moreover, perhaps Snape knew something that we did not. For 
instance, 
> that Dumbledore was already dying, his hand was rotting, and that 
he, 
> Snape, was a better of a use, for Harry, alive than Dumbledore 
dead. 
> Or that he and Dumbledore had talked about something like the 
> encounter they had was going to happen, and they planed it, hence 
it 
> was all a hoax. That could explain why Dumbledore froze Harry, so 
> that he would not ruin the performance that was going to take 
place. 

> 
> Sherry now:
> 
> If Dumbledore and Snape had some goofy plan, or even a serious 
plan, and if
> Snape  indeed is the one who could better protect Harry, why 
didn't anyone
> think to tell Harry before it all happened?  i just don't believe 
it.  It
> would make Dumbledore into a pretty evil wizard himself, in my 
opinion, to
> have pulled something like that.  
<snip> 
> Also if Dumbledore is still alive, then what does that say about 
JKR's oft
> and vehemently repeated statements that the dead don't come back?

Marianne:

Is it just me, or am I hearing shades of "Sirius isn't really dead?"
The context is different, but the feeling is similar. With Sirius it 
was - there was no body, we don't think the curse killed him, how 
could she possibly make Harry suffer the loss of the best connection 
to his parents, we've already had an unexpected death with Cedric, 
the veil could just be a way to get to Aruba...and, sure JKR *said* 
she killed him, but of course, she couldn't say he'd be back because 
that would ruin the surprise.

There are plenty of theories now popping up to change DD's apparent 
death into some sort of magical ploy to simply make us think he's 
dead. Body switching, vanishing people, additional unbreakable vows, 
polyjuiced people (wink, wink - that wasn't DD on the Tower, it was 
some other person), etc. It seems too implausible to me.  

I have to agree with Sherry on the question of the inadvisability of 
keeping Harry in the dark about whatever grand scheme Snape and DD 
supposedly came up with to cover this non-death.  After all, that 
tactic blew up in their faces once before. 

And the thought that people can be murdered all over, as has 
happened througout HBP, while DD can rise from the dead or jump out 
from behind the curtain or whereever he'd hiding, because he has to 
come back to help Harry along, would just be cheesy, IMO. At this 
point, Harry has to do it himself.  If you want to use a parallel to 
LOTR, sure Gandalf came back, but he was always know as a wizard, 
which was different, somehow, than the men, elves and hobbits of 
Middle Earth.  Dumbledore is a wizard, just like other wizards, even 
if he is smarter and stronger than most. Smarter and stronger 
shouldn't equate to an ability to come back from the dead.  

And, to stick with LOTR a bit longer, Gandalf came back, but had no 
interaction with Frodo until after Frodo completed his task.  At 
this point in JKR's story, to have the Mentor return to lead the 
acolyte by the hand would make me wonder why these books are about 
Harry at all.

Marianne