Saving Ginny (was Re: Lockhart's incompetence)

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 143230

> >>Geoff:
> > My concern is, that although there is a certain amount of smug 
> > satisfaction in watching Lockhart backpedalling, what were the 
> > staff actually proposing to /do/ about Ginny once they'd got him 
> > out of the way?
> > <snip>
 
> >>Potioncat:
> You're right! It certainly seems that everyone gave up. If anyone  
> was doing something, or planning to do something, we weren't told  
> about it. 
> But we were told that the castle had been searched many times and 
> no one could find any evidence of the Chamber. So what could the
> teachers do, but get the other students to safety?
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
I agree that the staff were really between a rock and a hard place.  
Which might explain why they turned on Lockhart with such 
enjoyment.  They knew there wasn't anything they could do and he was 
a perfect target for their frustrated aggression.  Frankly, I don't 
blame them.  Though I also think they were honestly relieved to have 
him out of their hair as they tried to deal with the crisis.

I can't think of anything the staff could have done to try and find 
Ginny.  The Chamber had been hidden for centuries; no one had a clue 
where to look for it.  Dumbledore seemed fairly sure Tom Riddle had 
opened the Chamber the last time, but he also knew that Voldemort 
was no where near the castle.  (I believe his sources had him back 
in a European forest somewhere.)  

He may have had an idea that Lucius Malfoy was behind the attack 
(through Snape) though I don't think there's anything in canon that 
suggests Dumbledore was thinking along those lines before Harry 
brought him the diary.  Even if Snape *had* ferreted out Lucius's 
involvement, Lucius himself had no clue how the diary worked, where 
the Chamber was located, and how it could be accessed.  So that line 
of inquiry would have gone no where, I think.

I do think Dumbledore suspecting Tom Riddle should have helped him 
figure out that the creature was a basilisk.  What with snakes being 
such a connection between Slytherin and Tom.  Just as Hermione made 
the connection because of Harry's knowledge of parseltongue.

I'm also surprised that no one spoke to Mirtle about her death.  I 
think Dumbledore would have been able to make the leap between a boy 
speaking some strange language and Mirtle's sudden death, just as 
Harry and Ron do.  He wouldn't have been able to access the Chamber, 
but I'm betting he would have found the snake drawing and realized 
the significance.  (I think Dumbledore had time to do this sort of 
detective work before he was booted from Hogwarts.)

So there is a bit of adult incompetence used to place Harry in the 
position of facing Tom alone.  But it's minor enough, IMO, that it 
didn't throw me out of the story.  I don't think it necessarily 
pointed towards a childhood virtue being stronger or more pure or 
something than an adulthood virtue, though.  

I've never gotten the sense that JKR is trying to say there's some 
aspect of childhood that is needed in adults.  Has anyone seen this 
message in the books?  I mean, even Harry's love power is something 
he gained from his adult mother, right?

Betsy Hp, who rambled a bit here, sorry.