Subverting Prophecies, Wisemen, Horcruxes (wasRe: Role of ESE in Hero's Quest...

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 147933

> >>Neri:
> I'm not sure that a stereotypic Wise Old Man should know *all* the 
> information. Merlin, Gandalf and Yoda surely didn't.

Betsy Hp:
Didn't they?  Especially compared to the other characters?  I'm 
trying to recall a moment when Gandalf or Yoda were genuinely 
stumped.  I mean stumped to the point that, for example, children 
under their care were being threatened by a deadly and unknown foe 
for an entire year.  Or stumped to the point of not knowing how to 
destroy their enemy for many, many years.

I mean, Dumbledore was *there*, right there when Voldemort whisked 
Harry away from him.  Would Gandalf have been so helpless? Or Merlin 
or Yoda?

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > <snip>
> > I think [Dumbledore] also fell down on the school unity issue,   
> > and he certainly failed Tom Riddle. 
> > <snip>

> >>Jen D.:
> Forgive me, really, but I am confused. How did Dumbledore fail Tom
> Riddle? Was it his inability to turn Tom around? Or deal sternly
> enough with him? Or his failure to share his suspicions with the
> Headmaster or fellow teachers? I am afraid I am missing a bigger
> point here. Enlighten me!

Betsy Hp:
Tom Riddle is a damaged child, Dumbledore sees and recognizes that 
and yet is unable to help him.  Honestly, I'm not sure what 
Dumbledore could have done, especially since he wasn't Tom's head of 
house.  But I would imagine that if you asked him, Dumbledore could 
think of a number of things he might have done differently.

But my big point here is that a Wise Old Man, like Gandalf or Merlin 
or Yoda, *would* have been able to save Tom.  Because they're so 
darn wise.  Dumbledore, being much more human, was unable or didn't 
know how to help.


> >>Neri:
> I see your list, in many cases, as making Dumbledore *more*,      
> rather than less, of a Wise Old Man stock character. Some of the   
> things that he didn't realize, like Quirrell's secret or his old  
> friend Moody being an imposter, are so unbelievable that some      
> notable HPfGU members simply refuse to believe it. In fact, even   
> Harry himself suspects by the end of SS/PS that DD knew everything 
> about Quirrell but let Harry have his fight.

Betsy Hp:
Yeah, I recognize that my human!Dumbledore is not popular.  But I 
honestly think there's a tendency to place too much importance on 
the length of Dumbledore's beard.  He looks like the standard Wise 
Old Man, so therefore he must have the extra-ordinary knowledge of 
the Wise Old Man.  IOW, I believe Harry is completely wrong at the 
end of PS/SS.  The last thing Dumbledore wanted was for Harry to 
face Quirrell. I think Harry came so near death that Dumbledore got 
a bit giddy with relief and did his foolish cup grab at the Leaving 
Feast. (A very not Wise Old Man move, unless of course all 
Slytherins are evil.)

Again, I really do see Dumbledore as hanging on by his fingernails 
and barely managing to pull a victory (or a draw) in pretty much 
every single book.  He does it with a twinkle, and makes it look 
easy (better to comfort the children with) but I don't see that it 
has been.

> >>Neri:
> I always have been an opponent of Omniscient!DD myself, but I'd   
> say the prophecy, Snape's motives and the Horcruxes is quite a     
> lot. It's a considerable percentage of the main mysteries in the   
> series.

Betsy Hp:
And yet, it's only three things.  And it's not any sort of fantastic 
knowledge that only years of scholarly attainment or superhuman 
powers could achieve.  It's something that a fairly intelligent 
schoolmaster who kept his ear to the ground could pick up.  

Yes, Dumbledore is the keeper of this knowledge, so that is a beat 
of the Wise Old Man.  But it's not *fantasitical* knowledge.  Heck, 
it's not even exclusive to Dumbledore.  Others have this information 
too.  Dumbledore is just clever enough to put it together. 

> >>Neri:
> To this you should add the powers that were transferred from Voldy 
> to Harry in GH, the mind connection between them, the Ancient      
> Magic protecting Harry, the interesting bit about the brother     
> wands and Wormtail's life debt, all of them things we know almost 
> exclusively thanks to Dumbledore's explainations.

Betsy Hp:
Again, there's a Wise Old Man beat, but none of this information is 
exclusively Dumbledore's.  And in fact, some of it (the life debt, 
for example) is something Dumbledore puts together as Harry tells 
him what's just happened.  I like how JKR shows Dumbledore thinking 
on his feet.  Where generally, the Wise Old Man knew what was going 
to happen, when, and has already had a dozen or so contingency plans 
ready to go. 

> >>Neri:
> And this is even before counting things like The Gleam or "in      
> essence divided" that are yet to be explained, but are probably   
> central to the main mystery. 

Betsy Hp:
Which may all seem quite esoteric until we get the explanation.  
Just because he's managed to confuse Harry doesn't mean Dumbledore 
is a near divine genius.

> >>Neri:
> 1) Wise Old Man identifies Hero and his destiny. 

Betsy Hp:
Only Dumbledore doesn't.  He tries to *keep* the hero from being 
identified by hiding the Potters away.  It's Voldemort who picks out 
the Hero who will destroy him.  Once Harry is forced into the hero 
role by Voldemort, Dumbledore does do his best to keep him alive.  
But I had the sense that Dumbledore wished that he'd been able to 
subvert the whole "destiny" thing from the beginning.

> >>Neri:
> 2) Wise Old Man coaches Hero and gives him some key background 
> information needed for the quest.

Betsy Hp:
The subversion comes from Dumbledore's great reluctance to do the 
above.

> >>Neri:
> 3) Wise Old Man steps aside, willingly or not, in order to let     
> Hero have his quest alone.

Betsy Hp:
Again, Dumbledore did this with great reluctance.  I mean the whole, 
allowing Harry his quest.  JKR got a lot of dramatic conflict out of 
Harry trying to fill the role of hero while Dumbledore did his best 
to keep him from it.  So again with some subversion.  Though of 
course, Dumbledore *did* need to give Harry his dues, and the more 
harmonic HBP was the resolution of Dumbledore finally stepping into 
the Wise Old Man shoes.  On the whole though, I think Dumbledore 
would have preferred to play the part of hero and spared Harry the 
pain.

That's the subversion, I think.  Dumbledore is very reluctant to be 
the Wise Old Man.

> >>Neri:
> I think we should measure the superiority of each Wise Old Man 
> against his natural habitat.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Okay.  Dumbledore is barred from his school by Lucius Malfoy and 
Fudge.  He was thwarted by politics.  Not too superior, I think.

I mean, yes, Dumbledore is certainly one of the most powerful 
wizards of his age.  He's got a very keen mind and a strong moral 
sense.  So there are characteristics of the Wise Old Man.  But he 
can also be kicked about by petty bureaucrats.  He has to be careful 
with how he spends his political capital.  The local paper has the 
power to turn the public against him.  And children under his care 
can be killed.  He's never done this Wise Old Man shtick before in 
his life.  He's only ever played the hero, and it looks like it was 
hard for him to allow a young boy to fill that role.  None of that 
fits into the Wise Old Man stereotype. 

> >>Neri:
> I know that the Horcruxes felt artificial to several readers of    
> HBP, and many others didn't like them much although they didn't   
> have the vocabulary to explain why exactly. I too couldn't explain 
> to myself why they felt weak until reading Lowe's article. 

Betsy Hp:
I still think this has the flavor of a future worry. That the last 
book will end badly because of the horcruxes.  They were predicted 
by other readers, though.  And they were forshadowed back in the 
second book.  And the series hasn't been tired and old yet, at least 
IMO.  The kind of traps Lowe mentioned haven't tripped JKR up yet.  
I have confidence she won't choke in the final stretch.

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > Quite frankly the very fact that there is more than one horcrux 
> > fits neatly into Voldemort's fear of death.  "If one talisman is 
> > good, more talismen are better."  <snip>

> >>Jen D.
> This is for Betsy especially, the number 7 has a great deal of    
> significance and I feel sure she's going to expand and expound on 
> that next book. After all, it's the 7th book!  7 means much more   
> than "more than one is better." And I believe it can be stretched 
> to the thematic as well as plot.

Betsy Hp:
Yes, seven is a powerful number, and that's why Voldemort picked 7 
horcruxes.  I do agree with Neri that there will probably be a 
reason, plot-wise, for there to be seven horcruxes, but I don't 
think this means the series is on a fast track for utter suckage.

> >>Neri:
> This is a plot reason, not a thematic reason. There's usually a    
> plot reason explaining the existence of the plot coupon, as such   
> reasons are mostly very easy to manufacture.

Betsy Hp:
Well, yes and no.  It's also a characteristic of Voldemort's.  It 
fits the thematic beats of his character.  And while yes, if 
Voldemort didn't fear death so very, very much he'd probably be Tom 
Riddle, Minister of Magic, loved and admired by the WW, well, one 
must have a story, right?

Telling a story by using a structure doesn't automatically make one 
a bad story teller.

Betsy Hp