Ollivander / Fortescue / Horcrux / Bk7 Opening

[exodusts]

No: HPFGUIDX 148304

> bboyminn: 
> I think we have fallen into a fandom trap here, the same trap we
> always fall into, and that is, once a new 'thing' is introduced in 
the
> books, it becomes the end-all be-all solution to every problem. When
> Time-Turning was introduce, it became the solution to every problem.
> Mysterious all-knowing Dumbledore is really Ron time-turning. In the
> end, Harry will time-turn back and save himself from Voldemort. Now,
> today, everything under the sun is a Horcrux. 
> 
> Dumbledore says he can hide Draco and family by faking their death,
> suddenly faked-death has to be the solution to every problem.
> Ollivander can just be gone, gone because gone is all that is need 
to
> solve his problem. Dumbledore may or may not have helped Ollivander
> escape, but there really is no need to fake Ollivander's death nor 
to
> fake the death of each and every character who is now or who will be
> missing. 
> 
> It is fun speculation, but it doesn't necessarily apply to every
> problem encountered.

Exodusts:
You are quite right that it is all to some degree speculation, and 
that DD could have hidden Ollivander, without faking Ollivander's 
death. The only thing to do is go with whatever evidence we do have, 
however slim that may be. When DD talked about hiding, he talked 
about faking death. In the absence of him talking about hiding people 
without faking death, we have to lean towards the conclusion that 
when DD hides someone, he probably fakes their death. It may be only 
a small weight in the balance, but for now it ought to tip that 
balance in favour of Ollivander having hidden by himself, not with 
DD's help. Although it could all be contradicted when book 7 comes 
out.


> bboyminn:
> Sorry, but I find it very hard to believe that you can coerce, 
extort,
> or blackmail a Portrait, something that is hardly more than a well
> made animated object.

Exodusts:
Fair enough, but there are many examples in the books of wizarding 
portraits having an emotional response to things said or done. I 
reckon you could induce sufficient fear in one to coerce it into 
obeying an order (especially if the Fortescue of the portrait and 
Florian Fortescue were close).


> bboyminn: 
> Just my opinion, but I think you have a distorted view of the nature
> of soul bits. Logically Voldemort has killed many many more people
> than he has made Horcruxes, so do you claim that all those soul bits
> are wandering free somewhere looking for a living body or inanimate
> object to inhabit? I don't think so.

Exodusts:
The discussion did assume that the "spare" soul bit had been split 
off during a deliberate Horcrux creation. I absolutely concur that 
the core "Voldy-bit" remained floaty, and became the thing that ended 
up possessing Quirrell.


> bboyminn:
> Personally, I don't like the idea of the attack happening at 
Grimmauld
> Place. That would pretty much eliminate the Black House from the
> story, even though we know that some significant events will likely
> occur there, like finding the Locket Horcrux. I think an early 
> attack at the Black House would force them to abondon it, since 
> clearly the Death Eaters would know where it is and would be 
> watching it.

Exodusts:
As part of my theory, I propose that HRH, probably with Order help, 
kick some mid-ranking DE's out of the House, so the location wouldn't 
get instantly written off. Harry would have time to do whatever he 
needs to do there, before it is shut up and abandoned for good by the 
Order.


> bboyminn:
> Also, as a side note, while Dumbledore's Secret Keeper Charm may 
have
> been broken, we know that the Black House is thoroughly protected by
> Sirius's ancestors with ever muggle repelling and protection charm
> known to man. Even without the Secret Keeper Charm, which can be
> re-instated with a new Secret Keeper, the Black House is more
> thoroughly protected than most magical places...or so I speculate.

Exodusts:
I had considered the possibility that 12 GOP was protected from 
discovery (by Muggles or Wizards) by more than just DD's relatively 
recent protections. But then I remembered this, from the same 
conversation in which DD reveals 12 GOP to the Dursleys:

"We do not know whether the enchantments we ourselves have placed 
upon it, for example, making it Unplottable, will hold now that 
ownership has passed from Sirius's hands."

This tells us that an Unplottable charm was the Order's doing (maybe 
even DD himself). It also mentions multiple enchantments. One would 
be the Fidelius charm. Yet others could be Invisible-to-Muggles, or 
Muggle-repellent. Thus, when DD died the house might have lost all of 
these protections. Alternatively, if the anti-Muggle charms were 
originals of the Blacks, they might have been lost when Sirius (the 
last Black) died, as DD says.

Oddly, Sirius says this in OotP:

"My father put every security measure known to wizardkind on it when 
he lived here. It's unplottable, so Muggles could never come and 
call - as if they'd ever have wanted to - and now Dumbledore's added 
his protection, you'd be hard put to find a safer house anywhere."

This suggests a) that the Unplottability was NOT DD's work (which 
contradicts what DD says in HBP), and b) that the Unplottable charm 
does more than just ensuring that something cannot appear on a map 
(which seems to contradict Hermione's explanations, to Ron, about the 
various magics used to hide buildings, in GoF).

Ultimately, I can't believe that JKR drew attention to Uncle Vernon's 
avaricious interest in Harry's House simply to reinforce Vernon's 
character. We know his character already. Logically, it ought to be 
foreshadowing for book 7.

exodusts