Second Task points/Draco and Dumbledore (combining 2)

[Ceridwen]

No: HPFGUIDX 152047

Alla: 
> Why is it not a reason to believe that people may die in the 
Tournament if you get the information that people well died in the 
Tournament in the past? I think it is a very good, rational reason to 
believe exactly that. Not saying that this is the only conclusion to 
make, but I consider it to be quite a sound conclusion. *(snip)*

Ceridwen:
I was under the impression that would-be champions died in past 
tournaments, not hostages.  From what I gathered, only people who 
wished to become champions placed their names in the Goblet, of their 
own free will.  A hostage is another matter entirely - he or she 
would be held or taken against their will (at least, that's the role 
being played).  We see that Harry doesn't know that Ron will be taken 
until he discovers that Ron's the prize he's playing for in the 
second task.  So, the participation of the hostages is a secret, at
least to everyone but the hostages.

I do wonder, though, about the events.  Does Hogwarts have the 
hostages in the lake because Hogwarts has a lake and merpeople?  Do 
all of the schools have lakes and merpeople?  Is there a general 
category of hostage scenario which is fulfilled by the hosting 
school's specifics - Hogwarts with the lake, Durmstrang with perhaps 
a colony of trolls?  Or are there very different tasks tailored to 
each hosting school?

Alla: 
> Well, then we are far apart then on this issue. If Fleur did not 
have the information that hostages were not in danger, why her 
automatic assumption should have been that nothing would happen to 
them? She knows what happened in the past, I would imagine.

Ceridwen:
I know we're discussing the judges and the tournament, but it just 
struck me to wonder about the merpeople:  would they have kept the 
hostages lying around if they weren't rescued?  I would think they 
wouldn't want that.  But then, if I just thought about this after... 
how many years?.. then I can't expect Harry and Fleur to think of it 
during the stress of the event.

Magpie:
> Which is why I would agree with Alla it's not *stupid* of Harry to 
not trust in the safety of the hostages. He's wrong in that case, and 
Hermione is right to point out that Harry tends to not even be able 
to consider that other people may be taking care of things-- there
are times when this messes Harry up like with Sirius and with the 
Stone. But at the same time you can see why Harry would have trouble 
trusting that things will work out without him.

Ceridwen:
I can certainly see why Harry thought the way he thought.  Harry 
tends to rely on himself to a greater degree than a lot of kids his 
age, due to living with the Dursleys where it was either stick up for 
himself or flounder, and the things which have happened to him at the
school over the years.  I can also see why Krum and Cedric thought 
the way they thought, too.  As far as they knew, things were being 
taken care of, and I expect they also had more faith in the judges.  
I don't know about Fleur.  She panicked, maybe, and might have been 
blaming herself for having to abandon the task?

 Magpie:
> It's funny that I've never thought of it before, but I wonder if 
Harry and Snape aren't more alike on that score. I can imagine Snape 
and Harry both wanting more intervention with Draco in HBP because 
neither of them trust in Dumbledore's claims that he's got it all
under control.

Ceridwen:
This is a good point.  It does seem as though both Harry and Snape 
are `rebelling' against Dumbledore's authority, or say-so, in HBP.  
We see several confrontations between Harry and Dumbledore when Harry 
questions Dumbledore's word, and we hear about a confrontation 
between Snape and Dumbledore in the forest, though we don't know what
it's about.  Interesting line of thought.  Thanks!

Ceridwen.