CHAPDISC: HBP17, A Sluggish Memory

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 153099

CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter
17, A Sluggish Memory
<snip excellent summary except for this bit>

>   Harry . . . describes the conversation he overheard between Snape
and Draco.  Predictably, [Hermione's] reaction resembles Lupin's and
Arthur Weasley's, but she does concede that Draco is obviously up to
something.  At the same time, she suggests that Draco's "master" might
be his father, not Lord Voldemort.

Carol responds:
Since you didn't ask about Hermione's reaction in your questions, let
me just comment here that I found her suggestion that Lucius might be
Draco's "master" more than a bit odd, especially given that Lucius is
in Azkaban and Draco is hardly likely to learn Occlumency to keep
anything from him. Both Draco and Harry understand that Snape means
Voldemort, but Hermione seems to be reaching desperately for some
other explanation that will get Draco off the hook. Consequently, she
misses Snape's use of "your master" rather than "our master," which to
me is a giveaway that he's Dumbledore's man working against great odds
to rescue Draco from Voldemort.

Questions:
>    
>   1. Early in the chapter, Harry and Hermione have the following
exchange: <snip>
>    
>   I first presumed this was fairly straightforward.  Harry wants
Hermione to stop being petty over Ron and she replies not as long as
she remembers the past (unlike someone who had been on a bender). 
Upon rereading it, however, it sounds much more ambiguous. <snip>

Carol:
I think your first reaction is the correct one. Hermione has had a
dull Muggle Christmas with her parents and is still annoyed at Ron.
Her earlier reactions to the Fat Lady's overindulgence (rolled eyes)
suggests that she's mildly contemptuous of the Fat Lady's mode of
celebration, but I don't think it has any connection with Ron's
adolescent infatuation, or rather, his newfound appreciation for
snogging and a willing partner in the sport. She's not mildly
contemptuous of Ron; she's furious. (Oddly, she's not remotely jealous
of Lavender, perhaps indicating that she knows that Ron has no
feelings for her other than perhaps a mild attraction.) I don't see
any ambiguity, but maybe I'm overlooking something.
>    
>   2. When the other sixth-years learn Harry has experienced
Apparition, they pelt him with questions.  Given how many of them come
from wizarding families, why do they grill Harry? Why not ask Mom,
Dad, or cousin Fergus?

Carol:
Because Harry is right there in the classroom and is in their year.
Besides, cousin Fergus, if he were present, would be no more likely
than Fred and George to answer their questions. He would probably just
gloat knowingly, like a Muggle kid who has his driver's license being
grilled by his twelve-year-old brother.
>    
>   3. Once again, Professor Flitwick provides comedy relief.  Is this
his role in the series, or will he play a more profound role by the end?

Carol:
I loved this scene, and I'm going to miss Professor Flitwick's classes
for the comic relief they provide. But I don't believe for a moment
that he was a duelling champion in school (that sounds like a joke to
me). If he has any role to play, maybe it will relate to the goblins.
(Didn't JKR say that he has a goblin ancestor?) But whatever role he
plays, if any, in Book 7 is likely to be small. A casualty, maybe.
> 
   
>   4. In the scene when Harry confides his concerns about the
Snape/Draco conversation, we have a Harry who is feeling wronged but
takes the high road, refraining from arguing.  This is markedly
different from his confrontations with Umbridge in Order of the
Phoenix.  Can we attribute that to his respect for Dumbledore, his
added maturity, or both?

Carol:
In an odd way, Umbridge's cruel detentions contributed to his
self-control. He was determined not to let her see that she was
getting to him, and he held his temper in check when she told him that
the detentions were designed to teach him not to tell evil,
attention-seeking stories (I'm forgetting an adjective but am too lazy
to look up the quote). And I think that the invasions of his mind by
Voldemort via the scar connection affected his self-control, making
him almost constantly angry in OoP. In HBP he's more himself, except
that he's projecting all the blame for Sirius's death onto Snape.
(Okay, I guess that's also being himself!) But aside from Snape, and
his understandable obsession with DE!Draco, he seems to be doing a
better job of dealing with other people--less judgmental, less prone
to jump to conclusions with people like Neville and Luna, much more
controlled and grown up in dealing with people like Scrimgeour. So
with Dumbledore, whom he knows and trusts (and who is speaking to him
again, unlike OoP), he's willing to be calm and respectful even though
he disagrees. But I think he also knows that he could never win an
argument with Dumbledore and is afraid of sabotaging the lessons.

BTW, you didn't ask, but I'm pretty sure that Dumbledore does indeed
know more than Harry about what's going on, including all three
provisions of the UV and those mysterious reasons for trusting Snape.
And he is still, at this point, withholding information about his
injured hand and Snape's role in saving him from the ring Horcrux,
perhaps because they don't yet have the unaltered Horcrux memory.
(Will we ever hear the whole "thrilling tale" that DD promised and
never told?)
>    
>   5. With Tom Riddle, Dumbledore again demonstrates his belief in
second chances.  This could build the case for "See, he was right to
give second chances," or "Here's an early demonstration of his tragic
flaw."  Which do you believe will be the eventual outcome?

Carol:
Dumbledore gives Tom a second chance but is never taken in by him,
never trusts him, keeps an eye on him throughout his career at
Hogwarts and knows exactly who really killed the Riddle family. He
does not interfere with Tom or reveal what he knows (though he does
try to clear Morfin), but he knows early on that Tom has blown his
chance. There is no third chance. When Voldemort applies for the DADA
position, Dumbledore turns him down firmly and absolutely, telling him
straight out that he knows what Voldemort has become, a murderer and
the leader of the supposedly secret Death Eaters. No wonder Voldemort
fears him.

Snape is an entirely different matter. He spied for Dumbledore at
great personal risk before Godric's Hollow, AFWK he does what
Dumbledore asks of him both as teacher and Order member, and
Dumbledore continues to trust him. Dumbledore is an excellent judge of
character, and I'm not sure that he was entirely taken in by
Crouch!Moody (he just can't put his finger on the answer to the
mystery, but he's "sifting" memories in the Pensieve trying to find it).

The fact that Voldemort blew his second chance does not make
Dumbledore wrong to grant them to others, from Hagrid (expelled from
Hogwarts for bringing in Aragog, which was utterly thoughtless and
irresponsible regardless of the fact that Aragog didn't kill Moaning
Myrtle) to Firenze, who has "betrayed" his herd. Giving Snape a second
chance was the right thing to do, regardless of Snape's true
loyalties. I believe that it was also a wise thing to do, turning
Snape into Dumbledore's man as firmly as denying him that second
chance would have turned him into a confirmed Death Eater. I am
certain that Book 7 will show Dumbledore's choice to be not only
merciful but wise and just. IMO, Dumbledore is not the "stupid old
man" that Draco believes him to be but "the epitome of goodness" (and
wisdom) who knows exactly where Snape's loyalties lie and what
sacrifices he is willing to make to thwart Voldemort. I will be very
surprised if Dumbledore is proven wrong in his judgment and giving
second chances turns out to be a tragic flaw. That's a very harsh and
IMO very dangerous lesson to teach her young readers.
>    
>   6. Dumbledore describes the group of Tom's friends as "a mixture
of the weak seeking protection, the ambitious seeking some shared
glory, and the thuggish, gravitating towards a leader who could show
them more refined forms of cruelty."  Can we apply this description to
any other groups in the series, both within and outside of Hogwarts?

Carol:
At Hogwarts now I don't see any examples of "the weak seeking
protection," but Wormtail clearly fits that category in terms of the
current DEs. Maybe Nott, who seems to be one of the original DEs, also
fits this category. He seems like a cringing, weak old man in GoF.
Draco (who is also determined to avenge his father's arrest) could fit
loosely into the "ambitious seeking some shared glory" (though his
hopes for glory are later overshadowed by his fears for himself and
his family). Gregory Goyle and Vincent Crabbe, Draco's thuggish
followers, seem at first glance to fit into the "thuggish gravitating
towards a leader" category, though that leader is Draco, not LV (their
fathers are another matter). But HBP finally begins to differentiate
CrabbenGoyle, with Goyle, the dumber of the two, still loyally and
mindlessly doing Draco's bidding, even transforming into a little girl
by drinking polyjuice, but Crabbe starts to ask questions and even
looks mutinous during the first Apparition lesson. Both of them look
lost without Draco at the end of the book. I don't think that either
of them is looking for "more refined forms of cruelty," only for
someone else to tell them what to do. Of the Death Eaters, I would
place the axe-wielding Macnair in this category. Voldemort promises
him more interesting and challenging victims than hippogriffs in the
graveyard scene in GoF, and he later acts as ambassador to the giants,
perhaps finding some way to scare them into submission. And Dolohov is
simply cruel and evil by nature; I don't think that he would seek more
refined forms of cruelty unless the Unforgiveable Curses were taught
to him by LV. My impression is that he has already mastered cruelty on
his own. And Bellatrix certainly wanted to learn whatever she could
from her master, but I wouldn't characterize her as thuggish, only a
fanatic whose brains have been addled by the Unforgiveable Curses.
Young Barty, too, though he may have fit in the "ambitious" category.
Anyway, we don't know the original DEs very well (some of them only by
name) so it's hard to categorize them. But I suspect that some DEs,
old and new, fall into more than one category or don't quite fit any
of them. (Rabastan Lestrange as the devoted follower of his
sister-in-law? Now that's strange!)
>    
>   7. We now have some explanation of how detection of underage magic
works and the Ministry's decision to allow families to monitor their
own children.  Did you find this to match your earlier presumptions? 
Do you agree with Harry that this policy is "rubbish"?

Carol:
It does fit with my preconceptions, but I don't think it's "rubbish."
As long as the parents can control their kids and the kids are under
the impression that their magic is detectable and can be distinguished
from their parents', it probably serves as a deterrent (even if it is,
erm, misleading). Unfortunately, it's the responsible parents who will
enforce it, and kids like Severus Snape can still come to school
knowing more hexes than most sixth years. (That to me pretty much
indicates that Muggle Tobias was long since out of the picture and
witch mom Eileen certainly didn't enforce the law for her son.) So,
not "rubbish," exactly, but by no means as effective as it ought to be
in preventing underage wizards from practicing magic under
uncontrolled conditions.
>    
>   8. Just how *did* Slughorn tamper with his memory?

Carol:
He added cornstarch to congeal it.
>    
>   9. Does the Slughorn memory scene help build the case for the Good
Slytherin?

Carol:
Not really. Slughorn isn't evil, but he's weak and self-serving. If he
were the Good Slytherin (who BTW is our own invention, I believe; JKR
herseld hasn't used the term to my knowledge), he'd have given DD the
unaltered memory in the first place. He does at least show that not
all Slytherins are murderers or approve of murder, which should help
to dispel the idea that Slytherin House is evil in itself. I'm still
holding out hope for Theo Nott, who may see what happened to Draco and
be shocked into realizing that he doesn't want to follow his father
down the road to Azkaban. (Blaise Zabini I think we can just dismiss
as another arrogant "Mudblood" hater, too indolent and too much in
love with himself to join the DEs. But Good Slytherin he isn't, IMO.)
>    
>   10. Harry (and Phineas) thinks Dumbledore could get the accurate
memory without Harry's help.  Does Dumbledore have a larger purpose in
setting Harry with the task?

Carol:
Sure he does. He wants Harry to develop to put his Slytherin
qualities, including cunning and resourcefulness, to good use. (And
Phineas, knowing that the boy is a Gryffindor, is understandably
skeptical about his ability to accomplish the task.)
>    
>   11. Fawkes "speaks" twice in this scene, once after Harry calls
himself Dumbledore's man and once after Dumbledore replies to Phineas.
 What is the significance of the placement of these two cries?
>
Carol:
Fawkes has a clear connection with Harry, coming to his aid in CoS
because of his loyalty to Dumbledore, and his tail feather somehow
aids Harry in building the golden dome and so forth in the GoF
graveyard scene--the Phoenix song that encourages Harry has the
opposite effect on LV. Fawkes' first cry strikes me as a cry of
approval or agreement or solidarity; he, too, is loyal to Dumbledore
(and more than loyal since a Phoenix, perhaps Fawkes himself, is DD's
Patronus or spirit guardian). I'm not sure about the second cry, but
maybe it's a note of agreement, a vote of confidence in Harry. If so,
it's ironic that the red-and-gold Fawkes, himself a symbol of
Gryffindor (or all that's best in Gryffindor, especially moral
courage?) as well as of immortality, would second Dumbledore's belief
in Harry's Slytherin qualities, including the subtle manipulation
required to obtain the unaltered memory.

Carol, having fun as usual with the chapter discussions and
apologizing to anyone who made it this far for the length of her post