Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: CHAPDISC: HBP20, Lord Voldemort’s Request

[Jordan Abel]

No: HPFGUIDX 158190

[regarding the wand twitch being the casting of the DADA curse or not]

See also http://www.redhen-publications.com/Hufflepuff.html for an
explanation of the alternate theory.

> Carol responds:
> Finally, an easy one.

It's _never_ an easy one. It's very obvious that we're intended to
think that. It's much less obvious that it's in fact true. JKR is no
stranger to misdirection, and neither is Voldemort.

> Yes, I do think that the twitch is Voldemort
> cursing the DADA position. Even though Dumbledore doesn't specifically
> mention the hand twitch, the chapter ends with his statement that he's
> never been able to keep a DADA teacher for more than a year since that
> interview. So, putting two and two together and knowing that DD views
> the one relic of Godric Gryffindor as safe

If he actually _said_ the 'one' relic of GG, that means the hat is NOT
in fact a relic of GG, because it would then have to mean the sword.
And DD is not omniscient. He missed it on the GoF, he could have
missed it on the hat.

> (ad JKR has said that the Sorting Hat isn't a Horcrux)

It's not a horcrux. That does _not_ mean it's not, like the Goblet of
Fire, the victim of a Confundus or something similar.

> I think we can safely conclude that the twitch was the curse being nonverbally cast.
> (IMO, Voldemort must have planned to end the interview that way if he didn't get the job.)

I think so too. But there's no reason he couldn't have cast it once he
was out of Dumbledore's sight, as a _cover_ for the wand-twitch that
he was worried he had noticed. It's a pretty big leap of Faith from
"The sorting hat is not a horcrux" to "the sorting hat has not been
messed with in any way whatsoever."

Snow:
> but thinking about it now, when
> would Voldemort have had the chance to place the curse if it wasn't
> then?

Why should a curse on something as abstract as a job opening need to
be cast at any particular time or place? I think it's quite clear that
we're _intended to believe_ that is what's going on. It's quite a bit
less clear whether it's actually true.