MuggleNet - Godrics Hollow Theory. General vs Specific

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 163554

---  Kemper <iam.kemper at ...> wrote:
>
> > Kemper earlier:
> > > The etymology of 'fidelis' (faithful) stems from
> > > 'fides' (faith). To be faithful is different than
> > > being loyal. One suggests a belief or trust in 
> > > something/one, the other an obligation to 
> > > something/one.
> > >
> > > ...
> >
> > Geoff responded:
> > I think you are splitting hairs here and that your 
> > argument is not really valid. My Latin dictionary 
> > gives "fides" as: faith; trust; confidence; belief;
> > credence; loyalty; honesty; allegaince; promise; 
> > security; protection. While the English-Latin section
> > gives "Fides" for both "loyalty" and "faith"
> > and in both cases the adjective form is "fidelis".
> >
> > ...
> >
> > Hence, I don't see precisely where your divergence in 
> > meanings is leading.....
> 
> 
> Kemper now:
> ... If you were following upthread, you will have 
> noticed that bboy was saying that:
> 
> "The Potter's trusted Peter with their lives, and in 
> accepting that trust, Peter is implying a true and deep
> loyalty to the Potters."
> 
> I read this to mean that bboy believes the Fidelius 
> Charm works (in part) by the loyalty Peter feels of the
> Potters.  I disagreed because I don't believe that Peter
> was loyal to the Poters at the time of the charm.  ...
> 
> Kemper, who wonders if your Latin dictionary would have
> been more accurately labeled a thesaurus
>

bboyminn:

There is one apect you are missing in my statements, and
that is that Peter 'fidelity' (loyaty, trust, etc...) is
not in question for ALL TIME. 

In a sense we have a magical contract that is very precise
in its terms, and in which, by figuratively signing, Peter
is agreeing to keep one specific secret. He is figuratively
swearing an oath of 'fidelity' specific to keeping this one 
secret. So, whether Peter was a 'rat' in general doesn't
come into play, and is not relevant to whether the 
Secret Keepr Charm remains or dissolves. 

Rat that he is, for as long as he keeps this one secret,
for as long as he remain true to this one specific oath,
the Charm stays intact. It is when he breaks the fidelity,
when he fails in the "fulfillment of one's duties and 
obligations and strict adherence to vows or promises"(1)
of that one specific 'oath' that the Charm becomes null
and void. 

That's why I don't think Peter's on-going character is
important to the successful creation of this one specific
Secret Keeper Charm.

The other aspect of how the Charm might have dissolved
relates to the exact wording of the Secret itself. If
the /secret/ was the Potters, then we have one set of
problems. If the /secret/ was the house, we have a 
completely different set of problems.

If the Secret was in the form 'The Potters are hiding at
123 West Lane Road; Godrics Hollow, UK', that is not a
house, it is a lot. That address exists independant of
whether there is a house on it or not.

If the Secret is in the form 'The Potters are hiding in
Dumbledore's ancestral home in Godrics Hollow' then things
are different, but house and home are not exactly the same.
So, that could create complications.

If the Secret is 'The Potter are hiding in Dumbledore's
house in Gordrics Hollow' that is more specific, but,
though I can't think of any at the moment, that must have
its own set of complications.

However, I think we all agree that for whatever reason,
the Charm was broken that night. By the time Hagrid got
there and the muggles came running, the Charm simply did
not exist anymore for whatever reason. 

If the Charm does still exist, I think we have many many
unresolvable complications to the story. I also think if
the Charm was on the Potter's themselves and is still in
effect, then again, too many unresolvable complications.

Conclusion; that charm must have been broken. I think it
was broken by breach of Fidelity. 

Of course, that's just my opinion, but it is FIRMLY my
opinion.

Steve/bboyminn

(1)- American Heritage Dictionary 3rd Edition CD-ROM V3.6a