Dumbledore the Godfather

[anne_t_squires]

No: HPFGUIDX 173935


Anne Squires wrote:
> > I didn't see any indication that 
> > LV had been knocked out. 

Eggplant wrote:
> 
> I did. Voldemort was flat on his back and embarrassed to find himself
> in such a undignified position, that's why he hastily refused
> Bellatrix's efforts to help him up.  

Anne Squires:

You are right, of course, that he is described as "getting to his
feet."  When I read that I interpreted it that LV had been knocked
down, not out.  I admit that other interpretations are very plausible.

Anne from an earlier post:
> 
> > Let's suppose the snake had been 
> > destroyed before Harry entered the
> > woods. If Harry had entered the
> > woods after Nagini's destruction and
> > faced Voldemort unarmed the exact 
> > same result would have taken place. 

Eggplant:
> 
> Actually the truth or falsehood of the above statement depends on the
> exact physics of the Potter universe; and as JKR is the only Einstein
> in the Potter universe we mere mortals must just struggle along as
> best we can. 

Anne Squires:

Point taken.  All of this is just the way I interpret the events.  I
concede that I could be mistaken.  I was just trying to explain the
way I read the text.  I am definitely a mere mortal.  The merest
mortal of them all.

Eggplant wrote:

Yes, perhaps Dumbledore knew from day 1 that Harry would
> live and be happy ever after, but I prefer the more interesting
> interpretation; Dumbledore is more (or perhaps less) than what he
> seems to be. And perhaps someday JKR will give her opinion on this
> matter; it won't fundamentally affect my thinking about her books; JKR
> has her opinion, I have mine.


Anne Squires:
I think that for the most part we are in agreement on this point.
I feel that DD thought Harry would have to die until he heard about LV
using Harry's blood to resurrect himself.  Even after that incident it
was just a guess on his part that Harry could survive, imho. The
"gleam" in the eye.  Anyway, I think that DD was raising Harry as a
"pig for the slaughter"  and was less than grandfatherly in his
approach to Harry.  I think Skeeter's word "sinister" sums up his
dealings with Harry very nicely. 
> 

Anne Squires in a earlier post:
> > I don't think he wanted Snape 
> > (or Harry for that matter) to know
> > that Harry would not have to die. 

Eggplant: 
> Why? Why would Dumbledore give a damn if Snape knew about it or not?

Anne:
In my opinion, he had two reasons for keeping Snape in the dark:

1.  DD played his cards very close to the vest.  He always gave out
information on a need to know basis.

2.  If Snape believed that Harry had to die then it would ensure that
Harry would believe the same thing when Snape told him.  DD could be
absolutely certain that Snape would not tell Harry the truth. 
Otherwise, given the fact that Snape had devoted his life to
protecting Lily's son for the sake of Lily's memory, I think Snape
could have possibly told Harry that DD thought he wouldn't have to die.

Anne Squires, mere mortal