LV's bigger plan (was:Fawkes possible absence)

[Dana]

No: HPFGUIDX 166332

Dana before:
<snip>
> > The things that help Harry during these events are not dependent
> > on DD's presence and I do not think with DD out of the way he is stripped
> >  of this help either.
<snip>

Carol:
> In SS/PS, Quirrel!mort is defeated, not by Harry, who would have
> died if it weren't for DD's timely arrival, but by the spell DD has
> put on the Mirror of Erised preventing anyone who wants to *use*
> the stone from getting it out of the mirror.
<snip>

Dana:
Granted Dumbledore saved him in PS/SS but he did still face LV alone
and to get to Harry, Dumbledore was not a real obstacle.  Besides, Harry
was not LV's main focus when Harry walked in on him. But give the
kid some credit will you? ;) Quirell not being able to touch him was good
to hold him off enough for help to arrive. The kid was 11 years old.

Carol responds:
> In CoS, Fawkes arrives with the Sorting Hat containing the Sword of
> Gryffindor because of the protections Dumbledore has set up: "Help
> will always be given at Hogwarts to those who ask for it" (CoS Am.
> ed.264)
<snip>

Dana:
In CoS he gets help from Fawkes, but it was Harry who called Fawkes to
him by showing true loyalty to DD.  He could get the sword because he
is a true Gryffindor, not because DD sent it to him. And he still
faced LV without DD's presence and Harry finished him off himself and
DD could not prevent LV from getting to Harry.
The help that Harry was given is still there and is not dependent on a
living DD or even a present one as we see in CoS.

I never implied DD is not a big or significant influence or that he
is irrelevant (or I did not meant it that way), but LV has gotten to
Harry without real obstacles and I do not agree that *only* because
of DD is Harry still alive.

> Carol:
> In PoA, which you don't mention, it's Dumbledore's idea to send
> Harry and Hermione back with the Time-Turner to save Sirius Black and
> Buckbeak (which, of course, he couldn't have done had Snape not
> conjured those stretchers and brought them to the hospital wing in
> the first place, ;-) ).
<snip>

Dana:
PoA is irrelevant to the point I was making.

Carol:
> In GoF, admittedly, Harry fights Voldemort alone, but it's the
> Phoenix-feather wand core that causes the Priori Incantatem effect
> and saves his life, so in a sense Fawkes, an extension of
> Dumbledore,keeps Harry alive.
<snip>

Dana:
And getting Harry there was not a real problem, either. Harry keeps
Harry alive by holding on even if he is inspired by Fawkes. It is
also he who gets himself back to Hogwarts. Having help does not
cancel out Harry's own efforts in staying alive. He was brave enough
to even try to face LV head on.

Carol:
> In OoP, as you say, it's definitely Dumbledore who rescues him
>(Snape has requested Sirius Black to stay behind and fill him in;
> Kreacher does it instead). Voldemort's humiliating defeat at
> Dumbledore's hands gives him additional reason to want Dumbledore
> dead, if not to make DD's death his number-one priority.
<snip>

Dana:
It is Harry's heart and his feelings for Sirius that saves Harry in
the end as well, but getting Harry to the DoM was no real problem, no
DD obstacle there and if LV's main objective had been different (not
getting the prophecy, but killing Harry right away) then he might have
succeeded.

Well Snape’s actions might have caused more harm then good because
Snape could have prevented everything if he had not been such a jerk
and caused Harry to not even consider him an ally. Snape could have
prevented it by not only checking on Sirius (if he indeed did), but
also giving warning that someone needed to go to the DoM just in case.
He could have followed him into the forest instead of waiting for
them to come out ect, ect.

In PS if Snape had told DD about Quirell, he could have prevented the
entire ordeal. In PoA if instead of running after Lupin he had run
straight to DD, none of it would had been necessary. And no, saving
Harry was not part of it because when he saw Lupin on the map, he did
not know Harry was there because Harry was not visible by that time.

I am not saying DD's death would not be a big bonus to LV, but the way
he chose to do it might very well have caused the necessary diversion
to execute a larger plan. By giving the task to Draco everyone was
busy with preventing Draco to become a murderer.  I think LV knows DD
as much as DD knows him.  So he would kill more birds with one stone.
I do not think DD was LV's number-one priority; killing Harry is and
DD is just one factor of it.  Ending Snape's spying game might have been
a second (him not being able to relay anymore information on LV's
movements would be an advantage to LV), and getting to the prophecy is
a third. Why not roll everything into one?

Carol:
> That he has not done so before now is surely because Albus
> Dumbledore, the greatest living wizard (until the end of HBP) and
> "the only one he  ever feared," is headmaster of Hogwarts.

Dana:
But LV has plenty of time to rule the world if the 'one with the
power to vanquish' him is out of his way. Harry now has even been
presented to the WW to be the chosen one. If he can't get him out of
the way soon, then people might find the strength to revolt. His
seeding fear all over the place is as much part of his strategy, to
become the greatest wizard of all times, as it is to eliminate all
those obstacles that could help prevent him getting there. Killing DD
might always have been part of his "to-do list" but he might just
have moved it up a few steps and made sure he will not be a further
nuisance to his plans to take out Harry.  But it doesn't mean that LV's
objective has changed over the course of HBP.  His main focus is still
Harry and he will use all means to take him out knowing the
prophecy in full would still be part of this.

JKR adding the Trelawney encounter to me indicates she wants us to
remember that the ball got rolling because LV put all his faith into
the prophecy and who brought it to him is actually quite irrelevant.
And him swarming the earth as a mere shadow of himself will just make
him believe in the prophecy more, not less.

> Carol:
> Let's say, then, that it's no longer his sole or primary concern, as
> it was in OoP. We certainly don't see him making any effort to
> secure information on the prophecy in HBP, and we do see, all through the
> book, a plot to kill dumbledore. LV knows that the Prophecy orb is
> broken. If he wants to get to Harry, as he surely does, he has to
> figure out some other way to do it. He doesn't actually need the
> Prophecy (we know that it wouldn't help him if he did); he just
> needs to get to Harry and deprive him of his wand.
<snip>

Dana:
If it was that simple then why is he even bothering the entire
previous year to get his hands on the prophecy? He could just have
lured Harry to the DoM, get his wand out of his hands and kill him on
the spot. We do not see him do that because he knows it will not be
that simple and he wants to know the full information on the prophecy.
He really, truly believes it will help him understand how to
take out Harry. DD is not merely trying to save Harry there either,
he also is preventing another confrontation between Harry and LV
because he knows LV cannot be defeated before his horcruxes are
eliminated.

We do not see LV plot anything, we only see that Draco has been given
a task to take out DD and we are told that no one even believes he
will be capable of doing so, so if killing DD is that important to
him, then why sent an inexperienced kid if even he (LV) has never been able
to do so? Just to take revenge on the boy's father and risk wasting
another year of getting nowhere if the kid fails to succeed with or
without this so called back-up? I do not think so. LV might be a lot
of things but stupid he is not.

<snip>
> Carol:
> Dumbledore's chief concern throughout the books has been Harry
> and/or the defeat of Voldemort, and, IMO, Fawkes's role reflects these
> concerns.
<big snip>

Dana:
Depriving LV from getting the information of the full prophecy is
part of that chief concern to keep Harry safe and defeating LV, it
has always been so. LV not knowing it in full is still an advantage,
that is too high a risk to lose. DD's personal feelings about Trelawney
have nothing to do with it. It  was still *her* prediction that sent LV
after Harry in the first place.

It has nothing to do with her being a fraud because LV made the
prophecy true by choosing to act on it and therefore DD found it
worthy enough to try and keep her safe all those years, even if he
thinks nothing much of the person herself. It is not about her but
about *the information*, she has, on what was actually said on that
night so many years ago.  Although I do not think DD would consider
her life meaningless, he indeed would not have given her a job and
made her a primary concern if parts of what she said never reached
LV's ears and he never had chosen to act on it.  Besides, don't you
think it is important to know that if Trelawney saw Snape then Snape
saw her too, and I think that is what JKR wanted us to know.

Carol:
> Carol, who thinks that Voldemort had every reason to fear Dumbledore
> and want him dead but also hopes that Dumbledore's death will
> inspire in Voldemort a false confidence that will prove fatal.
<snip>

Dana:
Harry's power to vanquish the Dark Lord was never dependent on DD
even if DD has aided him in many ways.  But I do not deny that LV might
indeed consider DD's death one less obstacle to get to Harry, but it
will not be this false confidence that will prove fatal.  He was not
defeated by DD the first time he tried to kill Harry. It had nothing
to do with DD or his fears for him, but with the underestimation of
the power of a mother's love and LV will do so again.

Dana