A Dark Glamour - Voldemort's Appeal - DDs Complicity

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 179250

> > Mike:
> >
> > Dumbledore didn't engineer the release of the prophesy.
> > 
> 
> lizzyben:
> 
> Oh, didn't he? :) I really still believe that DD deliberately 
> leaked the prophecy, & IMO that's supported by the text. 
>----<snip>----
> 
> In regards to the prophecy, a lot of people noticed the 
> discrepencies between Trelawney & DD's account of that event.
> DD said that Snape was thrown out before he heard the whole 
> thing, but Trelawney said that Aberforth caught Snape outside 
> the door & then brought him into the room.

Mike:
Yes, this was the basis for my DD does Lie posts and the ensuing 
arguments,... ahh, discussions with Neri. Neri said that it was the 
difference between two accounts and what was important for the 
recounters. I didn't agree. I thought DD recounted not only to  
protect Snape, but to also throw us off the trail as to his 
complicity in the release.

But, do go on.


> lizzyben:
> Snape had an opportunity to hear the entire prophecy, and DD 
> had an opportunity to Legimens or oblivate Snape. So, the 
> obvious question was, why did DD let Snape go with that 
> information? Maybe DD, that trusting soul, didn't suspect that 
> Snape was involved with the Death Eaters? If that were the case,
> DD should've been shocked when Snape came back & revealed that he 
> was a DE who had taken the prophecy to LV. 
> 
> Except, in DH, we learn that DD knew Snape was a Death Eater 
> all along. 
-----<snip good reasons, I agree>-----
> It's safe to conclude that DD already knew that Snape was a DE 
> when he was caught listening at the door - and DD allowed him 
> to run straight to LV with what he had heard. It was a message 
> to LV from DD, in a sense.

Mike:
I'm with you so far. DD's actions immediately after Sibyll finished 
were suspect. Hold that thought on the last sentence, though.


> lizzyben:
---<snip>--- 
> So, Prophecy!DD would want to know exactly how much of the 
> prophecy Snape had heard & relayed to LV.
> 
> "What request could a Death Eater make of me?" 
> "The - the prophecy, the prediction.... Trelawney...."
> "Ah, yes," said Dumbledore. "How much did you relay to Lord 
> Voldemort?"
> "Everything - everything I heard!" (DH 681)
> 
> DD's first question is "how much did of the prophecy did you carry
> to LV?" Very important - DD only wants LV to hear the first half.
> Snape's answer ("everything I heard") seems to satisfy Dumbledore.

Mike:
Here's where we have divergence. Why ask the question if he already 
knows the answer? No, that's not it. He could be trying to determine 
whether Snape is about to be honest with him. But, "everything I 
heard" is no answer at all insofar as determining *what* Snape 
actually heard. Unless DD is Legilimensing Snape just then.


> lizzyben:
> Why? How could DD be sure that Snape didn't hear the second half
> of the prophecy? The text tells us how. Right before this exchange,
> DD ensures that he & Snape can't be heard by any eavesdroppers. 
> "Dumbledore flicked his wand. Though leaves and branches still 
> flew through the night air around them, silence fell on the spot 
> where he and Snape faced each other." (DH 681) DD cast a silencing
> spell. 
> ---<snip>---
> I think DD did the same thing with Trelawney. She began 
> prophecizing, and after the first sentence, Dumbledore cast a 
> silencing spell to ensure that an eavesdropper (Snape) couldn't 
> hear the rest of the prophecy. This explains why Snape only heard 
> and relayed the first half of the prophecy.

Mike:
Two problems with this analysis. DD's spell made the outside noise
go away, there is no indication that he was keeping his conversation 
with Snape bound to within that bubble. True, with all the outside 
noise and them being able to speak in lower, more conversational 
volumes, that would make it difficult to hear them talking (without 
magic, that is <wink>). But Snape's Muffliato was the spell that put 
noise in outsider's ears to protect against eavesdroppers and that 
spell doesn't affect ones immediate ambient noise.

The second problem is that for DD to have done something to prevent 
an eavesdropper from hearing any more of Trelawney's prophesy, 
shouldn't he have suspected an eavesdropper? There was no indication 
DD knew Snape was there. Besides, Dumbledore doesn't put much stock 
in prophesies himself. Why would he immediately think to quash any 
further release after the first two lines? He doesn't know what's 
coming next, and he doesn't much care. It's not until Snape is 
revealed, after the full prophesy, that DD would or should have taken 
stock of what was said and what that could mean.


> lizzyben:
> I think DD would have sacrificed the Potters without a second 
> thought to ensure that the prophecy came true; he was already 
> planning to sacrifice an unknown family when he first leaked the 
> prophecy to LV. So when he demanded payment from Snape for 
> protecting the Potters, IMO he was totally serious about that. If 
> Snape hadn't promised "anything", I think DD would've allowed the 
> prophecy to play out as planned. And maybe he still did.

Mike:
We've now leaped into the formative stage of what to do once the 
prophesy has gotten to LV. Before that, when DD had the chance to 
Obliviate or Legilimens Snape, is where my big questions come in. 
This is when DD shows his contempt for prophesies, imo. He really 
doesn't care if Snape heard it, nor if Snape is going to take it to 
LV. He doesn't believe in the damn things. 

I think the prophesy occurs at Harry's conception, Holloween 1979. 
The meeting on the windswept hill occurs at least after Harry's 
birth, and probably much later than that. By that time, DD has 
received some indication that Voldemort is going to act on the 
prophesy. Now, finally, DD cares how much of the prophesy Snape 
heard. The conversation wasn't over when the memory faded out. I'm 
sure that DD either Legilimensed Snape to learn how much 
was "everything I heard" or got Snape to tell him exactly how much 
that was.

Now, as to your assertion that DD would sacrifice the Potters; I 
don't think so, for one simple reason and it was a basic premise of 
the entire series. What happened in GH had *never* happened before. 
For DD to have predicted that would happen takes us out of the realm 
of believability, imo. So DD would have earnestly tried to protect 
Harry and, by extension, Harry's parents. He couldn't predict the 
backfiring AK, the split off soul piece, nor what constituted "mark 
him as his equal". 

For all DD knew, targeting Harry constituted the marking. In HBP, DD 
explains to Harry that "Voldemort...was on the lookout for the one 
who would challenge him" and that "he not only handpicked the man 
most likely to finish him, handed him uniquely deadly weapons!" 
(p.510, US Ed.) Well, the "handpicking" part was already done by the 
time Snape met DD on that hill. The "uniquely deadly weapons" turns 
out to be the soul piece that gave Harry those powers, not something 
that DD could have predicted nor counted on. 

So DD's obvious course of action would have been to do everything to 
keep Harry alive, not to put him in harms way on the chance that 
several unknown and never before seen things would occur if Voldemort 
got the chance to personally attack Harry.




> lizzyben:
> 
> The "keeping Harry alive" thing gets a little muddled when DD's 
> sending Harry into obstacle courses to confront Dark Wizards, 
> disappearing w/Basiliks on the loose, making Harry enter the Tri-
> Wizard tournaments, etc. etc. All part of letting Harry "try his 
> strength". 

Mike:
It was training, combat training at that. I don't see why it would be 
hard to believe a manipulative DD wouldn't do these things. You, 
yourself said:

> lizzyben
> For example, "Keep an eye on Quirrel, will you?" is very off-hand, 
> causal remark. JKR doesn't have a big reveal that "OMG Dumbledore 
> knew Quirrel/Voldemort was after the Stone & totally set the 
> obstacle course up for Harry to fight him!" But with that one 
> statement, plus w/Harry's own statement in SS that "(DD) wanted to 
> give me a chance to face Voldemort." ... and yeah, it's pretty safe
> to conclude that he did just that.

Mike again:
Same for the Basilisk in CoS. Notice that DD was already back at the 
school and in conversation with the Weasleys when the CoS adventurers 
turn up, led by Fawkes. Had Fawkes detected that Harry wasn't going 
to survive, don't you think he would have apperated to DD 
immediately, and DD would have put everything to rights? And what was 
the one thing that could stop Basilisk venom? The very thing that DD 
arrainged to help Harry, a Phoenix.

The TWT was a perfect training ground, what with all the new safety 
precautions. I don't think the trip to the graveyard was in DD's 
plan, but luck saved Harry on that one.



> lizzyben:
> 
> DD's plan in DH is so nonsensical from top to bottom that I don't 
> even know where to begin. Why did Harry have to find the Horcruxes?
> Wouldn't using some of the capable Order members be a better idea?

Mike:
I think DD's penchant for secrecy was well established within the 
series. It was a flaw in his personality. He even told Snape that he 
didn't want to "keep all his secrets in one basket" (quoted from 
memory). It's a fault that even his brother decries.

 
> lizzyben: 
> ---<snip>--- And why did DD have the weird will gifts? What 
> was the point? Even if Harry figures out the symbol 
> (another miracle/deus ex machina), the Hallows were a useless 
> subplot. As Dead!DD later says, Harry needed the horcruxes, not 
> the hallows. So, not only is it a red herring, it's a red herring 
> wrapped in a mystery that wastes everyone's time.

Mike:
DD explained that he wanted Harry to know about them, while at the 
same time he wanted Harry to be slowed down enough to understand them 
and make the right decision. As to the plot contrivance - I agree, 
and I'll not waste time defending JKR's choice in this.



> lizzyben: 
> ---<snip>--- Everything DD does is cloaked in mystery & secrecy 
> that actually hurts the mission. It's like DD is more interested 
> in showing his cleverness w/elaborate Rube Goldberg schemes rather 
> than creating a plan that works. Harry won by sheer dumb luck - 
> note that if things had gone according to DD's plan, Voldemort 
> would have won.

Mike:
It was DD's **it's all my fault but here's why I did it** speech in 
OotP that clued me into where DD was coming from. That's when it 
became clear that DD had a plan for Harry that was too clever by 
half. It was if he knew his problem with secrecy and instead of 
correcting it, came up with his clever plans to to make his secrecy 
problem integral to the plan. 

Don't tell Harry about the prophesy, do everything you can to keep 
him in the dark. Lock up Sirius and forbid him to tell. Don't teach 
Harry yourself, make Snape teach Harry Occlumency, maybe it will 
forge a bond between them (fat chance!). Don't tell Harry about the 
Voldiepiece in him, that way he'll meet Voldemort with the intention 
of sacrificing himself without knowing he could survive it. Don't 
tell Harry about the Hallows and that he owns one himself, make him 
waste time discovering that so he has time to mature into the right 
decision. If I was Harry, I'd have been too pissed at DD by the time 
I got to "King's Cross" to have listened to a word he said.

But, that's the character that JKR wrote. And within the story, I 
think DD's characterization works just fine. Not that I like him. ;)

Mike