A Dark Glamour - Voldemort's Appeal - DDs Complicity

[lizzyben04]

No: HPFGUIDX 179426

Warning - this got pretty long & rambly! 

<snip>
> > lizzyben:
> ---<snip>--- 
> > 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:

Unless he's Legimising, or unless he knows that he cast a Silencing 
Spell halfway through the prophecy. Snape's assurance that he took
everything he'd *heard* to LV would reassure DD that Snape hadn't 
heard & relayed the entire prophecy.

> > 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. 
><snip> 
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. <snip>


lizzyben:

Nah, why would DD bother casting a spell just to muffle the wind? I
think it's pretty clearly a silencing spell of some kind, which 
encases Snape & DD in a bubble of silence - they can't hear the wind 
anymore, and outsiders can't hear them anymore. DD cast this right 
when Snape mentioned that he came with a warning, in order to keep 
the information Snape gave secret from possible eavesdroppers. And 
we all know how DD loves secrets. It doesn't work like Snape's own 
Muffliato spell, because that's one that Snape invented for himself. 
DD is using a different type of silencing spell - and this spell 
apparantly works by creating a bubble of silence around the two 
people having the conversation.

Mike:
> 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.<snip> 

lizzyben:

Well, yeah. I think DD already probably already knew that Snape was 
sent to spy on him. But it's a moot point, anyway. DD's the leader 
of the resistance, he should assume that he's being spied on at all 
times. Besides which, he was in the Hog's Head, a dodgy bar that had 
a reputation for an  "interesting clientele" full of spies, 
smugglers, Slytherins & other low-lifes. DD HAD to suspect an 
eavesdropper. This was just a boring job interview, so he doesn't 
bother concealing anything. DD said that he was just about to leave 
when Trelawney began prophicizing. When T gives a real
 prophecy, her demeanor totally changes - her voice falls very low, 
she falls into a trance, etc. As soon as DD heard the first 
sentence "The one with the power to vanquish the
 Dark Lord approaches ...born to those who have thrice defied him,
born as the seventh month dies," he must have realized that something
 odd was happening - it's directly related to Voldemort, predicting 
the LV's defeat, and who will ultimately defeat him, etc. 

DD casts the silencing spell at this point, protecting the rest of 
the prophecy from possible (or known) eavesdroppers. Then, Aberforth 
comes in with a Death Eater who had been listening outside the door. 
And DD lets him go, knowing that he will take the prophecy straight 
to Voldemort. Because only DD had heard the 2nd half of the 
prophecy, & only DD knew that acting on the prophecy would lead Lord 
Voldemort to his downfall.

What makes you think that DD didn't put any stock in the prophecy? Or
 that he doesn't care about the rest of the prophecy? DD was
 about to turn down Trelawney for a job, but after she makes that 
prophecy, he hires her instead & keeps her at Hogwarts for 20+ years 
as protection. He certainly put stock in Harry being the "Chosen 
One" who would defeat LV. All indications are that DD took this 
prophecy very seriously. But this is also a moot point. Because it 
doesn't matter if Dumbledore himself believes in prophecies or not. 
He knew that LV was afraid of death, so he knew or should have known 
that VOLDEMORT would take the prophecy seriously and act upon it. By 
letting Snape go, DD was endangering every family that fit the 
prophecy's description. But DD didn't care - he'd finally found a 
way to defeat LV.

 
> 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. 

lizzyben:

Nope, I don't buy this at all. DD may have contempt for prophecies, 
but he has caught a real live Death Eater outside his door. Wouldn't 
this be the time to call the Aurors? But he lets Snape go to LV, 
knowing the prophecy could endanger an innocent family if LV takes 
it seriously. Because DD knew that LV believed in prophecies, most 
especially anything foretelling his own death. DD doesn't have 
contempt for prophecies; in HBP, he just says that one party has to 
*act* upon it to make it come true. DD let the prophecy go to ensure 
that LV would act upon it, & make it come true.

Mike:
><snip>
> 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". 

lizzyben:

Well, that's why I just threw it in as a "maybe." I'm not sure if he
did or not, but IMO there's a lot of circumstantial evidence tying 
DD to the crime. First of all, DD asked for the Potters' 
invisibility cloak a week or so before the murders. The cloak
could've concealed Harry, & prevent him from being "marked" by LV. 
Secondly, how did DD know what had happened so quickly? He sent 
Hagrid to take Harry before the authorities had even shown up. And 
he also knew about the "blood protection" that Lily's sacrifice had 
created for Harry. Meaning he knew that Lily had stood in front of 
Harry & sacrificed her life. How does he know this? Really, how 
would he know what happened in Godric's Hollow? There were no 
witnesses, but within hours of the attack, DD knew exactly what had
happened, how it had happened, & why Harry survived. He sent Hagrid
specifically to pick up Harry - meaning that he already knew that 
the Potters were dead, & Harry was still alive. In real life, if 
someone has that level of detailed, private, information about a 
crime, it is considered incriminating evidence. Heck, maybe DD 
watched it all happen. I truly wouldn't put it past him.

Mike:
> For all DD knew, targeting Harry constituted the marking. <snip> 
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. 

lizzyben:

But he knew that simply "hand-picking" or targeting someone wouldn't
give anyone special powers. LV had to *mark* the child to make him 
his equal - and DD wouldn't know exactly how that would happen, but 
he knew that LV and Harry had to have a confrontation for it to 
happen. You can't have that confrontation when the child is hidden 
under an invisibility cloak or a Fidelius Charm. To trigger the 2nd 
part of the prophecy, LV had to meet and mark Harry. I think DD 
didn't care either way about the Potters & he certainly didn't 
respect their wishes after their deaths. If Snape hadn't 
given "anything" to protect them, IMO DD definitely
would've let the attack happen, just as he was willing to let an
anonymous family be attacked when he let the prophecy loose. With 
Snape as a valuable double agent, DD would have to make sure that 
the murders could never be traced to any fault or neglect on his 
part. Thus - Fidelius Charm, Peter as SK, & an attack within a week. 
I don't know, but I do suspect that DD pulled some strings there, 
just as he pulled many strings right after the attack occured to put 
the "Chosen One" within his control. I'm not sure, but I do suspect 
DD had a hand in arranging the attack, just as he had a hand in 
arranging LV's attack on Harry in Sorcerer's Stone. 

Mike:
> 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:

But a Harry that's kept safe & far away from Voldemort won't become 
the Chosen One. Both Harry & Neville could potentially fit the first 
half of the propechey - LV would have to mark one "as his equal" in 
order to trigger the second half & create the one who can defeat him.
DD doesn't need to know exactly how the prophecy would play out, or 
how Harry would become an equal, he just needs to know that this 
attack will create one w/special powers to defeat LV. DD has never 
shown hestitance to sacrifice for the "greater good". He's losing, 
LV is killing many people, etc. It's worth a shot. Harry wouldn't 
get the special powers until he was marked by LV, & that's not going 
to happen if he's sucessfully hidden from LV. 


> > 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. <snip>

lizzyben:

No, I totally believe that DD did do these things. I'm just saying 
that it shows that "protecting & keeping Harry alive" wasn't the 
primary mission here. It was all DD's version of training - which 
often seemed to involve a rather high danger of death/serious injury.

> 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. <snip>

lizzyben:

Yeah, agree here. The Basilik was another training opportunity for
 Harry. The petrified & possibly killed students were all collateral 
damage for the Plan. This is why I consider DD evil - he just used 
people up & casually tossed them aside. Hermione, Colin Creevy, 
Ginny etc. could have all died, but that just wasn't important to 
DD. I'm not sure he's capable of seeing people as real people at 
all. They're just pawns who can be used for a larger purpose. This 
POV is also why most of DD's plans fail - he doesn't seem capable of 
understanding that people have seperate motivations, agendas, 
emotions & thoughts of their own.

I just realized that Snape's plan, w/as little freedom as he had,
 actually worked much better than DD's plan. Snape's plan for the 
Sword of Gryfindor worked perfectly. Because Snape seemed to 
understand how Harry would react, & how events would actually 
unfold. He knew that Harry would follow the Doe patronus because of 
the connection to his parents, knew that Harry would show Gryffindor 
courage/recklessness & dive into freezing water to get the Sword, 
knew that Ron had split from the group & how to guide him back. It's 
a kind of empathy (NOT sympathy) that DD just doesn't seem to have. 
DD thinks that everyone else thinks exactly the same way he does. If 
DD is obsessed with power, well then everyone else must be too. 
 
Mike:
> 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:

Well, I'm not so sure about that. So, you agree that DD wanted Harry 
to enter the TWT as training. But he also should have known that 
there was a very big risk that Voldemort's minions also wanted Harry 
in the TWT. DD is reading the Little Hagleton paper, so he knows 
that Frank Bryce was murdered at the Riddle house. He knows that 
Snape's mark is growing darker, signaling LV's return. He knows that 
LV wants to kill Harry, and he knows that *someone* put Harry 
Potter's name in for the TWT, for some unknown reason. It doesn't 
take a genius to put 2 & 2 together here. Sirius suspected that LV 
was involved; certainly DD must have as well.

Oh, and don't forget that unnamed kind man who bought the abandoned 
Riddle house fifty years ago for "tax purposes". So kind, the owner 
even kept on the old groundskeeper, Frank Bryce, even though Bryce 
was accused of the murders that LV actually committed. What 
benevolent old man do we know that likes to give accused 
groundskeepers a second chance? Hmmmmm. Yeah, IMO DD owned the 
Riddle estate. He knew exactly what was going on there, and exactly 
why Harry's name was entered into the TWT. Both DD and LV wanted 
Harry to end up in that graveyard. When LV used Harry's blood to 
resurrect, that gave Harry the ability to survive an AK from LV. 
DD's plan *worked*, which is why he had a "gleam of triumph" at the 
end of GOF. 

Casualty count for the GOF Plan: Frank Bryce, Barty Crouch Sr., Barty
 Crouch Jr., Cedric Diggory.

Isn't it odd how often LV's & DD's interests coincide? They both 
wanted Quirrel to go after the Stone, both wanted a LV/Harry 
confrontation, both wanted Harry to enter the TWT, both wanted the 
Hallows, & both planned for Harry to die. It's more than complicity -
it's almost *collaboration*.


> > 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:

Yeah, I was looking for an actual logical reason why DD made this 
plan so ridiculous, implausible & doomed to failure. But there isn't 
one. The Plan makes no sense. I'm not sure whether to blame DD or 
bad writing here, but IMO it is in character for DD to make over-
elaborate, flawed plans. This is just worse than most. A child could 
come up with a better plan - indeed, no plan at all would've been a 
better plan. DD's plan allows LV to get the Elder Wand, allows him 
to kill Snape, & distracts the leader of the resistance from his 
vital mission w/useless, confusing red herrings. It also keeps Harry 
Potter away from the MOM or Hogwarts, where he could rally the 
resistance, & instead keeps him shivering in a tent, out of sight. 
It's a brilliant plan - if you want LV to win. Otherwise, not so 
much.


> 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:

This again shows DD's inability to understand others. Since when has 
Harry ever wanted power? That's DD's issue, not Harry's. So... he 
wanted to slow Harry down while he followed the red herring, then 
let Harry make the right decision to reject the red herring, & then 
do the actual mission. Why include the Hallows red herring at all? 
It seems to have more to do w/DD's own obsession with the objects - 
it's like some twisted test of moral virtue? So he can see who's the 
better man, Harry or DD? Meanwhile people are dying.
 
> 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. 

lizzyben:

Which is why I think it's all about DD in the end. He knows that his
 secrecy is a problem, but becomes even more secretive in each novel.
 Because IMO knowing secrets gave DD a feeling of power. The more 
secrets he knows, the more power he has & the more ability he has to 
manipulate people. DD denied himself power in the political world, 
but he can't stop himself from consolidating power anyway wherever 
he goes. He's a tyrant in nature, IMO, though he denies himself that 
role in real life. So even though he's decided not to seek world 
domination & evil overlordship, his instincts for tyranny & 
domination come out anyway in different ways. In his role as Order 
leader, DD consolidates power in himself only by denying any 
information or knowledge to other Order members. This makes them all 
totally dependent on him. It converts people into pawns, which DD
 can more easily move across the board. This is bad for the goal of 
LV's eventual defeat, but good for increasing DD's power, control & 
influence over his Order subjects. DD reminds me of the Grand 
Inquistor, using mystery, miracles & authority to control the 
masses, while keeping the truth secret for only the intellectually 
worthy (read: Albus Dumbledore).


Mike:
> 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.

lizzyben:

It's almost a plan that's designed to fail, isn't it?  And I think
perhaps it WAS designed to fail. Dumbledore's plan makes absolutely 
no sense at all in the end. W/all his supposed brilliance, DD ended 
up creating a plan that would almost certainly result in LV's 
victory. Why would he do this? And why would DD create all these 
elaborate plans centered on himself, instead of simply turning over 
LV to the Aurors when had the chance - while Riddle was at Hogwarts, 
or returning for a teaching job, or living in Quirrel's turban, or 
hanging out at the Riddle mansion, etc. 

I think it's because DD secretly liked having Voldemort around.  
It's a symbiotic relationship between tyranny and terrorism, in that 
one strengthens & feeds the other. Voldemort gave DD *power*, 
influence, pawns, followers, importance. It creates a society of 
fear in which people look to DD as their savior. And it creates a 
cult of personality around DD, the only wizard LV ever feared. W/o 
LV, DD is just a barmy old headmaster, but w/LV, DD is a great war 
leader, enlightened fighter for Muggle rights, a powerful wizard, & 
the epitome of goodness & justice.

And LV also acted out DD's own subconscious wishes - for Muggle 
domination, for Hallow collection, for immortality and absolute 
power. It's like Dr. Jekell & Mr. Hyde, or Frankenstein & 
Frankenstein's Monster. In these novels, the main character creates 
a monster that ends up acting out their own dark sides. I think 
Voldemort was Dumbledore's monster, in the end. 

Mike:
> 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


lizzyben:

Oh, I don't like him either. I think he's downright evil, maybe more 
evil than Voldemort. But he just might be my favorite character in 
the series. He's incredibly complex, conflicted, ruthless and 
idealistic. I agree that DD's characterization is just fine & IMO 
totally consistent throughout the series. Some characters seems to 
change radically from one novel to the next, but DD is always the 
same. For example, read the scene where DD tells Snape that Lily is 
dead, & see how cold, imperious, and ruthless he is. How oblivious & 
uncaring he is about Snape's grief. It's almost like he doesn't 
understand emotion or how to relate to people who are in pain. Then 
flip to the very first chapter of the first book, when DD dumps 
Harry off at the Dursleys. This scene took place, in real time, 
within hours of the DH scene with Snape. So the Potters have just 
been murdered, Snape is destroyed, Hagrid is weeping, & McGonegal 
has stood vigil all day to find out what happened. And as soon as DD 
spots McGonegal, he says "why aren't you out celebrating?... We have 
much to be thankful for. Lemon drop?" LOLOL, Dumbledore, what an 
asshole. And he's a consistent one! Is this a man who's grieving 
over the Potters' death & his inability to protect them - or
one who's quite smug & pleased about the success of his Plan for a 
chosen one? You decide.



lizzyben