GoF CH 27-29 Post DH look/ Snape and Harry redux

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 182256

> > Alla:
> > Because I do not remember reading that they defied Voldemort 
three 
> > times, that's why.
> 
> Potioncat:
> The Longbottoms also defied LV 3 times, yet they were driven to 
> madness by lesser wizards than LV. And, defying him, in whatever 
> manner, was not the same as defeating him.

Alla:

Of course. That is why I brought defying him three times as 
**possibility** that could increase their chances for survival.

 
> > 
> > Alla:
> > Yeah, I do. I also understand that all it takes to destroy him is 
> to destroy his horcruxes one by one and teenagers seem to do quite 
> well. 
> snip
> 
> Potioncat:
> Well, no. All the Horcruxes had to be destroyed, then he had to be 
> killed, even without an intact Horcrux, he was a powerful wizard. 
> And, not just anyone could have let LV AK them with the same 
results 
> Harry achieved.  

Alla:

Magpie addressed it better than I could - I do not believe that 
Voldemort without horcruxes can only be killed "Harry style", you 
know, but yes of course he has to be killed after horcruxes are 
destroyed, was sort of obvious in my head but not on paper, sorry 
about that.



 
> > Alla:
> snip
> > And nothing convinces me that horcruxes cannot be destroyed by 
> > somebody else. I say Several people would destroy horcruxes, no 
> > matter how  many years it takes and then somebody finish off 
> Voldemort - without  Harry battling him. 
> 
> 
> Potioncat:
> Oh! Oh! Your yahoo name fits you! You are Dumbledore! What is it to 
> you if countless others suffer so long as Harry is happy and safe? 
> <eg> 

Alla:

If the only way of those countless others not to suffer means WW 
putting all their hopes in one boy and depending on him to save them 
and , then you are actually absolutely right, I could care less about 
saving WW even if the price is the life of **only** one boy.

Although I seem to remember that Dumbledore quite merrily went along 
to sacrificing this one boy to see that those others not suffer. So, 
I think we do differ with him here.

Again, this boy sufferings and heroism makes for amazing story, but 
that makes me so very disgusted with WW, including DD yes.

 
Potioncat:
> DD seems to have believed the prophecy himself, because many of the 
> actions he took seemed to be to help it along. I think his actions--
> separate from Snape's or in addition to Snape's--nudged it into 
> fruition.

Alla:

I cannot quite figure out if he believed the prophecy or not,  but 
sure, I will agree that his actions in addition to Snape nudged the 
prophecy into fruition.

He seemed quite clear to me when he was saying that Prophecy came 
true because Voldemort believed it, but sure his actions hmmmm make 
one wonder.



 
Potioncat: 
> I'm not sure if we're all comparing apples to orange to bananas or 
if 
> we're the blind men examining an elephant. We're coming at the crux 
> of the matter from very different viewpoints.

Alla:

Sure.

Potioncat:
> Speaking only for me---because even those of us who agree with each 
> other, don't fully agree---Snape's action caused great suffering 
for 
> Harry and caused the death of the Potters. Snape himself would 
agree. 
> That he tried to prevent the consequences, that he atoned for them 
> afterwards, does not change that fact.

Alla:

Yes, Snape's action caused great suffering for Harry and caused death 
of Potters - that is we agree upon. 

Potioncat:
> So, even if you and I agree this much---I don't think changing the 
> one thing will give Harry a happy life. More than that has to 
change 
> or to be different. 

Alla:

I guess I have to give up, because I just do not get how you do not 
think that the dissappearance of one major event would not change 
anything.

It MAY NOT change anything, but I just do not see how you won't 
accept even the possibility of change.

Potioncat:
You gave examples of being happy in war, but in 
> all fairness, you offered people who are not in the war. They live 
> out of the war zone, and their children are not soldiers. 

Alla:

Well, no. I gave examples of marauders first of all. Any indications 
of James having unhappy family life? Or Remus? Besides him being 
werewolf? And the war was already on. As to RL example, that is not 
completely true either - they live in the country which is affected 
by war, at any time, at any place act of terror can happen and does 
happen, at any city, be it their city or anybody else's. They are not 
on the frontlines **right now**, but war can hit home at any time.

And they still live normal life pretty much. They go to work, child 
goes to school, they go out, etc, etc.

Potioncat:
Lily and 
> James had already joined the fray and I don't think having a child 
> would have changed that. <SNIP>

Alla:

Oh? I thought they only went to hiding to protect their child? So why 
do you think they would not have decided to slow down and avoid the 
active fight when Harry was born?

After all presumably that is why Weasleys were not in the first 
order - little kids, no?

JMO,

Alla