Who needs Harry? (was: GoF CH 27-29 Post DH look/ Snape and Harry redux)

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 182301

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > <snip>
> > This is part of the reason the series fell apart for me,         
> > honestly. Not only did it not make sense that everything relied   
> > on Harry, the WW suffered more *because* they relied so much on   
> > Harry.  There was nothing that occurred in book 7 that showed me 
> > why a crack group of wizards couldn't have defeated Voldemort way 
> > back before Harry was even born.  In fact, it made it rather     
> > embarrassing for all involved that Voldemort *wasn't* defeated.  
> > At least, IMO. <g>

> >>Carol responds:
> I can see a group of intelligent Wizards (admittedly, we don't see
> many such people in the WW that JKR created) figuring out that a
> Horcrux, perhaps two, are keeping Voldemort alive, but that could   
> only happen if he's "killed."
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
So why didn't anyone kill Voldemort?  He's never shown to be all that 
formidable.  For that matter, why worry about killing him, just 
capture the man and then go from there. Wizards have the ability to 
read minds after all.  Yes, Voldemort's very good at protecting 
himself from such things, but once he's captured he could easily 
be "softened".  Heck, there's probably a potion or two that could be 
used to assist.  (A nice strong love potion would more than likely do 
the trick.)

> >>Carol:
> The problem is, the possibility of creating Horcruxes *is not common
> knowledge.* Maybe the students of Durmstrang know about them, but
> Hogwarts-educated students don't. Horcruxes have been a forbidden
> topic at Hogwarts since Tom Riddle's time, and Dumbledore has      
> removed all the books on the topic from the library.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Another blow against Dumbledore.  (I frown on anyone who feels the 
need to "protect" others against knowledge they deem dangerous.)  
But, if Durmstrang students are aware of Horcruxes, if anyone 
Riddle's age or older are aware of Horcruxes, than they're not *that* 
esoteric. It'd just take one letter to a world-renowned Dark Arts 
expert.

"We captured this mad bloke bent on Britain domination.  He's 
completely crazy, but he also killed quite a few people so we tried 
to execute him.  Thing is, he won't die.  Any clues as to how that 
might be?  Thanks ever so, and I hope your garden is doing well."

After that it'd just be a matter of deduction.  

> >>Carol:
> We could even have Slughorn finding his courage and admitting that
> Voldemort wanted to make six Horcruxes...
> <snip>
> But how is anyone other than Dumbledore, who has researched Tom
> Riddle's past, supposed to know what those Horcruxes are? Who       
> besides DD would know about the ring, the cup, and the locket, or   
> figure out where they might be hidden?
> <snip>
> But who besides Dumbledore knows where the Gaunts lived? Who        
> besides Dumbledore would know about the cave? Who besides          
> Dumbledore knows about Tom Riddle's penchant for                   
> collecting "trophies," or about the ring, the locket, and the cup? 
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Any wizard of any salt could figure out all of the above, just as 
Dumbledore did, by questioning those in Tom Riddle's past.  If Riddle 
collected things, he'd have kept on collecting and his dormmates 
would have recalled such behavior, for example.  The Gaunts' are a 
matter of government record, what with their tangling with the law 
and all.  And anyone at all familiar with the history of Hogwarts 
should know about the Founders and their special items.

Or, they could capture Voldemort and find out from the man himself.  

> >>Carol:
> And without a venom-imbued Sword of Gryffindor or access to the     
> Basilisk in the basement (only Harry can manage that part of the   
> task), they'd have to find another Basilisk ("May we borrow some   
> Basilisk venom? We have some Horcruxes to destroy"), risk raising   
> one themselves (not a smart idea since only a Parselmouth can      
> control a Basilisk), or find some other means to destroy the       
> Horcruxes. (Fiend-Fyre? They'd have to be as stupid as Crabbe to    
> use something so uncontrollable. And if other means were available, 
> DD wouldn't have needed to pass on the Sword to Harry or use it    
> himself.) 
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Was it only Fiend-Fyre and Basilisk venom that could destroy a 
Horcrux?  Then, yeah, buy some Basilisk venom (if any were available) 
or figure out how to set off some Fiend-Fyre in a controlled 
environment.  Muggles are able to harness the power of split atoms.  
Surely the wizarding world can figure out how to harness Fiend-Fyre 
for a short burst or two.  (Heck, the Trio survived their brush with 
it.)

Or, just keep Voldemort locked away.  Charles Manson is still alive 
after all.  But he's contained.  Why couldn't the Wizarding World do 
the same?

> >>Carol:
>  ...you've got to have Harry somewhere in the mix, and a Harry     
> without the soul bit in his scar won't do. Felix Felicis *might*   
> enable DD to coax the truth out of Helena Ravenclaw and to find the 
> diadem in the RoR, but only Harry can discover and destroy
> the diary, which was only at Hogwarts in the first place because
> Voldemort had "died" at Godric's Hollow. 
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Why though?  I mean, what was so special about Harry the Ravenclaw 
ghost spoke to him and him alone?  Wasn't it just that 
Harry...asked?  And why was Harry the only one who could have found 
the diary? There wasn't some sort of special Harry-vibe that 
attracted the diary to him, he just lucked across it.

There was just nothing in DH that gave me a reason for Voldemort not 
being stopped at his height before Harry even arrived into this 
world.  Except for the sheep-like idiocy of wizards.  It's not that 
Voldemort was that bad.  They were that weak.

> >>Philip:
> <snip>
>> The simple fact is that people are scared and few will
overcome that fear and attack. Moreover, like Hitler,
Stalin, Lenin, Napeleon and every other singular force
for change in the world, Voldemort plays to the stereotypes
and problems in society. This allows him, despite his
half-blood nature toform a movement for change. The
singular problem is that: "All that is necessary for
the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." <<

Betsy Hp
The problem for me though, is Voldemort is not shown to be on the 
level of a Stalin or a Hitler.  He's at best, a street thug.  And I 
mean at the top of his game and everything.  There's nothing in DH, 
where we were supposed to be seeing Voldemort unleashed, to really 
get an idea of the horror of his power, that points to him as 
anything but a petty bully with a few incredibly stupid people behind 
him.

But, okay, link Voldemort with Hitler.  It didn't take a very 
specific person to take down Hitler.  It was a team effort.  Too bad 
the WW refused to work as a team. <g>

> >>Phillip:
> The simple fact is that Harry is uniquely placed, because he is an 
> orphan thanks to Voldemort, to be willing enough to do something    
> about it.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
I get that Harry had a personal grudge going on.  But surely he's not 
the only person Voldemort hurt.  So the idea that only Harry had a 
motivation... I can't believe that.  And there's nothing that Harry 
accomplishes, nothing Harry does, that another wizard (and 
intelligent, trained wizard) couldn't have done. 

All in my opinion, of course. <bg>

Betsy Hp