CHAPDISC: DH36, THE FLAW IN THE PLAN

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 185249

SSSusan, earlier:
> > 5.  Why is it that Harry does not feel the pain of the Crucio? Is 
> > it  the same reason the Dementors don't affect him? 
 
Pippin:
<snip>
> The way I understand it, and I admit it's taken me a  long time to
> grasp this idea, the magical power of love can provide physical
> protection only to  *other* people. So, Voldemort was right in a 
> way, IMO. Love magic didn't have the power he desired. It would not 
> give him the power to protect himself from physical harm. But it 
> does protect against spiritual harm, and that would explain why 
> Harry no longer needed a patronus to protect himself from the 
> dementors.

SSSusan:
I suspect I am not going to add much new in this post, but I wanted 
to say that I am grateful you took the time -- however long -- to 
come to this conclusion.  It sure had never occurred to me, but I do 
believe you are correct, and it does make wonderful sense.  Deepest, 
purest love isn't for self, but for others.  So it is fitting that 
the protective power of love would be for others, not self.  
Brilliant.


SSSusan: 
> > 8.  It's interesting that Voldemort specifies just the emblem,
> > shield  and colors of Slytherin being good enough for all.  Why 
> > didn't he say  anything about Slytherin's principles?  Or were 
> > they implied along  with the rest?

Pippin:
> Voldemort isn't interested in principles. As far as he's concerned
> there is no good and evil, only power. He certainly doesn't believe 
> in the superiority of pure blood, and if there's one thing he 
> doesn't value in his followers, it's ambition!

SSSusan:
Another excellent point.  I shoulda thought of that one. ;)  

It is all about power for him, and it's about followers who have 
enough of it to be capable, but not so much of it -- and not combined 
with ambition -- so that he doesn't have to worry about competition.

But on that issue of purebloodedness....  We all know Voldemort isn't 
a pureblood, and yet he did hide the fact that he wasn't from his 
followers, which of course makes sense since they were a band of 
purebloods.  So why *did* he go for purebloods as his gang members?  
Was that just because he knew, for whatever reason, that the people 
he wanted as followers were also those who tended to believe in the 
superiority of purebloods?  Or is it possible that Voldemort did 
believe in that one principle?  Is it possible that he so hated his 
own mixed blood because he did believe in the superiority of 
purebloods?  Could he have believed that his power would have been 
even greater, his road to the top even faster & more assured, if he'd 
been pureblood himself?  

This does, of course, beg the comparison to Hitler -- how one who 
himself had a partially Jewish heritage could pretend that he did not 
and promote the ideal of the Aryan race.  Does that mean that Hitler 
never truly believed in that principle of Aryan superiority?  That's 
not rhetorical question -- I'd really like to know what people 
think.  Because it seems to me that it *is* possible that a person 
who lacks something still believes in the principle of its 
superiority.

So, *was* there room for this one principle within Voldemort's 
worldview?  Or not even for that?


SSSusan:
> > 17.  Now that time has passed and it's all been considered & 
> > talked over (and over and over), does the "Who's master of the 
> > Elder Wand and how does it happen?" work for you or not?
 
Pippin:
> It works for me. I didn't understand why JKR couldn't just let love
> magic save Harry for the final and conclusive time -- but if her 
> point is that love  gives us the power to help others, that wouldn't
> work.   I think JKR made the Elder Wand story deliberately difficult
> to follow because she wanted us to read the books over again, 
> looking for the answers but also seeing just how much our 
> perspective changes when we have full knowledge.

SSSusan:
I have a feeling that the thought that JKR would write it this way so 
as to try to get us to re-read repeatedly will *really* tick off some 
people.  As for me, I chuckle at it -- I love thinking that that's a 
real possibility. ;)


SSSusan:
> > 19.  Many were disappointed by the part Slytherin played at the 
> > end, having hoped for so much more from students, children of 
> > DEs, etc.  Thinking of the roles of the Slytherins who *did* play 
> > a part – Horace and Narcissa in particular – are those parts 
> > worth celebrating?  How significant to the outcome were they?
 
Pippin:
> The thing is,  there really shouldn't be anything remarkable about a
> Slytherin being morally good, any more than it should be remarkable
> that a Muggleborn is good at magic. 

SSSusan:
No, there really should be.  However...

Pippin:
> Harry really can't play up Slytherin goodness too much without 
> sounding like Slughorn praising Lily.  

SSSusan:
Is this a good enough excuse, though?  Isn't JKR a talented enough 
writer to have found a way to *show* it a little bit?  Was it an 
error on her part to have not understood how very much this mattered 
to so many of her fans?  And is it a legitimate criticism for those 
disappointed fans to level at her?  

(And am I insane to be fueling these flames again?)


SSSusan:
> > 20.  Many left this book rather stunned at revelations about DD, 
> > not altogether happy with the strings he pulled or decisions he 
> > made or actions he took.  What do you make of the fact that, for 
> > Harry, DD's pride and — let's face it — DD's approval were a balm 
> > equal to phoenix song?

Pippin:
> In Harry's eyes, Dumbledore is still the wisest man he ever knew. 

SSSusan:
Yup, I agree.


SSSusan:
> > 21.  Would you have kept any of the Deathly Hallows?  If so, 
> > which one(s) and why?  If not, which would at least have tempted 
> > you?  Are there any to whose power you think you'd have been 
> > totally immune?
 
Pippin:
> As I'm not a wizard, the Elder Wand would be useless to me.  

SSSusan:
LOL.  I should have mentioned that I was assuming witch-or-wizardhood 
was a given for the reader in this one. ;)

I just realized that this was one of my own questions that, for no 
apparent reason, I wanted to answer.  

I do not believe that I would have been the *slightest* bit tempted 
by the Elder Wand.  The violence associated with it would've been 
enough to scare the crap out of me.  I'd have had little interest in 
the Resurrection Stone, either, at least at this point in my life.  
While I can definitely understand the lure of it for those who are 
alone or who have lost someone whose time they feel really hadn't yet 
come (e.g., a parent who's lost a young child), the fact that those 
people couldn't *truly* come back and one couldn't hold on to them 
would make it more of a torment than a gift, for me.

OTOH, I'd have kept the Invisibility Cloak, too.  Not so much because 
I could envision a specific time or place where I'd need it, but more 
just because it's cool and seems, relative to the others, pretty 
harmless. :)  *If* one were famous, as Harry was, it might have been 
really, really nice to have had that at the ready.

I'll bet JKR would've loved to have had the IC, too, by about 1999 or 
so... so that she could have continued to write in coffee shops.


SSSusan earlier:
> > 23.  So if you had to do it in your own words and as concisely as 
> > possible, how would you sum up just what that "flaw in the plan" 
> > was?

SSSusan now:
I'm snipping all of Pippin's response because it's too long to leave 
in just so that I can say "thank you."  But I do say thank you.  When 
I wrote this question, I REALLY wanted someone to turn this into a 
summary that I, personally, could read and say, "Yes! That's it 
exactly!"  So, in short, it was a very selfish question on my part.  

But this was the answer I was hoping for, so thank you. ;)

Siriusly Snapey Susan