What would convince Harry/canned memories

[Randy]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Barry Arrowsmith" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Geist" <editor at t...> 
wrote:
> > I had two questions. Why didn't Dumbledore just *tell* Harry why 
he could
> > trust Snape? And how, now, can Harry possibly learn, and 
*believe in,* the
> > reason Dumbledore trusted Snape? I think the only person who 
knew,
> > Dumbledore, made it impossible for himself to tell anyone. I 
think it is
> > only Dumbledore, still, who has a reasonable chance of making 
Harry
> > understand. And I think it will still be Dumbledore who tells 
him.
> > 
> > I grant you, death is a bit of an obstacle to communication. But 
given all
> > that we now know of Pensieves, I think I can see an explanation 
for why
> > Dumbledore did not tell him (or anyone else, evidently) and the 
way for
> > Dumbledore to give this last bit of information to Harry.
> > 
> > Here's my summation of Pensieve knowledge (forgive the caps, 
please--I
> > cannot underline or otherwise set off for ease of reading):
> > 
> > (1) PUTTING A MEMORY IN THE PENSIEVE TAKES IT OUT OF YOUR HEAD. 
Canon
> > supports this:
> >
> 
> You're right, but whether Jo will stick strictly to existing canon 
is
> something else again. There are hints that some previously 
believed to
> be fixed canon is not so fixed after all - the Protection Where 
Lily's Blood Dwells
> for one (well spotted that poster) and there could be more that'll 
reveal
> themselves as we become more familiar with the detail in the book.
> 
> Yes, some of us have commented already on how useful bottled 
memories
> will be in setting young Potter on the straight and narrow, though 
I hadn't 
> myself got round to the possibility that the way Snape could avoid 
betraying
> himself to Voldy (or DD) is not to have the dangerous memories in 
his noggin
> in the first place (nice bit of deductive thinking there, by the 
way).  There's
> even a danger that this neat wrinkle of banishing inconvenient 
memories
> could be over-used - what a wonderful excuse for characters not 
telling
> Harry stuff when he needs it! Even (and this repeats a thought I 
posted
> some time back) -  there could be a bottled memory *from Harry* 
showing
> what he saw at GH. Yes, he was a toddler and he might not have 
understood
> what he saw, but that wouldn't neccessarily mean that the memory 
couldn't
> be accessed. They must have been doing something interesting in 
the Missing
> 24 hours, don't you think?
> 
> It could also play to the long-held Memory-Modified Neville 
theories.
> Hells teeth! What has Jo presented us with?
> 
> A further question -  if someone dies with memories missing, does 
that
> mean that they are missing from any post-death animated 
representation
> of them? 'Cos I was sort of relying on DD's portrait launching 
into the
> final explication at the end of book 7. But if he's got memory 
blanks that
> exercise might be less than complete.
> 
> The implications of these handy thought-sized bottles bear 
thinking about. 
>  
> Kneasy

Perhaps, the memories being missing from your head depend on which 
spell you use to retrieve them.  For instance, you have the "cut and 
paste" spell or the "copy and paste" spell for pensieve use.  If you 
wish to move the memory out for better storage space utilization, 
you would choose the "cut and paste" spell.  Sometimes you can use 
a "disc optimization" spell to clean out unwanted memories from your 
mind.  

Randy  ( who hopes Bill Gates does not make money every time someone 
uses a pensieve too !)