Further thoughts

[Barry Arrowsmith]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> wrote:
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith
> > 
> <snip>
> > the last book is yet to come, but didn't herself say that it was
> the   time for answers? Anybody notice any of significance?
> >
> Pippin:
> Um, yes, actually. We found out that Snape had indeed resumed his
> role as double agent, we found out what excuses he had made to
> the Death Eaters in order to be accepted back into the fold, we found
> out that Voldemort had ordered Snape to join Dumbledore, we found 
> out why Dumbledore believed Snape had left the dark side, we 
> found out the nature of Lupin's "mysterious business for the Order" 

Kneasy:
None of which I'd consider particularly significant in terms of "what
it's all about". Snape's double/triple dealing has been the object of
heated discussion ever since I joined an HP board - and *still* there
is no agreement as to which side he's on. The mere mechanics of
his operations may be interesting but they don't definitively tell us
good or bad, nor is it a revelation that both sides think he's working 
for them. Added to which, I don't really trust *ANYTHING* DD has told 
Harry about Snape. IMO what he says is shaded or emphasised in ways 
that will get Harry to think or react in the way DD wants him to.
It's manipulation pure and simple, and one usually finds a few weasel
words like "I wouldn't be surprised if.."  in there. 
But Harry never hears those.

The Lupin explanation falls into the same class of plot business as Hagrid 
and the Giants - but with less detail. Again, unless he comes across with
something more than "the werewolves are on Voldy's side" it's no more 
than background filler, explaining the absence of a major character
without adding anything to the main story threads. 

> and we found out how Voldemort had survived the rebound of the 
> killing curse. 
> 

Kneasy:
Sort of - but it's messy and there are holes all over the place. This is
partly why I don't like this hersclix stuff; it's the subject of what seems 
to be special pleading in the plot construction. Or possibly there's
more to it all than has yet been revealed, in which case what we
think we know doesn't mean much.

If,  as DD speculates, the soul fragments are not connected or aware
of each other, why would the soul-part in a destroyed Voldy not do the
decent thing and slip to 'the other side'? That part in the Diary didn't 
hang around - and it wasn't even attacked by 'magic' but by Basilisk 
venom. Why didn't the other soul fragments ensure it's survival? On the
other hand Voldy at GH is assumed by most to have been zapped by an 
AK - and you can't get a more magical death than that. Yet that fragment
is still around.
Why the difference - except for exingencies of plot?

There's ambiguity in just what Harry and DD have been doing - are they in 
the business of destroying Horseclicks or the soul fragments within them?
If it's Hxs that's one thing - they are after all just protective devices, but what 
happens to the fragment when the protection is stripped away? Does it hang
around like a bad smell, seek a refuge, try to join another bit or vanish
through the Veil? Or is it destroyed? We don't know - the protective devices -
in one case a body, in the other the Diary, are destroyed, yet the fate of the 
soul-fragments differ.

In one passage DD implies that they can be destroyed:-
"However, a withered hand does not  seem an unreasonable exchange for
a seventh of Voldemorts's soul." 
Yet a soul is supposed to be eternal, the one part of an individual that will 
last forever. 

Maybe DD meant something different, maybe he's been collecting the
fragments - a WW version of stamp-collecting. "Swap you a hand for one 
seventh of your soul."

Whatever. But of the 3 fragments tackled so far (GH, Diary, ring) when their
abode/hiding place/protection is destroyed two vanish and one doesn't.
Why? Does one part of a soul differ from another? I doubt it, the implication
is that the seven parts are more or less of equal size and quality. Anyway, for
the bits to differ qualitatively Voldy would have to be able to decide/determine
which section of his soul got ripped off whenever he decided to construct 
another HX.
Like I say, it's messy. 
And it's unlikely to be cleared up until we know exactly what happened at
GH, maybe not even then.
But in the meantime it's getting more and more like Agatha Christie - and 
that ain't a compliment.

> 
> It was reconfirmed that Voldemort is misleading in his monologues 
> and we should be very careful about believing anything he says. 
> 

Kneasy:
Not new. We knew that when Jo blew the gaff about Diary!Tom lying in 
saying that Hagrid reared werewolf cubs under his bed. She said then that 
his words weren't to be trusted.

> We found out (though from interviews not directly from the text) 
> that Harry's incompetence at occlumency was not Snape's fault.
> 

Kneasy:
Only determined Snape-ophobes or blinkered Harry-philiacs denied that
anyway - there was loads of canon that pointed to that in OoP. Harry didn't
try and it was obvious that he didn't, just the opposite, he was determined
to follow the dreams/visions no matter what Snape said or did.
Hardly anything new; just another skirmish in the on-going Harry/Sevvy 
relationship, only this time the consequencies were a bit Bangier than 
previously.