Connecting the dots

[nkafkafi]

>  Kneasy wrote:
> <snipped>
> No:  what does interest me is that DD  defeated Grindy and held down 
> his teaching job at the same time. 

Neri:
Dumbledore defeating Grindy at the same time he and Tom were a teacher
and a student at Hogwarts depends on the absolute dating of the
Potterverse, because Grindelwald was defeated in absolute dating ("in
1945") while Tom was a student in story internal dating ("fifty years
ago"). Practically the only thing that connects the two time frames,
and enables us to deduce that these two events happened at the same
time, is NHN deathday cake. There's a lot of discussion if JKR
originally meant to ground the story in absolute dating. Personally
(especially after OotP and her latest timing flints) I tend more to
the opinion that she didn't, and the NHN deathday cake dating was a
one-time blunder. To my knowledge this dating cannot be corroborated
anywhere else in canon. 
 

>  Kneasy:
> Both get wands with Fawkes's feathers as cores.
> (Now this *must* be a killer fact. I refuse to believe it's chance. 
> It's as much an accident as Mugabe winning elections IMO.)
> According to canon both recognise  something of themselves in the 
> other. (If you can't see that as a nudge to sit up and take notes, then 
> I despair of you, I really do.  Though I'll grudgingly admit that if 
> the  two feathers were provided at the same time, a major re-think 
> would be in order. But nobody believes that, do they? Nah. 'Course 
> not.)
> 

Neri:
We already know that the brother wands weren't an accident. The wand
chooses the wizard (Ollivander makes sure we get that - he says it
twice and adds "remember") and the brother wands saw similar things in
Tom and Harry. We also know that Dumbledore knew about this –
Ollivander contacted him immediately after Harry bought the brother
wand. However, the same "free will" of the wands would make it
difficult for Dumbledore to orchestrate the whole thing in the first
place. It's certainly not an accident, but canon points at fate (or,
in the meta level, JKR) rather than at Dumbledore.


>  Kneasy:
> Oh, and there's one other connection - Dumbledore. He's the one leading 
> the fight against both would-be EOotU, he's the one that owns the 
> phoenix that provides the feathers. He's also  the one who gazes 
> penetratingly into Tom's eyes and asks if there's anything Tom wants to 
> tell him. 


Neri:
I think this is movie contamination. At least, in the book Dumbledore
never asks Tom if he wants to tell him something. It's old Dippet who
asks something like that, and it is Harry who makes the connection
with his own answer to Dumbledore:


CoS, Ch. 13, p. 244 US:
Riddle's eyes had widened.
"Sir — if the person was caught — if it all stopped —"
"What do you mean?" said Dippet with a squeak in his voice, sitting up
in his chair. "Riddle, do you mean you know something about these
attacks?"
"No, sir," said Riddle quickly.
But Harry was sure it was the same sort of "no" that he himself had
given Dumbledore.


Tom's interaction with Dumbledore, immediately after Tom leaves the
headmaster office, is rather brief and mild in the book, although
Dumbledore's "penetrating" stare is indeed mentioned:


CoS, Ch. 13 p. 245 US:
Then, as though he had suddenly reached a decision, he hurried off,
Harry gliding noiselessly behind him. They didn't see another person
until they reached the entrance hall, when a tall wizard with long,
sweeping auburn hair and a beard called to Riddle from the marble
staircase.
"What are you doing, wandering around this late, Tom?"
Harry gaped at the wizard. He was none other than a fifty-year-younger
Dumbledore.
"I had to see the headmaster, sir," said Riddle.
"Well, hurry off to bed," said Dumbledore, giving Riddle exactly the
kind of penetrating stare Harry knew so well. "Best not to roam the
corridors these days. Not since
"
He sighed heavily, bade Riddle good night, and strode off. Riddle
watched him walk out of sight and then, moving quickly, headed
straight down the stone steps to the dungeons, with Harry in hot pursuit.
  

It seems that, while making the parallels between Tom and Harry
obvious, JKR avoids making Dumbledore's role identical in both their
cases. It is Dumbledore and Dippet who have parallel roles in the
text, although the movie scriptwriter, trying to make things more
obvious and get rid of Dippet, missed this subtle nuance.

Neri