Some questions

[Talisman]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, Kathy King <kking0731 at g...> 
wrote:
>Talisman: Children growing up in the magical world must be exposed
>to a great many things--if only anecdotally--that Harry and the
>reader must discover along the way. And, to borrow from Eoin
>Colfer's terminology, the twins are *running hot* with magic.

Snow:
>Not to be rude but are you kidding! I could accept that answer for 
the teddy
>bear/spider incident, but not with a vow that has such dark 
overtures. There
>are many things that Harry and his audience need to be provided 
with but not
>from the mouth of babes. It simply makes me curious not educated.


Talisman:
 Don't worry about being rude, I don't mind it nearly as much as I 
mind people who turn into self-righteous wet hens when I return the 
favor.

 I am not kidding, at all, to say that, though we may well find a 
Book 7 corollary to Snape's HBP vow, I do NOT expect it to involve 
the ~nine-year-old-twins, even to the extent of a flashback episode 
where they walk in to find Arthur and Molly vowing away, in 
flagrante delicto.  

They had older siblings coming home from Hogwarts with information 
both academic and social; they could overhear their parentfs 
conversations, including tales Arthur brought home from the 
Ministry; they could  listen to wizard news reports; read wizard 
novels; read the Daily Prophet, etc.

Rowling needed a way to introduce the information to Harry, and this 
is the avenue she chose.  IMO she expects readers to find it 
plausible precisely because of the twinfs track record.

You, of course, are perfectly free to go on imagining dire scenarios 
in which the tender-aged twins are taught how to elicit unbreakable 
vows, but I expect such efforts to come to naught.  

>Talisman,
>Got your choices, really: 1.) Phoenix tears can't cure everything;
>2.) it suited DD's purposes to be seen as having *slowed down* and
>become vulnerable; 3.) all of the above.
>While we are on the subject, notice that DD wasn't calling for
>Fawkes after he drank the green goo, either. Nope, he was calling
>for Snape. That would be the same person he credits with saving him
>from the curse that destroyed his hand.

Snow:
>I noticed that as well which is why I had to question the 'all 
purpose'
>Phoenix tears. 

Talisman: Ifm not sure that Phoenix tears were ever established as 
*all purpose* in the sense that they could cure anything and 
everything.  If that were the case youfd think they would just have 
a tank of them at St. Mungofs.  Wouldnft have had to fiddle around 
with Arthurfs experimental stitches, etc.   Speaking of which, 
surely, DD would ask Fawkes to squeeze a few out for an Order 
member, wounded in the line of duty.

I have no doubt that Fawkes was dispatched to the CoS at DDfs 
orders, and that it was no matter of happenchance that Fawkes was 
specially suited for the job of protecting Harry from the Basilisk.  

Ifm sure there are any number of other ailments he can cure, as 
well.

On the other hand, I donft think that Fawkes is the answer to all 
wizarding health problems.


Snow:
We also know that Fawkes was at the rescue in the DOM when
>push came to shove but he is not essential with all his powers (of 
eating an
>AK) when it comes down to the Horcruxes? 

Talisman: (In a terribly insincere manner) Well, I suppose Fawkes 
could try to eat the Hxes, and then someone could AK him... `course 
some of the artifacts might be harder to swallow than others. : P 
Then too, who would really want to AK Fawkes? Hefd have to fly 
around the DEfs till he instigated an attack. All very tiresome.


Snow:
>It simply leads me to believe that Dumbledore is taking an 
alternate route this time for >whatever purpose, and there could be 
many:

Talisman: 
Phoenix tears have healing properties, and Fawkes can certainly take 
a lethal hit and come back, but thatfs a different proposition than 
saying that he can cure the effects of any curse that LV may have 
used to protect his Hxes.  Whether Fawkes could destroy the Hxes 
requires more information on exactly how that is done--something we 
are unlikely to find out before Book 7, as the SK business is still 
in the lead over at the FAQ poll.  

Letfs face it, if he could simply have pecked a hole in the Diary, 
why didnft he do it straight away in CoS, and save Harry all the 
bother?   

Well of course the Chamber action was DDfs little learning 
experience for Harry--as is the whole Hx project--but I still donet 
think Fawkes is the easy answer to every problem involving illness 
or evil. 

Snow:
>(a) Dumbledore needs people to believe that he is dying of old age 
and
>doesn't have the power he once had

Talisman: It certainly seems that DD wanted the idea of his waning 
power to be noised around.  Snape made a point of including it in 
his misinformation session with Bella.

Snow:
>(b) Dumbledore wants Snape to believe that he needs him desperately 
for
>the job at hand

Talisman: DD does need Snape desperately for the job at hand.  I 
donft think Snape is at all unaware of this fact.  Moreover, if 
phoenix tears could have cured the hand, Ifm certain Snape would 
have been aware of that, too.  The idea that DD is patronizing Snape 
in order to make him feel more talented and useful than he really 
is, is a pretty blatant misread, if you ask me.

Itfs about as bad as the recent assertion that Snape would get his 
comeuppance if only Hermione (or perhaps the  reader, in their own 
fantasy) could argue back in class, which rates as probably the 
worst reading of character, to date. 

In classroom competition, the mere margin notes of the 16-year-old 
Snape ran circles around Hermione, via a proxy. Donft doubt the man.

If you missed all the evidence that Snape is a truly powerful healer-
-and we know how prowess in many subject areas is necessary to be a 
great healer, thanks to OoP-- youfll be in for a treat when  you 
thoughtfully reread HBP.

P.S. Miserable DE gits probably donft spend a lot of time learning 
ancient healing charms.

Snow:
>(c) Dumbledore needs to make the forthcoming death look real so 
that no
>one would question whether or not he may still be alive.

Talisman: Sure. Anyone who considers the possibility of Alive!DD has 
to think this is part of the mix. This relates back to why DD would 
want to display his *decline.*  


Snow:
>It could go on and on as to why Dumbledore did not call Fawkes and 
insisted
>on Snape in both scenarios.

Talisman: Yeah, like Snape is the better choice.

Snow: 
>However my personal favorite is that Dumbledore
>realized there is a close spy amongst them that caused Snape's 
loyalties to
>be questioned by the deatheaters and Voldemort so Dumbledore had to 
use his
>own demise to flush out the culprit.

Talisman: Itfs not at all clear to me what you mean.  That LV and 
the DEfs questioned Snapefs loyalties is a matter of canon.  LV 
may have accepted Snapefs explanations, but certainly he had his 
reservations, ergo Wormtail on the premises *to assist* Snape in 
unspecified ways, 24 / 7.  Bella makes it pretty clear that shefs 
not buying Snapefs story, no doubt there are others in that camp.  

This need to improve his credibility is very much why Snape went in 
for the drama of the unbreakable vow.  And, Snapefs ability to hold 
LVfs trust and to move with impunity in the DE world during 
upcoming events is a great part of why DD felt it necessary to have 
Snape AK him in front of  DE witnesses.  Of course, itfs also part 
of manipulating Harry, so he had to witness it, too. 

Apart from Snapefs role in the matter, merely the belief that  DD 
is *out of the way* will induce LV & Co. to act boldly--bringing 
about their own downfall, just as DDfs need to go on the lam led to 
Fudgefs sorrow in Book 5.

On the other hand, I donft see your evidence that there is a new 
traitor in the Order.  Havenft we done that one already?


Snow:
> Dumbledore couldn't really trust anyone but Snape to his plans. 

Talisman: DD generally works on a need-to-know basis.  Itfs the 
prudent thing to do in the world of espionage.  That doesnft 
signal  Wormtail redux.  Itfs just that loose lips happen, not to 
mention Legillimens, veritaserum, torture, people listening at 
keyholes, etc.  Moreover, not everyone is as good an actor as 
Snape.  Need some real tears at the funeral.

On the other hand, someone else may know.

Snow:
Snape was furious at Dumbledore and responded to him
>at the edge of the forest that he took "too much for granted" 
because it
>would have been a scenario that had to be played out with everyone's
>cooperation; Draco, the spy, the DeatheatersEeveryone in the right 
place at
>the right time and what if Snape hadn't been able to stop Fenrir

Talisman: Snape definitely didnft savor playing the *kill DD* 
card.  Ifm not comfortable with the term *everyonefs cooperation,* 
the parties you list were managed, they were not cooperating in the 
plan, per se.  Draco was expected, it was his assignment; A DE death 
squad to witness things was required, and expected; Snape doubtless 
had to arrive at just the *right* time; I reserve judgment on 
whether Fenrir was specifically necessary to the plan.  (Though on a 
meta level, Ifm sure we needed the introduction)


Snow:
>In other words I don't think that Fawkes can't do the jobEe wasn't 
asked to
>do it. Fawkes loyalty to Dumbledore would not or could not have 
been defused
>except by Dumbledore himself. Even if Fawkes could not have saved 
his hand
>or his life, he would have been present as he appeared in the DOM.

Talisman: Ifll agree with you this far, whether or not Fawkes could 
have healed DDfs hand, he certainly could have been present on the 
tower to block Snapefs AK--if DD had wanted that to happen.  Itfs 
not clear whether Fawkes needs to be summoned, or generally knows 
whatfs going on.  Either way, there was plenty of time for DD to 
summon him as they raced back to the Dark Mark.  Indeed, DD managed 
to work the counter-incantation so he clearly had enough juice in 
him to call his familiar.

The implication is that  DD did not want Fawkesfs help, on his own 
behalf or anyone elsefs.   That is because, per usual, DD had the 
situation in hand, albeit a black and shriveled one.  What happened 
was what was supposed to happen. Dfaccord.


>Talisman:[re Big blondie] I see him as mainly a marker, used for 
artistic purposes,
>to preserve the mirrored symmetry patterns in the series. He
>signals the action, in book 7, of another notably big blonde:
>Dudley, who will doubtless use his late-blooming magic in a battle--
>quite possibly at No. 4 Privet Dr.--to Harry's benefit. I'm
>personally partial to the notion that No. 4 will burn to the ground,
>as well.
>Snow:
>Now here is a twist I could live with. Something off the wall but 
doableE
>highly doubt it but there is roomEbr> 
>I would love to see Dudley, a common muggle (?) the size of a 
killer whale
>become aware of his magical sideEhat a hootEbut only if he is 
Harry's
>sidekick.

Talisman:
Ifm not at all sure theyfll ride off into the sunset together, but 
the signs are that Dudley will fight on Harryfs side, for once.

Even if you donft understand the patterns in the plot structure, we 
know JKR has left  Dudley as the one Dursley with hope of 
redemption; we know that *someone* is a magical *late-bloomer;* and 
we can see how events in OoP, not to mention DDfs comments in HBP, 
can be working in Dudleyfs messed-up little brain to convince him 
hefs been a bit of a shit all his life. 
 
Big D has known for some time that he is magic. Hefs seen the 
symptoms before, through young Harry's experiences at home.   Who 
knows, maybe he even got a late-bloomer invite to Hogwarts.  In Book 
7 it will go from being his worst secret to a start at claiming his 
own personhood, when he uses it productively, in a desperate 
moment.  

As always, I expect to see Vernon and Petuniafs blasted husks 
steaming on the ruble when the smoke clears.  A nice fresh start for 
our Dudders, eh?

Talisman