Viewing the evidence

[Barry Arrowsmith]

A long one.
Sorry about that, it grew in the writing. But since it's a mere  
tiddler compared to past posts like Pip!Squeak''s 'Spying Game'  
masterpieces, I hope that will  be excused - even if the quality  
isn't up to those either.

Like an itch one can't quite scratch, that night at GH rankles.
What happened there is important backstory, could even be one of the  
keys to "what it's all about". So once more, like a dog chobbling on  
a well-gnawed bone, here we go again.

This time though, no assumptions, no presumptions, no theories, no  
wishful thinking - or not until the problem has been laid out in  
terms of canon. Strict and unbiased canon, mind - no giving one bit  
more weight than another, no brushing an inconvenient snippet under  
the carpet and hoping it'll go away; and definitely no pseudo-canon  
of the ''it must have happened like this 'cos otherwise I can't make  
it fit the way I want it to'' variety. Tough, I know.

And it gets tougher - you lucky people! - because the intention is to  
pose a wider question that may be applicable to all the outstanding  
mysteries of HP. Can the GH event be explained solely by analysis of  
the canon that is directly or demonstrably connected to it? Or is its  
solution only possible by guessing that apparently irrelevant textual  
detail (i.e. not obviously canonically linked to GH) is needed to  
crack the puzzle? To put it bluntly - analytical logic or inspired  
intuition - which is the best tool? This particular post offers  
facts. What can be made of them? Intuitive thinking is put aside for  
consideration at a later date. So let's look at it exactly as Jo  
gives it to us - sort of as a Black Box problem.

For those not familiar with the term, Black Boxes are imaginary  
constructs generally employed in the physical sciences - there is an  
input A and an  output B. So how/why do we get from A to B? (There is  
no need to postulate that A ---> B - that's already accepted.) The  
desired solution is to figure out what happens in the intervening  
Black Box, usually by asking how A can be transformed to produce B in  
the conditions obtaining and given the accepted limitations of the  
physical properties of A and B. It's considered cheating to propose,  
for example, 'a miracle happens'. Admittedly, magic isn't too distant  
from the miraculous, but for the purposes of the exercise, canon will  
dictate what magic can and cannot do - but it is important that with  
magic the properties of spells are strictly limited to what is  
*provable* by reference to canon, that if possible we add *no*  
potential property or capability that has not been shown in the text.  
Hopefully this will eliminate 'solutions' that rely on guesswork and  
make the whole thing somewhat more manageable.

Just to make it a bit more complicated, we are presented with two  
classes of canon evidence - that from persons (and an object) that  
are known to have been present at the event (primary evidence) and  
comments, opinions or assumptions offered by those who (on the canon  
available so far) were most definitely not present (secondary  
evidence). Mostly the secondary stuff is not particularly helpful,  
nor does it offer much that can't be gleaned (or assumed) from the  
primary evidence. Maybe that's its function - reinforcement of an  
idea already planted or suspected. Or perhaps not.

While it's difficult to imagine an honest author fiddling primary  
evidence, the same does not hold for secondary evidence - not to the  
same degree, anyway. Particularly with a sneaky author addicted (self- 
confessedly) to planting clues and red herrings. And what better way  
than by getting a character to express an opinion or assumption as  
fact, especially if we are not told how/why the character made that  
assumption or determined that fact? It's a bit like hearsay; strictly  
speaking it should be dis-allowed, but since this ain't a court of  
law and since Jo must have had some reason for throwing it in, it  
should be listed - while admitting that caveats loom large.

Oh, dear.
This is the difficult bit. Not so much the accumulation of the  
evidence, it's resisting the overwhelming urge to emphasise, to  
theorise, that causes the clenched teeth and the white knuckles. And  
I'm asking the same from you - if possible look at all the evidential  
canon before contriving a solution that is supported by - or at the  
very least does not conflict with - all the primary evidence. It  
would be unrealistic to expect the secondary evidence to meet the  
same standard for the reasons stated above.

What evidence there is can be found scattered throughout the books,  
and words or events occurring quite late in the series may fit neatly  
(or not) into the Black Box input/output evidence lists - though  
there is a danger that what one reader sees as having relevance may  
not carry any weight with another. Nothing I can do about that, I'm  
afraid, except list it. To someone, somewhere it just might be the  
switch that illuminates that cartoon bulb between the ears.

There's an ancillary event, too - Prophecy Night down the local pub.  
It's more or less universally accepted that this little tete-a-tete  
was the trigger, if not the fons et origo of the GH happenings, and  
what transpired down the boozer has, to a greater or lesser extent  
(and depending on one's inclinations) the potential to upset a number  
of theoretical applecarts.
OK. So what do we actually *know* about it?

Quoting great slabs of text would make this post interminable, as  
would cataloguing repetitions by the same characters at different  
times. Not only that, there'd be a tendency to flick through it - and  
why not? Haven't you read the words x times before? 'Course you have  
- and I'm willing to bet that by the time you were reading it for the  
x-nth time your eyes slid over those sections that didn't support  
your favourite theory of what happened - and may well do so again.  
Naughty reader! So a precis of the relevant points might help  
concentrate the mind - not only yours, mine too. No opinions will be  
voiced, though observations (strictly canonical) and objective  
questions will be appended.
And I'll strive to keep it honest - honest.

Ready?
OK. Off we go. We have:

Pub night:
Divination.
Prophetic trances and Seers.
DD's comments.
Sybill's comments.
The eavesdropper.

GH.
Input - Primary evidence:
Harry's visions.
Voldy's account.
The properties of an AK.
Wand P.I.
The nature of Protective Magic.
The Ministry battle.

Output - Primary evidence:
Dead bodies.
A ruined house.
A live Harry.
The scar.
The transferred powers.
Wand P.I.
Vapor!Mort.

Secondary evidence:
Hagrid's comments.
Quirrell's death.
Lupin's surprise.
DD's comments.
Crouch!Moody's comments.
Jo's comments.

Anything missing?
Nothing of significance, I hope. But if yes, then I humbly apologise.

Now let's put a modicum of flesh on some of those bare bones.

Pub Night.
DD is considering dropping Divination from the curriculum.
He interviews what he considers a talentless 'Seer'.
Who in a trance makes a prophecy of interest to both sides in the war.
It is overheard, the eavesdropper is apprehended.
Sybill identifies the eavesdropper as Snape and DD confirms this.
Snape also was there for a job interview.
Snape tells Voldy.
One year later Snape is spying for DD.
Voldy takes no action on the prophecy for almost two years.

Observations.
Sybill describes "feeling odd"  which is what we are to believe  
depicts a trance state and during which a Seer is supposedly  
oblivious to all around her.
There is a small discrepancy between the two testimonies. Sybill says  
she saw Snape when he 'interrupted' her interview i.e. she was out of  
her trance.
DD insists that Snape only heard half the prophesy (which may also  
conflict with his previous assertion "was detected a short way into  
the prophecy and thrown from the building").
Sybill describes only one period of oddness, which would indicate  
that she had finished her prophesy before she saw Snape.
DD is sceptical about the prophesy, considers it may have been self- 
fulfilling.
On the other hand "thrice defied" is remarkably specific.
Voldy's interpretation of the prophecy points to the Potters and  
Longbottoms and it is this that causes Snape to switch sides.

Q.
Was it by chance that the job interview was held in a pub?
Just how much did Snape hear? Does it matter?
If, as DD suspects, prophesies are self-fulfilling claptrap, does  
that mean Harry doesn't have a 'power the Dark Lord knows not'?
At that time did DD know or suspect that Snape was a wrong 'un?
Is it likely that the thought of a clutch of dead Potters and  
Longbottoms would make Snape recant?
Did Voldy try a soft approach before resorting to death and  
destruction? Is this where the "thrice defied" fits in? And does this  
link to Hagrid's comment "Suppose the myst'ry is why You-Know-Who  
never tried to get 'em on his side before."?
  Snape (at the end of HBP) haughty, dismissive of Potter, openly  
committed to Voldy, proud of his service to his master, does not  
throw his betrayal of J&L in Harry's face. Would you expect him to?


GH Input.
Piecing together Harry's visions we get the following sequence:
A warning urging Lily to grab Harry and run, "I'll hold him off"
The door bursting open, a cackle of high-pitched laughter
"Get out of the way, girl"
"Not Harry!",  "Take me instead!... Mercy!" etc.
Shrill laughing
Screaming
Green flash
A high, cold, cruel laugh
(Uncertain if this occurs thrice - depends how one reads Harry's  
thoughts in PS/SS chap.4. But note that all three laughs are  
described slightly differently.)
Voldy backs this up - he kills James, then Lily and the wand PI  
confirms this.
Then he has a few problems.
He intended to kill Harry (Voldy, DD and everybody in the known  
universe confirm).
There is nothing in the PI playback.
Protective magic, emplaced by DD and triggered by Lily sees him off.
Though when DD is asked how Harry survived - "We can only guess... we  
may never know."
It's bloody painful, this discorporation lark.
"The curse rebounded... Pain beyond pain... I was ripped from my body"
".... he's gone" McGonagall
Voldy was painfully expelled from Quirrell's body when the possessed  
Quirrell and Harry came into physical contact. A second Vapor!Mort  
resulted.


GH Output.
Dead bodies (two).
No mention of Voldy making a lovely corpse.
Harry found alive in the rubble of the ruined house and sporting a scar.
An essentially powerless Vapor!Mort takes a long holiday.
At least one (Parseltongue) and according to DD more (unspecified) of  
Voldy's powers have been transferred to Harry.
The scar is some sort of connection between Harry and Voldy.

Observations.
Why was Lupin surprised that Harry heard James's voice?
Harry reports only one green flash - and Lily was killed by one.
Jo has said that Lily was not holding or touching Harry when she was  
killed.
AKs travel in a straight line until they hit something. If it's  
something alive, it dies without a mark on the body; if it's an  
inanimate object, it sustains moderate damage.
According to Crouch!Moody there is no counter-curse, it cannot be  
blocked magically. Yet he also says that Harry survived one. Both  
statements cannot be true.
In the finale of the Ministry battle quite a few AKs get thrown. DD,  
the originator of the protective magic for Harry, uses no shield  
against them - they either miss and knock bits of statues and set a  
kiosk afire, or something solid interposes itself between the curse  
and DD. None bounced, even  when striking a charmed or magical object.
The protective magic appears to consist of two spells.
One is the part that prevented Voldy from touching Harry, negated  
when Voldy uses Harry's blood in his resurrection stew. The other  
protects Harry while he can call Privet Drive his home - and  
according to DD was still active during HBP. Neither protected  
against Voldy's wand when Peter was wielding it.
Voldy's basic plan, generally accepted by most fans - walk in, kill  
the kid, walk out. This is contradicted by his words in the graveyard  
"... a protection I admit I had not foreseen..... I could not touch  
the boy. [...] but no matter, I can touch him now." And he does so.
PI  replays the physical effects of spells.
The wand PI is entirely blank for the attack on Harry's person.
There is no clue as to what bounced back on Voldy or what it was that  
demolished the house.


Q.
Why didn't Lily grab Harry and run?
Why is there a scar and just what is it, exactly?
Did Voldy try to touch Harry?
What happened to Voldy's body?
What exactly is Vapor!Mort?
Is the Privet Drive spell a replacement conjured by DD for a similar  
charm that applied to GH? Or does it work wherever the closest living  
blood relative resides?
If the protection was unable to shield Harry when Peter uses Voldy's  
wand, just what protection is provided? Is it specifically anti-Voldy?
Which spell was invoked by Lily's sacrifice - the 'where your blood  
dwells' or the Voldy no-touch charm?
Did Harry gain powers solely because Voldy lost them when  
discorporating?
If Harry had died at Quirrell's hands in PS/SS, would Voldy have got  
his powers back?
In PS/SS did Harry's magical quotient increase by the small amount  
that a very weak Voldy had rebuilt before vaporising?
Did taking Harry's blood return to Voldy powers that had previously  
been transferred to Harry?
Why was there no reaction when Harry and Quirrell shake hands in the  
Leaky Cauldron, even though Quirrell states "He is with me wherever I  
go."? Can the protection distinguish between evil and evil intent and  
react accordingly?


Jo's comments.
Jo has said very little about GH, though whether this is through  
authorial  caution or because she hasn't been asked the right  
questions at the right time is up for grabs. She suggests it's the  
latter.
However, the relative importance of the events at GH on the main plot  
was underlined when the Q&A session from last year's Book Festival in  
Edinburgh was reproduced in the 'News' section of her website. The  
'hint' was not prompted by a question, she volunteered it, indeed  
seemed a touch concerned that nobody was asking it - "Why didn't  
Voldy die at GH? The killing curse rebounded, so he should have died.  
Why didn't he?"

"Hossclucks!" shouts Carolyn from the sidelines.
And this is the gist of what's in HBP.
But Jo asked this question after HBP had been published.
Why? There was no need to, was there?
And though it might explain why he didn't actually die there are  
still a lot of other things up in the air.

There is no indication if this is the question Jo (knowing all the  
answers) would ask - or if it's the question she'd expect from  
someone who hasn't yet been told what actually transpired at GH.  
Tricky. As usual.

Why am I not surprised that Harry is going back to GH in book 7?
And it was paired with another unprompted hint - "Why didn't DD try  
to kill Voldy at the MoM?" (She admits that the reason given in the  
text is not the true reason.)
"Hoss-" Yes, OK Carolyn. We get the message.

In essence - the Black Box question - what magic was invoked against  
Harry and why did it produce the results described in the text?

Can the GH mystery be solved using the above canon with no need for  
additional assumptions?
I know what I think - but that's for another post.

Kneasy