SPOILER WARNING: A thread about the Harry Potter books

[Donovan Morningfire]

I liked PoA as book. It just had the feel of a good mystery, with enough red herrings, as all along the reader is lead to believe that Sirius Black is the turncoat.

The Time Turner I had no issue with, but then I think Rowling handled it pretty well, or at least a lot better than other authors of books for kids would have done.

Wasn't thrilled with the movie, as it seemed to change things simply for the sake of changing them, and completely cut out the Marauders' plotline, as well as the significance of the shape of Harry's Patronus; which I wouldn't be surprised if in Book 7 it takes a new form, given the traumatic death of the wizard he most admired.

Raven Crowking,
Hate to break it do you, but in an emphatic statement from Rowling herself, Dumbledore is deadier than disco. She killed him so that Harry has no major protectors left and now has to confront Voldemort alone, as befits the Campbellian Hero Myth that she's been using as a very general guideline for Harry's story.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Raven Crowking,
Hate to break it do you, but in an emphatic statement from Rowling herself, Dumbledore is deadier than disco. She killed him so that Harry has no major protectors left and now has to confront Voldemort alone, as befits the Campbellian Hero Myth that she's been using as a very general guideline for Harry's story.

Maybe. We'll see.

However, as written, I have a very hard time believing that Dumbledore being actually dead was her intention when HBP was released. It could be that, since D's survival (and means thereof) is so glaringly obvious that she changed her mind thereafter. I, for one, see no evidence in the HP books that JKR's statement about having the overarching plot worked out since Book 1 is true, so I can't give that much weight.

RC

 

[billd91]

Maybe. We'll see.

However, as written, I have a very hard time believing that Dumbledore being actually dead was her intention when HBP was released. It could be that, since D's survival (and means thereof) is so glaringly obvious that she changed her mind thereafter. I, for one, see no evidence in the HP books that JKR's statement about having the overarching plot worked out since Book 1 is true, so I can't give that much weight.

RC

I thought his magical appearance as a portrait in the headmaster's office sealed the deal. Dumbledore is dead. But note that because of his portrait, he's still available to offer advice if not protection (meaning he still gets to be a contributing character... I wonder if he could communicate through his Chocolate Frog trading cards?). That's why I thought it pretty obvious Dumbledore is definitely dead.
His death was also foreshadowed by Hagrid's statements that he's not worried as long as they had Dumbledore. I had been expecting Dumbledore's death before Sirius Black's.

 

[billd91]

I thought the time turner was the plot device of a lazy author. I hate time travel in my novels.

I thought she handled it pretty well, particularly since they smashed the hell out of the time turners in the Department of Mysteries so there was no way to go back and undo the deaths of Sirius and Dumbledore.
Rowling covered her tracks nicely there.

 

[sniffles]

I thought his magical appearance as a portrait in the headmaster's office sealed the deal. Dumbledore is dead. But note that because of his portrait, he's still available to offer advice if not protection (meaning he still gets to be a contributing character... I wonder if he could communicate through his Chocolate Frog trading cards?). That's why I thought it pretty obvious Dumbledore is definitely dead.
His death was also foreshadowed by Hagrid's statements that he's not worried as long as they had Dumbledore. I had been expecting Dumbledore's death before Sirius Black's.

I certainly hope Dumbledore is genuinely dead. I would hate to have gone through such a wrenching experience only to have Rowling press the reset button at the end of the next book. That would be a disservice to her readers.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I thought his magical appearance as a portrait in the headmaster's office sealed the deal. Dumbledore is dead.

I hope you realize that the living can appear in those sorts of mobile pictures, and have many times in the various HP novels.


RC

 

[Donovan Morningfire]

I hope you realize that the living can appear in those sorts of mobile pictures, and have many times in the various HP novels.

RC

But can you interact with those mobile pictures as opposed to the interactive portraits of dead people that we've seen?

As billd91 mentioned, when Harry was ushered into the Headmaster's office after Dumbledore's death, there was a new portrait of the recently-deceased prior Headmaster.

I agree with sniffles in that it would severly cheapen the overall story and the significance of Snape's actions if Dumbledore were to appear alive and well in Book 7. Not to mention that Rowling has painted a pretty through picture that once you die, there's no coming back, such as with Sirius (what a crummy way to go for such a neat character, but at least he died during a pitched battle with the bad guys).

Not saying we won't have some form of interaction with Dumbledore, as his portrait is around to dole out a few last bits of sage advice to Harry. And considering how clever the man is, he probably knew that the odds of him cashing out before Voldemort's defeat were about equal to the proverbial snowball in hell, so he's probably left behind something for Harry to help him along the way, such as instructions on how to find/destroy the Horcuxes, or maybe even some really advanced spellwork that will give Harry a much needed leg-up when he finally does face Voldemort.

 

[Raven Crowking]

If Dumbledore didn't orchestrate his "death", and he died as shown in HBP, he simply is not the clever man we've been led to believe.

RC

 

[billd91]

If Dumbledore didn't orchestrate his "death", and he died as shown in HBP, he simply is not the clever man we've been led to believe.

RC

It's not a question of being clever. It's a question of saving Draco Malfoy, whatever the cost. Remember the argument between Snape and Dumbledore. I think Dumbledore told Snape he had to protect Draco even if that meant killing him (being Dumbledore, darn pronouns) and Snape was having a hard time with that.

 

[Donovan Morningfire]

If Dumbledore didn't orchestrate his "death", and he died as shown in HBP, he simply is not the clever man we've been led to believe.

RC

Well, also think back to Dumbledore's words on the subject of death to Harry in Book 1.

"To the well-organized mind, death is but the next great adventure." (or somesuch)

I don't think Dumbledore knew when and where he was going to die, but like I said, I'm sure he knew the clock was ticking (especially after he got maimed when destroying the ring horcrux), and he certainly wouldn't be clever if he didn't put into motions plans in the event that he did die. After all, he made sure that Harry knew the secret of how his mortal enemy had "cheated" death, and so better equip him for the task should Albus fall along the way. As for the draught of living death potion, Albus never had the time to take it, and I'm pretty sure Voldemort would have used an actual poison to safeguard one of his precious horcruxes.

I agree with billd91 that Snape was forced to kill Dumbledore on the headmaster's prior instructions that every step is to be taken to safeguard Draco. To the headmaster of a school, the welfare of a student would easily take precedence over his own, plus he also planned on Snape still having a role to play for the good guys. Whether it is Snape's intention to carry through with whatever Dumbledore ultimately planned or has truly returned to the Death Eater fold is still the subject of some very lively debate.