Comments | a_chapter_a_day: Chapter 27 :: The Lightning-Struck Tower

monkeyshine4616 in a_chapter_a_day

Chapter 27 :: The Lightning-Struck Tower

Sep 13, 2005 00:28

Sorry about the timing. Too much on my plate at the moment. I completely forgot that I had a summary to do until I saw Chapter 26 on my f-list. So so sorry. *begs for forgiveness*Harry apparates himself and Dumbledore back to Hogsmeade after the adventure in the cave. Harry notices Dumbledore isn't feeling so hot, so he tells Dumbledore that they' ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Back to all threads

oh, yay, exposition cadesama September 13 2005, 07:46:05 UTC

So, even with the Dark Mark hanging over Hogwarts, there might be teachers inside who don't realize what's up? Hogwarts security really, really sucks.

Dumbledore muttering in a "strange language" -- hint that Harry will have to learn foreign magic to win? Possible implication of global travel?

So, the way that Dumbledore saw through Harry's invisibility cloak in PS/SS apparently wasn't Legilimency, since Draco can't detect Harry's presence there.

Dumbledore's argument here is pretty feeble. Draco is only anything less than a murderer by accident. The necklace and the poison in the mead were meant to be fatal. If neither Ron nor Kattie had gotten medical attention immediately would they have survived? Probably not. Putting a land mine in front of the wrong house doesn't make it any less deadly. No matter what rationalizations Draco may have chanted to himself, his actions were deadly and his reprieve in each instance is an accident at best ( ... )

Re: oh, yay, exposition cyber_fay September 13 2005, 22:05:57 UTC

Dumbledore's argument here is pretty feeble. Draco is only anything less than a murderer by accident. The necklace and the poison in the mead were meant to be fatal. If neither Ron nor Kattie had gotten medical attention immediately would they have survived? Probably not. Putting a land mine in front of the wrong house doesn't make it any less deadly. No matter what rationalizations Draco may have chanted to himself, his actions were deadly and his reprieve in each instance is an accident at best ( ... )

Re: oh, yay, exposition cadesama September 14 2005, 03:35:47 UTC

Oh, agree, and I think Dumbledore was probably right to assume he was fairly safe in the situation as long as he kept the ball in Draco's court. But I don't like the whole "Draco, you aren't a killer" thing. It's really misleading, and it could just be more of Dumbledore's patter while he tries to talk Draco down, but I think the fact that he never moved against the attempted murderer in their midst sort of belies that.

Re: oh, yay, exposition cyber_fay September 14 2005, 16:49:29 UTC

but I think the fact that he never moved against the attempted murderer in their midst sort of belies that.

Yeah, I wondered about that, too.
If he knew that Draco was the one spreading havoc in Hogwarts, why didn't DD do something about him sooner? I may be stretching the argument here, but maybe Dumbledore chose to keep Draco around in order to learn (by Legilimency or whatever) more about Voldemort's plans, methods of hiring, current preoccupations, etc - after all, Harry is being blocked out and cannot help him any longer. I know that at this point he has Snape for that, but the more information the better and Snape is also an expert Occlumens. So Dumbledore probably thought that he could manage everything Draco could pull out, and so he kept him around for the sake of information. And then hubris was the cause of his fault. Yeah, I know that now I'm just being mean :)

Re: oh, yay, exposition cadesama September 15 2005, 02:17:00 UTC

Actually, I think that's very plausible. Most of the instances where Dumbledore is biding his time, it seems to be under the guise of diverting the enemy (such as the entire plot of OotP), or gathering information (the reason why Dumbledore wasn't destroying Horcruxes years ago, presumably). The problem is that we just never see any actual information come out of this effort.

Re: oh, yay, exposition pilly2009 September 13 2005, 22:56:24 UTC

So, the way that Dumbledore saw through Harry's invisibility cloak in PS/SS apparently wasn't Legilimency, since Draco can't detect Harry's presence there.

But do the abilities of Legilimency and Occlumency come hand in hand? I mean, we're given an indication that they do (every character who is able to cast one seems able to cast the other), but it doesn't add up that you would have to learn one to fully grasp the other. (I mean, Snape was only instructed to teach Harry Occlumency.)

Dumbledore's argument here is pretty feeble. Draco is only anything less than a murderer by accident. The necklace and the poison in the mead were meant to be fatal. If neither Ron nor Kattie had gotten medical attention immediately would they have survived?What I find interesting is that Dumbledore almost seems to grant forgiveness on Ron and Katie's behalf in this scene; "no harm was done" and all that. Which is weird, because it's not really his place to do that, and you have to wonder whether Ron or Katie or their families, or even Rosmerta would be ( ... )

Re: oh, yay, exposition cadesama September 14 2005, 03:42:23 UTC

But do the abilities of Legilimency and Occlumency come hand in hand? I mean, we're given an indication that they do (every character who is able to cast one seems able to cast the other), but it doesn't add up that you would have to learn one to fully grasp the other. (I mean, Snape was only instructed to teach Harry Occlumency.)

Not idea, really, but Harry's lessons in Occlumency did result in one instance where he successfully read Snape's mind. So, learning one may not immediately lead to the other, but I think they are even more connected than one might expect simply because they are opposites.

but it's just sort of strange how godlike he is viewed within this world; if not a god, he almost seems to have a similar standing in the wizarding world as the Pope would have in Christendom.I go back and forth as to how much of that role I think it's his role in the text, and how much is his role in their actual world. I mean, Dumbledore has been doubted and deposed in canon, but never by a substantive force, and never based on his ( ... )

Re: oh, yay, exposition pilly2009 September 14 2005, 13:19:17 UTC

I suppose it is nice to finally see a character who isn't immune to Imperius, after Barty Jr., Sr. , and Harry.

Were the two Bartys actually immune to the curse? I suppose Bary Jr. grew immune to it after fourteen years under the spell (which is an interesting property of the curse, actually), but I thought that Wormtail had accidentally slipped up when Barty Sr. managed to gain his free will back.

Re: oh, yay, exposition cadesama September 14 2005, 15:58:38 UTC

Jr became immune, and I thought that Sr. did eventually as well. Hmm, lemme check. Looks like we're both right, "After a while he began to fight the Imperius Curse just as I had done ... But Wormtail neglected his duty ... My father escaped" (689US, paperback).

Re: oh, yay, exposition woman_ironing September 14 2005, 10:29:23 UTC

What I find interesting is that Dumbledore almost seems to grant forgiveness on Ron and Katie's behalf in this scene; "no harm was done" and all that. Which is weird, because it's not really his place to do that

Dumbledore is speaking to Malfoy with a specific purpose in mind. He's trying to keep Malfoy talking until Snape arrives, and he's doing all he can to persuade him not to kill but to seek protection.

but it's just sort of strange how godlike he is viewed within this world; if not a god, he almost seems to have a similar standing in the wizarding world as the Pope would have in Christendom.He seems a more controversial figure to me. He's certainly not liked by the Ministry of Magic or The Daily Prophet. Lucius Malfoy managed to get him sacked from Hogwarts. The Ministry forced him to flee. He's respected by some and feared by others for his magical power. His friends like him though, lol. Even so, Harry's always shouting at him and Snape never stops whinging. Filch seemed quite happy to have him replaced by Umbridge ( ... )

Re: oh, yay, exposition pilly2009 September 14 2005, 13:31:00 UTC

Dumbledore is speaking to Malfoy with a specific purpose in mind. He's trying to keep Malfoy talking until Snape arrives, and he's doing all he can to persuade him not to kill but to seek protection.

Well yes, I know that Dumbledore's circumstances were critical, but I was speaking narratively. In narrative terms of the book, Draco seems to have been granted an absolution of sorts because it came from Dumbledore. Basically, he's been given "the okay", he's in the clear, not only because he lowered his wand but because he's been forgiven by Dumbledore. It reminds me a bit of the theme in PoA, when trying to prove Sirius's innocence and how it was all about gaining Dumbledore's acceptance, rather than the Ministry's. Understandable, given that Sirius hasn't been given much reason to trust the Ministry, and even at that point, neither have any of the kids. But all the same, it's a bit odd.

He seems a more controversial figure to me. Oh, I agree that he's a controversial figure (but then, so are most religious figureheads). Only post- ( ... )

Re: oh, yay, exposition woman_ironing September 14 2005, 20:24:23 UTC

This is difficult to respond to because it depends on your view of Dumbledore. I just don't see that what Dumbledore says to Malfoy in this particular instance necessarily has any wider implications for the book as a whole. He doesn't speak the book's (or books') truth or something. At least not to me. If you see him as JKR's mouthpiece or believe that JKR intended him to be omniscient then whatever he says or does will of course have more meaning for you. But even so in this instance it's stretching it a bit don't you think?

On Dumbledore's place in the wizarding world. I think I interpreted your comment as Dumbledore being Godlike rather than godlike, the God when you meant a god. I guess a god is pretty much the same as a very powerful wizard!

Re: oh, yay, exposition woman_ironing September 14 2005, 10:11:17 UTC

Dumbledore's argument here is pretty feeble. Draco is only anything less than a murderer by accident.

But of course Dumbledore is trying to keep Malfoy talking here to prevent him from committing murder. The last thing you'd say in Dumbledore's position is, 'Yes Malfoy, you are capable of murder and it's only bad luck that's stopped you so far!'.

Re: oh, yay, exposition cadesama September 14 2005, 16:16:57 UTC

I dunno, but I think that the way you try to convince someone says something about you. Dumbledore doesn't seem desperately grasping at straws here, and instead of throwing out every point that occurs to him, he seems to be giving a thought out (possibly rehearsed) argument for why Draco shouldn't do it. Why is the angle that Draco isn't a killer? Why isn't it that no matter what he's done, there's forgiveness? Why isn't it that there's no power, no dignity in service the Dark Lord, and doesn't he see that now? Obviously how the speech was crafted is just as dependent on what Dumbledore thinks will work on Draco as it is on the way Dumbledore sees the issue, but I don't think we can toss out the speech as a batch of nonsense lies.

Re: oh, yay, exposition woman_ironing September 14 2005, 20:39:16 UTC

No the things Dumbledore says to Malfoy are definitely not nonsense lies. They're what will make the most impression on him in the circumstances. Mind you, there's quite a bit of bluffing going on though.

Back to all threads