Dumble’s (Mis) Conceptions about Godric’s Hollow: James’s and Lily’s Roles

[terri_testing]

To figure out what Albus believed saved Harry from Tom that night, we have to look closely at his actions. (Including his speech acts, while making sure not to assume he’s invariably speaking truthfully.)

So, what acts can we judge Twinkles on?

Comments

[librasmile]

Part 2

WHY is Voldie so afraid of death? Why does he fight it so much? I can't give a simple logistical answer but I can give a cosmic one. Wizards are akin to the angels who rebelled and fell because they dared to challenge God. How could they not be? Ordinary humankind is always prey to arrogance, always trying to push God off His throne. So how much worse must wizards, who have what can appear to be godlike powers, be? So if they fall prey to arrogance how far and deep does it go? Do they cheat death, the one great leveller of all humankind? To me Voldie Wars I and II are the cosmic trial to teach WIZARDS once and for all that they are merely human, no greater no lesser, and that are equally subject to the divine authority. They cannot escape no matter what they do. Voldie runs around frantically trying to avoid death. Dumbles thinks he's so clever in embracing death. Neither one has a clue really, or rather a lick of the necessary humility to truly embrace the lesson in death - which is that we are all subject to God ( or whoever you choose as your divine power or if you choose no power see it as we are all mortal, all runs down to entropy ). This cannot be avoided, mastered, or controlled. And yet neither Dumbles nor Voldie can stop trying. They're too arrogant.

Another reason I think this is that silly children's story Rowling tossed into DH. Why bother talking about death and the need to welcome it like an old friend otherwise? Voldie ran from death or fought it. ( Elder wand and invisibility cloak ). Dumbles manipulated it ( Resurrection stone ). Harry DID welcome it and overcame it. Not through any particular virtue IMHO. Not even because of the horcrux ultimately but because he had the humility to accept death and walk toward it. Would I call this an immoral voluntary human sacrifice? No. It's not done for ritual purposes. It's done to protect others from danger. So I think it's moral and sanctioned.

So I say all this to say, I don't think it was luck ( although I admit if it was just luck, I agree, it was OBSCENELY good luck ). I think the powers that be decided the season wasn't right. I wouldn't put it past Dumbles to bury parts of Lily near the Dursley house to impart protection. I've read about similar things as well. I have not read The Golden Bough so I'd love to hear from you what it has to say about luck. I will say this though, I think even in some parts of the ancient world it was understood that human sacrifice was murder, plain and simple, and it was eschewed. So an argument can be made that there was a moral understanding that human sacrifice was wrong even in ancient times. Which means, to me, there's a much deeper game going on here. Moral tests are being thrown about without being recognized as such and the outcomes of those decisions and their consequences really are what this war is about, not about Voldie's or Dumble's victory. Hence I think it might be worth taking yet another look at Dumbles, James and Lily.

Still WONDERFUL essay. It was a delight to read. Keep 'em coming!

[600ants]

What puzzles me is why bother to look for reasons and causes, if you know that ultimately everything boils down to powers that be feeling like it (or not). However I agree that, though utter bollocks otherwise (always imo), this theory works wonderfully for the HP universe. I noticed some time ago (around the time I stopped trying to make any sense of this great pile of rubbish) that there really is no cause and consequence in Harry Potter, but only "JKR said so". Because she felt like it. Or not.(Actually, you two might make brilliant pen palls - apparently she also believes that striving for *anything* is evil incarnate. Luckily since we weren't smitten down for cheating death with seat belts and chinin yet, if there is a god, it seems to think otherwise. (I wonder why an omnipotent being that has always been would be shit scared of us humankind pushing it off its throne...))

It *is* on-topic! Just on a more cosmic level.

[oryx_leucoryx]

You do realize the Potterverse is a fantasy universe and it's rules are different than those of the one we live in (whatever you may believe about the latter)? We don't know if there is/are any god(s) operating in the Potterverse. We don't know how close Potterverse magic is to a force of nature vs the actions of a sentient superbeing. The normal spells look like the former, but prophecy, wandlore and the actions of some magical objects look more like the latter. But from the existence of Felix Felicis potion we know that in the Potterverse luck is an actual force of nature that can be manipulated directly (in contrast with our universe, where 'luck' is what we call 'things happening in our favor for no discernible reason'). And Harry constantly has more luck than is reasonable to expect. If he played dice, he'd always roll a six (as Vimes said of Carrot, and one reason Pratchett got bored with Carrot's character and pushed him to the sidelines). Of course the reason Harry is so lucky is because Rowling can't write a realistic plot. But in-universe, it looks like someone harnessed the power of luck on his behalf.

[oryx_leucoryx]

Of course the reason Harry is so lucky is because Rowling can't write a realistic plot. But in-universe, it looks like someone harnessed the power of luck on his behalf.

Which makes me worried for UA! It is the same Harry, so he would be lucky, but luck makes for weak plots.