Harry Potter - DH and the Nurmengard scene

[rhaella]

So I have, as we all know, been on a Harry Potter kick ever since I watched the Half Blood Prince, once again fascinated by all things Dumbledore/Grindelwald as I try to decide whether or not it was reciprocated. I’ve come to one conclusion that I wanted to share, because I haven’t seen it before (not that I’m particularly attentive!) and I think

Comments

[pathology_doc]

Here via grindeldore

Are you suggesting that Grindelwald attempted to die for Dumbledore in the same way that Lily died for Harry, and Harry tried to die for everyone in Hogwarts? Interesting.

I would, however, dispute your assertion that Grindelwald could not have known of Dumbledore's death. The reliability of Harry as a source is irrelevant - Dumbledore's funeral, at least in the books, was a public event that the most important politician in the Wizarding World attended; it was hardly hidden! That Voldemort is even there about the wand means that Dumbledore must no longer have it. Dumbledore is like JFK - everyone would remember what they were doing when they heard he'd been killed, and it seems improbable that the news would not get back to Nurmengard. The fact that Grindelwald knew who Voldemort was suggests to me that he knew a whole lot more.

Also, just as Harry recognized the fact of Dumbledore's death as much by the lifting of the body-bind curse upon him as much as by Snape's actions, so Grindelwald might have recognized Dumbledore's death by the lifting of some curse, binding or limitation upon himself.

Finally, remember that we are seeing the Voldemort/Grindelwald interview through the filter of Voldemort's mind, AND at a time when Harry is distracted by other, immediate concerns - he might have missed something.

You've got a good theory, but I think it's got a few holes - and I must say, your questioning of Harry's reliability as a source of such easily verifiable information as Dumbledore's death (remember all the Hogwarts staff and students gathered around the body before Ginny takes Harry back upstairs? Remember that it's GINNY, not Harry, who first tells Ron, Lupin and co. the terrible truth?) makes me wonder where your biases lie.

[guardians_song]

You've got a good theory, but I think it's got a few holes - and I must say, your questioning of Harry's reliability as a source of such easily verifiable information as Dumbledore's death (remember all the Hogwarts staff and students gathered around the body before Ginny takes Harry back upstairs? Remember that it's GINNY, not Harry, who first tells Ron, Lupin and co. the terrible truth?) makes me wonder where your biases lie.
Nah, she says that Harry's claim that Grindelwald knew Dumbledore was dead is unreliable. And, to be fair, Harry's goof ups on major statements out of ignorance (Black betrayed my parents! Snape hated my parents!) do get used as red herrings, so I'll have to agree with her on that one. :|

lj doesn't want to let me post this dammit

[rhaella]

Oh no, I’m not disputing Harry’s reliability as a witness of Dumbledore’s death. Not at all. I’m sorry if I gave that impression; no anti-Harry bias here. I simply think that his words to Dumbledore during the Kings Cross scene indicate that he’s taking for granted the fact that - as far as he knows - everyone has been made aware of Dumbledore’s death, and he’s applied it to the one scenario where this might not necessarily be the case. And I think this conclusion on his part is a bit premature, because all he knows concerning Nurmengard and Grindelwald is a few moments he spent in Voldemort’s head. Until then, he didn’t even know whether Grindelwald were even still alive. And I mention Harry because he’s the only one who makes an observation on the matter one way or the other.

Oh, I’m not insisting that Grindelwald could not have known about Dumbledore’s death (though this line of thinking obviously is contingent upon this possibility), only that he might not have known. Despite how public Dumbledore’s funeral was, we don’t know enough about Nurmengard to know what information was getting through, to know when information was getting through, how quickly, etc. Which is why I said that even his knowledge concerning Voldemort might have been 20 years old (a possibility, not a probability). And when it comes to Dumbledore, it’s also possible that guards/visiting dignitaries/whatever might have concealed the truth out of respect, not wanting his old enemy to, pardon the clichÈ, dance upon his grave. (You do have a point about residual spells, though that’s speculative as well.)

Now, in logic, when you come to an either/or situation, you work through both possibilities and see where the contradiction lies. And because the original reading of the scene struck me as somewhat problematic, as outlined above, I worked through the other track to see where it might lead. Hence… well.