NeutiquamErro's favorite thread with an obscure title

I anticipated these rebuttals. Firstly, Dumbledore may have had that plan of action regarding the DA ready, but simply pulled it out of the bag at the correct moment. And also, when he cried, that could have been more as a result of being touched by the situation in the office, as it was. Imagine Dumbledore sitting in his office eavesdropping on Harry’s conversation. In the context of Harry’s argument there wasn’t much to get emotional about, Harry was just angry. But in Dumbledore’s office, he was announcing his full loyalty in a much more moving manner, and that is why he cried. Or, he was faking, an elaborate ploy to get Harry to avert his eyes so he would not notice that Dumbledore was obviously not that surprised.

I agree that both of these are highly unlikely, but then again the entire premise of the theory is patchy, as I mentioned earlier.

And the Invisibility Cloak may have been exceptional, but it wasn’t infallible. A gifted wizard such as Dumbledore could, for example, disturb the dust in a manner which revealed the absence of air in that part off the room. Also, Dumbledore probably heard voices before he entered, and he noticed that the room had only recently been vacated, and he could easily guess who. From there it was easy to notice footprints, breathing or the like that gave away their presence.

Add to that that he had been with the Minister up until then, and could hardly excuse himself to eavesdrop on Hagrid’s conversation. And knowing they were in the room wouldn’t tell him where in the hut they were hiding anyway. This part of the theory certainly doesn’t stand up to even mild scrutiny.

Duke

Writersoul actually gave me an idea – It could be that the map didn’t actually show transformed animagi, like it didn’t show people under the Polyjuice Potion, and thats why Fred and George and Harry didn’t notice Wormtail.

Lupin, however, was one of the creators of the map. He might have been able to use it in ways nobody else could. I imagine there was a way of activating it to show animagi, and Lupin did just that. Remember, Lupin was using the map because he thought they might go to Hagrids, and therefore wanted to make sure nothing happened to them. Knowing as he did that Sirius was a animagus, he would have activated it to check if Sirius was anywhere on site. Suddenly, he saw Peter Pettigrew as well. You could also say, a slight variation of this, that even though general animagi would show up, the Marauders coded that map to show nobody but a fellow Marauder their own animagi, because their animagi were illegal and secret!

“There are over a thousand students at Hogwarts.”

That’s another issue. There are five boys in Harry’s year in his house. If that is representative of the school at large then the total number of students should be something like 5x2x7x4 which would come out to 210 students.

@Patul Avar Assur:

I would assume Harry’s generation was particularly lower than most, as many children were killed/ people too scared of Voldemort.

It probably varied year to year, Harry’s year being the least.

But if we go with the theory that there probably under 250 students during Harry’s third year, than it doesn’t make sense that Harry didn’t notice Peter and Sirius on the map. So it must be that the map hides animagus when in animal form…

Gryffindorable Girl:

That would affect at least several years before Harry’s year as well. Remember, Mr. and Mrs, Weasely quickly got married because no one was certain about the future with Voldemort and all. Bill finished Hogwarts before Harry started, so this would certainly apply to anyone who overlapped with Harry.

I don’t think it’s so crazy that Harry never noticed Sirius or Peter. First of all, he didn’t exactly use the map very often. And when he was using the map, Sirius may have been out of the maps boundaries. Peter was probably either with Ron or chilling in the dormitory, which are not exactly places that Harry would be wont to look at, and during the periods when he was missing, he may have also been outside the boundaries.

It is interesting though, because Peter and Sirius both knew about the map and Peter for sure knew that Lupin was in Hogwarts, so they may have had some fear of being seen. This in turn may have led them to be careful to whatever extent possible to not be seen on the map.

Yekke2:

I don’t think there is any source that it was confiscated while they were at school. They may have left it (either directly or indirectly) to the next troublemaker(s). But regardless of when it was confiscated, none of them would have any reason to assume that it wasn’t still on the school premises. In fact I think it’s actually a kashya on Lupin. After the first time that Sirius entered the castle, he should have immediately sought the map. A simple summoning charm could have gotten it for him. Which incidentally leads me to my next question: Fred and George’s entire plan of escape in the fifth book relied on summoning their brooms. What would have happened had Umbridge protected the brooms from summoning charms? But perhaps Fred and George had somehow determined that she hadn’t.

How much is tuition at Hogwarts?

Does the ministry pay for it?

Why don’t they pay for your books also?

Another issue:

The thought process via which Harry figured out how to access the Resurrection Stone was way way way way way way too contrived.

PAA – I am in total agreement there. If I remember correctly, JK Rowling waxes poetic with metaphors comparing life to a Quidditch game – The game was over, the snitch had been caught, and suddenly Harry remembers the Snitch.

It would have been much more mood appropriate for him to be thinking about Life and Death, Immortality, Master of Death, the Deathly Hallows, and let everything suddenly fall into place. It wouldn’t hurt for him to think of his dying mother.

Yekke2:

Fair question. (By the way I assume that when you wrote “the means to the end” you meant the opposite.)

If I may venture into what may very well be ??????? ?? ???:

Perhaps the quest for immortality is not inherently good or bad. It depends why you want to conquer death. Someone who wants to conquer death for the proper reasons (whatever they might be) would not so via horcruxes since it involves murder. Perforce, one who makes horcruxes is attempting to conquer death for the wrong reasons which is indeed something which should not be spoken of. Dumbledore, though he didn’t use horcruxes, knew himself that he was doing it for the wrong reasons, hence he was no better than Voldemort.

I realize this is a tremendously dochek answer and it doesn’t even really explain why a horcrux would be the “wickedest of magical inventions”. However, despite the fact that creating a horcrux would not be inherently any worse than any other ways of conquering death, it could still make sense that “we shall not speak nor give direction”, in that the assumption is that generally speaking, the creation of a horcrux is the only practical way to conquer death (i.e. anyone can do it), so by censoring he instruction manual, you can effectively prevent almost everyone from conquering death.

I actually shlugged myself up miney ubey in my last post.

RebYidd23, you beat me to posting that! I figured nine hours later, at one in the morning, if no one had responded, I didn’t need to hurry! I was working on a post hours ago already, but it wasn’t quite done, and I’ve been busy with other things…

PAA:

“(By the way I assume that when you wrote “the means to the end” you meant the opposite.)”

No, he used the words correctly. The “means” is murder, and the “end” is immortality (through the Horcrux). (“Means” is a way of accomplishing, as in “by any means,” and “end” is the accomplishment, as in, “to that end.”)

(I haven’t been reading the fancruft – I came in for the official study. When I saw you say you’d shlugged youself up, I went to take a look, and read up through Yekke2’s Horcrux post.)

yekke2:

“What was so evil about Horcruxes[…]?”

Have you forgotten that Horcruxes involve dividing/ripping/tearing

(or whatever words are used in the book) the soul?*

Besides, Dumbledore describes murder as the “ultimate evil” – it

is no stretch from there to saying that something created to depend on the ultimate evil is the “wickedest of magical inventions.”

(Also, perhaps the evil of the Horcrux is that it is not merely murder as a means, but murder as a means for life. The creator takes that which he values so highly as to kill for it from his victim. An extreme degree of selfishness must be present for this (not precisely) vampirism.)

Your Dumbledore quote seemed a major issue – I thought you had J.K. over a barrel with the “if it’s so evil to conquer death” question, but then this occurred to me – can’t “Was I better?” be interpreted not morally, but character-wise? He could simply be admitting being subject to the same fear as Voldemort was – but is then comforted either by the fact that he had not succumbed to it in the same way as Voldemort had, indicated by his morality not failing, or simply that he had not failed morally as did Voldemort.

So:

(a) It is personal weakness that lies behind the effort to avoid death.

Additional answer: As in Judaism, wizard “X?”ology could hold

that the purpose of life is not in this world but somewhere

one goes after death. Attempting to avoid death is, then, an attempt to frustrate the purpose of life itself. Note the ending of Book 1? (It’s been a long time.)

(b) Dumbledore had not been as weak, and/or failed morally as well. Why Harry was needed to give this answer is beyond me, but don’t many fans criticize the portrayal of Dumbledore towards

the end of the series?

(c) Horcruxes involve damaging the soul (and denying another,

in favor of oneself, that which one holds most dear).

*

So what? A question for another post.

What’s wrong with dividing the soul? And premeditated murder is still nothing to cry about! Yes, its, evil, but that is the Unforgiveable Curse of Avada Kedavra. What is so unspeakable evil about Horcruxes that all books must be removed from library and even the Darkest books won’t speak of it?

And what issues did you mention, Randomex (Can’t remember! Rewrite them to renew!)

Randomex:

I read “It is simply the means to the end which is undesireable, namely murder” as referring back to the previous statement. Apparently it was its own statement. A small misunderstanding.

Randomex – What is the problem about ripping souls etc.? And I understand that it shows much more disrespect to life when one is killing simply for ones own purposes rather than because one wants the victim dead. But surely it is non proportionate – if a book full of Dark Magic (which horrifies Hermione!) can’t mention it, it has gotta be a whole load worse than simple murder (which is, as you said, evil, but is not a taboo subject at all!)?

And Dumbledore was upset with himself because he himself who had said “For the well organized mind, death is but the next great adventure”, fell through in the pursuit of immortality. I hear that.

I don’t like how you differentiate between Philosophers Stone and Horcruxes. If we grant that the problem with horcruxes is the “end”, not the “means”, ie denying death=defeating life etc, like you suggested, then the Philosophers Stone would be equally bad.

One could suggest, similar to what you are saying, that immortality is different to the Philosophers Stone, which was intended to extend life rather than prevent death.

But why would there be a problem of preventing life at all? (And I mean that 100% even from a Jewish perspective, although if you want to debate that we can do that on another thread.)

Question 12) What happens when a secret keeper dies? Seems to be a contradiction whether the secret dies with him (Book 3) or whether all those to whom the secretkeeper divulged the secret to become keepers in their own rights?

Question 13) Can prefects dock points? Inconsistency. In Book 5, Malfoy is informed that prefects cannot dock points, however in book 2 Percy docks points from Ron for being in Myrtle’s lavatory. (Although “cannot dock points from other prefects”, it is clear from that chapter that it was a chiddush that Malfoy could dock points at all. V’dok.)

Just looking through the old thread, “In Witch She Snorted”, and both those questions are discussed there. I apparently had a tzad to answer “Question 13” that a prefect can only dock points from his own house, so as not to abuse the rights. I quite like that, actually.

It’s not really life when it’s a Horcrux.

Because you are so obviously a Ravenclaw! Poppa (resident Slytherin) might be a Parselmouth, but PAA?

That isn’t like Percy at all to bluff. It is like him to think he could, but more like him to think he should. Hmmm. I prefer my answer!

Just thinking now, the point system is quite nonproportionate too. At the beginning of Book 1, we start by docking one point at a time. After that, the numbers seem to multiply!

Because you are so obviously a Ravenclaw! Poppa (resident Slytherin) might be a Parselmouth, but PAA?

Interesting. I might be the first non-Slytherin to go bad. But given the choice, I probably would want to be in Ravenclaw. Keep in mind though that Harry was a Gryffindor and a Parselmouth

edited name, not sure whose – 29

Keep in mind though that Harry was a Gryffindor and a Parselmouth

No he wasn’t. Common misconception, loads of people somehow missed the revelation in the book! Harry was NOT a Parselmouth; his body held two souls – his own and a fraction of Voldemorts. It was Voldemorts soul that could talk Parselmouth, not Harry’s. I highly doubt that after the Horcrux was exorcised Harry could still speak it. (Which sort of defeats the purpose of Dumbledore’s drosho in Book 2, but what can we do? It’s true!)

My scar didn’t prickle whenever you post, so there is definitely no Dark Wizard hiding in your skull!

Harry Potter is the best book series ever written. You haven’t lived till you’ve experienced HP addiction. 🙂