PS Chapter One

[hafl.livejournal.com]

- I've been a lurker here for a long time, but this is supposed to be the last time I'm reading the books before putting them into a box in the corner and giving their shelf space to Maurice Leblanc, so I figured I'd share my thoughts on this last reread here.

- I'm reading a translated version of the first four books and the translations is a little goofy in some places. Any factual errors are probably my mistake for not checking the English text.

- From the first paragraph, the Dursleys are presented as completely mundane and unwhimsical. Still, the initial description is not really negative, we only find out that Petunia is nosy, probably to distance her from terminally uncurious Harry. Dudley is also presented as being a wonderful child only in his parents' opinion, even before we properly see him.

- The completely ordinary weather is supposedly showing that mysterious things are about to happen. Emphatic weather does not work like that.

- When vernon commutes to work, we see him rationalising the unusual things he sees, like people dressed in strange clothes. It is probably the only instance in the series where we see Muggle reaction to Wizard business, so it is worth mentioning.

- That said, it is probably intended to show Vernon as unsympathetic and thinking only in mundane manner.

- Vernon's behavior at work makes him look like a horrible boss who screams at his employees. We don't know his reasons, we're just supposed to assume he does it without any reason.

- When Vernon considers phoning Petunia to ask her about the Potters' son's name, he shows concern about her and he does not want to disturb her.

- Dudley is constantly portrayed as a spoiled child that's hard to control.

- Dumbledore finally appears and thanks to the Czech language being unspecific in this area, I'm seeing him wearing stilleto heels.

- The conversation between Dumbledore and McGonagall is mostly an infodump, but McGonagall casually remarks that Muggles may not be completely stupid. Remember kids, prejudice is wrong, unless the good guys show it.

- Dumbledore and McGonagall are actually contrasting quite well here with Dumbledore being all whimsy and McGonagall being all serious.

- Dumbledore says that he does not know why Voldemort wasn't able to kill Harry. I could say he's lying and witholding information, but he probably did not have time to do any research into the matter.

- Dumbledore's watch begins the theme of wizarding tools being more complicated than the Muggle equivalent without any sign of being better.

- Dumledore's arguments for giving Harry into the Dursleys' care are not all that convincing. Sirius is still around at the moment and he could be able to take care of Harry. Especially if we assume that Dumbledore does not yet know about the blood protection.

- Strangely, the first impression we get of Hagrid is not very pleasant.

- Don't the wizards have any charms for removing scars? Though Dumbledore not even considering removing Harry's scar and just saying it's unremovable is a minor nitpick, even if he just saw the kid for the first time since Voldermort's attack. He's Gryffindor, they probably think scars are cool, even if they are earned by complete accident.

- And Hagrid's goodbye with Harry shows that he's gruff, but with a heart of gold.

- Even Dumbledore seems a little sad when he has to give up Harry. Since the chapter probably has an omniscient narrator, it is a genuine emotion, but he's still the least emotional of the three people present.

- Hagrid makes a mistake in the declension of Sirius. Is it because the translator wanted to show that he is poorly educated or because the translator does not know that clearly Latin names are an exception to the rules of declension? Only Prisoner of Azkaban will tell.

- And Harry is left alone. It is decently written though Rowling tries a bit too hard to show how he is a special boy, given up to the ordinary world.

Comments

[lynn-waterfall.livejournal.com]

I don't think Dumbledore could have found out anything important, since he did not visit Godric's Hollow that day. He sent Hagrid to pick up Harry, the only survivor and witness.

Well, he did already know that Severus had asked Voldemort to spare Lily, and that that Voldemort had killed her anyway. Dumbledore could at least have a hypothesis, particularly if sacrificial magic is an area of magic that he's knowledgeable about.

I don't know that visiting Godric's Hollow would necessarily make a difference, in any case. Was there anything in particular to be learned there?

How I'm wondering whether Dumbledore didn't really *know* what happened at Godric's Hollow until the end of book 1, when it turned out that Quirrelmort couldn't touch Harry for some reason. Maybe he didn't actually work it out until then. What information did he gain, or might he have gained, between the Potters' deaths and Harry's arrival at Hogwarts?


He might have been sincere in wanting to give Harry to the Dursleys, so that he would be protected from all his fame until he's older. Later, when he found out about the blood protection, he might have decided to keep Harry at the Dursleys, even though they were clearly abusive.

True. I suppose it isn't odd that he wouldn't tell Harry later how his reasons changed, since he wouldn't want to look less than omniscient. He has an image to maintain, after all.

Still, I don't really find the "protect Harry from his fame" argument to be very convincing. First, Dumbledore does *nothing* to "protect" Harry from his fame once he gets to Hogwarts, or even in his first trip to Diagon Alley. It makes it look like Dumbledore just wanted to contrast the WW, full of people who admire Harry, with the Muggle world, which isn't. Even if Dumbledore didn't know what the Dursleys would be like, he knew that the Muggle world obviously wouldn't admire Harry as a celebrity.

Second... how did Harry get to be a celebrity -- how did everyone know who to credit with Voldemort's downfall? Terri pointed out to me that within 12 hours, everyone had decided that Voldemort's disappearance is all about *Harry*, rather than the result of something that James or Lily did. In fact, it wasn't Harry at all; it was Lily. Would everyone in the WW really have unanimously decided, that quickly, that it was all about Harry unless someone had gotten people thinking in that direction?

Maybe they would have.

But it does seem reasonable to think that Dumbledore might have spread that idea himself. The only other people who would have had enough information would have been members of the Order, and probably not *everyone* in the Order. Severus would have had as much information as Dumbledore, I would think, but he probably would *not* have either come to that conclusion or have been busy spreading gossip. Sirius and Peter would have had enough info, but they were busy tracking/setting up the other. Remus probably would have had the time and the information. (shrug)

[jodel-from-aol.livejournal.com]

All the more reason to suspect that Albus had his Order members, and his supporters in the Ministry spin a fine tale of their blameless infant savior.

Because, that really is the question. Why would *anyone* think the fact that the child survived was due to anything that the *child* did -- or was. It almost reads like a deliberate distraction. Why would they think that the child had even been under attack when the Dark Lord bought it? No one knew what was in the prophecy but Albus and Snape (and Tom) Rookwood, in the DoM knew there *was* a prophecy, but not what it said. No more did any of the DEs, let alone the wizarding public.

And who leaked the information about the kid's so highly distinctive scar? Admittedly, all it would have taken was for someone to get Hagrid drunk, but who knew that he was the one to ask?

Rowling consistently fumbles the ball over who knew what, when, or how.

[aikaterini.livejournal.com]

/Why would *anyone* think the fact that the child survived was due to anything that the *child* did -- or was./

Possibly because he survived while his parents didn't. The whole 'Boy Who Lived' moniker is created by the fact that Harry is the only person to survive Voldemort's wrath, the only person who has survived the Killing Curse (as Moody tells us in GoF). I mean, yes, it sounds silly - how could a baby do anything? - but the fact that he survived *and* somehow was the cause of Voldemort's demise gave rise to the idea that he must have been special in some way.

[oryx_leucoryx]

In any case some kind of spin was involved. Because we know Harry didn't really survive an AK in Godric's Hollow. The AK never connected. What Harry was hit by was Voldemort's soul bit. Under slightly different conditions the cat (same one Harry nearly killed from his baby broom) would have ended as a Horcrux and sporting a strange scar somewhere, but Harry would still have had Lily's protection.

[jodel-from-aol.livejournal.com]

What's even sillier is that unless you know about the *scar* -- which had to have either come from Hagrid, or one of the Accidental Magic Reversal squad some years later -- there is no reason for any of the public to think that Tom got around to *trying* to kill the kid. It would have been thought that the last person he killed either did, or was something he hadn't expected, and had managed to blow him up when he killed them. I mean, really. Two adults dead, Tom gone, why would anyone think he got a chance to attack the child as well?

We know it because Albus tells us so, but he wasn't telling the wider wizarding public. Or was he?

[condwiramurs.livejournal.com]

But how did people know that Voldemort fired a killing curse at *Harry* at all? Someone coming upon the scene immediately after would have seen that two people were killed and *something* happened to make their killer vanish or die without leaving a body; it could just as likely have been something that one of the dead adults (who have a knowledge of magic after all) did that took Voldie with them. Why assume the BABY did something? As oryx says, the CAT could have been responsible for the scar so far as the average person was likely to know without having been guided to think of Harry-as-target. Who knew that Voldie shot off THREE AKs - beyond Voldie, Harry, and Dumbledore if he legilimized infant Harry (otherwise it is speculation on his part, as he *was not there to see it*)? His wand was never found to be tested, so that's out.

[jodel-from-aol.livejournal.com]

It's enough to make one wonder whether Albus orchestrated the whole Boy-Who-Lived myth as a tool for manipulating Harry.

Either by soothing him by telling him it was his mother who did it, or as a way to convince him he is *special*, and has a high destiny to meet.

[oryx_leucoryx]

His wand was never found to be tested, so that's out.

Heck, even when Harry made that wand spout its last spells we did not see anything between Lily's death and Bertha Jorkins'. Because the AK (or whatever it was) disembodied Voldie, so there was nothing for the echo to show.

[oryx_leucoryx]

I don't know that visiting Godric's Hollow would necessarily make a difference, in any case. Was there anything in particular to be learned there?

What could have Dumbledore learned from his office, and what could he have learned from visiting Godric's Hollow?

He definitely knew something was up or he wouldn't have known to send Hagrid.

OK, if he was not part of the Secret he would know when the Fidelius Charm no longer held, because he would be able to remember the Potters' location. (Extra-canonically Rowling said he placed some kind of alarm charm on the house, that would work too). Since the Secret was breached he knew the Secret Keeper (presumably Sirius) was the traitor. From whatever Severus reported about his Dark Mark he knew something happened to Voldemort that weakened him very significantly. Did he know Harry survived and needed to be taken to safety or did he send Hagrid to see if this was so? Because without assuming any unmentioned charms or perhaps the report of a portrait from Harry's room the only way Dumbledore could have *known* Harry survived was the wording of the Prophecy - it implies at least 2 encounters between Harry and Voldemort, one in which Voldemort would mark Harry as his equal and one where one of them would die at the hand of the other. The only way Dumbledore could know that Lily's sacrifice was at work was if he knew she had died and I don't know how he would know that without the report of someone who had been to the house.

What could be gained from visiting Godric's Hollow, or hearing the report of someone who did?

The knowledge that James and Lily were dead. That James died at the door and Lily by Harry's crib. That their wands were nowhere near their persons but somewhere in the living room. That Lily attempted to barricade herself in Harry's room. Confirmation that Harry was indeed alive, though scarred. That there was no sign of Voldemort's body.

Knowing Lily died, and especially knowing she was at Harry's crib with no means to protect herself (and knowing Voldemort said something to Severus about her possibly being allowed to live) was necessary knowledge to construct a theory of sacrificial magic saving Harry. I do not know if it was sufficient knowledge. Maybe Dumbledore had to see the protection in action as he did at the end of the book to know it worked and how. But at the very least, he needed evidence that could only be gained from within Harry's room. Unless he had the report of a portrait or time-travel was somehow involved he could only have learned this after he had already sent Hagrid.

To construct a hypothesis about Voldemort having a Horcrux he needed to know Voldemort survived something that should have otherwise killed him. That Voldemort was still alive, though significantly weakened, he could learn from Severus' Dark Mark. But once he figured out Lily's sacrifice Dumbledore could understand what it was that hit Voldemort - the AK intended for Harry - and thus confirmation that indeed Voldemort was struck by something that should have been fatal.

[lynn-waterfall.livejournal.com]

Knowing Lily died, and especially knowing she was at Harry's crib with no means to protect herself (and knowing Voldemort said something to Severus about her possibly being allowed to live) was necessary knowledge to construct a theory of sacrificial magic saving Harry.

Right, I'd forgotten about the significance of where Lily died, and the fact that she didn't have her wand. Silly of me.

Still. To play devil's advocate...

Is there no way that Lily could have died to save Harry if Voldemort had caught her elsewhere in the house, and if she'd had a wand but had been disarmed? The fact that Lily died by Harry's crib, without a wand on her, would certainly get Dumbledore thinking about sacrificial magic, but I don't think that either of those two facts were necessary to the sacrificial magic itself.

Whether Dumbledore would've been able to guess at the magic involved if Lily's body were found elsewhere, though, I don't know, and that's what we were discussing. It's quite possible he couldn't've worked things out without that information.

[oryx_leucoryx]

Ok, but at the very least he had to know for certain that Lily died (rather than, say, was kidnapped and was being held hostage by other DEs). Could he have known that Lily was certainly dead without hearing from someone who had been to the scene?

[lynn-waterfall.livejournal.com]

I don't know. I admit, I was assuming that Dumbledore knew that James and Lily were dead, regardless of whether he had been to Godric's Hollow personally.

For that matter, the bodies might have been removed fairly soon after the attack, whether by wizards or by Muggles. Certainly *Harry* was removed right away, according to Hagrid. Dumbledore might have seen the bodies without having been to Godric's Hollow. And as you say, he might also have heard from someone who had either been to the scene, or who had seen the bodies later, who hadn't been to the scene him- or herself.

[oryx_leucoryx]

There is one more person to consider - Bathilda Bagshot. Albus may have exchanged some floo calls with her that night. He may have sent her scouting around.

Also, at some point Peter showed up and retrieved Voldemort's wand. (Was that wand still lying around when Bathilda arrived? That might have been the confirmation that Voldemort was gone.)

[oryx_leucoryx]

Hmm. We are never told (at least not in canon) if there was any indication from the Dark Marks that Voldemort was only gone temporarily, yet Dumbledore is convinced Voldemort will return (as he tells Severus). If that isn't based on the Dark Mark then it is entirely based on believing the prophecy.

[oryx_leucoryx]

Possible reasons to decide to bring Harry to the Dursleys and possible reasons to leave him there may have been separate matters.

At least one immediate reason was to keep Harry away from the traitor Sirius. When Dumbledore told Harry he had to be kept away from DEs this was what he meant. (Of course he didn't want to word it like that just after Sirius died protecting Harry.) However this reason became irrelevant the following day.

If leaving Harry at 4PD had to do with the blood protection then this was not relevant while Voldemort was disembodied. (There is no way the blood protection could save Harry from Bellatrix or anyone else - Lily's sacrifice is specific to bodies where Voldemort is. Quirrell can touch Harry when he is merely acting in Voldemort's service, it is only when he is bodily possessed by Voldemort that the protection kicks in. Similarly, Draco as a DE can curse Harry and break his nose, Peter can tie him up and stab him, Barty can Imperiurize him, grab him, other DEs can hit him with spells etc.) Perhaps the blood protection had to be established ahead of Voldemort's return but did it really require Harry living there for all those years?

Neither was obscuring Harry's location a significant factor, or if it was it wasn't done well. Random wizards knew how to find Harry. Any DE who wanted to could have found him on his way to or from school or at the playground. Or just owled a cursed object, since owls seem to be able to find people when their location isn't known (Sirius while on the run) or even Secret Kept (Hermione's parents owling her at 12GP, school owls arriving at 12GP).

I think it comes down to contrasting the Wizarding World with Harry's home environment, thus creating a preference and loyalty for the former. Controlling Harry's exposure to the Wizarding World such that it can be done in a way that ensured Harry's personal loyalty and trust to Dumbledore (and possibly encouraged his Sorting into Gryffindor, where he would learn self-endangerment). Possibly learning how the presence of Tom's soul-bit influenced Harry's character and development.

Remus probably would have had the time and the information.

Remus had been excluded from the Potters' circle for at least 3-4 months before Halloween. He wasn't more informed than any other Order member.

I agree Dumbledore wanted to isolate Harry from the wizarding world and control his exposure to it

[oryx_leucoryx]

To sum up my previous posts: I think Dumbledore should have been able to put together both Lily's sacrifice and Harry as Voldemort's Horcrux within a day of the attack, just thinking through the information he had - the prophecy, knowledge of Severus' request, Severus' report about the status of his Mark and a reconstruction of the events of the attack based on a description of the crime scene, possibly an examination of Harry. We do know he believed Voldemort survived yet he never searched for his Horcrux all those years, so I think he decided it was Harry rather soon.