Deathly Hallows, chapter 2

[anehan]

In Memoriam

* The Dursleys are leaving tea cups outside Harry's bedroom door. What are they, house elves?

*Harry has never learned to heal wounds and thinks it's a serious flaw in his magical education. Maybe he ought to have, you know, studied during the six years at Hogwarts instead of letting Hermione do all his work for him. Sorry, Harry, but you have no one else than yourself to blame. Normal people, if they had a lunatic after their blood, would have actually devoted some time for making sure they weren't completely unprepared.

* Harry has never cleaned his trunk before. Gross. Our Harry isn't much for hygiene.

* Finding a fragment of the mirror Sirius had given him, Harry feels a sudden upsurge of bitter memories, stabs of regret and longing. He suffers, I tell you.

* Harry is going to take his photograh album and a stack of letters with him. Good lord, what does he think he's going to do with them. The boy is an idiot.

* And we come to the sickening obituary by Elphias Doge. One more person whom Dumbledore managed to hoodwink into believing he was a noble person.

* Dumbledore never revealed the remotest anti-Muggle tendency. Except when he bullied the Dursleys. But that doesn't count, because the Dursleys totally deserved it.

* Dumbledore became the most brilliant student Hogwarts had ever seen and constantly outshone his friends. Bet he liked that. It would have done good for him to be second-best at something. Instead, everything confirmed him in his belief that he was superior to others and that it was his duty to manipulate others for the greater good.

* According to Doge, Dumbledore never had Ministerial ambitions. True enough. He just wanted to take over the world.

* "Albus Dumbledore was never proud or vain". Ahahahahahaa!

* Dumbledore's losses "endowed him with great humanity and sympathy". Bitch, please. The man is clearly incapable of empathy.

* Doge was right in one thing, though: Dumbledore always worked for the greater good. Too bad his methods and definition of "greater good" were rather questionable.

* Harry had thought he knew Dumbledore quite well. What made him think that? The great openness Dumbledore displayed in his dealings with Harry, perhaps?

* Harry thinks that the idea of a teen-aged Dumbledore was odd, like trying to imagine a stupid Hermione. Much as I love Hermione, I have no problem in imagining her stupid. She isn't half so clever as she likes to think. For example, what good did it do to the DA to brand the traitor's face? It didn't prevent Marietta from squealing.

* The only personal question Harry had asked Dumbledore was the only one he suspected Dumbledore hadn't answered honestly. That's too naïve even for Harry.

* Unpleasant Skeeter may be, but I at least would rather read her book than any more of Doge's pennings. There might ever be a shred of truth in what she writes, if you manage to discount the more lurid details.

* Skeeter calls the Potter-Dumbledore relationship unhealthy, even sinister. Brava! At least someone finally got it right.

* Another chapter in which nothing happens comes to an end. I really need that alcohol to get through this.



Informed Attributes:
Dumbledore is noble. No, really.

Misdirected Answering:
Did you hear what Dumbledore got up to as a teenager? What do you mean, you're not interested?

Nut o' Fun:
Desiccated beetle eyes.

Final score: 3. Nothing happens in this chapter.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

She burnt out with GoF, possibly when a plot hole opened up beneath her and she fell in.

Well, the first huge, series-wrecking plot hole actually opened in PoA with the time-turner. Because it would have been soo easy for Sirius or anybody else who cared about the Potters to save them. Or for devoted DEs to save Voldy. JKR really should have left time-travel alone.

[cressida0201.livejournal.com]

No, I wouldn't say that ruined everything. She just needed to set some limits on the time-turners. She'd already suggested that they were rare and hard to get at; all she had to do was add something like "They can only be used to go back a maximum of three hours, and it was more than three hours before the bodies were discovered/the Ministry wouldn't authorize their use in this case."

[(Anonymous)]

How rare and hard to get could they be if a kid could get issued one for no weightier reason than because they wanted to take extra lessons? Then there would be quite a few officials with similar access - staring with DD, who is responsible for well-being of hundreds of kids.
3 hours limitation wouldn't be enough, because what about all those other people killed in the first VW? Shouldn't quite a few of them been saved via a time-turner? No, she really should have left the theme of short-range time-travel alone. It has seldom been done well even by good SF authors who took it seriously.

Re: Crouch junior and a portkey - it never made sense to me that Hogsmeade wasn't protected against all forms of teleportation. Because that means that any of the kids that go there on Hogsmeade Saturdays could be kidnapped at any time. And that stealing/robbery would be very easy. I mean, wouldn't the only wizarding village in Britain invest in security? And yes, some good ideas about the ritual happening on solstice. OTOH, the whole tourney shtick would still remain as idiotic as ever, because luring Harry outside of protections was never difficult and would have been much easier than to manhandle him through a tournament, in which he was singularly poorly equipped to compete.

Time turners: story breakers?

[cressida0201.livejournal.com]

How rare and hard to get could they be if a kid could get issued one for no weightier reason than because they wanted to take extra lessons?

So, lose the "Hermione was using a time-turner all year" subplot. It's cute, but hardly essential. Find another way for the time-turner to fall into their hands.

what about all those other people killed in the first VW? Shouldn't quite a few of them been saved via a time-turner?

Well, why not? It wouldn't change anything important to the story if some of the deaths in the first war had been reversed. If three hours is too much, make it one hour and change the climax of PoA accordingly.

I agree that time travel is problematic, but I still think it could have been salvaged with a little extra work (and no, I don't mean destroying a bunch of time turners in OotP!). It wasn't anywhere near as bad as the plot holes in later books.

Re: Time turners: story breakers?

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, but it _also_ would have made CoS even more of an idiot plot than it already was. I mean, DD and McG should have been able to solve that mystery pretty quickly as it is, but throw in a time-turner and their level of ineptitude and stupidity would reach new depths. Some of the victims were found quite quickly, after all. Or PS with that attempt on Harry? Utterly trivial to fix even if he _had_ fallen. Etc.
BTW, CoS is another badly plotted book with lots of logical holes. I just think that while the books were short and more clearly aimed at young children, people were more willing to forgive the lapses.
Moreover, every event in that world would need to be re-examined with the possibility of time-turning in mind. It is just far too complicated and difficult on consistency, IMHO. Not that Rowling ever gave much for consistency, of course, but IMHO one cool/funny sequence wasn't worth it.

Re: Time turners: story breakers?

[cressida0201.livejournal.com]

Some of the victims were found quite quickly, after all.

So DD requests a time-turner from the Ministry and an obstreporous official (suspected of being a former Death Eater) refuses his request on the grounds that "They're only Petrified, not dead, so don't ask me to release these tightly-controlled items and start making mandrake potion instead!" While they argue, the one-hour time limit passes, and the point becomes moot. Dark speculation that the official was being deliberately obtuse because the Petrified students were all muggleborns.

I just think that while the books were short and more clearly aimed at young children, people were more willing to forgive the lapses.

Very true.

Moreover, every event in that world would need to be re-examined with the possibility of time-turning in mind.

Only if you assume that the people concerned could get access to a time-turner. I think it would have been possible to make that a remote possibility. Hey, how about this: the time-turner used to save Sirius is an ancient and rare item (someone's family heirloom, perhaps), the method for making them has been lost, and it's only good for one use anyway?

Re: Time turners: story breakers?

[tdotm.livejournal.com]

I agree with you re: Time Turners. There are probably several ways she could get round it. The 3 hr limit you suggested is a good start. Also, perhaps it should have been stated that they could only be used to double up on time or whatever and that it was illegal to use one to change history? Hermione had more that enough time to tell Harry any stringent rules. It'd make getting caught even more of a ris as they were bound to get expelled.

Anyone caught doing so would get a 20 year Azkaban sentence. It might seem harsh in some cases, but would make sense (even in real life) as chaos would be caused if people could mess about with history willy-nilly. Obviously the Baddies would try, but Hogwarts Staff wouldn't. Not least because the situation would be too public, and it would easily get out if they had.

Perhaps Snape/Madame Pomphrey/McGonagall could mutter about them during one of the many whispered conversations during Chamber, and Dumbledore would reply that the Ministry said it wasn't possible. Then in Book 3 it wouldn't be completely new.

There should only be a limited number (50?) in existence, and The Department of Mysteries knew where each and everyone was. Being caught in possesion of an unlicensed one was another Azkaban sentence.

As for how the Department of Mysteries was persuaded to let an underage witch get one to go to extra lessons, I don't know! Perhaps Dumbledore broke the habit of a lifetime and was less than honest....

Re: Time turners: story breakers?

[(Anonymous)]

So DD requests a time-turner from the Ministry and an obstreporous official (suspected of being a former Death Eater) refuses his request

Sorry, but it just doesn't work. MoM was eating from DD's hand at the point and really, refusals wouldn't stop him if he wanted something. He'd just break in and take it. I don't think that even with his megalomania he was evil enough to just let the kids die.
And it is absurd to think that any laws would have stopped Voldy and his DEs.

An old heirloom that only works once? Perhaps, but frankly that's just too much dancing around needed to accommodate one "cool" moment. Not worth it, IMHO.

Also, perhaps it should have been stated that they could only be used to double up on time or whatever and that it was illegal to use one to change history?

Being in 2 places at the same time, even just for lessons _is_ changing history. And why include something like that, when it only gets used _once_?

No, I know that you guys love early books, but they have all the same problems as the later ones. For instance, Apparition gets introduced in PoA as well and it makes quite a few plot points in the previous books problematic/absurd as well. Maybe it is just that the world is fresher in the books 1-3 and they are more focussed?

Re: Time turners: story breakers?

[kaskait.livejournal.com]

Being in 2 places at the same time, even just for lessons _is_ changing history.

Current scientific theories state that Time Travel is just about impossible. But what is possible are concurrent universes reflecting our many choices...the many worlds theory. In this theory, Harry and Hermione did not change history they just jumped universes.

But I doubt JKR had any of that in mind.

Re: Time turners: story breakers?

[mmmarcusz.livejournal.com]

The whole thing was idiotic anyway, after a week (or even a day) everyone would have ganged up on Hermione and ordered her to tell them how she was in two classes at once. Ron & Harry mumble it at her a few times, but bizarrely never follow up on it.

Re: Time turners: story breakers?

[cressida0201.livejournal.com]

MoM was eating from DD's hand at the point

Not necessarily every single member of the MoM, though. Which might have made the story more interesting.

and really, refusals wouldn't stop him if he wanted something. He'd just break in and take it.

But he only has an hour to do so, and DD isn't so omnipowerful that he can't be stalled for an hour.

An old heirloom that only works once? Perhaps, but frankly that's just too much dancing around needed to accommodate one "cool" moment. Not worth it, IMHO.

And here I was thinking that it might make the "cool" moment even cooler. *shrug* We've probably reached the point where it's best just to agree to disagree, actually.

Re: Time turners: story breakers?

[(Anonymous)]

Just wanted to point out that :

But he only has an hour to do so, and DD isn't so omnipowerful that he can't be stalled for an hour.

Wouldn't apply for CoS. DD had more than half a year after the first student was petrified in which he could have obtained a time-turner. If a kid can get one to sit in extra lessons, then a headmaster certainly can do so to ensure safety of the school. Heck, given that DD easily abandoned borders of legality when he chose, he would have gotten one regardless, to counteract various dangers.
Hm... maybe Harry's continued survival in face of adversity wasn't sheer dumb luck, after all. Perhaps DD rolled back that basilisk fight 50 times, until Faulks and Harry finally won?

Another example of a new element making previous stuff problematic/illogical, even in the early books, are Apparition issues.

Re: Time turners: story breakers?

[cressida0201.livejournal.com]

Wouldn't apply for CoS.

My point is that it could have applied if JKR had thought about it and made it apply. It's her world, after all; she gets to decide what DD's relationship with the Ministry is.