Layers in Harry Potter

Dumbledore says during the duel that he and Voldemort disagree on whether there is anything worse than death. Why is it important whether they've had a wand duel before?
They've obviously had some kind of interactions. Whether they've had wand duels or not ......
I don't understand what it affects one way or the other. I'm more interested in what they define as "worse than dead."

How about dead and spirit destroyed--A ghost that gets erased. That almost happened to Voldie the first time he tangled with Harry. He was reduced to something "less than the meanest ghost." What if Harry's able to completely destroy Voldemort, body and spirit if his entire power is unleashed and Voldy hasn't built up his immortality spells? Tom's ultimate nightmare. A complete end, completely ceasing to exist. Something he doesn't even consider possible.:elaugh:

Hi Jordemundt6

I think it is what happened to Voldemort when he failed to kill Harry. But in the context of the dialogue during the duel....
Voldemort denies that there is anything worse than death. Dumbledore disagrees.

I think the points I'm trying to make are that we don't know if Dumbledore can be killed, even by Voldemort, and Voldemort has reasons to fear the headmaster even if Dumbledore isn't the One who can kill him once and for all.

I remember the discussion in PS/SS over the unicorn's body. Damned must be worse than dead. Maybe there's some unspecified Hell in HP.

Dumbledore says during the duel that he and Voldemort disagree on whether there is anything worse than death. Why is it important whether they've had a wand duel before?
They've obviously had some kind of interactions. Whether they've had wand duels or not ......
I don't understand what it affects one way or the other. I'm more interested in what they define as "worse than dead."

Of course it's not important. None of this forum is important. I'm more interested in Books 6 and 7.

I mentioned I had the impression from re-reading "The Only One He Ever Feared" that they had not dueled before. There was disagreement. I was simply making the case for it. Seems better than lulls in the discussion.

The consequences are these possibilities: If Dumbledore and Voldemort didn't duel before then there's a likelihood Dumbledore did not directly help the Longbottoms and the Potters escape Voldemort three times. Maybe they did indeed do it on their own. Or perhaps someone else helped them escape, someone like James' parents. I would not have thought of this if I hadn't been considering the matter of the duel, so it has been useful for me. It also matters if this is their first encounter, because it may be that from now on Voldemort's attitude toward Dumbledore may change. If he has learned only now that Dumbledore won't kill him it may lead him to a bolder strategy. If Voldemort's fear of Dumbledore had been based on indirect experience and Dumbledore's reputation, it gives some things to consider about whether Grindelwald was Tom Riddle Jr's tutor, and whether Voldemort did or did not realise the struggle could be in succeeding stages, Dumbledore and Grindelwald, and not Voldemort and Dumbledore, but Voldemort and Harry.

Another thing to consider. Everyone thought Harry was the only one ever to survive a Killing Curse. But Voldemort survived it too. Not in the way he would have liked, not with his powers. That's still his goal, but he knows now that he can survive. If his disembodied state was worse than death, does he fear that still? Does he fear the Avada Kedavra so much any more? So far, that is the maximum in Dumbledore's arsenal, and Dumbledore chooses not to use it.

Interesting question, is the rebounded curse the same as the original curse itself? Did VD (chuckle, if you want) actually survive the AK?

No, it's different and, if possible, more terrifying. If it were an AK, all it could do to Voldy would be turn him into a ghost (since he doesn't want to leave) this attacks and DESTROYS his body and then goes to work on his soul or spirit and almost almost destroys that as well. The parasite that Voldemort survived as is "less than the meanest ghost" he had to force himself to exist, second by second, for over 12 years and if he had let go, he would have ceased to exist. This is something more dangerous, terrifying, and powerful, than an unmarked death.

I always assumed that VD (Sorry, I love that Vigilance) did indeed survive a (rebounded) AK.

My impression was that it was all the preperation he had done that allowed him to survive it.

Okay, there's a lot that doesn't add up if that's really what happened. First, if the curse had an effect on its intended target it can't be expelled by the target and bounced back at the originator. The curse broke through the protection gave Harry a deep scar and even passed some of Voldemort's talents to Harry. Usually when curses are blocked they have no effect on the protected target and are wholly bounced back at the originator. Dolohov's not having to dodge his own curse when Harry was unable to completely block it (he mostly blocked it but it scraped his face) bears me out on this. Also, the thing that hit Voldemort did not behave like an AK particularly one that hits its target. It destroyed the house AND Voldemort's physical body and even severely weakened his spirit. When AKs hit people or animals, the animals are killed but their bodies are unharmed and their spirits are unharmed except that they are no longer housed in physical bodies. The magic that hit Voldemort didn't behave that way.

I'm more interested in Books 6 and 7. Clearly.

What lull?

Another thing to consider. Everyone thought Harry was the only one ever to survive a Killing Curse. :huh: Who?
But Voldemort survived it too. Not in the way he would have liked, not with his powers. That's still his goal, but he knows now that he can survive. If his disembodied state was worse than death, does he fear that still? Does he fear the Avada Kedavra so much any more? So far, that is the maximum in Dumbledore's arsenal, and Dumbledore chooses not to use it.Whatever gave you that idea? Don't underestimate Dumbledore.

Barmy, Voldemort seems to clearly fear death most of all the ills known to mankind. He spoke of it graphically in GoF.

"... I was ripped from my body, I was less than spirit, less than the meanest ghost... but still, I was alive. What I was, even I do not know... I, who have gone further than anybody along the path that leads to immortality. You know my goal - to conquer death. And now, I was tested, and it appeared that one or more of my experiments had worked... for I had not been killed, though the curse should have done it... I remember only forcing myself, sleeplessly, endlessly, second by second, to exist... "

Those are the words of a being with an abnormal fear of death. He reaffirmed the feat during the duel in OotP when he snarled: "There is nothing worse than death, Dumbledore!"

Dumbledore, of course, remarked the Voldemort was "quite wrong" and that Voldemort's failure to "understand there are things much worse than death" has always been his (Voldemort's) greatest weakness.

Another thing to consider. Everyone thought Harry was the only one ever to survive a Killing Curse. But Voldemort survived it too. Not in the way he would have liked, not with his powers. That's still his goal, but he knows now that he can survive. If his disembodied state was worse than death, does he fear that still? Does he fear the Avada Kedavra so much any more? So far, that is the maximum in Dumbledore's arsenal, and Dumbledore chooses not to use it.

Voldemort had no real comeback after Dumbledore's comment on his "greatest weakness." Instead he shot another killing curse at Dumbledore and ended up fighting a rope of fire.

The difference between these two duelists isn't magical might. We saw them duel almost to a draw. I believe what Voldemort fears is the unknown. He knows much, truly, but he also knows Dumbledore possesses the greater depth and knowledge. What might Dumbledore know that he doesn't? Voldemort knows he can survive the avada kadavra... but what if there is something else, something that didn't occur that night in Godric's Hollow, something that might have taken his life if perhaps Dumbledore had been there?

Voldemort is fearful, in great doubt. Is there something to this boy Dumbledore is mentoring, some power or weapon Harry possesses that could kill him? He likely still dismisses Harry, feeling Harry lacks the strength to wield whatever this weapon or power might be, or that he is too young and too green to learn to wield it all at once... but Dumbledore! Dumbledore does have the strength of will to wield this power, whatever it is. Alas that his servants failed to get that prophecy!

Voldemort is watching, reading the signs in increasing doubt and fear. The boy the prophecy speaks of still lives, having successfully defied him four times in one way or another, the unexpected defeat of his mightiest death eaters at the Ministry of Magic, the winds of fate turning against him each and every time he crosses paths with this boy, Harry Potter.

Dumbledore's name and reputation are worth more than an army of wizards set against him. His presence on the scene may just give Harry the chance he needs to come into his own.

Who?
I meant everyone in the story. And I was imprecise.
Moody /Crouch teaching the Unforgivable Curses in book 4 said of the Killing Curse, "Only one known person has ever survived it, and he's sitting right in front of you." That fact seemed to be common currency. It was being taught by an Auror to students. The views of all may have changed once it was known Voldemort had returned.

As for Voldemort's fear of Dumbledore, I have tried to be careful to not confuse it with his growing awareness of Harry's threat. Of course he fears Dumbledore and has reasons to do so. Once again, I point out that I was trying to show the fear was not based on direct experience from a duel with Dumbledore. It doesn't matter whether Dumbledore even knows how to do a Killing Curse or not. He didn't use it. Voldemort fears death most of all, yes. The cause of death, the Killing Curse, is not going to come from Dumbledore, apparently. It seemed to be news to Voldemort. And it doesn't matter if he is hit by the killing curse because he can survive it. He knows it. We may think his bodiless condition was worse than death but apparently, after surviving it, he still thinks there is nothing worse than death.

Jordmundt, you may be right about the reflected killing curse, but it is not established that it destroyed the house. There was a fight between James and Voldemort as well, wasn't there? And you can't say with certainty that because the curse gave Harry the scar, that it wasn't rebounded in its entirety. That would seem logical, but without knowing the nature of the protection on Harry, you can't say what it let in and what it bounced back. Could be it took in some of the soul behind the curse but bounced back the full curse itself. And the magic that hit Voldemort could have behaved differently simply because he had changed himself greatly and wasn't like any other living creature. He had given himself protection against death.

Voldemort should have been doing what Umbridge did. Attack Harry. Do it whenever and wherever possible. Get rid of him. He heard the first part of the Prophecy. He knows at least that the one with the power is either Harry or Neville. Neville should have been toast long ago. Harry should have been a goner too. Deatheaters at the train station, wherever, and as often as it takes to get the job done. Perhaps it has been fear of Dumbledore that has kept Voldemort to those grand schemes of his. Perhaps now that he truly understands where the threat lies, he will act more boldly and directly.

As for what's worse than death, I thought again today that right after the subject was discussed by Voldemort and Dumbledore, Ms. Rowling gave us a very graphic example of something that was worse than death. Voldemort's possession of Harry. Or was it possession? So I am still considering what she showed us and I won't offer anything about it now. It took me ages to write this much as it is.

As for Voldemort's fear of Dumbledore, I have tried to be careful to not confuse it with his growing awareness of Harry's threat. Of course he fears Dumbledore and has reasons to do so. Once again, I point out that I was trying to show the fear was not based on direct experience from a duel with Dumbledore. It doesn't matter whether Dumbledore even knows how to do a Killing Curse or not. He didn't use it. Voldemort fears death most of all, yes. The cause of death, the Killing Curse, is not going to come from Dumbledore, apparently. It seemed to be news to Voldemort. And it doesn't matter if he is hit by the killing curse because he can survive it. He knows it. We may think his bodiless condition was worse than death but apparently, after surviving it, he still thinks there is nothing worse than death.

It seems so... but Voldemort is afraid. He fears what he doesn't know, fears treachery from those he thinks he knows, fears what the rest of that prophecy foretold and what use Dumbledore and/or Harry (or both in concert) might do with the knowledge that has so far been withheld from him.

Jordmundt, you may be right about the reflected killing curse, but it is not established that it destroyed the house. There was a fight between James and Voldemort as well, wasn't there? And you can't say with certainty that because the curse gave Harry the scar, that it wasn't rebounded in its entirety. That would seem logical, but without knowing the nature of the protection on Harry, you can't say what it let in and what it bounced back. Could be it took in some of the soul behind the curse but bounced back the full curse itself. And the magic that hit Voldemort could have behaved differently simply because he had changed himself greatly and wasn't like any other living creature. He had given himself protection against death.

I agree with you 100% on this one - which will come as no surprise to Jordan. We've been debating this off and on for months.

Voldemort should have been doing what Umbridge did. Attack Harry. Do it whenever and wherever possible. Get rid of him. He heard the first part of the Prophecy. He knows at least that the one with the power is either Harry or Neville. Neville should have been toast long ago. Harry should have been a goner too. Deatheaters at the train station, wherever, and as often as it takes to get the job done. Perhaps it has been fear of Dumbledore that has kept Voldemort to those grand schemes of his. Perhaps now that he truly understands where the threat lies, he will act more boldly and directly.

Barmy, I think he has done quite a lot of that and has been confounded at each confrontation with Harry. Think a minute... Godric's Hollow, through the trap door and not getting the sorcerer's stone... Harry's unbelievable escape from the cemetery after the TriWizard... Harry's ability to call on a power so awesome it expelled Voldemort from his body in the Ministry of Magic. On each of these occasions, Voldemort has come out swinging, expecting to make short work of Harry Potter - and each time has come off the worse for his trouble.

I won't offer anything about it now. It took me ages to write this much as it is.

Don't feel bad. My last post (above) took over an hour and I'm still afraid I haven't stated what I was trying to say the way I wanted it said.

Vote for jessica!

Barmy, I think he has done quite a lot of that and has been confounded at each confrontation with Harry. Think a minute... Godric's Hollow, through the trap door and not getting the sorcerer's stone... Harry's unbelievable escape from the cemetery after the TriWizard... Harry's ability to call on a power so awesome it expelled Voldemort from his body in the Ministry of Magic. On each of these occasions, Voldemort has come out swinging, expecting to make short work of Harry Potter - and each time has come off the worse for his trouble.
Well, yes, but....

Godric's Hollow, first attempt to do the right thing.

Philosopher's Stone, attempting to become immortal when he should have been destroying Harry. He should have been getting the Deatheaters on the case. Didn't Quirrell know how to use an owl? Oh- just remembered Quirrell did try to dump Harry off his broom. OK, one real attempt on Harry's life for the year. Apart from the spontaneous attack on Harry in front of the mirror.

The Triwizard Tournament, any wizard would do for returning to power, but no it had to be Harry. And what did Voldemort do when he had him, after a year's chicanery? Gave him back his wand.

I am keeping in mind that Harry has been kept generally in very protected surroundings. All the same, Umbridge nearly managed to do in one try what Voldemort has been trying for years to accomplish. Almost makes one think Voldemort has a death wish.

Still working on the worse than death thing.

I've said Voldemort's greatest weakness is fear. I think that's close enough to Dumbledore's take that his greatest weakness is his inability to understand there are fates worse than death. Fear of death is fear of the unknown, at least in his particular situation.

His second greatest weakness is hubris - overweening pride in his own strength, cunning, and magical ability. He had to arrive in Godric's Hollow with the express idea he would make short work of the ballyhooed baby and his upstart parents. Ooops! As weak as he was in The Sorcerer's Stone, he and Quirrell were not supposed to be bested by an 11yo kid. Ooops again!

The cemetery is a glaring example. You mention him giving Harry his wand. Stupid thing to do, of course - no argument there. It's the reason he did it that strikes me as most incredible. He wanted that duel for two purposes: to make an end of Harry and to put on enough of a show in doing so to remove all doubt from the minds of his death eaters that little Harry Potter was in the same league as him.

Pride came into play again when he apparated into the Ministry of Magic - pride and some anger this time. The fact Harry had inadvertently destroyed the prophecy incensed him. He may not even have known at that moment that his death eaters were caught neatly in the death chamber. He certainly didn't stop to consider that Dumbledore was there - and couldn't be bothered to listen when Bellatrix tried to tell him to be wary.

You know, the pride thing was noticeable in CoS as well. He got angry when Harry disputed his claim to be the greatest sorcerer in the world. Even went to the trouble of arguing about it.

Voldemort is gnawed by fear and doubt, and hamstrung by pride and a fierce desire to prove himself. It's going to get worse before it gets better, I think.

One try--which try? Umbridge's "attempt" (if you're referring to the pair of dementors she sent out) failed even more spectacularly than any of Voldemort's attempts.

He's been seconds away from complete victory every time.

Sorcerer's Stone--Quirrell was trying to perform a lethal curse when Harry grabbed him.

Chamber of Secrets--A tooth from the basilisk (a beast Harry should never have been able to kill, even if it was blinded) had shot Harry's arm full of some of the most lethal poison known to man. Even with the wound healed Harry had no weapons and Riddle had Harry's wand. One Unforgivable and it's all over but the shoutin' Instead, Riddle, fixates--to late--on Fawkes and then instinct takes over Harry before Riddle can react.

GoF--Voldie actually CAST a Killing Curse. Even with Harry's remarkable luck, casting a spell at the exact same instant, he should NEVER in a MILLION YEARS have been able to overpower Voldemort on sheer talent and willpower. NEVER. Even conceding that--where did the brains of the two dozen DEs go--vacation? Home to the cookies they left baking? Harry should never have been able to elude them all with nothing but his injured legs, a statue and a single Impedimenta Curse (that actually caught a pair of DEs).

OotP--Wasting no time in the confrontation, Voldemort cast another Killing Curse. Harry didn't react. Dumbledore intervened at the last possible moment to block the spell. On the possession, figuring the odds--Is there ANY way by rights a 15-year-old should be able to overpower and expel one of the most cunning and powerful wizards of all time?

Voldemort meant business all 5 times (yes, Memory-Riddle should count) and best case scenario (GoF), he's barely been able to save face. In all others, he's lucky to escape at all.

Any of these attempts equalled the ambush in effectiveness. In fact, the ambush wasn't even that close to being effective--compare it to the much more dangerous attack by a dementor squad in PoA.

The two of you are very persuasive. I yield to your arguments.

Oh, well.

But give me a chance to think more about Voldemort's possession of Harry.

I'm just after reading this article (http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/thenorthtower/nt01.shtml) point, and it made a great point about the connection between Tom Riddle aka Voldemort, Harry the boy who lived and Dumbledore and I have to admit that I did't take into consideration that exact argument before. This article (Read it if you haven't already done so!) suggests that Harry could vanquish the Voldemort part of Tom Riddle.....I would never ever have put the two together so kudos to you, its a fantastic connection :agree:

what would be worse than death for Voldemort? Not being Voldemort, having to show who he really is? stripping back all the layers of magical transformations????? admitting that he is a mudblood? not being who he thinks he is? Could we equate it to Buffy where Angel gets his soul back (either time) and having to live with what he has done? is this worse than death?

Definitely lots to think about!


Liselle

I read the article. I have to admit I'm annoyed with it. It seems to have been lifted from the second iteration of our prophecy threads. Every point she makes was hashed out and discussed in painful detail here around the same time her article was published.

Hehe PurpleHawk, I was thinking the same thing when I originally read it, "Geez, this is like a Book report on the Prophecy Thread"

Regarding what's worse than death for Voldemort. I think he'd be surprised if he becomes a ghost, just how much worse than being dead it would be for him. Once you're dead in JKR's universe, that's it, no coming back. If Voldemort were a ghost, I believe he would lose most of his supporters, and he would have no magic of his own, so he would exist forever, with no ability to take over the world, so what would be the point of existing any longer. At least in the in-between years, there was hope that he could rise again, but as a ghost, there would be no going back, that's all there would ever be for him.
[of course if you don't think being a ghost counts a being worse than dead, ignore the above]

I read the article. I have to admit I'm annoyed with it. It seems to have been lifted from the second iteration of our prophecy threads. Every point she makes was hashed out and discussed in painful detail here around the same time her article was published.

:huh: I'm not surprised.

Regarding what's worse than death for Voldemort. I think he'd be surprised if he becomes a ghost, just how much worse than being dead it would be for him. Once you're dead in JKR's universe, that's it, no coming back. If Voldemort were a ghost, I believe he would lose most of his supporters, and he would have no magic of his own, so he would exist forever, with no ability to take over the world, so what would be the point of existing any longer.
[of course if you don't think being a ghost counts a being worse than dead, ignore the above]Nicely put, sindatur!

It needn't be something that is objectively worse than being dead, but rather something that is, for Voldemort, worse than being dead. Voldemort's obsession with immortality is intimately linked to his desire for power; perhaps he fears death because it is the only limit to his acquisition of power, or perhaps he desires power in order to use it to escape death. Either way, the two go together for him. To exist, but not to be able to use magic (do ghosts have access to any magic whatsoever?), would break the bond that exists (for Voldemort) between power and (non)death.

Nicely put, sindatur!

It needn't be something that is objectively worse than being dead, but rather something that is, for Voldemort, worse than being dead. Voldemort's obsession with immortality is intimately linked to his desire for power; perhaps he fears death because it is the only limit to his acquisition of power, or perhaps he desires power in order to use it to escape death. Either way, the two go together for him. To exist, but not to be able to use magic (do ghosts have access to any magic whatsoever?), would break the bond that exists (for Voldemort) between power and (non)death.

I don't believe ghosts can use magic, because only wizards can become ghosts, and we've never seen a ghost use any kind of magic. I think being just being stripped of his power wouldn't be worse, because he would still have hope of somehow regaining his magic, as when he forced himself to continue existing in the years in between.

So no magic and no ability to pursue his goals of conquests, with no hope of ever regaining his ability to pursue those goals, would be about the worst thing you do to him. I think at that hopeless stage, he would prefer to cease to exist altogether.

This might the longest "lull" the Layers thread has ever experienced.

Semi-related topic.

Before OotP, JKR gave an interview saying that we would find out why some people became ghosts and others didn't. But she wouldn't give the answer at the time.

Does anyone else wonder why? The answer didn't seem that extraordinary - we had pretty much figured that out from Moaning Myrtle in GoF. I was thinking that maybe this is an overall plot clue and that the scene with Nick was more important than we (or at least I) thought.

Any takers?

I have the impression that when she makes big statements like these, she's talking to children who can't put it all together and intuit the answers the way adults can. Maybe I'm being uncharitable? Maybe there's more to it?

Yeah, that could be it.

I don't know, we could be so desperate for clues that we're making a mountain out of a molehill.

I just thought it was strange :shrug:

Just dropping in here, hope you don't mind. :)

I'v always thought that people become ghosts because they've got some kind of unfinished business. Nick came back because... well, he wasn't properly beheaded? And Myrtle came back because she wanted to haunt Olive Hornby. Or perhaps dying in an unhappy mood makes you become a ghost (heh, doubt it). Nick and Myrtle weren't in cheery moods when they died, were they?

I've also a question about ghosts and whether or not they can physically move anything. We know that Peeves can - then again, he isn't a ghost - but so far there's been no indication that Nick can. When Harry was in trouble with Filch in his second year for tracking mud in, Nick had Peeves drop the Vanishing Cabinet over Filch's office. Perhaps that's only because it wouldn't seem right if Nick caused chaos like that? And at Nick's deathday party the ghosts had to open their mouths and let the food pass through them in order to get an inkling of a taste. It seems as though these ghosts can't touch anything or make anything move - but Myrtle can! She's always splashing around in her bathroom and in the lake - is this just because of the circumstances surrounding her death?

Did Myrtle actually splash or was that just the water splashing? I don't recall anything indicating Myrtle was actually moving the water. I guess I'm saying I don't think ghosts can really touch or manipulate people or objects.

Jess, I think there is a clue in her statement - and it would be just like her to keep it a secret until the last possible moment. That whole conversation with Nick was there for a reason. Okay, the obvious reason is to deal with Harry's passionate desire to see Sirius again and to speak with him... but I think there's more to it.

"If it is destroyed, then he will fall; and his fall will be so low that none can foresee his arising ever again. For he will lose the best part of the strength that was native to him in his beginning, and all that was made or begun with that power will crumble, and he will be maimed forever, becoming a mere spirit of malice that gnaws itself in the shadows, but cannot again grow or take shape... "

This quote seems to fit nicely with the Turn-Voldemort-into-a-Ghost theory. I've mentioned before my desire to see him end up as a powerless something that can never again rise.

This is a ramble, prompted by the umpteenth re-reading of the chapter, "The Only One He Ever Feared" from book 5. It didn't get done in time for the recent lull, but you can wait till the next lull to read it if you like.

Voldemort: There is nothing worse than death, Dumbledore.
Dumbledore: ...there are other ways of destroying a man.
Merely taking your life would not satisfy me...
Your failure to understand that there are things much worse than death has always been your greatest weakness.

I think these clearly stated views on a very profound matter show us the fundamental difference between the two greatest wizards of the time. (I say this knowing Harry's potential for greatness, but thinking he hasn't reached his potential yet) So we are justified in asking what is worse than death?

Almost immediately after the profound-chat-while-duelling, Ms. Rowling gives us a very powerful example of something worse than death. But it is strangely worded, beginning with, "And then Harry's scar burst open. He knew he was dead: It was pain beyond imagining." "He was gone from the hall, he was locked in the coils of a creature with red eyes." "They were fused together, bound by pain, and there was no escape."

And he thinks,"Death is nothing compared to this."

I think it is significant that we are given this particular example immediately after the issue has been raised. Of all things worse than death, this one should have our attention.

But what is it? Is it Harry being possessed by Voldemort? Does it sound similar to Ginny being possessed by Tom Riddle of the Diary? No. Perhaps that is because Tom Riddle of the Diary was not the full equivalent of the current Voldemort. Does it resemble Trelawney's state during a true prophecy. No. Both Ginny and Trelawney are taken over by something, and both have no memory of being in that condition. And neither possession is marked by extreme pain. As far as I can remember, there is no mention of Voldemort's victims being in pain when he possesses them, the snakes and rats, even though we are told their lives are shortened. So we don't know one way or the other about it. But so far, I take this fusing of Harry and the red-eyed creature to be at least something more than possession, if not something different. The pain it causes Harry seems a unique thing, and it is very likely an extreme form of the pain Harry normally feels through his scar.

Among the things I find strange about this passage is this: "He knew he was dead." How can being dead be worse than death? Well, it could be simply that the extreme pain was beyond any life experience and so he thought it was death. It could also be that knowing you are dead, while at the same time you know you are alive, is something worse than actual death. Pretty flaky concept, I agree, but we are being shown Harry fused with the creature with red eyes. And I suspect that is the key to this. I think this condition is what Tom Riddle Jr yielded himself to when he became Lord Voldemort. I think if Tom Riddle Jr were allowed to speak as Tom Riddle Jr. he would be saying things that Lord Voldemort normally doesn't say. He would say, "Kill me now, Dumbledore." He would say,"If death is nothing, Dumbledore, kill the boy..." (Isn't that strange? Dumbledore never said death is nothing, he only said there are things worse.) He would say, "Let him kill us...End, it Dumbledore...Death is nothing compared to this..."

You're all upset because you know that Tom Riddle Jr isn't saying those things. Lord Voldemort is, right? He's misquoting Dumbledore about death being nothing just to taunt him, right? He's trying to get Dumbledore to kill Harry. Some of those quotes were Harry thinking for himself, right? The thing is, the two are fused together. I changed the speaker of the words in order to show a different perspective, and to provoke discussion. Because I think there is a lot more to this than simply Voldemort possessing Harry for the moment, and Harry ousting Voldemort. He was fused with a creature with red eyes. Is that what you normally think of when you think of Lord Voldemort? Both Harry and Lord Voldemort were in the hall of the ministry of magic. Harry was not in the hall while in the coils of the creature. Breaking the union with the creature was a remarkable feat, but I suspect that Harry will have to use the union to subdue the creature.

Anyway, I'd rather have thought through this more before presenting it. I know many have already had most of these ideas. I'm also sure there will be objections to such things as my comparison of Trelawney's prophecy to a possession. I can't take the ideas any further. I'm hoping that your comments will help me see more of the implications. If you think this has been just covering old ground, then treat it as a summation, maybe. If I were making money from this, you could accuse me of plagiarism, because so much of what I've read here is part of it.

I think you should start a thread on this subject as you seem unable to discuss anything else. It's okay to focus on one thing. But Layers is intended to be a little more fluid. Layers is here is to provide a place where thoughts and concepts can evolve without "topic" restrictions, and then be brought for further discussion to threads devoted to that subject. Do you need help to start a thread?

If a new thread is going to be made, I'd sure like to know. Barmy's post has had my rapt attention for the past twenty minutes. I'd like a chance to respond.

WeasleyIsOurKing - You're more than welcome here :) I'm with you on the water thing (she causes a flood in the girl's bathroom - you have to be able to move water in order to so this!) It seems strange that she is the only ghost we know of that can do this.

Also on ghosts, we've all noticed the Sturgis Podmore/Sir Properly Decapitated Podmore connection. As well as the plethora of information about Nick's death. Are the ghosts we've met already going to play in?

purplehawk, I like your LotR connection. Nice parallel.

I don't remember Myrtle causing a flood. It was the diary that caused the flood, wasn't it?

Thanks, Jess. I have a feeling we're getting closer and closer to realization of that parallel as we approach the last two books.

I'm not sure about ghosts having power but isn't Peeves afraid of the Bloody Baron? Why? What could he do to Peeves?

I don't remember Myrtle causing a flood. It was the diary that caused the flood, wasn't it?

Thanks, Jess. I have a feeling we're getting closer and closer to realization of that parallel as we approach the last two books.

At nearly headless Nicks party, Hermione tells Harry that the toilet has been out of order as Moaning Myrtle has being having Tantrums and flooding the bath room,
After Peeves had upset Myrtle and she returned to kill herself forgetting she was already dead, Ron, Hermione and Harry went to visit her in the bathroom, she got upset when Ron pointed out that she was already dead, she slashed them with water as she dived into her U-bend, later in the book she flooded the bathroom when Ginny chucked the diary through her head, so she must have some way to interact with the real world, or at least she can when she is feeling strong emotions

Froggy, good point about the emotional element. Maybe this is because she died young?

We've seen the magic of underage witches and wizards do things they didn't intend under emotional duress. Could be the same thing is happening here?

WeasleyIsOurKing - You're more than welcome here :)

Hehe. :D

I agree with the "emotions" idea as well. Perhaps all ghosts have the ability to do things like Myrtle when they're feeling stressed. Or Myrtle could just be special.

Maybe because of the way she died? Killed by a basilisk is a more unusual death - could be it leaves a ghost slightly different?

BTW I know you're used to the love thread, we can say nasty things about your ideas if it will make you feel more at home here ;)

We've seen the magic of underage witches and wizards do things they didn't intend under emotional duress. Could be the same thing is happening here?


A twelve or thirteen year old spending fifty years stuck in the emotional roller coaster that is puberty, never moving on, she might not have the hormones to worry about, but the emotional legacy of dying and being stuck in that angst, no wonder she goes off on one at the drop of a hat, poor Myrtle

A twelve or thirteen year old spending fifty years stuck in the emotional roller coaster that is puberty, never moving on, she might not have the hormones to worry about, but the emotional legacy of dying and being stuck in that angst, no wonder she goes off on one at the drop of a hat, poor Myrtle

My God! The true definition of hell on earth :lol:

My God! The true definition of hell on earth :lol:

That might be Dumbledore's meaning "there are things worse then death," perhaps the Dark Lord is to come back as a muggle, ( a Muggle girl,) and be magically stuck at that age, imagine it, forever stuck listening to boy bands and being a bridesmaid but never a bride (if you understand me)

Good thought. Being young and not prepared to die sounds like part of it, too. But what exactly can ghosts do?

Maybe Harry needs to ask someone else.

The idea of ghosts choosing to stay behind, in Nick's case, because he was afraid to move on, is interesting. (searching frantically through tome.) He says he is neither here nor there.

I wonder what this means in view of the fact that each of the houses has a ghost associated with it. Hmmmm ......

Could Myrtle be on her way to becoming a poltergeist?

That might be Dumbledore's meaning "there are things worse then death," perhaps the Dark Lord is to come back as a muggle, ( a Muggle girl,) and be magically stuck at that age, imagine it, forever stuck listening to boy bands and being a bridesmaid but never a bride (if you understand me)


I do! You're cracking me up! Only thing is, I thought the diary stopped up the toilet when Ginny flushed and that caused the flood. I always assumed Ginny, in the course of being in the bathroom to open the Chamber, was the individual who caused the floods.

An interesting thing about the house ghosts. The houses were founded over a thousand years ago. But Nick died in 1492. Only five hundred years ago!

So did all four ghosts come at around the same time or are some more recent than others?

I do! You're cracking me up! Only thing is, I thought the diary stopped up the toilet when Ginny flushed and that caused the flood. I always assumed Ginny, in the course of being in the bathroom to open the Chamber, was the individual who caused the floods.

That might have been the case for the one incident with the diary but according to Hermione, Moaning Myrtle had been having tantrums and flooding the place all year, (this was during Halloween,) now as to whether Hermione means the whole year(since the last Halloween) or the school year so far, that is anyone's guess. I doubt that Ginny caused all the floods, and Myrtle did splash the three with water, so she has some form or substance on occasion

Where did I get the idea that ghosts had unfinished business? I thought it was in the conversation with Nick at the end of OotP, but not so much.

Is it somewhere else or am I reading too many Casper the Friendly Ghost comic books?

Great age has found a weakness in you

:rotfl: Don't knock it.
It must have been all that math. :agree:

So ghosts don't have unfinished business. They just decide not to move on, to remain "neither here nor there."

Nick sure wanted to be accepted on the headless hunt.

Hi Whiz, I remember something about unfinished business as well, for some reason, so maybe unfinished business is what causes some of them to make the choice not to move on (rather than just fear of the great beyond).

Great point on the water and Myrtle, I kinda dismissed it because, I figured my mind had been poisoned by "Movie Magic", but if the text also gives the impression Myrtle affects the water, then it's fair to say she does.

While catching up on the posts, I had the same thought about Myrtle possibly being connected in some way to being a Poltergeist. We know from other stories (do we have any real life information on this) that Poltergeists are in some way attached to children. We haven't been told yet by JKR why Peeves is a Poltergeist, instead of a ghost, or how a Poltergeist is created. So, since strong positive emotion makes a Patronus Corporeal, perhaps strong negative emotion gives ghosts corporeal-ness (probably not a real word, eh?) and/or has something to do with the creation of Poltergeists.

(Let me run with this for a minute)
Say Peeves was a youngster (Like Myrtle) who died an awful death at a young age. He stressed constantly over it, his strong negative emotions started giving him the ability to physically affect his surroundings, until one day he became what he currently is, and now, since he is in this semi-corporeal state and able to affect his surroundings physically, his demeanor changed, and he's now no longer depressed, but rather enjoying himself. Perhaps feeding off the emotions of the students may have something to do with it as well. Also perhaps Myrtle is transforming slower, since she hides out and keeps to herself, not being so much exposed to the emotions of others to feed off.

That's a good thought. Peeves' sense of humor is sophomoric, to say the least. Perhaps he was young when he passed away. Maybe that's got something to do with his being afraid of the Bloody Baron. Like the twins fear their mother?

I'm not sure sophomoric is the word I'd use to describe it. Peeves' sense of humor is actually quite twisted... more along the lines of the truly insane.

Good point.

But sometimes, it reminds me of Fred and George, too.

But what exactly can ghosts do?A good line of inquiry, perhaps.

You are quite right, jessica, Myrtle can create some physical effects with water, it wasn't just the diary stopping up the toilet.

We also know that people do feel, physically, the passing of a ghost through their flesh: it is like ice-cold water.

And they are, still, visible, we have never been told that they can make themselves invisible. So they do interact with light in some way.

And, of course, they talk. (as Nick says, "Yes, I walk and talk, yes.")

But primary is their consciousness, the fact that they remain who they were when they were alive. They think and they experience emotion. We know that Myrtle has taken a bit of a fancy to Harry, for example. We know that Nick feels jealousy and resentment of Podmore.

Hang on, and doesn't Myrtle say that she sometimes gets flushed down the toilet into the lake (don't think too much about the lack of septic treatment!), if someone flushes when she's not expecting it? So the force of the water does have an effect on her. And of course Nick was petrified by the basilisk (though he couldn't be killed).

But I don't really know how all this adds up to anything. I do think that the issue of death is central to what is going to happen in the remaining two books. That the question of what happens after death will be of utmost importance to what will happen to Voldemort. But other than these intuitions (well, more than that, I suppose. I mean, haven't the books been, largely, about accepting death, coming to terms with loss. After all, Harry is an orphan.)

Anybody make anything of these scattered thoughts?

Come to think of it, Nick turned black from the basilisk's stare, didn't he?

I do think that the issue of death is central to what is going to happen in the remaining two books. That the question of what happens after death will be of utmost importance to what will happen to Voldemort.

I agree with you there. We're surely going to see JK's vision of a fate worse than death in how she ultimately disposes of Voldemort.

Hard to believe there's anything worse than being digested by a dementor. Anyone think the ghosts will be important in the war? Maybe they have something to do with the other means the Order has of communicating.

Hard to believe there's anything worse than being digested by a dementor. Anyone think the ghosts will be important in the war? Maybe they have something to do with the other means the Order has of communicating.

I'm not sure about that first line Whiz, while it sounds truly horrifying, is the body left behind (or the soul being digested) aware of the circumstances. If you're no longer self aware after a dementor kisses you, it might not be so horrible as you would imagine. Many things could be truly more horrific, such as watching something horrible happen to your entire family, while you could do nothing but watch. If on the other hand, you are self aware, it could be as horrible as being buried alive (IE: Voodoo Zombies), without the hope of ever actually dieing, which could be incredibly horrendous. Movie scenes with someone being buried alive are some of the scariest scenes I've ever seen, and I'm only a little claustrophobic.

I definitely believe Dumbledore will find uses for them, if an invasion of Hogwarts occurs.

Interesting idea about using them for communicating. Do we know if the ghosts are free to come and go from Hogwarts, or if they are "stuck" to Hogwarts? We've never seen a Hogwarts ghost, for example in Hogsmeade have we?

If you're no longer self aware after a dementor kisses you, it might not be so horrible as you would imagine.
Good point.

I definitely believe Dumbledore will find uses for them, if an invasion of Hogwarts occurs.

Interesting idea about using them for communicating. Do we know if the ghosts are free to come and go from Hogwarts, or if they are "stuck" to Hogwarts? We've never seen a Hogwarts ghost, for example in Hogsmeade have we?
I don't think so. Where do they all ride on the headless hunt? Do they leave the grounds?

Well we know Myrtle left Hogwarts ( to go torment Olive Hornby) and was forced to come back - so she at least used to be free to leave.

Don't know about the others.

Maybe ghosts can't wander very far from where they died. But, if that's the case, Sir Nick would have been nearly beheaded at Hogwarts?!!?

Ghosts can go wherever they bloody well want so long as they don't specifically single out one person or family and make it the object of their afterlives to terrorize those specific victims. Remember that Myrtle wasn't restricted to her dying zone until Olive Hornby (or whatever her married name was at that point) filed a formal complaint with the Ministry.

OOOh, the Headless Hunt, I hadn't thought about that, probably that is offgrounds, since I believe there are Ghosts who aren't resident at Hogwarts involved in it. Great Point.

Myrtle left to torment Olive Hornsby, I missed that, I thought she just tormented her on School Grounds, another very good point. Been too long since reading that, apparently :elaugh:

Those two examples leave me to believe it's safe to assume they come and go as they please, and only reside at Hogwarts because they want to, rather than being bound to it.

Thanks for your input as well Jormundt.

Just came from the anagrams thread and, I'd forgotten about this.

Hogwarts = ghost war

:wow:

I am not sure where this idea that ghosts are stuck in one place, apart from Myrtle zooming of to torment Olive Hornby, Nearly headless Nick had quite a few non-resident ghosts at his Death-day party, the leader of the Headless Hunt Sir Patrick Delany-Podmore came with a group of his huntsmen, there was also group of gloomy nuns, a ragged man wearing chains, somewhere in that group was a knight with an arrow sticking out of his forehead, plus the ghost who tried to eat the rotten food and the ghost that Nick tried to impress, the Wailing Widow from Kent, they must be allowed to travel, after all the Wailing Widow came all the way from Kent,

As the party was held at Halloween, they might be restricted to travelling on that one night, perhaps Myrtle spent a few months haunting the toilets (she died some time before the summer holidays 1942) then on Halloween she sped off to haunt Olive, only to be forced by the ministry to stop haunting Olive, so on the next Halloween she came back to the school,

I myself don't support this, as, unless all ghosts share a official death-day, no one would be able to go to a death-day party of someone who died for example in March, Nor would Nearly Headless Nick be able to participate in the headless hunt (if he was fully headless that is)

Nice Snape.

So the ghosts can move around. At least on Halloween, anyway. Besides, why would Nick have been beheaded, (almost) on Hogwarts grounds?
I wonder if there was a Gryffindor house ghost before Nick?

I wonder if there was a Gryffindor house ghost before Nick?

Course there was. Listen to the Sorting Hat's song :p

The houses were founded at the time of the four founders and Nick's only been dead for 500 years.

...anyone wonder WHY there are ghosts "assigned" to the houses at all or is that just me!

I wouldn't say that Nick was beheaded at Hogwarts either, if Nick has only been a ghost for 500 years or so and Hogwarts was founded over 1000 years ago, it wouldn't be a very plesant experience for students to watch a beheading.....unless your interests tend that way of course!

Just going back to what was said earlier on about Peeves and his possible metamorphisis from ghost to Poltergist...I'm not sure about that personally. THere is another thread lurking somewhere here, its called "New Peeves the Poltergist theory" or something to that. Yes Poltergists are usually attracted by teens and especially girls but they are manifestations of power/emotion, not entities/beings that evolved from one thing to another. A poltergist is "summoned" and controlled by a troubled soul, yes it could be myrtle but it could also be the fact that Hogwarts is a picnic of hormones and teen angst, course it could be any of the other staff members too like Flich or the Bloody Baron

Liselle

That's another question, why is Peeves afraid of the Slytherin ghost, the Bloody Baron. Is it the Baron who summons the negative energy that is Peeves?

And did all the ghosts arrive at about the same time? Have there always been ghosts at Hogwarts? What was going on 500 years ago when Nick arrived. Oh why didn't I pay more attention in History of Magic class! :upset:

When Nick bit it, Christopher Columbus set in motion the colonization of the New World...Maybe he "discovered" the Americas for the wizarding world first? Maybe he's the Walter Raleigh of the wizarding world or something! :D

Oh! and the movie costuming suggests that the Gray Lady and the Bloody Baron were about 100 years later than Nick or more. The Fat Friar could be older than Chaucer, the one from the Middle Ages and our oldest ghost. But that's only if you trust the movie costuming. :shrug:

Costumes! So they're from different eras.

We seem to be having another of those lulls here... Have we unwrapped all the layers, or are we just brain-dead?

Barometer must be dropping.

Any thoughts on Mark Evans? Is he related to Harry? Why did Dumbledore say Harry had no other relatives, especially on his mother's side if there is a Mark five years younger than Harry?

Barometer must be dropping.

Any thoughts on Mark Evans? Is he related to Harry? Why did Dumbledore say Harry had no other relatives, especially on his mother's side if there is a Mark five years younger than Harry?

No and no. Because there are no other relatives, on either side of Harry's family tree, and Mark is just a kid in the neighborhood who happened to cross paths with Big D and his gang. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Barometer must be dropping.

Any thoughts on Mark Evans? Is he related to Harry? Why did Dumbledore say Harry had no other relatives, especially on his mother's side if there is a Mark five years younger than Harry?
Barring some secret adoption in the family that even Dumbledore does not know about, i do not see how he could be a relative.

I am bothered by Harry's whole family tree issue. I can accept( even though it is quite hard) that a young married couple can only have three surviving relatives they never talk to and a son, but I have noticed that there has been some strange comments made about harry's family tree. I would say that really Sirius and Dumbledore would be the only two characters that we can rely on to tell us about Harry's family. Now, notice that they have both been very careful in the information they reveal. Neither one has ever said that Harry has no other relatives besides the Dursleys. Sirius tell us that Harry is the last Potter. Sirius also makes it clear in discussing his family tree that relatives are not the same as family. Dumbledore has said that the Dursleys are Harry's last remaining relatives on on Harry's mother's side. Dumbledore has also said that Harry has no other family.
Now that leaves a large loophole( which would hopefully leave Mark Evans out). Following Sirius' and Dumbledore's comments, Harry could quite possibly have female relatives on his father's side that no not consdier Harry family.
So maybe Mark Evans is just a way to disrtact us form the possibility that someone is a relative. But then again there is always secret adoptions....:whistle:

All we know about Lily's side of the family is that Petunia is her closest relative and Harry's, we know this from Phoenix when DD explains the blood protection....this bothers me as Dudley surely shares harry's blood too but Dumbledore says that he put his faith in his (Harry's) mothers blood ~Petunia. COrrect me if I'm wrong but unless Dudders was adopted wouldn't he count towards Harry's blood protection if Lily got the chop? would he not be Harry's only relative with Evans blood running through him? Otherwise thats a pretty big gamble with only Petunia.....

Course there's always the case that while Petunia is the closest living relative on his mothers side(mothers sister...that means Lily had no other brothers or sisters) he may have other cousins so that Dudley would not be Harry's closest relation if Petunia died....there could well be other Potters out there.

I'm not sure on Mark Evans at all, his name was slipped in and I didn't notice it the first time I read Phoenix, so I'm caught between trying to think of unlikely ways he could be related to Harry and thinking its a red-herring to get us all asking questions again!

Liselle

"... I put my trust, therefore, in your mother's blood. I delivered you to her sister, her only remaining relative."

So "closest relative" won't cut the mustard. He clearly says only remaining relative.

yes but Dudley (unless adopted) must also be a relative of Lily's as her sisters son....I'm probably just nit picking though but its a point that irritates me

I concede that point. As a child himself, however, Dudley would hardly be in a position to offer Harry a roof over his head.

true but what I'm getting more at is that should something happen to Petunia Harry would still be safe at Privet drive as Dudley would hold some of her blood and therefore still be a blood relative of Harry's on Lily's side so Lily's protection would still be "recharged". Yes its all conjecture I just thought I'd bring it up

true but what I'm getting more at is that should something happen to Petunia Harry would still be safe at Privet drive as Dudley would hold some of her blood and therefore still be a blood relative of Harry's on Lily's side so Lily's protection would still be "recharged". Yes its all conjecture I just thought I'd bring it up

I don't think so, Liselle. Petunia had to accept Harry into her home and, in doing so, she sealed the charm Dumbledore had placed upon him. This is discussed in "The Lost Prophecy Chapter" of OotP.

"But she took you," Dumbledore cut across him. "She have taken you grudgingly, furiously, unwillingly, bitterly, yet still she took you, and in doing so, she sealed the charm I placed upon you. Your mother's sacrifice made the bond of blood the strongest shield I could give you."

If this means what I interpret it to mean, Dudley would have to agree to assume his mother's responsibility relative to Harry's safety.

fair enough, I was really just kind of wondering and as I said, its conjecture. Anyway for all we know there could be another cousin out there from James' side....as we know so little about his side of the family. Although the charm wouldn't work with them I know.

Back to the original question, I've not a clue about Mark Evans, I suspect that he could be a red herring

I think so, too, Liselle.

In PS/SS, I think that Dumbledore says that the Dursleys are the only family Harry has, rather than that Petunia is his only living relative. He may have said that somewhere else, though. Interesting that there may be female Potter relatives around.

How about if Lily is the older daughter. Her mother, a muggle, was married to a wizard or a squib who was Lily's father. Something happens to husband #1 and Mom marries Mr Evans. Mr Evans adopts Lily, (to protect her?) and he and mom have Petunia.

In this scenario, the Evanses are related to Petunia and Dudley, but they are not blood relatives of Harry's.

And I've always found it odd how quickly the Evanses took to having a witch in the family. Petunia always seemed to feel as though they thought Lily was pretty darn special. And what ever did happen to them? Hmmmmm..........

But then Mark's age, 10 does make one wonder if he'll be in Hogwarts next book ... I mean, year. What if he is a wizard? Are the Evanses one of those famililies that produces more than one magical person?

Still, unless Mark and his family are recently arrived from another planet, it makes a liar of Dumbledore for Harry to have any living relatives.

Dumbledore would not be a liar. just uninformed. Dumbledore has always said that he will not lie, just refuse to answer certian questions. That establishes that we cas trust him to tell the truth. We just can't be certian that he know the whole truth or that he has told us everything he knows. If Harry does have any other relatives then most likely dumbledore knows and just has neglected to mention it. i am sure there is quite a bit he has not mantioned to Harry. Such as how Harry's aunt was convinced to keep Harry. I am also sure that Dumbledore is well aware of why Harry's aunt knows as much as she does about wizarding ( I seriously have my doubts she overheard a conversation about dementors). He is just not volunteering that information .... You would think Dumbledore would have learned his lesson by now....

In PS/SS, I think that Dumbledore says that the Dursleys are the only family Harry has, rather than that Petunia is his only living relative. He may have said that somewhere else, though. Interesting that there may be female Potter relatives around.

But what is the real difference between the two statements? The "only family" Harry has left or "only living relative" seem to me to say the same thing. I read some of the old Mark Evans thread and, for the life of me, I can't see what all the fuss is about. I'll probably have egg all over my face when book six comes out with the Sorting Hat doing its thing with this Mark Evans child :lol: but, for now, I'm content to ignore all the speculation.

The difference between relatives and family is made in OOTP by Sirius. On p 114 of the american ed, Sirius specifies that Belatrix Lestrange is not his family, but does acknowledge that she is a relative of his. Sirius makes it quite clear that there is a difference, which allows for the loophole in Harry's case. But Mark Evans would not qualify under these circumstances as we see the clues so far.

I think Sirius was differentiating between family he felt close to and family (relatives) he disliked. All relatives are family, but one's family may include non-relatives... as in friends who are perhaps closer than family. In Sirius' case, the Potters would qualify as non-related family.

I don't think this is much of a loophole. Either you're related or your not. If you are, you are family whether or not you and your relatives wish to claim each other.

Catching up, sorry for the late reply.

Yes, Dudley would indeed have Harry's mother's blood, but, that blood would also be diluted with Vernon's blood, so the blood bond between HArry and Dudley, would not be as strong as the blood bond beyond Harry and Petunia.

Now I disagree. Family are those who have care and concern for you ( and vice versa) wether they appear to or not. Family does not have to be relatives, just as relative do not have to be family.
However you define family and relatives is your choice but look at Sirius' quote: "Does it matter that she is my cousin?" snapped Sirius. "As far as I am concerned, they're not may family. She's (Belatrix) certianly not my family. I haven't seen her since I was your age, unless you count the glimpse of her Comming into Azkaban. D'you think that I am proud of having relatives like her?"

Notice that Sirius denies her as family but accepts that she is a relative. there is a fine difference between the two as far as Sirius is concerned.

I think that plays into what I posted earlier, harp. Sirius is disowning her as family, despite the fact she is indeed a member of his family, as evidenced by the tapestry. The act of disowning her does not change the fact they are both related to each other and members of the same family. Sirius' mother disowned him, too, but he still got the house because he was the last Black family member alive at the time.

Sindatur, Dudley's blood would be diluted with Dursley blood but I think he would still have some of the same gene pool. Perhaps enough to keep Harry alive.

I think that plays into what I posted earlier, harp. Sirius is disowning her as family, despite the fact she is indeed a member of his family, as evidenced by the tapestry. The act of disowning her does not change the fact they are both related to each other and members of the same family. Sirius' mother disowned him, too, but he still got the house because he was the last Black family member alive at the time.

Sindatur, Dudley's blood would be diluted with Dursley blood but I think he would still have some of the same gene pool. Perhaps enough to keep Harry alive.

I quite agree Purplehawk, the way I read the reply I was responding to, it sounded like that person was of the belief that Dudley's blood didn't count, so I was merely expanding, meaning I believed there was still a possibility that Dudley's blood may still work, if something happened to Petunia. Not as strong a bond as Petunia, but still something there. My apologies, if it appeared I was discounting Dudley's connection to Harry.

But Sirius is not on the tapestry at all anymore. His family status has been removed, not Belatrix. He has the house because a family member was not named to get the house. Her has it because he is the next relative. Kreature lets us know that Mrs. black would not be happy with the use of the house.

But Sirius is not on the tapestry at all anymore. His family status has been removed, not Belatrix. He has the house because a family member was not named to get the house. Her has it because he is the next relative. Kreature lets us know that Mrs. black would not be happy with the use of the house.

You can't remove family status by blasting a hole in a tapestry. Tapestries don't determine who is family and who isn't. Blood, genes, and DNA determine those relationships. The fact that old bat burned Sirius' name off the tapestry means nothing more than she was mad enough and evil enough to disown her own son.

Just thought I'd drop in to say I'm downloading the pages I've missed and the catch-up post is coming soon. All the really nasty exams over (including French Oral which ought to be banned by Health and Safety regulations). I can't wait to get back to writing something interesting which I actually know something about after a fortnight of writing sobre mis vacaciones en 100 palabras and giving descriptions of the Haber process.

Did anyone else think it was odd that both Sirius and Tonks had been removed from the tapestry, but Kreacher will only take orders from Sirius.

Sirius says that the reason Kreacher will not take orders from Tonks is because she had been removed from the tapestry but he himself has also been removed.\

Am I making sense?

Did anyone else think it was odd that both Sirius and Tonks had been removed from the tapestry, but Kreacher will only take orders from Sirius.

Sirius says that the reason Kreacher will not take orders from Tonks is because she had been removed from the tapestry but he himself has also been removed.\

Am I making sense?

Hi Jessica, isn't that because Sirius is named Black, and also the legal heir of the family home, so Kreacher can't use the tapestry as a loop hole, like he can with Tonks.

Yeah, I was just curious if there was something more to it. JKR made a point of saying it. But then again, it's a long book. She said a lot of things.

You can't remove family status by blasting a hole in a tapestry. Tapestries don't determine who is family and who isn't. Blood, genes, and DNA determine those relationships.But blood, genes and DNA, particularly the first, are also open to interpretation. Think about whom we are discussing: the noble and most ancient house of Black, toujours pur. "Blood" for them means something different than it would for, say, the Weasleys. The fact that Tonks is a mudblood surely has something to do with Kreacher's unwillingness to obey her.

While I quite agree that unrelated people can become one's family, while one's blood relations can be somehow not family, it would seem that the protection put in place by Dumbledore and employing the force of Lily's sacrifice does make use of blood: as much as the Weasleys are more like family to Harry than are the Dursleys, nevertheless, it is via Petunia, and, potentially, Dudley that the protection is maintained. But, should something happen to Petunia, if Dudley doesn't willingly agree to keep Harry as his foster-brother, then there would be no more protection.

Hi Phoenix. Glad to see you back! :tu:

They're all interrelated. That's a fact. They are also at war with each other in midst of familial ties like blood, genes and DNA. Andromeda and her two sisters are another glaring example, as are the Weasley's pureblood ties to the Malfoys.

Despite all the hangling, though, they are blood relatives and thus family.

This reminds me a bit of the descendants of Thomas Jefferson here in the United States, where our third president has left both a black and a white line of family. The twain didn't meet until a certain little DNA test was done in 1997 and, at long last, the black descendants were welcomed to Monticello for the annual "family" reunion. I say "welcomed," but it should be noted they were not welcomed by all Jefferson's descendants, many of whom are desperately seeking any excuse, however flimsy, to disprove the fact the president sired a number of children by Sally Hemings.

But blood, genes and DNA, particularly the first, are also open to interpretation. Think about whom we are discussing: the noble and most ancient house of Black, toujours pur. "Blood" for them means something different than it would for, say, the Weasleys. The fact that Tonks is a mudblood surely has something to do with Kreacher's unwillingness to obey her.

While I quite agree that unrelated people can become one's family, while one's blood relations can be somehow not family, it would seem that the protection put in place by Dumbledore and employing the force of Lily's sacrifice does make use of blood: as much as the Weasleys are more like family to Harry than are the Dursleys, nevertheless, it is via Petunia, and, potentially, Dudley that the protection is maintained. But, should something happen to Petunia, if Dudley doesn't willingly agree to keep Harry as his foster-brother, then there would be no more protection.
Actually Tonks would be a halfblood, Kreature will not take orders from Tonks because she was never on the family tapestry. She was never acknowledges as a mamber of the family. The difference is that Sirius was at one time considered a member of the family.
There must be some distinction between family and a relative or else there would have been no point in Sirius being disowned my his mother. It would have been meaningless words.
I agree with the assessment that if something were to happen to Petunia, Dudley would have to acccept Harry as a family member for it to work.

Maybe part of the confusion lies in the term "disown" which is different from "disinherit."

Sirius' mother disowned him, but he inherited the house because he apparently had not been disinherited.

As for Tonks', the next interesting question becomes, why did Kreacher take orders from Fred and George? Is is a pureblood thing? Or was he aware that they were related to the Blacks?

Hmmm.. now that is puzzling... We were told that the weasley's would not have been anywhere on the tapesry either. Maybe Kreature forgot? :tu: Siriusly, that is quite odd... Maybe it was because they were actually living in the house of an extended period of time.

It may be that Mrs. Black, or the Black family, is more interested in seeing their line survive than in disinheriting Sirius. After all, even if he is a blood-traitor, maybe his child, were he to have one, would come back into the family fold and redeem the bloodline.

Which is probably why he wasn't disinherited.

And I know I'm a broken record on this point, but I reject the idea that either Harry or Tonks is a half blood. They both had two magical parents. But one parent was muggleborn. At least, we're sure that's Tonks' status. The only way Harry could be a half blood would be if both his parents were half bloods, and we would really have been led down the garden path if that turns out to be the case.

Good point. Then they would not have to accept sirius, but there is some hope in the future, as remote as it may be.

But Ted Tonks is a muggle isn't he?

I was pretty sure about that :shrug:

I have to admit to not caring too much about the labels half-blood, etc. I doubt she'll delve into it too much.

One other thing on the tapestry that struck me is that Narcissa and Bellatrix are sisters. Given what we know of Narcissa, does anyone else think she's even worse than we've been led to believe?

I don't care for the labels either. I took half blood to mean anyone who is not muggleborn and can not trace their family back many generations as wizards only, with no immediate muggle relations. Half blood would describe anyone else regardless of the actual presentage... but anyway....


In reading the first four books i pictured Narcissa as just some trophy wife. Someone to makes her husband look good and bear children. After learning her family tree, i would say that she is just as horrible as anyone else in he family.

I'm pretty sure Ted was a muggleborn wizard. I think ...... ???!

Narcissa is still a closely held mystery. Her name suggests vanity, and we know Kreacher ran to her to betray Sirius. But, she dotes on her son and wants him in Hogwarts, even though Lucius wanted to send Draco to Durmstrang. What do they know? Would Durmstrang have been safer in the case of a war? Why would she let Draco go to a school headmastered by Dumbledore, except that it gives the Malfoys some access to the goings on there?

Strange.

Ted Tonks is muggleborn.

I do not think that she was considering the possibility that voldemort may be around anytime soon in deciding where to send Draco to school. I think she just honnestly wanted him closer to home. I doubt Lucius was either, but it may have been a consideration for him. Lucius probally did not want his son to mix with non purebloods anyway. Anything dark he would want draco to know he surely could teach himself. Lucius is careful not to let his son know too much

Lucius is careful not to let his son know too much

That's a good point. He keeps Draco on the edge of darkness just as Dumbledore does with Harry. We know why Harry can't be told everything, but why is Draco uninformed? Are they afraid he'll spill the beans?

Lucius knows how to manipulate people. He does not want to look suspicious. He is just protecting himself, not draco. Dumbledore is trying to protect Harry.
Part of sending Draco to Howarts could have been a was to make himself look reputable in public. Sending draco to drumstrang could have looked fishy.

Well, Draco does seem to spill the beans whenever he is told something so it seems likely that Lucius is just being prudent on that score.

harp230 makes a good point about Durmstrang. Also it seems to me that Hogwarts is a little more prestigious and the Malfoys are all about prestige.

I'm pretty sure Ted was a muggleborn wizard. I think ...... ???!"Andromeda's sisters are still here because they made lovely, respectable pure-blood marriages, but Andromeda married a Muggleborn, Ted Tonks, so --"

Sirius mimed blasting the tapestry with a wand and laughed sourly.
If Andromeda was blasted off when she married Ted, then it is logical that her child/children would not be on the tapestry. And as Sirius says:
"I see Tonks isn't on here. Maybe that's why Kreacher won't take orders from her - he's supposed to do whatever anyone in the family asks him...."
When does Kreacher obey Fred and George?

As for Lucius, Draco and Durmstrang, I agree with harp230 that it would look fishy if Lucius sent Draco to Durmstrang. Not to mention that Lucius might not have had the most pleasant of feelings about Karkaroff the traitor, even if he didn't betray Lucius.

And Draco is a complete blabbermouth. If Lucius has any brains, which he does, then of course he wouldn't tell his son anything important, unless it is information that he want to get out.

It's interesting that we see so little of Narcissa. Do you suppose that she's the one pulling the strings in the Malfoy family? After all, Lucius wanted Draco to go to Durmstrang and she preferred to keep him closer to home. So Draco goes to Hogwarts. Somehow this seems like a clue ... or two.

Regarding Kreacher Obeying Fred and George, if I remember right, didn't they make some off-hand crack, like go polish your ears (Not exactly this statement, but something in this vein), and he ran off to do something, so it subjective as to wether he was actually following orders, or he was just manipulating the situation, in order to get away from them (Foreshadowing of the way when Sirius told him Get Out, he manipulated that to go run off to Narcissa?)?

On pgs 108 to 109, OotP Am Ed, Kreacher is in the parlor with Fred, George, Ginny, Ron, Hermione and Harry. He only responds when Fred and George address him, and he bows deeply and respectfully to both of them, but no one else.

I can't remember if we see him ignoring Tonks, or if we only hear Sirius mention that he won't take orders from her.

On pgs 108 to 109, OotP Am Ed, Kreacher is in the parlor with Fred, George, Ginny, Ron, Hermione and Harry. He only responds when Fred and George address him, and he bows deeply and respectfully to both of them, but no one else.

I can't remember if we see him ignoring Tonks, or if we only hear Sirius mention that he won't take orders from her.

That is strange, and doesn't make much sense, what difference is there between Fred/George and Ron? Perhaps the twins taught Kreacher some respect the "hard way" that we never saw?

Maybe. He doesn't respond to Ginny or Ron, yet he shows Fred and George pretty much the same respect he shows to Sirius. ???:huh:

Maybe Ron and Ginny are adopted?

Wait! Wait!

When Ron gets his prefect badge, Molly says, "Well that's all of you."

Maybe it's Fred and George who are adopted?!

Maybe it's Fred and George who are adopted?!
That could be true. It makes sense if you put the Molly quote and the behaviour of Kreacher towards Fred and George together. Maybe they were adopted from somebody in the Black-family?

I don't know. . .

Not to be too skeptical but they've got the Weasley hair. I mean all seven of them look alike. It just doesn't make sense to me that they wouldn't be blood relations.

I guess I might be open to them being cousins to the Weasleys with some more Black thrown in but then, if they're off the tapestry than we're back where we started with Tonks.

That could be true. It makes sense if you put the Molly quote and the behaviour of Kreacher towards Fred and George together. Maybe they were adopted from somebody in the Black-family?


It is suddenly suspicious. Hmmmm....
I think I'll go back and take another look at the twins. Kreacher refers to them as "unnatural little beasts." Is that because they're twins? Or does he know something about them that we don't know? :huh:

On pgs 108 to 109, OotP Am Ed, Kreacher is in the parlor with Fred, George, Ginny, Ron, Hermione and Harry. He only responds when Fred and George address him, and he bows deeply and respectfully to both of them, but no one else.
I don't know, whizbang, it seems to me that Kreacher responds simply because Fred directly addresses him, which no one else did. It is true that he doesn't respond to Hermione when she addresses him, but that is either because she is a "Mudblood" or out of the shock of it being Harry Potter to whom she has introduced him. Unless there is some other example, I am not convinced that Kreacher "obeys" Fred and George, simply because he answered Fred when addressed.

And yes, I think they are "unnatural little beasts" simply because they are twins.

It's interesting that we see so little of Narcissa. Do you suppose that she's the one pulling the strings in the Malfoy family? After all, Lucius wanted Draco to go to Durmstrang and she preferred to keep him closer to home. So Draco goes to Hogwarts. Somehow this seems like a clue ... or two.Well, I wouldn't be completely surprised if we find that Narcissa has plans of her own, independently of Lucius. Whether this means she's the one wearing the pants in the family, as it were, I can't really say. Just because Narcissa is strong doesn't mean that Lucius must therefore be weak.

I don't know, whizbang, it seems to me that Kreacher responds simply because Fred directly addresses him, which no one else did. It is true that he doesn't respond to Hermione when she addresses him, but that is either because she is a "Mudblood" or out of the shock of it being Harry Potter to whom she has introduced him. Unless there is some other example, I am not convinced that Kreacher "obeys" Fred and George, simply because he answered Fred when addressed. Probably, but Ron and Ginny both addressed him together. They told him not to call Hermione a mudblood and he certainly didn't respond to them as he did to both Fred and George. His reaction is the same as it is to both Hermione and Harry. He keeps muttering as though they can't hear him. However, I see your point.
And yes, I think they are "unnatural little beasts" simply because they are twins.:lol: There's definitely something about those two. But, for all we know, Sirius and Regulus might be twins, as well.

Well, I wouldn't be completely surprised if we find that Narcissa has plans of her own, independently of Lucius. Whether this means she's the one wearing the pants in the family, as it were, I can't really say. Just because Narcissa is strong doesn't mean that Lucius must therefore be weak.

I agree, but it may be that Narcissa is the one with the connections.:huh:

I just briefed through the responses, and I agree with Phoenixsong that the twins pay more attention to him therefore Kreacher bows to them. Kreacher doesn't get attention from Sirius and when he does its to throw him out or yell at him with a mean indifference, as if he wasn't there. As for Hermione, well, if you notice, when Hermione spoke to Kreacher to introduce Harry, Kreacher was amazed and appalled at the same time that she dared speak to him. Yet he doesn't acknowledge Harry. He still responds to Hermione because she does pay attention to him.

He doesn't answer her, or bow as he did when addressed by Fred and George. But that doesn't seem surprising. What surprises me is when both Ron and Ginny speak to him directly, and he virtually ignores them.

I'm scanning the book. When Molly discovers that Ron is a prefect, she says, "That's everyone in the family!"
"What are Fred and I, next door neighbors?" said George indignantly, as his mother pushed him aside and flung her arms around her youngest son.

:huh: All the family?! What exactly are Fred and George. Something from a kettle?

There's definitely something about those two. But, for all we know, Sirius and Regulus might be twins, as well.



That's it, Fred and George are actually Sirius and Regulus :elaugh: :rotfl: (Sorry, couldn't resist the setup, LOL)

Seriously though, it could be right on the money, to say it's because they paid him a bit of respect, Dumbledore explained several times how important it was to be respectful of Kreacher.

Fred and George with their being insulted about Molly's "Well that's everyone in the family", I think is simply because they were never a possibility, they are twins and also the school jokers. Ginny doesn't come into, because she hasn't yet been old enough to be considered. Maybe JKR slid a hint in there, but, I think Fred and George are Weasleys through and through.

I do wonder about the Prefects though. Percy seemed to be the only Prefect for Gryffindor before Hermione and Ron were selected, no mention of one in GoF or a lower classmen Prefect before Percy graduated. Is there a Prefect set for each 5th and 6th year class, plus a Head boy and Head girl for 7th year for each house? Or, when one set of Prefects is too old, another set is selected? What exactly are the rules? At first I believed you had a female and a male Prefect in each house, who served until being Head Boy/Girl or graduating, and then a new group was selected the following year. So, only 1 male and 1 female per house, in an authority position at a time (either Prefect or Head), after OotP, I'm now confused.

I always thought the menace bowed to be sarcastic. It's not their place to order him around, and this is his mocking way of telling them so.

Also, if you've read any Homi Bhabha, his view about colonized/colonizer relations and stereotyping seems to apply. By mockingly accepting one's role, one is in fact resisting it (of course, I realize this is a gross simplification of Bhabha's arguments).

He doesn't answer her, or bow as he did when addressed by Fred and George. But that doesn't seem surprising. What surprises me is when both Ron and Ginny speak to him directly, and he virtually ignores them.

I'm scanning the book. When Molly discovers that Ron is a prefect, she says,

:huh: All the family?! What exactly are Fred and George. Something from a kettle?
Ron and Ginny yell at him and dont really treat him politely. They treat him with the same indifference as Sirius. So its interesting too to see that although Kreacher doesn't answer directly to Hermione, he does however still acknowledges her instead of who she is introducing which is the typical response--to bow or to either mock--in the case of Kreacher, reply with sarcasm to the newcomer. He is still under the impression that mudbloods from his mistresses prejudice are still scum of the earth but he still can't help himself from responding to Hermione's kindness.

As for the twins and Molly's reaction, well, Fred and George are a bit of a handful and do disobey Molly a lot. Molly doesn't mind it too much because she knows her boys and tries her best to be strict but doesn't work. Besides if the twins were to become prefects, who'd get it? You can only have one male at a time be a prefect and it wouldn't be fair if Fred got it and George didn't.
Remember when McGonagall threw both out of the Gryffindor Quidditch team?? Its because she couldn't throw one twin out just because the other twin didn't participate. She knew if the other were not restrained he'd also be in on the fight. They are both basically connected to the hip. lol.

by sindatur
Seriously though, it could be right on the money, to say it's because they paid him a bit of respect, Dumbledore explained several times how important it was to be respectful of Kreacher.

Fred and George with their being insulted about Molly's "Well that's everyone in the family", I think is simply because they were never a possibility, they are twins and also the school jokers. Ginny doesn't come into, because she hasn't yet been old enough to be considered. Maybe JKR slid a hint in there, but, I think Fred and George are Weasleys through and through.


I totally agree. The twins as prefects? It would be absolute chaos. Percy was perfect for the role.

Also, if you've read any Homi Bhabha, his view about colonized/colonizer relations and stereotyping seems to apply. By mockingly accepting one's role, one is in fact resisting it (of course, I realize this is a gross simplification of Bhabha's arguments).Well, following Homi's argument, the colonized needn't even be aware that he or she is mimicking the colonizer in order for the critique to be present and effective. Kreacher's deference could, in fact, be "real" but nevertheless show up the bizarreness of the whole system of house-elf servitude.

Ron and Ginny simply yell to Kreacher, "Don't call her a Mudblood!" Perhaps if they had shouted, "Apologize to Hermione" then we would have seen whether or not he would obey them. But I still maintain that just because Kreacher responds to Fred and George doesn't mean he would obey them. Likewise, Sirius , who he does obey, tells him "Keep muttering and I will be a murderer!" which is rather like an order, but it certainly doesn't stop Kreacher from muttering. That may be because there was no explicit order given. I think there are very specific rules about what counts as an order and what doesn't, which is what we have learned from Dobby and from Kreacher, and that house elves can have some freedom by following the letter, if not the spirit of those rules.

No, one does not need to be aware, but that relates more to mimicry than mockery, don't you think? I definitely saw mockery, but maybe I'm seeing what I want to see. I was devastated when JKR gutted Dobby's experience by making him seem more of a house-elf freak for wanting rights. I'd like to see Hermione and her cause actually get off the ground. As JKR has written it since book four, the insistance on elf liberation seems insulting--Hermione is telling the elves what they should want, which is wrong. It would be great if they actually wanted freedom for themselves, offered a practical resistance.

No, one does not need to be aware, but that relates more to mimicry than mockery, don't you think? I definitely saw mockery, but maybe I'm seeing what I want to see. I was devastated when JKR gutted Dobby's experience by making him seem more of a house-elf freak for wanting rights. I'd like to see Hermione and her cause actually get off the ground. As JKR has written it since book four, the insistance on elf liberation seems insulting--Hermione is telling the elves what they should want, which is wrong. It would be great if they actually wanted freedom for themselves, offered a practical resistance.

Ideally yes it would be great if the house elves all wanted freedom, I just hope Hermionie doesn't get too carried away with trying to force freedom on the house elves at Hogwarts though. Her hearts in the right place, just the way in which she is going about it is off.

Dobby for all we know could just be the tip of the iceberg, there probably are other disgruntled/unhappy house elves out there wanting to be free of their masters but its all about their social behaviour, until the under lying problem (as we see it!) is altered i.e. freedom from their masters OR basic rights which seem to have been denied to them; which have been ingrained in their psyche then we will really never know.

No, one does not need to be aware, but that relates more to mimicry than mockery, don't you think? I definitely saw mockery, but maybe I'm seeing what I want to see.I agree, on the first point, but Kreacher's intentions are truly unclear to me.

I think that we are supposed to feel pained by Hermione's efforts, particularly in OotP. It seems to me that rather than try to trick house elves into freedom, or try to reason them into acceptance from some pure position of logic that they don't have available to them, house elves need some concrete examples of the alternative possibilities. We have had an inkling of the terrible things that can happen because of house elf loyalty in the case of Winky. Even if you don't have a problem with Voldemort and the Death Eaters, poor Winky was responsible for the death of the Master she loved because of her compulsion to keep her master's secrets. So that is the negative example. Perhaps we will see Dobby become the shining example of what might happen if house elves are given certain, if not entire, freedoms.

As far as house elf liberation goes, we have no idea why the house elves themselves resist the idea of freedom. It's possible it has as much, or more, to do with magic or magical oppression, as with social or cultural mores. Which is probably the same thing in different words, but ..... :rolleyes:

Still, Dobby is a mystery. How was he able to defy the Malfoys to aid Harry, and why? Dobby is adjusting well to freedom, yet poor Winky is not. Freedom, in her view was the ultimate punishment, and she suffers it appropriately.

Still, in a short space, there are two possible clues that the Weasley twins may somehow be different from the rest of the family, other than in the obvious way of being the clowns.

As far as house elf liberation goes, we have no idea why the house elves themselves resist the idea of freedom. It's possible it has as much, or more, to do with magic or magical oppression, as with social or cultural mores. Which is probably the same thing in different words, but ..... :rolleyes:

Still, Dobby is a mystery. How was he able to defy the Malfoys to aid Harry, and why? Dobby is adjusting well to freedom, yet poor Winky is not. Freedom, in her view was the ultimate punishment, and she suffers it appropriately.



this is interesting.

My speculation is this, since everyone doesn't know Narcissa yet. And Narcissa has been speculated around here as this cold hearted nobletype pureblood woman who is even colder than Bellatrix, I would offer another analysis,
that perhaps she isn't as cold as her sister and knows about Sirius Black, her cousin so therefore sent Dobby? hah. Yeah. Far fetched....because if she did that, she'd have to have her son, Draco do this favor. Hmmm. that is indeed farfetched. These answers need to be filled in the next book.

I think that Hermione is trying to "liberate" herself or something. I know she's absolutely driven to help those oppressed but even those who want to help do go a little far. Maybe by this act she is making a louder statement and will be "heard". As for the house elves resisting freedom, maybe Hermione doesn't know that some house elves love their masters. Maybe some masters treat their elves very fondly.

Interestingly, purplehawk was just describing in the "cream and sugar" thread, how she was involved with trying to salvage an inner city playground for the kids who lived there.

I've done some work with an inner city park and finally gave up in despair. No matter how many times the equipment was repaired or replaced, the older "kids" would tear it apart until nothing was left of how it originally looked but the ceramic tiles painstakingly hand-painted by a local artist. For some reason, they left those alone.

I prefected in that park until bullets flew one afternoon. That convinced me it was no longer safe to be there.
I don't suppose you could organize the other parents in a "Take Back our Park" kind of movement?
Oh, I think that's what they were doing, in a way. I live way out in the 'burbs, as did the other ladies in my service group. We didn't belong there and they let us know it in no uncertain terms. The children welcomed us and maybe some of their parents, but the generation in between did not.

The inner city residents have to want the park and be willing to work for and appreciate the park for it to happen. Otherwise, handing it to them on a silver platter is a waste of time and energy.
The house elves are a similar situation. Handing them freedom will turn them all into Winky. They have to want it. They have to see value in it. And maybe a spell or two may need to be lifted.

Do you see Harry becoming the catalyst that will make them want to fight for their freedom? Dobby sure seems to think so...

I'm still trying to figure out how Dobby was able to help Harry at all. Dumbledore's influence?

Remember in CoS when Lockhart mentioned that his ideal birthday gift was harmony between all magical and non magical peoples? Lockhart of all people. :huh:

But, somehow, Harry is at the center of all these things.

Dobby, as he has prove time and again, is an exceptional house elf, were he human he'd be an exceptional human being. He does have his corrolaries (Firenze of the centaurs--the leaders of the reasonable giants--who were all murdered) and his opposites (Kreacher, Bane, etc.) He is excpetional. I get the impression that the house elf's servitude has something to do with his or her own willpower and the fact that they are the only creatures with magical power like humans and their power is organic and as powerful as human wanded magic leads me to believe that they were the helpers and guardians of the first wizards and witches who were defenseless against the prejudice of their fellow human beings and at the mercy of their own uncontrolled gifts. Then, after the elves showed them how to make wands and control their power and taught htem basic enchantments to protect themselves from persecutors, the humans turned on their teachers--or saw them as threats--and forced them through intimidation, into bondage. But the bondage will only hold as long as the elves are willing to serve. The abuse Dobby endured at the hands of the Malfoys was severe enough that he wanted to break free. It's like the Imperius Curse. It can only hold you as long as you don't fight it. He fought and he broke through. The victory wasn't absolutely complete (as we've seen) but I'd say it's probably up to 70%. I think Dumbledore might know the history of this and that's why he believes house elves are worthy of respect and kindness. But we can't fight their mental battles for them. In time they will learn. Woe betide wizardkind if someone like Fudge is in power when the House Elves finally decide they've had enough and use their talents to be a little more like their goblin cousins (species cousins, not literal cousins--from descriptions it looks like these two species are in the same family or maybe even genus classification).

Getting back to Kreacher and the twins though. Dobby bowed to Harry and mumbled his rude question at him. I think he bows lowest of all to purebloods (Fred and George--whatever else they are--are purebloods) next come half-bloods who because of their pureblooded parent deserve a small measure of respect (though for Harry the respect was the respect or fear one feels for the unknown "Kreaher wonders how he did it." Mudbloods are scum. Muggles are beasts to be hunted--as Sirius' dear great-aunt would have it). Let's not make more of this than there really is, shall we, hmm? I know I'm contradicting myself by saying that after my long spiel on house elves with precious little text support but I think that this simpler explanation works pretty well to explain Kreacher's behavior. I think Molly's comment was a momentary slip and Fred and George have called her on it.

this is interesting.

My speculation is this, since everyone doesn't know Narcissa yet. And Narcissa has been speculated around here as this cold hearted nobletype pureblood woman who is even colder than Bellatrix, I would offer another analysis,
that perhaps she isn't as cold as her sister and knows about Sirius Black, her cousin so therefore sent Dobby? hah. Yeah. Far fetched....because if she did that, she'd have to have her son, Draco do this favor. Hmmm. that is indeed farfetched. These answers need to be filled in the next book.



This sounds intriuging. Sent Dobby, where, when? I can only assume you mean at the beginning of CoS, but that was before anyone (aside from Scabbers) knew Sirius wasn't a bad guy. So I'm puzzled, what did I miss?

I think so too. Dobby is what might be termed a progressive house elf; the others, Winky notably, are as conservative as you could ask for. Kreacher, on the other hand - apart from being an evil old fart - might be more of a moderate if treated decently. Like Dobby, he could take risks to accomplish his aims... maybe there are more like those two? I doubt the Hogwarts house elves are going to revolt any time soon. They're happy, they're well cared for, and probably think they have the best situation possible for their kind. I think Dumbledore could rouse them if he needed to. I mean, he would have only to ask for their help, wouldn't he?

I'm still trying to figure out how Dobby was able to help Harry at all. Dumbledore's influence?

Remember in CoS when Lockhart mentioned that his ideal birthday gift was harmony between all magical and non magical peoples? Lockhart of all people. :huh:

But, somehow, Harry is at the center of all these things.

1st: I'm still trying to figure that out also. Strictly speaking, he sho't have been able to do it at all. I would think that the charms on a house-elf would prevent such a thing from happening. I don't really know how Dumbledore could have influenced it.

2nd: Ironic, eh?

3rd: No wonder Snape's trying to make him keep his ego down! :D

1st: I'm still trying to figure that out also. Strictly speaking, he sho't have been able to do it at all. I would think that the charms on a house-elf would prevent such a thing from happening. I don't really know how Dumbledore could have influenced it.

2nd: Ironic, eh?

3rd: No wonder Snape's trying to make him keep his ego down! :D

Ah, but, that's the key, are they magically bound to servitude? I say not (merely socially conditioned) since Dobby did indeed break through whatever barriers, and betrayed his Master (to a very minor degree). Kreacher did the same thing with Sirius, he manipulated the letter of the statement "Get Out" to go run off to Narcissa. Is it possible Dobby used the same trick? Lucius got peeved at Dobby (Maybe Dobby spilled a drink on his shoe, perhaps even intentionally), and Lucius yelled at him "Get outta my sight" (or something similar) and so Dobby did precisely that? He obviously still felt bound in some kind of way to the Malfoys, as he told Harry almost nothing, and what little he did tell Harry, he punished himself for.

Well, I think it says somewhere in the books that they are. Of course, we don't know these spells thoroughly, so we don't know whether or not Dobby's visits to Harry are actually possible without intervention of no. So it could be possible, and it could not be. House-elves are strange characters!

Still, Dobby is a mystery. How was he able to defy the Malfoys to aid Harry, and why? Ahh, a true mystery! I was speculating above that it may have something to do with the sort of liminal, cusp-y area between servitude and freedom, between a suggestion and a command, between taking words literally or figuratively (as in telling Kreacher to "get out" and having him really and truly leave the house, and seek out Bellatrix). But this still doesn't answer the question of why Dobby would come to have the desire to betray the Malfoys; hmm, here's a thought, though: we saw with the example of Kreacher that he could betray Sirius largely because he knew himself to be "truly" loyal to the Black family, with Sirius the traitor. Thus he could create the initiative to act seemingly independently. Could something like this have happened with Dobby? Maybe everything is not as "unified" at the Malfoy household as we are all imagining. Maybe there are conditions there which would make Dobby's independence possible.

Dobby is adjusting well to freedom, yet poor Winky is not. Freedom, in her view was the ultimate punishment, and she suffers it appropriately.I read the situation a bit differently. I would say that part of Winky's inability to move on from the horrible circumstances that broke apart her family is precisely because her servitude put her in a no-win situation, because her family was divided against itself: if she betrayed Crouch's secret, she would be a disloyal servant, and yet through not betraying his secret, she caused his death.

House elves are:

"... He was bound by the enchantments of his kind, which is to say he could not disobey a direct order from his master, Sirius... I warned Sirius... that Kreacher must be treated with kindness and respect. I also told him Kreacher could be dangerous to us... Kreacher is what he has been made by wizards, Harry... Yes, he is to be pitied. His existence has been a miserable as your friend Dobby's... "

"A house-elf must be set free, sir. And the family will never set Dobby free... Dobby will serve the family until he dies, sir..."

"This, sir? Tis a mark of the house-elf's enslavement, sir. Dobby can only be freed if his masters present him with clothes, sir. The family is careful not to pass Dobby even a sock, sir, for then he would be free to leave their house forever...

"Ah, if Harry Potter only knew! If he knew what he means to us, to the lowly, the enslaved, we dregs of the magical world! Dobby remembers how it was when He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named was at the height of his powers, sir! We house-elfs were treated like vermin, sir! Of course, Dobby is still treated like that, sir... but mostly, sir, life has improved for my kind since you triumphed over He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named. Harry Potter survived, and the Dark Lord's power was broken, and it was a new dawn, sir, and Harry Potter shone like a beacon of hope for those of us who thought the Dark days would never end, sir... "

"You've lost me my servant, boy!"

But Dobby shouted, "You shall not harm Harry Potter!"

There was a loud bang, and Mr. Malfoy was thrown backward. He crashed down the stairs, three at a time, landing in a crumpled heap on the landing below. He got up, his face livid, and pulled out his wand, but Dobby raised a long threatening finger.

"You shall go now," he said fiercely, pointing down at Mr. Malfoy. "You shall not touch Harry Poter. You shall go now."

Lucius Malfoy had no choice. With a last, incensed stare at the pair of them, he swung his cloack around him and hurried out of sight.

"Well, put it this way - house-elves have got powerful magic of their own, but they can't usually use it without their master's permission...

"Well, whoever owns him will be an old wizarding family, and they'll be rich," said Fred...

"Yeah, Mom's always wishing we had a house-elf to do the ironing," said George. "But all we've got is a lousy old thoul in the attic and gnomes all over the garden. House-elves come with big old manors and castles and places like that; you wouldn't catch one in our house... "

"... Tis part of the house-elf's enslavement, sir. We keeps their secrets and our silence, sir. We upholds that family's honor, and we never speaks ill of them... "

I sure wouldn't want to be one of them!

Dobby, as he has prove time and again, is an exceptional house elf, He does have his corrolaries (Firenze of the centaurs--the leaders of the reasonable giants) and his opposites (Kreacher, Bane, etc.) I get the impression that the house elf's servitude has something to do with his or her own willpower and the fact that they are the only creatures with magical power like humans and their power is organic and as powerful as human wanded magic It seems at least as powerful. Maybe more so. Dobby can apparate within Hogwarts. :agree:
leads me to believe that they were the helpers and guardians of the first wizards and witches who were defenseless against the prejudice of their fellow human beings and at the mercy of their own uncontrolled gifts. Then, after the elves showed them how to make wands and control their power and taught htem basic enchantments to protect themselves from persecutors, the humans turned on their teachers--or saw them as threats--and forced them through intimidation, into bondage. But the bondage will only hold as long as the elves are willing to serve. The abuse Dobby endured at the hands of the Malfoys was severe enough that he wanted to break free. It's like the Imperius Curse. It can only hold you as long as you don't fight it. He fought and he broke through. The victory wasn't absolutely complete (as we've seen) but I'd say it's probably up to 70%. Just to qualify, none of that is in canon, right?
I think Dumbledore might know the history of this and that's why he believes house elves are worthy of respect and kindness.

Getting back to Kreacher and the twins though. Dobby bowed to Harry and mumbled his rude question at him. He only bowed and responded to Fred and George identically to the respect he showed to Sirius. He neither bowed to any of the others, nor spoke directly to them. He only muttered to himself as though they couldn't hear him. (pgs 108-109, OotP, Am ed) I think Molly's comment was a momentary slip and Fred and George have called her on it. Just as likely.

Ahh, a true mystery! I was speculating above that it may have something to do with the sort of liminal, cusp-y area between servitude and freedom, between a suggestion and a command, between taking words literally or figuratively (as in telling Kreacher to "get out" and having him really and truly leave the house, and seek out Bellatrix). But this still doesn't answer the question of why Dobby would come to have the desire to betray the Malfoys; hmm, here's a thought, though: we saw with the example of Kreacher that he could betray Sirius largely because he knew himself to be "truly" loyal to the Black family, with Sirius the traitor. Thus he could create the initiative to act seemingly independently. Could something like this have happened with Dobby? Maybe everything is not as "unified" at the Malfoy household as we are all imagining. Maybe there are conditions there which would make Dobby's independence possible. That makes sense, but unless someone lives there that we haven't met, yet, I can't see it being Lucius, Narcissa or Draco.
I would say that part of Winky's inability to move on from the horrible circumstances that broke apart her family is precisely because her servitude put her in a no-win situation, because her family was divided against itself: if she betrayed Crouch's secret, she would be a disloyal servant, and yet through not betraying his secret, she caused his death.Well, that's possible. but it's not what she says, nor does it seem to agree with the opinions of the other elves in the Hogwarts kitchen.

edit:
Thanks purplehawk. Those quotes clear up the enchanted and enslavement question, not to mention power. ;)

I think it's a safe bet Jordan isn't too far off the mark. House elves have powerful magic of their own, as we've seen mentioned more than once. Lucius Malfoy with a wand in hand was blasted off his feet and made to vacate the scene by little Dobby.

Tolkien's Simarillion and the Lord of the Rings trilogy depicts the elves as the First-Born of all human types and extremely powerful beings they were! They were the teachers of men, the Second-Born. Fortunately, Tolkien's elves were never enslaved and made to keep house for mankind, and they certainly weren't little shrunken creatures like Rowling's elves... still there is a literary precedent for what Jordan is describing.

I threw together every quote about house elves I could remember off-hand from the books in my post above. Fred's comment that "house elves have got powerful magic of their own, but they usually can't use it without their master's permission" may well prove prophetic. I mentioned earlier the possibility of Dumbledore seeking and gaining the help of house elves in this second war.

This sounds intriuging. Sent Dobby, where, when? I can only assume you mean at the beginning of CoS, but that was before anyone (aside from Scabbers) knew Sirius wasn't a bad guy. So I'm puzzled, what did I miss?

Well considering Narcissa is a Black, wouldn't she know that Sirius was innocent? For all we know, maybe one or two of the Black sisters knew about Sirius's innocence but kept it quiet? Or maybe they knew Sirius would never be a criminal? Now that I think about it, its too iffy. I dont know Narcissa's character as much as any of you guys. All I know of her is that she didn't want her son to go to Durmstrang and have him be closer to home. That to me smacks of a mother who is doting (plus gives sweets to her son by OWL) or a mother who wanted her son to be among muggle borns. I mean, if she really really was like Lucius, she would demand like Bellatrix to go to Durmstrang, far or not far. So the analysis on her character is still debatable. Very interesting though that Kreacher is the only one that respects her out of all the Blacks left.

Dobby can't apparate within Hogwarts right? Someone had to take him to the hospital wing or tell him to go visit Harry in CoS. The reasoning against the argument with Kreacher is that Kreacher hates Sirius Black. He will at any opportunity go against Sirius when he was literally kicked out. Kreacher did not betray the order but Sirius. Dobbys excuse would be to betray Lucius but to visit in the hospital wing and to go against his wishes? Unless Narcissa had a say in it. Wouldn't that extend to other owners in the household?

by purplehawk
I threw together every quote about house elves I could remember off-hand from the books in my post above. Fred's comment that "house elves have got powerful magic of their own, but they usually can't use it without their master's permission" may well prove prophetic. I mentioned earlier the possibility of Dumbledore seeking and gaining the help of house elves in this second war.

exactly. House elves can't go against their masters permission so Dobby would not go against the bound rules that bind them to the house ownership. Whether or not they have the magical power or not, house elves are loyal.

No.

But part of their loyalty is a choice. Dobby openly defied ALL of his Master's family to warn Harry, to keep him from getting to Hogwarts, to warn him what was happening at Hogwarts, and to get him sent home. I know of very few commands except "GET OUT!" that could be construed liberally enough for him to be considered to have been ordered to perform any of these tasks. I think Lucius and Narcissa may know Sirius is innocent, but neither of them would want to aid him and if they did they would implicate themselves as DEs. Narcissa's gathering of information from Kreacher and her willingness to:

1. Consult with Voldemort
2. Offer direct instructions to implement Voldemort's plan

appear--repeat APPEAR--to nullify the chance that she is a good witch imprisoned in a horrible marriage and clandestinely helping the side of good. It isn't definite yet, but considering that she doesn't let Lucius dictate to her, I'd be very skeptical of any theory that had her accepting Kreacher's information (he only talked to her) and giving him instructions under durress. Just me.

I'm glad to see that my theory has sparked some discussion. I'm still not convinced on the Kreacher thing but it's quite possible that the old fart picked up the habit of only bowing to purebloods (while, of course, reserving the right to curse their "blood traitor" attributes under his breath).

First of all... Lucius and Narcissa did - as in definitely - know that Sirius was innocent. Lucius was in the cemetery with Voldemort and Wormtail the night of the rebirthing party. Lucius would have heard these words:

"Wormtail's body was ill-adapted for possession, as all assumed him dead, and would attract far too much attention if noticed... "

So there is no excuse whatsoever that either Malfoy wouldn't know of Sirius' innocence. It appears from Draco's comment to Harry on the train to Hogwarts in OotP that Draco also knew - and knew further that Sirius was an animagus.

Dobby can indeed apparate within Hogwarts. He did so just as Dumbledore and McGonagall were bringing Colin Creevey into the hospital wing. He did it again when he said good-bye to Harry on the staircase, after summarily dismissing Lucius Malfoy.

As we've not heard anything about Dobby being spotted carrying a drunken Winky to the Room of Requirement, or of any house elves at all being seen cleaning the house dorms, it seems safe to assume they all can.

I'm not buying the idea Narcissa is a good witch trapped in a miserable marriage. If she was the only Black family member Kreacher had any respect left for, you can bet she's more Wicked Step-Mother than Cinderella.

I wonder if Andromeda sent Dobby to Harry? Hmmmmm........ :huh:

I'm still not convinced on the Kreacher thing but it's quite possible that the old fart picked up the habit of only bowing to purebloods (while, of course, reserving the right to curse their "blood traitor" attributes under his breath).

"Hello, Kreacher," said Fred very loudly, closing the door with a snap.

The house-elf froze in his tracks, stopped muttering, and then gave a very pronounced and very unconvincing start of surprise.

"Kreacher did not see Young Master," he said, turning around and bowing to Fred. Still facing the carpet, he added, perfectly audibly, "Nasty little brat of a blood traitor it is."

"Sorry?" said George. "Didn't catch that last bit."

"Kreacher said nothing," said the elf, with a second bow to George, adding in a clear undertone, "and there's its twin, unnatural little beasts they are."

Harry didn't know whether to laugh or not. The elf straightened up, eyeing them all very malevolently, and apparently convinced that they could not hear him as he continued to mutter.

"... and there's the Mudblood, standing there bold as brass, oh if my Mistress knew, oh how she'd cry, and there's a new boy. Kreacher doesn't know his name, what is he doing here, Kreacher doesn't know ..."

"This is Harry, Kreacher," said Hermione tentatively. Harry Potter."

Kreacher's pale eyes widened and he muttered faster and more furiously than ever.

"The Mudblood is talking to Kreacher as though she is my friend, if Kreacher's Mistress saw him in such company, oh what would she say ---"

"Don't call her a Mudblood!" said Ron and Ginny together, very angrily.

"It doesn't matter," Hermione whispered, "he's not in his right mind, he doesn't know what he's --"

"Don't kid yourself, Hermione, he knows exactly what he's saying," said Fred, eying Kreacher with great dislike.

Kreacher was still muttering, his eyes on Harry.

"Is it true? Is it Harry Potter? Kreacher can see the scar, it must be true, that's that boy who stopped the Dark Lord, Kreacher wonders how he did it --"

"Don't we all, Kreacher?" said Fred.

"What do you want anyway?" George asked.

Kreacher's huge eyes darted onto George.

"Kreacher is cleaning," he said evasively.

"A likely story," said a voice behind Harry.

Sirius had come back; he was glowering at the elf from the doorway. The noise in the hall had abated; perhaps Mrs. Weasley and Mundungus had moved their argument down into the kitchen. At the sight of Sirius, Kreacher flung himself into a ridiculously low bow that flattened his snoutlike nose on the floor.

The only difference I can see between Fred and George and Ron and Ginny in terms of Kreacher's behavior, is that Fred and George are of age, and the protocol may be different. But nowhere in canon am I aware that it says that.

Whiz, that's assuming Andromeda and Narcissa are on speaking terms. I'm guessing marrying Ted Tonks killed any sisterly affection that existed between them. Can you imagine the Malfoy's reception if he came to dinner?

It could be that he only bows to of-age purebloods or you could be right about genetics, but considering how like the Weasleys the twins are physically and emotionally this seems to be a gigantic stretch.

I'm not buying the idea Narcissa is a good witch trapped in a miserable marriage. If she was the only Black family member Kreacher had any respect left for, you can bet she's more Wicked Step-Mother than Cinderella.
Notice it is Narcissa that is the only one Kreature has respect for, not Bellatrix? I find that very odd. Why wouldn't Kreature have respect for her? What is the difference (that would affect Kreature's respect) between the two, besides Belatrix going to Azkaban? And I doubt the isnwer is that both Kreature and Narcissa are really nice.:sigh:

Was Bellatrix still in Azkaban at the time? Even if she had escaped, it's a lot easier just to go to Narcissa.

I'm with you though. I think she's as nasty as her sister.

Well, they did find Bellatrix's picture in Kreacher's little den of a bedroom. They noted her picture was apparently his favorite because he'd mended the broken glass.

First of all... Lucius and Narcissa did - as in definitely - know that Sirius was innocent. Lucius was in the cemetery with Voldemort and Wormtail the night of the rebirthing party. Lucius would have heard these words:



So there is no excuse whatsoever that either Malfoy wouldn't know of Sirius' innocence. It appears from Draco's comment to Harry on the train to Hogwarts in OotP that Draco also knew - and knew further that Sirius was an animagus.

Dobby can indeed apparate within Hogwarts. He did so just as Dumbledore and McGonagall were bringing Colin Creevey into the hospital wing. He did it again when he said good-bye to Harry on the staircase, after summarily dismissing Lucius Malfoy.

As we've not heard anything about Dobby being spotted carrying a drunken Winky to the Room of Requirement, or of any house elves at all being seen cleaning the house dorms, it seems safe to assume they all can.

I'm not buying the idea Narcissa is a good witch trapped in a miserable marriage. If she was the only Black family member Kreacher had any respect left for, you can bet she's more Wicked Step-Mother than Cinderella.

well thanks for that. At least they knew.
but I thought it wasn't possible for anyone to apparate in Hogwarts...so I guess Dobby's case was different? Or rather house elves. Okay.
Maybe that wasn't implied in the books but perhaps their powers extend differently.

As for Narcissa being a good witch. Who knows. It seems more logical to fit her into the wicked witch with better looks than Bellatrix. She has not done anything that we know of to help Sirius or to do anything other than support her husband, I think.

As for Kreacher respecting only Narcissa....hmmm, that must mean Narcissa treats him as fair as Mrs. Black. thats all I can think of.

If Bellatrix was with Voldemort, Narcissa may just have been more accessible to Kreacher. She seems a bit saner, too. :rolleyes:

But, Dobby. He may have gone to Andromeda under circumstances similar to Kreacher going to Narcissa. If Andromeda is connected to the Order or to Dumbledore ...
CoS is three years before OotP. Tonks would still have been in auror training school, I think.
I'm always suspicious of names dropped with no elaboration. Where are Ted and Andromeda these days. No indication that they're dead, is there?

Spies for the Order?

On page six of PS/SS, we discover that the newscaster's name is Ted. I know it's an old question, but could the newsman be Ted Tonks?

Andromeda might be a possibility but it's the Malfoys' house and he's a Malfoy servant. Unless he's particularly attached to Narcissa and puts higher stock in females (tough to tell with Dobby) he would have no reason for thinking of Andromeda. Interesting possibility though. As to the Narcissa/Bellatrix thing. Bella was in Azkaban--it was impractical to go to her. And the people who've brought this up are right, Bella's picture had a place of honor in Kreacher's nest--he revered her.

As to Ted being a TV personality--possible, but unlikely. His wife and daughter are just too magical and Nymphadora is just too mischievous to fit in with a large Muggle neighborhood.

You can bet your last Knut that Andromeda and Narcissa were NOT on speaking terms. Marrying a Muggleborn would have ended the relationship as soundly and swiftly as Lily's marrying James ended her relationship with Petunia.

Edit: GryffindorGr--Mrs. Black did not treat Kreacher fairly. She and her husband treated him, if possible, worse than Sirius did.

As to Ted being a TV personality--possible, but unlikely. His wife and daughter are just too magical and Nymphadora is just too mischievous to fit in with a large Muggle neighborhood.

Good point. So, where are they? Underground with Mark Evans?

I'm always suspicious of names dropped with no elaboration. Where are Ted and Andromeda these days. No indication that they're dead, is there?

Spies for the Order?

On page six of PS/SS, we discover that the newscaster's name is Ted. I know it's an old question, but could the newsman be Ted Tonks?

As far as Ted goes on all questions ...Who knows?


Sirius says that Andromeda was his favorite cousin. Was could indicate that she has died, Eventough Tonks implies that her mother is out there folding clothes safely at home. It is just to vague. All I could say is that we will probally learn more latter.

Here's a winner for ya--we'll probably find out in Book Six. They could be almost anywhere secluded or they might even raised Nymphadora in Hogsmeade--come to think of it, that's the only place I can think of where her liberally used talent wouldn't attract too much attention (for all the pranks she'd pull and the games she'd play). Also, it would exmpt her from some of the restrictions on Magic and avoid the necessity of having A Nymphadora Tonks Bureau in the Improper Use of Magic Office.

Mark isn't hiding--the spunky little dude has been living right there in Little Whinging all along.

He can only be in Little Whinging if he's not a wizard. If he is, he doesn't live there, but he might be from nearby.

Tonks is a colorful Klutz, but I can think of a few places right here where no one would notice. :agree: It's true. There's this place called "Thayer Street" in Providence. No one would notice.

Ookaay--I'll take your word for that one. As for Mark--If he's a Muggleborn they wouldn't have a record of him yet. Muggleborns get their records with the Ministry established when they hit school age.

Edit: GryffindorGr--Mrs. Black did not treat Kreacher fairly. She and her husband treated him, if possible, worse than Sirius did.

Where was it in OotP that she treated him worse?
Maybe not kindly perhaps but worse? I highly doubt it and I disagree.

Dobby seems to imply there are other house elves who view Harry as something akin to a saint or a diety. His little speech about how terrible there conditions were during Voldemort's first rise to power is a strong indicator he's not entirely alone in his thinking. It seems as though the elves have their own little network, or a big network might be more likely, where they probably do talk about things they could never say openly in the presence of wizards or witches.

Winky, for example, knew the story of Dobby and Harry before she ever met Harry.

I wonder if Andromeda sent Dobby to Harry? Hmmmmm........ :huh:
Ahh, thanks for reminding us of Andromeda, whiz! Even if Andromeda isn't necessarily the one who was giving Dobby the leeway to intervene back in CoS, she, and the others blasted off the Black family tapestry are important in that they stand for the fact that not all pure-bloods are bad, and that there is disunity even within the worst of families, holes that can be used by the good guys.

Ookaay--I'll take your word for that one. As for Mark--If he's a Muggleborn they wouldn't have a record of him yet. Muggleborns get their records with the Ministry established when they hit school age.
Really?

Can you point me to that? I know the part about the magical quill and the list that McGonagall uses every year to send out letters came from an interview, but I don't remember about the ministry.

I think in the interview she says that the quill records the magical children as they are born. But jordmundts theory makes sense to me, although I don't think it's canon.

This is a link to the interview she gave on February 3, 2000,

Classrooms across America went online to ask J.K. Rowling their burning questions about Harry Potter.

http://www.scholastic.com/familymatters/parentguides/potter/interview.htm


How can two Muggles have a kid with magical powers? Also how does the Ministry of Magic find out these kids have powers?


It's the same as two black-haired people producing a redheaded child. Sometimes these things just happen, and no one really knows why! The Ministry of Magic doesn't find out which children are magic. In Hogwarts there's a magical quill which detects the birth of a magical child, and writes his or her name down in a large parchment book. Every year Professor McGonagall checks the book, and sends owls to the people who are turning 11.

Good quotes, Masterfroggy. So it could well be that Mark is already written down there. Or not. ;) Well, we'll know in the next book if he turns up at Hogwarts...

Yeah, it'll all be clear sometime before you and I trun 40 :lol:

Yeah, it'll all be clear sometime before you and I trun 40 :lol:

Unfortunately not before I do, though :upset: ;)

Yes, Mark should already be written down by the quill at Hogwarts. If his parents are Wizards, the Ministry probably has a record, of his parents, and therefore most likely a record of him. If his parents are Muggles, most likely the Ministry doesn't have a record

Madame Bones said the Ministry has no record of any witch or wizard in Little Hangleton other than Harry, so it's a safe bet this Mark, if he isn't a red herring, is a Muggleborn.

I hope I can read the last two books before I'm old enough and blind enough to qualify for Living Books.

A girl scout will come read them to you, purplehawk.

I believe I remember that Mark lives a couple of streets over from Harry. One of the boys lives in Little Whinging and the other lives in (something) Hangleton, I believe. Unless I'm confusing Mark with another character, or I've completely lost my mind, both of these are possible, LOL

I believe I remember that Mark lives a couple of streets over from Harry. One of the boys lives in Little Whinging and the other lives in (something) Hangleton, I believe. Unless I'm confusing Mark with another character, or I've completely lost my mind, both of these are possible, LOL

Mark and Harry both live in Little Whinging. I believe Hangleton is where the Riddles lived (dang - don't have my books with me). Of course Hangleton could be the next town over from Little Whinging (or Great Whinging) for all I know. You'd think that we would have heard that by now, but ...

Now wouldn't that be disturbing to find that Mark Evans came from the same location as Voldemort!?

I don't think we know where Mark lives. He might have roamed in from the next town. Isn't the playground where Harry "ran into" Dudley in a different neighborhood?

But as for Mark being a wizard, it was pointed out at the hearing that Little Whinging was under special surveillance due to past events. Perhaps ordinarily they wouldn't know about a muggle born wizard until they came to school, but it sounds like Harry's home town is being carefully watched.
Little Hangleton is where the Riddle mansion is.

I don't think we know where Mark lives. He might have roamed in from the next town. Isn't the playground where Harry "ran into" Dudley in a different neighborhood?

But as for Mark being a wizard, it was pointed out at the hearing that Little Whinging was under special surveillance due to past events. Perhaps ordinarily they wouldn't know about a muggle born wizard until they came to school, but it sounds like Harry's home town is being carefully watched.
Little Hangleton is where the Riddle mansion is.I think that Mark Evens must live fairly close to harry, because Harry heard about him on one of his nightly walks, but Harry can not afford to walk to far from privet drive, else Vernon will lock him in the shed if he arrives after Dudley, taking it that Dudley returns past the park each night and is most likely to walk along Magnolia Road and down to the crescent, this is where Harry met him and they started to walk home together, (something I would not expect from Harry)

Personally I think that Mark lives within a mile or so of Harry, and knowing what the Estate housing is like in that part of the world, there could be hundreds of little streets, where Mark could grow up, never realising that the Famous Harry Potter or to hear the local gossip that Potter delinquent was close by, I am in two minds as to Marks future role in the next two book but I feel that he will have some role albeit a minor mention by maybe the Professor McGonagall and sorting hat

I doubt that the ministry would be aware of Mark Evans, he is yet to make his mark on the world, Without draconian powers the ministry would never be able to force every witch, wizard or warlock to register the birth of their children, and what with Muggle's giving birth to magical children, I know for sure that professor would never countenance the passing of that information to the Ministry


Dobby struggled to break his conditioning and make his way to see Harry Potter in the Chamber of Secrets he said to Harry:


"No, no, no," squeaked Dobby, shaking his head so hard his ears flapped. "Harry Potter must stay where he is safe. He is too great, too good, to lose. If Harry Potter goes back to Hogwarts, he will be in mortal danger."

"Why?" said Harry in surprise.
"There is a plot, Harry Potter. A plot to make most terrible things happen at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry this year," whispered Dobby, suddenly trembling all over. "Dobby has known it for months, sir. Harry Potter must not put himself in peril. He is too important, sir!"


It's not like he just thought one day
"Oh I throw of my bonds and tell the great Harry Potter"
He took months to work up the courage and to set everything in place, he struggle with himself in more way than one, I think that even breaking his bonds to such a limited degree put a terrible strain on Dobby, and doubt that even if Dumbledore was to ask the Hogwarts House elves, they would struggle to help in the fighting, I'm sure that they would be able to tend the wounded or make potions under supervision, but fight, I doubt it unless it was against other elves, but I don’t' think the supports of Lord Voldemort would bring along their elves to do anything but shine boots or clean up the spilt blood

But as for Mark being a wizard, it was pointed out at the hearing that Little Whinging was under special surveillance due to past events. Perhaps ordinarily they wouldn't know about a muggle born wizard until they came to school, but it sounds like Harry's home town is being carefully watched.
Well, not carefully enough to know that there is a squib at "nearby Wisteria Walk". And the quote that Masterfroggy shared with us makes it pretty clear that the Ministry does not have access to the contents of the book on which the magical quill writes its names. Clearly this is a detail that Rowling has already carefully thought through, if she made a point of indicating who has which information about magical children when. In fact, it is unclear as to whether McGonagall or anyone else has access to the contents of the book other than the section pertaining to those coming of age. It is quite possible that she, like us, is in the dark about Mark Evans. But quite certainly the Ministry would be in the dark: there is no record of any witch or wizard in Little Whinging, so if Mark Evans is, in fact, a young wizard, then he must be Muggleborn.

And I think that Dedalus Diggle is right: all the Dursley-related activities take place in Little Whinging.Harry knew perfectly well that Dudley had not been to tea anywhere; he and his gang spent every evening vandalizing the play park, smoking on street corners, and throwing stones at passing cars and children. Harry had seen them at it during his evening walks around Little Whinging...Little Whinging receives a bunch more mentions in that opening chapter as well, it seems to me highly unlikely that Mark Evans is from anywhere else.

even if Dumbledore was to ask the Hogwarts House elves, they would struggle to help in the fighting, I'm sure that they would be able to tend the wounded or make potions under supervision, but fight, I doubt it

But aren't house elves bound to do their master's bidding? It would seem that if any of them, regardless of the person to whom they are enslaved, were asked to do battle - they'd just do it for Master.

Edit: Come to think of it, this might be just what they need to again realize they are strong enough to stand alone and not be subservient to a bunch of high-brow, pureblood wizards.

I can't remember why I'm arguing for Mark to be a wizard. It's just his age seems to make it obvious.

But really, I suspect that Mark is a clue that Lily isn't an Evans. Otherwise, Harry would have other living relatives with his mother's blood, and Dumbledore says there is only Petunia. Even Dudley is overlooked. :huh:

Mark Evans is just too complicated for me. We have such conflicting evidence and not enough of it!

But I do agree that if anything he's muggle born.

Do we have any evidence at all? Anything other than his name passed in a conversation between Harry and Dudley?

Well, we have

1) Last name of Evans
2) Age of 10
3) Petunia is Harry's "last living relative" - 15 years ago.
4) No wizards in Little Whinging.

From that we have created a monster.

Do we have any evidence at all? Anything other than his name passed in a conversation between Harry and Dudley?Evidence of what?
That he's a wizard. The only clues are his name and the fact that he's ten. Oh! And he's cheeky. :eyebrows:

Dudley beat him up on Harry's birthday. Is that significant?

But if he's from the same Evans family as Lily and Petunia, then Harry has other relatives with his mother's blood, and Dumbledore led us all down the garden path again. Problem is, I believe Dumbledore.

Of course, if Lily isn't an Evans .......

:lol:
What Jessica said.

I guess I see where you're coming from. I just have a hard time getting excited about it. If Lily had no surviving relatives 15 years ago, other than Petunia, the only way this Mark Evans could be related to her was if she donated an egg at some point before she died... or if there is or was another sibling who ran away from home and later had a kid named Mark.

I just don't get it.

Well, what exactly does Dumbledore say?

He says the Dursleys are the only family Harry has in PS/SS. Anyone remember what he said about Petunia? I've got my book here, but some of us know it so well.

;) hint, hint.

Thanks for the interview quote--"The Ministry DOESN'T know which children are magical." That backs up my point. In spite of surveillance if Mark's a fledgling Muggleborn, the Ministry won't know about him until his Hogwarts letter is sent out. That, of course, is a big if. By the way, Mark does seem to have some of Harry's spunk, just not his speed. It would probably take quite a monumental insult for dear old Dud to register "cheek" remember Harry's comment about bullying at Stonewall that went right over Dudley's head? This suggests that little Mark (we know he's little because of his age, but it also suggests that he might be small for his age because Big D likes the biggest advantage possible) really has quite a lot of guts. Most of the kids his age live in abject fear of Dudley and his cronies. Mark, when confronted, doesn't lose the opportunity of getting some of his own back. Sounds quite a bit like Harry, no? There's still a lot to establish, of course but that's food for thought. And Dobby did more than just appear that one time, he'd been hanging around all summer stopping Harry's letters. He had to defy the Malfoys often to do that. There must have been a lot of extra punishments going on over at Malfoy Manor--too bad for them that Lucius and Draco were too thick to notice.

That's if the poor kid cheeked Dudders at all. Mark may have just been picked out of a crowd of fleeing ten year olds as the easiest to catch. Dudley isn't exactly reliable.

As for Dobby, a mystery. Who knows what kind of magic he may have used, or how much hanging around he would have had to do. He's obviously extremely powerful. Seemingly far more so than mere wizards.

Again we have to ask--does THAT trait vary from house elf to house elf like it does with wizards and witches? I'd be inclined to say yes but how much and how can you tell?

By the way, this is a little off-topic, about the Wand Restriction--no nonhuman is permitted to possess one. Does that strike anyone else as similar to the laws in the South forbidding literacy among the slaves? Winky's insistence that "I is a good elf, I is not knowing how" just sort of struck me as somewhat similar.

Again we have to ask--does THAT trait vary from house elf to house elf like it does with wizards and witches? I'd be inclined to say yes but how much and how can you tell?.
I would agree that it does vary. Dobby does strike me as being more powerful than Winky. Otherwise it is just her personality.

By the way, this is a little off-topic, about the Wand Restriction--no nonhuman is permitted to possess one. Does that strike anyone else as similar to the laws in the South forbidding literacy among the slaves? Winky's insistence that "I is a good elf, I is not knowing how" just sort of struck me as somewhat similar.
That was one of the first things I though of too. Especially in the manner that the elves speak.

Well, what exactly does Dumbledore say?

He says the Dursleys are the only family Harry has in PS/SS. Anyone remember what he said about Petunia? I've got my book here, but some of us know it so well.

;) hint, hint.

He doesn't. McGonagall mentions her being kicked by Dudley, screaming for sweets. The only quote from Dumbledore in that first chapter is:

"I've come to bring Harry to his aunt and uncle. They're the only family he has left now."

I also checked out the chapter called "The Mirror of Erised," where Harry first sees Lily and James. He saw "a whole crowd of people... "

Harry looked into the faces of the other people in the mirror, and saw other pairs of green eyes like his, other noses like his, even a little old man who looked as though he had Harry's knobbly knees...

Dumbledore, darn his hide, doesn't add anything interesting in the last chapter, either, at least not on the subject of Harry's family.

I've always suspected that the "whole book two is the key to the series" relates to house elves and slavery. But as we go along, it becomes more evident that there's a lot more at stake than just the rights of house elves. Fantastic Beasts and where to find them, goes into more detail about who decided when what was or was not a beast, the chaos than ensued until new guidelines were written, etc.

Well, it's all the way to OotP to get back to Petunia. Dumbledore:
"I delivered you to her sister, her only remaining relative."

If Petunia is Lily's only remaining relative, and there are Evanses of the same family around, then Lily can't be an Evans, I don't think.

The key there would be "Evanses of the same family," though - and we have absolutely nothing but a kid's name and age, and the fact Dudley beat him up to go on.

I dunno, Whiz. I'll have egg on my face when he turns out to be Harry's half-brother or something, but I don't feel Mark Evans is a big deal. Wouldn't be the first time I've misjudged Rowling, though.

I think there's a lot more at stake than house elves too - in fact, the whole wizarding world, or the way it's currently structured, is going to be up for grabs. They do so many things wrong IMO. The secretiveness, the pureblood mania, the bizarre business of modifying the memories of any Muggle who happens to witness or be the victim of a magical act, the racism and denial of basic rights for non-human or part human magical creatures... Well, frankly, their world needs to be turned upside-down.

I've always suspected that the "whole book two is the key to the series" relates to house elves and slavery. But as we go along, it becomes more evident that there's a lot more at stake than just the rights of house elves. Fantastic Beasts and where to find them, goes into more detail about who decided when what was or was not a beast, the chaos than ensued until new guidelines were written, etc.

Well, it's all the way to OotP to get back to Petunia.

If Petunia is Lily's only remaining relative, and there are Evanses of the same family around, then Lily can't be an Evans, I don't think.


I don't think that would work as Dumbledore said her only remaining Relative, which would mean that if Lily was not an Evans then Petunia was not an Evans, and that would make no sense at all, why call her Evans at all, why not Bloggs or Jones, how far away from the main family line do we have to go before it changes from a relative to just someone who is related, something that Sirius Black mentioned, something like:
"they might be related but I don't consider them family "

They might have had the same mother, but different fathers.