Login  
 
 
Go Back   Chamber of Secrets > Forum Archives > Post DH References

Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4



 
 
Thread Tools
  #1021  
Old March 25th, 2012, 6:20 pm
HedwigOwl's Avatar
HedwigOwl  Female.gif HedwigOwl is offline
Curse Breaker
 
Joined: 3612 days
Location: Surfing a Probability Wave
Posts: 6,718
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by MerryLore View Post
I believe it's ShadowSonic's (although they'd have to clarify this) choice of terminology to explain how Lily's choice to not step aside when confronted by Voldemort was used by Dumbledore to protect Harry at Privet Drive, because the same blood that ran through Lily's veins also ran through Petunia's. Harry had to stay with a blood relative for the full protection from his mother to run it's course until his 17th birthday.
As that's not a term used in the series, and posters may not have seen when ShadowSonic coined it, I'm sure it confused more people than just me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MerryLore
Therefore, I think ShadowSonic's question is whether or not this blood protection/blood ward caused the shock which got Vernon to release Harry when he was strangling him.
I tend to think it's just a burst of unintentional magic from Harry (and Harry did have his wand in hand also which may have helped), a defensive reaction at being choked.


__________________
http://www.cosforums.com/images/img/401694897da473df47.png[/img]
People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey stuff...

....I miss David Tennant....
Sponsored Links
  #1022  
Old March 25th, 2012, 6:40 pm
ShadowSonic  Male.gif ShadowSonic is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 1160 days
Location: Regina, SK, Canada
Posts: 1,100
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

I'm the only one to call the spell on the House a "Blood Ward"? I'd heard it on other forums a few times and figured that was the name.


  #1023  
Old March 25th, 2012, 7:27 pm
HedwigOwl's Avatar
HedwigOwl  Female.gif HedwigOwl is offline
Curse Breaker
 
Joined: 3612 days
Location: Surfing a Probability Wave
Posts: 6,718
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadowSonic View Post
I'm the only one to call the spell on the House a "Blood Ward"? I'd heard it on other forums a few times and figured that was the name.
I don't think it's in the books at all. I think it might originate in fanfiction.


__________________
http://www.cosforums.com/images/img/401694897da473df47.png[/img]
People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey stuff...

....I miss David Tennant....
  #1024  
Old March 25th, 2012, 7:31 pm
ShadowSonic  Male.gif ShadowSonic is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 1160 days
Location: Regina, SK, Canada
Posts: 1,100
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

I think it's just a fan-nickname, I've never read as anything more than "protection spell" in fanfics.


  #1025  
Old March 25th, 2012, 7:52 pm
wolfbrother  Male.gif wolfbrother is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 2308 days
Age: 25
Posts: 1,228
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

I'm leaning towards it being caused by the protection charm. Umbridge has a similar reaction to Vernon when she manhandles Marietta and that was caused by Dumbledore.


  #1026  
Old March 25th, 2012, 8:34 pm
HedwigOwl's Avatar
HedwigOwl  Female.gif HedwigOwl is offline
Curse Breaker
 
Joined: 3612 days
Location: Surfing a Probability Wave
Posts: 6,718
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfbrother View Post
I'm leaning towards it being caused by the protection charm. Umbridge has a similar reaction to Vernon when she manhandles Marietta and that was caused by Dumbledore.
The blood protection charm, though, seems specifically targeted to Voldemort. That is why Dumbledore tells Snape that Voldemort himself must be the one to kill Harry, that it is essential it be that way -- the blood protection will allow Harry to live. So Vernon wouldn't count.


__________________
http://www.cosforums.com/images/img/401694897da473df47.png[/img]
People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey stuff...

....I miss David Tennant....
  #1027  
Old March 25th, 2012, 9:35 pm
willfitz's Avatar
willfitz  Male.gif willfitz is offline
I gave String Theory to my Cat...
 
Joined: 1994 days
Location: Victoria, BC
Age: 23
Posts: 3,467
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by HedwigOwl View Post
The blood protection charm, though, seems specifically targeted to Voldemort. That is why Dumbledore tells Snape that Voldemort himself must be the one to kill Harry, that it is essential it be that way -- the blood protection will allow Harry to live. So Vernon wouldn't count.
In that instance, though, Dumbledore refers to the blood protection which shields Harry from Voldemort in person everywhere, not just at home. The way I read it, the extension of the charm to Privet Dr. must protect Harry from the advances of anyone working for Voldemort, not just Voldemort himself.

I honestly don't see how that scene could have been a result of anything other than Harry being desperate and afraid- the typical precursors of non-wand magic in underage wizards. Now that Harry had more control, I believe the result was more controlled. I just don't think that the protection could possibly have protected Harry from the Dursleys, when they had absolutely no influence on the sacrifice which Lily made. I think we'd have to look back at all of the instances where that protection is explained or defined by Dumbledore.


__________________


"The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress."

"It is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it."
Joseph Joubert

"...He seeks to know himself and his fellow man rather than to know a god. An Atheist believes that a hospital should be built instead of a church. An Atheist believes that a deed must be done instead of a prayer said. An Atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death..." -Madalyn Murray
  #1028  
Old March 25th, 2012, 10:03 pm
horcrux4's Avatar
horcrux4  Female.gif horcrux4 is offline
Hogwarts Graduate
 
Joined: 3170 days
Location: Sheffield UK
Age: 69
Posts: 2,167
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by willfitz View Post
In that instance, though, Dumbledore refers to the blood protection which shields Harry from Voldemort in person everywhere, not just at home. The way I read it, the extension of the charm to Privet Dr. must protect Harry from the advances of anyone working for Voldemort, not just Voldemort himself.

I honestly don't see how that scene could have been a result of anything other than Harry being desperate and afraid- the typical precursors of non-wand magic in underage wizards. Now that Harry had more control, I believe the result was more controlled. I just don't think that the protection could possibly have protected Harry from the Dursleys, when they had absolutely no influence on the sacrifice which Lily made. I think we'd have to look back at all of the instances where that protection is explained or defined by Dumbledore.
I had the impression there were two slightly different charms at work - the protection of Lily's blood which prevented Voldemort from killing Harry anywhere, and a protection Dumbledore put on the house (also connected with Lily's blood) which prevented Voldemort or the Death Eaters from getting at Harry there. I can't see that either would protect Harry from the Dursleys, or indeed anyone else but Voldemort and the DEs.


__________________
Meet Mickey, my new kitten!
Quote:
"From this time forth we shall be leaving the firm foundation of fact and journeying together through the murky marshes of memory into thickets of wildest guesswork."
Albus Dumbledore, HBP
  #1029  
Old March 25th, 2012, 10:13 pm
HedwigOwl's Avatar
HedwigOwl  Female.gif HedwigOwl is offline
Curse Breaker
 
Joined: 3612 days
Location: Surfing a Probability Wave
Posts: 6,718
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by horcrux4 View Post
I had the impression there were two slightly different charms at work - the protection of Lily's blood which prevented Voldemort from killing Harry anywhere, and a protection Dumbledore put on the house (also connected with Lily's blood) which prevented Voldemort or the Death Eaters from getting at Harry there. I can't see that either would protect Harry from the Dursleys, or indeed anyone else but Voldemort and the DEs.
I agree. It's my opinion that Harry himself did this subconsciously; he was trying to pry Vernon's fingers from his throat with one hand, but was also holding his wand in the other. An intent by Harry to make Vernon let go could have been accomplished as a type of nonverbal magic, helped along by the wand.


__________________
http://www.cosforums.com/images/img/401694897da473df47.png[/img]
People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey stuff...

....I miss David Tennant....
  #1030  
Old March 25th, 2012, 11:00 pm
wolfbrother  Male.gif wolfbrother is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 2308 days
Age: 25
Posts: 1,228
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by willfitz View Post
I honestly don't see how that scene could have been a result of anything other than Harry being desperate and afraid- the typical precursors of non-wand magic in underage wizards. Now that Harry had more control, I believe the result was more controlled. I just don't think that the protection could possibly have protected Harry from the Dursleys, when they had absolutely no influence on the sacrifice which Lily made. I think we'd have to look back at all of the instances where that protection is explained or defined by Dumbledore.
Has it been mentioned that the protection applied only against Voldemort and his people ? I always assumed that the protection protected Harry from anyone. This would also take care of edge cases that might occur if the charm worked only against certain people.


  #1031  
Old March 25th, 2012, 11:53 pm
willfitz's Avatar
willfitz  Male.gif willfitz is offline
I gave String Theory to my Cat...
 
Joined: 1994 days
Location: Victoria, BC
Age: 23
Posts: 3,467
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfbrother View Post
Has it been mentioned that the protection applied only against Voldemort and his people ? I always assumed that the protection protected Harry from anyone. This would also take care of edge cases that might occur if the charm worked only against certain people.
OotP (Dumbledore)While you can still call home the place where your mother's blood dwells, there you cannot be touched or harmed by Voldemort. He shed her blood, but it lives on in you and her sister. Her blood became your refuge. You need return there only once a year, but as long as you can still call it home, there he cannot hurt you. Your aunt knows this. I explained what I had done in the letter I left, with you, on her doorstep. She knows that allowing you houseroom may well have kept you alive for the past fifteen years.

It seems to me that, according to this quote, it is protection only against Voldemort and any Voldemort-motivated plots, especially given that the protection is connected to the protection in Harry's blood, which is a shield against Voldemort alone.


__________________


"The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress."

"It is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it."
Joseph Joubert

"...He seeks to know himself and his fellow man rather than to know a god. An Atheist believes that a hospital should be built instead of a church. An Atheist believes that a deed must be done instead of a prayer said. An Atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death..." -Madalyn Murray
  #1032  
Old March 26th, 2012, 1:41 pm
wolfbrother  Male.gif wolfbrother is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 2308 days
Age: 25
Posts: 1,228
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by willfitz View Post
It seems to me that, according to this quote, it is protection only against Voldemort and any Voldemort-motivated plots, especially given that the protection is connected to the protection in Harry's blood, which is a shield against Voldemort alone.
I'm not convinced by that line. Harry's main threat came from Voldemort and that is why, I think, Dumbledore mentioned Voldemort there. I'd be fine with it if the protection worked against Voldemort alone but the protection worked against death eaters as well.

Does this mean that the protective charm had to figure out intent of a person and the person behind it all to apply ? How many degrees of separation would there need to be from Voldemort for the charm to fail to detect him ? This would also mean that Harry was completely unprotected from the dementors in OoTP (even when at home) because the dementors were following Ministry orders and Umbridge was not following Voldemort's orders.

This rounds back to my earlier question on how Voldemort could have been so sure about the protection. Given that it is likely that Dumbledore's charm was his own creation and not something found or documented in a book, I find it hard to believe that Voldemort would deliver verdict on it without attempts to resolve ambiguities on his own.

IMO the protective charm was analogous to the Fidelius charm the Potters were under. The Fidelius charm was performed primarily to hide them from Voldemort and his people but the charm couldn't pick and choose. It hid the Potters from the good guys as well as the bad guys. I think Harry's charm worked that way as well. Harry was protected from everyone at Privet Drive including the good guys who would obviously never try to harm him.


  #1033  
Old March 26th, 2012, 7:30 pm
willfitz's Avatar
willfitz  Male.gif willfitz is offline
I gave String Theory to my Cat...
 
Joined: 1994 days
Location: Victoria, BC
Age: 23
Posts: 3,467
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfbrother View Post
I'm not convinced by that line. Harry's main threat came from Voldemort and that is why, I think, Dumbledore mentioned Voldemort there. I'd be fine with it if the protection worked against Voldemort alone but the protection worked against death eaters as well.

Does this mean that the protective charm had to figure out intent of a person and the person behind it all to apply ? How many degrees of separation would there need to be from Voldemort for the charm to fail to detect him ? This would also mean that Harry was completely unprotected from the dementors in OoTP (even when at home) because the dementors were following Ministry orders and Umbridge was not following Voldemort's orders.

This rounds back to my earlier question on how Voldemort could have been so sure about the protection. Given that it is likely that Dumbledore's charm was his own creation and not something found or documented in a book, I find it hard to believe that Voldemort would deliver verdict on it without attempts to resolve ambiguities on his own.

IMO the protective charm was analogous to the Fidelius charm the Potters were under. The Fidelius charm was performed primarily to hide them from Voldemort and his people but the charm couldn't pick and choose. It hid the Potters from the good guys as well as the bad guys. I think Harry's charm worked that way as well. Harry was protected from everyone at Privet Drive including the good guys who would obviously never try to harm him.
Well, first of all, we know that it doesn't act like a Fidelius Charm. The FC is used sparingly because of how extremely powerful and life-changing its effects are. The house never was hidden from anyone who normally would visit the Dursleys in their day-to-day life- the mailman, Aunt Marge, Ms. Figg, etc.

Beyond that, though, think of the magical characters who gained entrance to the house with no problem, whatsoever: Dobby, the Weasleys, the perpetrators of the Seven Potters scheme. I don't believe there was anything stopping any of those members of the magical community from punching Harry in the face, so to me, there does seem to be something of a selective filter at play.


__________________


"The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress."

"It is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it."
Joseph Joubert

"...He seeks to know himself and his fellow man rather than to know a god. An Atheist believes that a hospital should be built instead of a church. An Atheist believes that a deed must be done instead of a prayer said. An Atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death..." -Madalyn Murray
  #1034  
Old March 26th, 2012, 10:35 pm
wolfbrother  Male.gif wolfbrother is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 2308 days
Age: 25
Posts: 1,228
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by willfitz View Post
Well, first of all, we know that it doesn't act like a Fidelius Charm. The FC is used sparingly because of how extremely powerful and life-changing its effects are. The house never was hidden from anyone who normally would visit the Dursleys in their day-to-day life- the mailman, Aunt Marge, Ms. Figg, etc.

Beyond that, though, think of the magical characters who gained entrance to the house with no problem, whatsoever: Dobby, the Weasleys, the perpetrators of the Seven Potters scheme. I don't believe there was anything stopping any of those members of the magical community from punching Harry in the face, so to me, there does seem to be something of a selective filter at play.
IMO the charm was supposed to protect Harry, not hide the house. So you could get in the house and break Harry's nose if you wanted to, but you couldn't kill him. To me it makes more sense for Dumbledore to design a charm that protected Harry from everyone rather than certain specific individuals. His reasoning for using the blood protection was that Voldemort would underestimate it and not due it inherently being superior to other charms. This suggests that you could break the charm given sufficient know-how.


  #1035  
Old April 1st, 2012, 3:25 am
HedwigOwl's Avatar
HedwigOwl  Female.gif HedwigOwl is offline
Curse Breaker
 
Joined: 3612 days
Location: Surfing a Probability Wave
Posts: 6,718
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfbrother View Post
IMO the charm was supposed to protect Harry, not hide the house. So you could get in the house and break Harry's nose if you wanted to, but you couldn't kill him. To me it makes more sense for Dumbledore to design a charm that protected Harry from everyone rather than certain specific individuals. His reasoning for using the blood protection was that Voldemort would underestimate it and not due it inherently being superior to other charms. This suggests that you could break the charm given sufficient know-how.
I don't think it's possible to break a blood charm. I think what Dumbledore did realize, was that every other type of protection charm could be overcome eventually by Voldemort, so extending the blood charm to Petunia's home was the best chance to protect Harry. Of course, he could die other ways -- falling off a broom, for example; but as we see at the end, the blood charm holds.


__________________
http://www.cosforums.com/images/img/401694897da473df47.png[/img]
People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey stuff...

....I miss David Tennant....
  #1036  
Old April 1st, 2012, 4:02 pm
wolfbrother  Male.gif wolfbrother is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 2308 days
Age: 25
Posts: 1,228
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by HedwigOwl View Post
I don't think it's possible to break a blood charm. I think what Dumbledore did realize, was that every other type of protection charm could be overcome eventually by Voldemort, so extending the blood charm to Petunia's home was the best chance to protect Harry. Of course, he could die other ways -- falling off a broom, for example; but as we see at the end, the blood charm holds.
Dumbledore's reasoning for picking the blood protection seemed to be based on Voldemort's weakness for understanding that type of magic. The way I read it, the protection was the strongest he could give Harry precisely because Voldemort was weak in that area.


  #1037  
Old April 2nd, 2012, 6:52 pm
StarryVeil  Female.gif StarryVeil is offline
Second Year
 
Joined: 872 days
Location: Godric's Hollow
Age: 20
Posts: 168
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

I haven't read through this whole thread so I don't know if this has been discussed before. One thing that has always bothered me is why James and Lily had to choose a Secret Keeper from one of their friends. We see in DH that Bill was the SK of Shell Cottage, meaning it is possible to be the SK of your own house. Then why didn't either James or Lily become the SK of their own house in Godric's Hollow, thus making their hideout completely foolproof? This part of the story always struck me as a Harry's-parents-have-to-be-killed-off-in-some-way kind of a thing. But I'd be glad to know if there's a logical explanation for this.


__________________

Picture by LaurelSKY from http://laurelsky.deviantart.com/art/...tter-170927604

"Its hooves made no mark on the soft ground as it stared at Harry with its large, silver eyes. Slowly, it bowed its antlered head. And Harry realized..."Prongs..."
- Hermione's Secret, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
  #1038  
Old April 2nd, 2012, 7:58 pm
ShadowSonic  Male.gif ShadowSonic is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 1160 days
Location: Regina, SK, Canada
Posts: 1,100
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

There probably isn't any explanation other than "I had to kill them somehow" and she may not have thought up the idea of one of the people protected by the Fidelius Charm also being the Secret Keeper.


  #1039  
Old April 3rd, 2012, 12:05 am
Goddess_Clio  Female.gif Goddess_Clio is offline
Seventh Year
 
Joined: 1034 days
Location: The pirate ship Revenge
Age: 29
Posts: 1,849
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by StarryVeil View Post
I haven't read through this whole thread so I don't know if this has been discussed before. One thing that has always bothered me is why James and Lily had to choose a Secret Keeper from one of their friends. We see in DH that Bill was the SK of Shell Cottage, meaning it is possible to be the SK of your own house. Then why didn't either James or Lily become the SK of their own house in Godric's Hollow, thus making their hideout completely foolproof? This part of the story always struck me as a Harry's-parents-have-to-be-killed-off-in-some-way kind of a thing. But I'd be glad to know if there's a logical explanation for this.
First of all, if James or Lily had been the secret keeper for themselves there would have been no story to tell since the story as we know it can only happen if Harry's parents both die.

On the other hand, it might have been a choice they made in order to prove to themselves and to show others that their friends are trustworthy. We know that there was some animosity developing between Sirius and Remus (Sirius suspecting Remus of being the spy) so by chosing one of their friends to keep the biggest secret they had they were showing everyone that they had confidence in those whom they kept close by them, that James and Lily fully trusted their friends even though everyone was telling them not to. In the end they made a bad choice in the last minute switch to Peter but hindsight is 20/20.

Also, I'm rereading POA right now and Rosmerta asks how the Fidelius Charm works so it might not be a very commonly known charm and when it was described to James and Lily it might have been phrased in such a way that they thought they had to choose a third person to be their secret keeper.


__________________
"I could have been in politics 'cause I've always been a big spender."
  #1040  
Old April 3rd, 2012, 2:01 am
Arcus  Male.gif Arcus is offline
Second Year
 
Joined: 1108 days
Location: FL, USA
Posts: 115
Re: Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by StarryVeil View Post
Then why didn't either James or Lily become the SK of their own house in Godric's Hollow, thus making their hideout completely foolproof? This part of the story always struck me as a Harry's-parents-have-to-be-killed-off-in-some-way kind of a thing.
I've asked that question before as well. No definite answer was given. As far as I'm concerned, this is a gaping hole in the story.

You can argue all you want that it was in James' nature to trust his friends and that he felt completely safe using Pettigrew. Nonetheless, there is always a risk in using someone outside the house that's being protected. Keeping the secret keeper inside the protected area nullifies that risk.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goddess_Clio View Post
Also, I'm rereading POA right now and Rosmerta asks how the Fidelius Charm works so it might not be a very commonly known charm and when it was described to James and Lily it might have been phrased in such a way that they thought they had to choose a third person to be their secret keeper.
I find this unlikely. While the Fidelius Charm may remain a mystery to those who've had no experience with it, I doubt very much that it would remain a mystery to the Potters, especially since Dumbledore was directly involved and was probably the one who did the explaining.


__________________
ARCUS
Harry Potter Chat

Last edited by Arcus; April 3rd, 2012 at 2:05 am.
 
Go Back  Chamber of Secrets > Forum Archives > Post DH References

Bookmarks

Tags
basilisk, harry, hole, horcrux, plot


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 5:39 pm.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Original content is Copyright MMII - MMVIII, CoSForums.com. All Rights Reserved.
Other content (posts, images, etc) is Copyright its respective owners.