Login  
 
 
Go Back   Chamber of Secrets > Harry Potter > The Stone > Legilimency Studies

Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2



Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #841  
Old January 18th, 2013, 1:22 am
decaye23  Undisclosed.gif decaye23 is offline
Second Year
 
Joined: 3047 days
Posts: 108
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

i edited my post, i meant proof of how many there were. Not that he had them. Im on my phone now and its rough posting. Have to answer u tomorrow.


Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #842  
Old January 18th, 2013, 1:33 am
mirrormere's Avatar
mirrormere  Undisclosed.gif mirrormere is offline
The Potions Master
 
Joined: 3212 days
Location: En route to Lothlorien
Posts: 1,358
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by decaye23 View Post
i edited my post, i meant proof of how many there were. Not that he had them. Im on my phone now and its rough posting. Have to answer u tomorrow.
I think he already knew there were more than one, he just didn't know there were 7. By the time of OotP, I don't think he wanted to take a chance on killing LV and losing Harry. Or giving LV any inkling that he had the EW by an excessive show of power.


__________________


Mugglenet.com Editorial: The Flaw in the Plan
Potion notes: noxspell.org

NoxSpell7790 on Pottermore and still Slytherin!
Ebony, Phoenix Feather, 11-3/4" . . . Unyielding

Reply With Quote
  #843  
Old January 18th, 2013, 3:45 am
meesha1971's Avatar
meesha1971  Female.gif meesha1971 is offline
Master of the Magical Arts
 
Joined: 5528 days
Location: The Unknowable Room
Age: 49
Posts: 12,731
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldMotherCrow View Post
I know the wand was not made into a Horcrux. But there are examples of near indestructible items in the Harry Potter universe-- among them Horcruxes. But I do not think an item has to be a Horcrux to be almost indestructible; Hermione spoke about how the book she read warned Dark wizards that they needed to put strong enchantments on the item to protect it. I think it is those enchantments that protect the Horcrux, not the fact that an item is a Horcrux that makes it protected. So I am assuming that it is those same enchantments that can be used on other things that wizards don't want destroyed. I think the Elder Wand was probably protected by those same sort of enchantments, and if that is the case, then Dumbledore did have the means to destroy it.
Actually, he would not. The enchantments used on the Horcruxes to protect them were limited. Ginny tried to destroy the diary by flushing it, but it repaired itself due to the enchantments placed upon it. Harry stabs the diary with a basilisk fang and the venom completely destroys it because the only "cure" for basilisk venom is phoenix tears and Fawkes had already left - and he wouldn't have used his tears on the diary anyway. There was no way the diary could repair itself from the damage caused by basilisk venom.

The Elder wand may have been protected by similar enchantments, but as we see with the ring, the Hallows would not be completely destroyed by things like basilisk venom. That demonstrates that the Hallows were protected by something more than the type of enchantments used to create a Horcrux.

Quote:
It was actually the Stone turned three times that summoned the dead, not the ring. It is quite possible that the ring part of the ring had some properties that were completely destroyed by the Sword whacking it received. The Stone was a separate and established item that at some point was incorporated into the ring as a setting. The function of the ring as a whole was destroyed, but an individual element survived, damaged but still working. Since the Stone cracked, I take that as good evidence that it was subject to damage from the same sort of things that would damage Horcruxes. I do not believe that it became invulnerable as soon as the ring was damaged enough to destroy the soulbit.
The ring had minor damage with a crack in the stone - it was not destroyed at all. The band was still intact and it could still be worn as a ring - Harry put the ring on his finger when he used it in fact. The stone had a crack, but still functioned to summon the spirits of the dead.

Quote:
None of the Horcruxes were utterly destroyed, except Ravenclaw's. The Diary had a hole and burnt and soggy pages but remained recognizable for what it was, the Locket was punctured and its glass shattered but it was still there, the Cup mangled but still in existence. I am not seeing much difference between them and the Ring, except the Ring actually had a second item combined to it that did not need to be completely destroyed to destroy the Ring's ability to be a Horcrux. As an individual item, I do not think the Resurrection Stone was a Horcrux.
They were all utterly destroyed except for the ring actually. The diary had a huge gaping hole all the way through it. That utterly destroyed it. A diary with a huge gaping hole in it has been utterly destroyed because it can no longer be used. The glass in the locket was described as being punctured - the locket itself was described as being shattered. It was broken and no longer usable as a locket. The cup was mangled - no longer usable as a cup. It was just a mangled piece of metal after being exposed to basilisk venom.

Destruction doesn't always mean the object won't be recognizable for what it was. Sometimes that is the case, but not always. When my mom's car was totaled, it was still recognizable as a car even though the damage was too extensive to be repaired. Out of all the Horcruxes, the ring was the only one that was not completely destroyed in terms of it's original purpose/function. It was still a ring with the band intact so it could still be worn as a ring and the resurrection stone still functioned exactly as it was supposed to. The ring had minor damage with a crack to the stone - that was all the basilisk venom managed to do to it where it completely burned, shattered, or mangled the other objects it came into contact with so extensively that they could no longer be used for their original purpose. The diary was garbage, the locket was shattered, and the cup was nothing but a mangled piece of metal. After exposure to basilisk venom, the ring should have been nothing more than a melted/mangled hunk of metal with a stone embedded in it - but that is not what happened at all. That shows that the ring could never be completely destroyed. At best, one could do some minor damage to a Hallow with something extreme like basilisk venom or fiendfyre.

Quote:
I don't think so. I think Dumbledore was too mesmerized by the Hallows to outright destroy one. Once he had it in his possession, why would he? I think he considered himself to be its steward, and figured he could keep it and break its power-- just a small way of achieving the goal of becoming Master of Death, by proving himself better (by using it only for good, and planning on its power to die with him) than all the rest of the Wand's owners.
I disagree. Dumbledore explained to Harry himself that he gave up the idea of ever becoming the Master of Death - and he came to understand that he could never achieve that because of his own flaws. Dumbledore only kept the wand to protect others from it - having it in his possession was the safest hiding place there was. If it had been possible to destroy the wand, Dumbledore would have done so back in 1945 because he had come to consider the wand dangerous.

I would agree that Dumbledore maintained an academic interest in the Hallows so it is likely that he would have wanted to study the wand before destroying it, but he would have destroyed it after studying it if it were possible to do so. As far as I'm concerned that is 100% fact and completely indisputable. Dumbledore would have destroyed the wand if it were possible.

Quote:
It was a Hallow. Dumbledore also had no reason to keep James's Cloak other than it being a Hallow, and he did. I think Dumbledore's fascination with the Hallows persisted throughout his life. I do think the way he perceived them did evolve-- in Kings Cross Dumbledore indicated that the Wand was really the least of the Hallows, but I think their symbolism was still so important to Dumbledore that he would not engineer any of them to be destroyed without dire need and no other recourse.
Dumbledore's only interest in the cloak was academic - he wanted to study it because he realized it might be a Hallow. He had every intention of returning the cloak to James after completing his examination of it - and after James died, he did have a reason to keep it because he intended to pass it along to Harry when he was older. Dumbledore passed the cloak along to Harry because it was rightfully his and never once considered keeping it for himself. Being fascinated because he realized the cloak might be one of the Hallows and wanting to examine it is not the same thing as being obsessed to the point that he would try to steal someone's property. The cloak presented no danger to anyone like the wand did so there was never any reason to consider destroying the cloak.

The wand did present a danger and that is precisely why Dumbledore would have destroyed it if that were possible.

Quote:
Dumbledore seemed to have been convinced that if he arranged his death with Snape, the power of the wand would stay with him when he died-- although that is not altogether clear in the text, because Dumbledore may also have also intended for Snape to have the wand.
It is not possible for Dumbledore to have intended for Snape to be master of the wand because Dumbledore would have known that giving Snape permission to kill him nullified any defeat. For Snape to become master of the Elder wand, he would have had to defeat Dumbledore against Dumbledore's will. Dumbledore telling Snape to kill him guaranteed that Snape could not become master of the wand so we know for certain that was not his intention.

Likewise, Dumbledore knew that the Elder wand would not give anyone any genuine advantage. He knew better than anyone that the Elder wand was not unbeatable because he had beaten it himself. Snape having the wand would only be a guarantee that Voldemort would get it because Snape was not capable of defeating Voldemort. The Elder wand would not change that. That's why Dumbledore never intended for Harry to have it either. The only advantage the Elder wand gave to Harry was that being its true master prevented Voldemort from being able to use it against him. Had the situation been reversed with Harry using the Elder wand, he would have lost the duel because the wand was not unbeatable and Harry was not capable of defeating Voldemort without some kind of advantage or technicality to help him. Dumbledore knew that the only logical option was to remove the Elder wand from the equation completely. That's why the fact that he tried to break the wand's power proves that it could not be destroyed. There were no other options.

Quote:
Harry's baffling decision to not just break the Elder wand in two (Neville was there with the Sword-- shouldn't have been too hard to make kindling out of the Wand), is the only thing that gives me pause. But I still have to contend with the idea that some items are indestructible by no means whatsoever, when nothing in the text says that the Hallows cannot even be destroyed by things that pierce the very most powerful protective enchantments that are used to stop things like Horcruxes from being destroyed. Why place a limit on the most powerful enchantments, first mentioned in DH, and then not have it apply in this situation in DH?
The text shows that the Hallows could not be destroyed - that's more effective than simply telling. Harry's decision was not baffling at all. The wand could not be destroyed so the only logical option was to hide it and try to die undefeated to break its power - which is exactly what Dumbledore tried to do. Harry was not as powerful as Dumbledore so trying to hide the wand by keeping the wand in his possession would be a mistake. Even his best friends were having difficulty resisting the temptation of the wand so it was in Harry's best interest to hide it somewhere else and make sure nobody could figure out where it was. That way, even if he failed to die undefeated, the wand would still be hidden and not an immediate threat to anyone.

Quote:
As far as Dumbledore goes, I think he wanted to depower the Wand rather than destroy a Hallow. He had his plan, and was determined to stick to it even with the possibility that it could all go wrong (which it did), in my opinion.
Dumbledore had no problem trying to destroy the ring. He may have given in to the temptation to try and use it first, but he did attempt to destroy it. He only managed to damage it enough to destroy the fragment of soul encased in it because the Hallows were shown to be indestructible. Dumbledore was not against destroying the Hallows so the only reason for him not to destroy the wand was that it could not be destroyed.

Dumbledore was not so stupid that he would put people's lives at risk just for the sake of maintaining a historical object - particularly one he considered so dangerous. The bottom line was that Dumbledore did not want anyone to be able to master the wand - which is why it is indisputable that he would have destroyed the wand if it were possible to do so. It was not about keeping the wand for himself or protecting a Hallow. It was about protecting others from what he considered to be a very dangerous wand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mirrormere View Post
I think he already knew there were more than one, he just didn't know there were 7. By the time of OotP, I don't think he wanted to take a chance on killing LV and losing Harry. Or giving LV any inkling that he had the EW by an excessive show of power.
Dumbledore did not try to kill Voldemort in OOTP because he believed there were more Horcruxes - which meant that Voldemort could not be killed until all of the Horcruxes had been destroyed. Jo has confirmed that. He didn't know how many Horcruxes Voldemort had made yet - that was why he wanted Slughorn's memory - but he did believe that Voldemort had made more than one because the diary was not protected. Dumbledore lied to Voldemort about why he wasn't trying to kill him because he didn't want Voldemort to realize that he knew about the Horcruxes. The Elder wand had nothing to do with that - Dumbledore knew the wand was not unbeatable and no guarantee of winning anything because he had beaten the wand himself.


__________________

Reform must come from within, not from without. ~ James Cardinal Gibbons

"So, if people want information on my characters, then they have to accept that I'm going to give them the information on the characters. And if they don't like it, that's the nature of fiction. You have to accept someone else's world because they made that world, so they probably know a little better than you do what goes on there." ~ J.K. Rowling


All posts are my opinions and interpretations based on reading the Harry Potter books and interviews with J.K. Rowling.

Reply With Quote
  #844  
Old January 18th, 2013, 2:39 pm
HRW  Male.gif HRW is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 2877 days
Location: Under Fidelius Charm
Posts: 410
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

I would also add that from the impression I got the Hallow that had a major control over Dumbledore was always the Resurrection stone which would explain why he found it hard to resist when he saw the stone buried in the Riddle house. He wanted the Stone initially to free himself from the shackles placed on him and later to perhaps apologize to his sister. He had the Wand for more than 50 years and any power it might have initially had on him would have long disappeared and I don't think he would have had any problems in breaking the wand had that been possible.


Reply With Quote
  #845  
Old January 18th, 2013, 2:55 pm
mirrormere's Avatar
mirrormere  Undisclosed.gif mirrormere is offline
The Potions Master
 
Joined: 3212 days
Location: En route to Lothlorien
Posts: 1,358
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
Actually, he would not. The enchantments used on the Horcruxes to protect them were limited. Ginny tried to destroy the diary by flushing it, but it repaired itself due to the enchantments placed upon it. Harry stabs the diary with a basilisk fang and the venom completely destroys it because the only "cure" for basilisk venom is phoenix tears and Fawkes had already left - and he wouldn't have used his tears on the diary anyway. There was no way the diary could repair itself from the damage caused by basilisk venom.

The Elder wand may have been protected by similar enchantments, but as we see with the ring, the Hallows would not be completely destroyed by things like basilisk venom. That demonstrates that the Hallows were protected by something more than the type of enchantments used to create a Horcrux.
I’ve reread the pertinent parts and as OldMotherCrow says, the damage to the other horcruxes, with the exception of Ravenclaw’s diadem, did not seem to incur much more damage than the ring did. And there is no instance that we are shown where someone purposely tries to destroy a Hallow, so there is no way to tell if they are absolutely impervious to destruction. JKR does not tell us that directly nor do I believe it is inferred.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
The ring had minor damage with a crack in the stone - it was not destroyed at all. The band was still intact and it could still be worn as a ring - Harry put the ring on his finger when he used it in fact. The stone had a crack, but still functioned to summon the spirits of the dead.
Actually, the stone was separated from the ring when Harry used it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
It is not possible for Dumbledore to have intended for Snape to be master of the wand because Dumbledore would have known that giving Snape permission to kill him nullified any defeat. For Snape to become master of the Elder wand, he would have had to defeat Dumbledore against Dumbledore's will. Dumbledore telling Snape to kill him guaranteed that Snape could not become master of the wand so we know for certain that was not his intention.
In two places we are told it is impossible to perform an Unforgivable Curse without real intent behind it. To perform an AK, Snape would have wanted to murder DD when he cast that curse. Snape’s intent, at that moment, and DD subsequent death would have been sufficient for the Elder Wand to have changed masters. Faux Moody also says the AK “needs a powerful bit of magic behind it.” That power would quite easily attract the wand since that is it’s only loyalty.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
Snape having the wand would only be a guarantee that Voldemort would get it because Snape was not capable of defeating Voldemort. The Elder wand would not change that. That's why Dumbledore never intended for Harry to have it either. The only advantage the Elder wand gave to Harry was that being its true master prevented Voldemort from being able to use it against him. Had the situation been reversed with Harry using the Elder wand, he would have lost the duel because the wand was not unbeatable and Harry was not capable of defeating Voldemort without some kind of advantage or technicality to help him. Dumbledore knew that the only logical option was to remove the Elder wand from the equation completely. That's why the fact that he tried to break the wand's power proves that it could not be destroyed. There were no other options.
I think the logic here might be a bit flawed. If DD intended to break the power of the Elder Wand by assisted suicide, why didn’t he warn Snape that the power of the wand was still active? Upon his death DD knew that Draco had become the master of the wand – why didn’t DD’s portrait warn Snape that the wand needed to be hidden and kept away from LV? DD failed to inactivate the wand’s power and the portrait would have known how dangerous that was to Snape and ultimately to Harry’s mission. DD’s overriding goal was to get rid of LV. Snape was the one that had to tell Harry he was a horcrux to that end. To endanger Snape would be to endanger the entire mission.

The only explanation, in my view, was that DD indeed wanted the power of the wand to be active. He wanted Snape to end up with it (as its master).

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
Dumbledore was not so stupid that he would put people's lives at risk just for the sake of maintaining a historical object - particularly one he considered so dangerous. The bottom line was that Dumbledore did not want anyone to be able to master the wand - which is why it is indisputable that he would have destroyed the wand if it were possible to do so. It was not about keeping the wand for himself or protecting a Hallow. It was about protecting others from what he considered to be a very dangerous wand.
Exactly – DD was not a stupid man. He knew how dangerous the wand was, so why not warn Snape to hide it where it could not be found? If that were his original intention?


__________________


Mugglenet.com Editorial: The Flaw in the Plan
Potion notes: noxspell.org

NoxSpell7790 on Pottermore and still Slytherin!
Ebony, Phoenix Feather, 11-3/4" . . . Unyielding

Reply With Quote
  #846  
Old January 18th, 2013, 4:36 pm
meesha1971's Avatar
meesha1971  Female.gif meesha1971 is offline
Master of the Magical Arts
 
Joined: 5528 days
Location: The Unknowable Room
Age: 49
Posts: 12,731
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRW View Post
I would also add that from the impression I got the Hallow that had a major control over Dumbledore was always the Resurrection stone which would explain why he found it hard to resist when he saw the stone buried in the Riddle house. He wanted the Stone initially to free himself from the shackles placed on him and later to perhaps apologize to his sister. He had the Wand for more than 50 years and any power it might have initially had on him would have long disappeared and I don't think he would have had any problems in breaking the wand had that been possible.
I agree. Dumbledore's fascination was always with the resurrection stone. Initially, he saw that as a possible means to return his parents to life - which would relieve him of the responsibility of caring for his siblings. After he realized the stone would not actually bring a person back to life, he felt the stone would give him the opportunity to summon the spirits of his parents and sister to apologize to them for what he had done - which he later realized was also selfish because he would have been forcing them to appear simply to make himself feel better.

Regardless, it was the stone that Dumbledore most valued among the Hallows - and that was also the one that he had no problem attempting to destroy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mirrormere View Post
I’ve reread the pertinent parts and as OldMotherCrow says, the damage to the other horcruxes, with the exception of Ravenclaw’s diadem, did not seem to incur much more damage than the ring did. And there is no instance that we are shown where someone purposely tries to destroy a Hallow, so there is no way to tell if they are absolutely impervious to destruction. JKR does not tell us that directly nor do I believe it is inferred.
Actually, they incurred quite a bit more damage than the ring because none of them were usable insofar as their orginal purpose. The diary could not be written in with a large hole burned through the center of the book. The locket could no longer be worn after it was shattered. The cup was merely a mangled hunk of metal. Those objects were completely useless after being exposed to basilisk venom - no more than garbage. The ring was still a ring with the band intact and only minor damage to the stone that did not prevent it from working as it was supposed to work.

Quote:
Actually, the stone was separated from the ring when Harry used it.
I double checked that and you are right - however, the point still stands that the crack in the stone did not prevent it from working as it was supposed to work. Also, Dumbledore removing the stone from the ring does not change the fact that the ring was still intact after being exposed to basilisk venom. Dumbledore was wearing the ring when he picked Harry up in HBP - after he had destroyed the Horcrux.

HBPHe shrugged and spread his hands wide, as though to say that age had its compensations, and Harry noticed a ring on his uninjured hand that he had never seen Dumbledore wear before: It was large, rather clumsily made of what looked like gold, and was set with a heavy black stone that had cracked down the middle. Slughorn’s eyes lingered for a moment on the ring too, and Harry saw a tiny frown momentarily crease his wide forehead.


Harry also saw the ring as he was leaving one of his meetings with Dumbledore.

HBPHe turned away again, and was almost at the door when he saw it. Sitting on one of the little spindle-legged tables that supported so many frail-looking silver instruments, was an ugly gold ring set with a large, cracked, black stone.

“Sir,” said Harry, staring at it. “That ring —”

“Yes?” said Dumbledore.

“You were wearing it when we visited Professor Slughorn that night.”

“So I was,” Dumbledore agreed.

“But isn’t it … sir, isn’t it the same ring Marvolo Gaunt showed Ogden?”

Dumbledore bowed his head. “The very same.”


In both examples, the ring itself was intact with only a crack in the stone - which we are later shown had no impact on the function of the stone at all. The text gives us a very clear example of someone attempting to destroy a Hallow and failing to do so.

Quote:
In two places we are told it is impossible to perform an Unforgivable Curse without real intent behind it. To perform an AK, Snape would have wanted to murder DD when he cast that curse. Snape’s intent, at that moment, and DD subsequent death would have been sufficient for the Elder Wand to have changed masters. Faux Moody also says the AK “needs a powerful bit of magic behind it.” That power would quite easily attract the wand since that is it’s only loyalty.
It was also explained - and shown - that it was not necessary to kill someone to become master of the Elder wand. A fact that Dumbledore was well aware of. Draco mastered the wand by disarming Dumbledore. Harry mastered the wand by physically yanking Draco's wand out of his hand - he didn't even use magic. The Elder wand would only transfer allegiance if - and only if - its current master was defeated.

Dumbledore giving Snape permission to kill him nullified any defeat. He was not going to fight back or defend himself in any way. That was not murder - it was nothing more than an assisted suicide. Dumbledore planned his own death and that ensured that Snape would not become master of the Elder wand. It simply was not possible for that to happen with Dumbledore allowing that to happen. Likewise, that has no impact on Snape's intentions because he did intend to kill Dumbledore. He had agreed to do so, promised he would, and even took the Unbreakable Vow with Narcissa to further add to that promise. Snape's intentions were never an issue. The question was why he killed Dumbledore - not whether or not he intended to.

That is also why the Elder wand did not transfer allegiance when Voldemort "killed" Harry in the forest. Harry allowed that to happen so he remained master of the Elder wand. Jo has confirmed all of that.

Quote:
I think the logic here might be a bit flawed. If DD intended to break the power of the Elder Wand by assisted suicide, why didn’t he warn Snape that the power of the wand was still active? Upon his death DD knew that Draco had become the master of the wand – why didn’t DD’s portrait warn Snape that the wand needed to be hidden and kept away from LV? DD failed to inactivate the wand’s power and the portrait would have known how dangerous that was to Snape and ultimately to Harry’s mission. DD’s overriding goal was to get rid of LV. Snape was the one that had to tell Harry he was a horcrux to that end. To endanger Snape would be to endanger the entire mission.

The only explanation, in my view, was that DD indeed wanted the power of the wand to be active. He wanted Snape to end up with it (as its master).
If Snape died, nothing would change beyond Dumbledore's portrait having to come up with a different way to tell Harry that he was a Horcrux - and there were numerous ways that could be accomplished. Snape was never the only option there - and he was actually the least likely to succeed. It was only luck that enabled Snape to give Harry those memories. If Harry had not chosen to go to the Shrieking Shack at that time - or had just left after Voldemort killed Snape - he would never have seen Snape's memories. That wouldn't change anything because there were other ways for him to find out.

Dumbledore did not want Snape to know about the Elder wand from what we are shown. Regardless, it was not necessary to tell Snape anything about the Elder wand because Voldemort was going to believe Snape was the master of the Elder wand regardless because Snape had killed Dumbledore. Voldemort believed it was necessary to kill in order to master the wand so he would never have considered Draco as a possibility. Dumbledore knew that from the moment he asked Snape to kill him - he knew that Voldemort would eventually kill Snape to try to master the Elder wand himself. He also knew that would fail because Snape was not the master of the Elder wand. Whether the power of the wand was broken or Voldemort killed the wrong person wasn't going to change the fact that Voldemort would not be able to master the wand either way. Draco becoming master of the wand made the situation more complicated, but the end result was going to be the same as far as Voldemort's attempts to master the wand went. Snape had already agreed to protect Draco and it was unlikely that Voldemort would kill Draco - his practice was to torture Death Eaters that failed him rather than to kill them. Not saying anything was the more logical course of action there because giving any kind of warning would most likely have put Draco in danger.

I do agree that it was rather callous for Dumbledore not to tell Snape that killing him would result in Voldemort eventually killing Snape, but I can also understand why he chose not to. Snape would not have agreed to go along with it if he had known he was signing his own death warrant by doing so. Likewise, Dumbledore had always limited how much information he gave Snape because he knew there was always a risk of Voldemort finding out any information Snape had. That's why Dumbledore never told Snape anything about the Horcruxes or the Elder wand from what we're shown. Dumbledore never told Snape anything that he did not want Voldemort to know.

Quote:
Exactly – DD was not a stupid man. He knew how dangerous the wand was, so why not warn Snape to hide it where it could not be found? If that were his original intention?
Hiding the wand was not going to work. Voldemort would find it eventually because he wasn't going to give up until he did. If that meant ripping Snape's mind to shreds, he would have done so because finding that wand and mastering it was far more important to him than the life of a single Death Eater. Once Snape had killed Dumbledore, Voldemort was going to believe that he was the master of the Elder wand. If the wand had not been in Dumbledore's tomb, Voldemort would have then turned to Snape to discover where it was hidden. If Snape were the one to hide the wand, that would only make it easier for Voldemort to discover where it was hidden. That's why Dumbledore never told Snape anything that he did not want Voldemort to know - there was too much risk of Voldemort being able to get that information from Snape.

It was more logical to simply let Voldemort find the wand and assume that Snape was the master of it. That ensured that Voldemort would not become the master of the wand because he would kill the wrong person. Snape knew nothing about the wand or Draco disarming Dumbledore so he could not endanger Draco in any way. Even if Voldemort ripped his mind to shreds, he would not learn about Draco because the only living people who knew that Draco had disarmed Dumbledore were Draco and Harry. And Draco had no idea that disarming Dumbledore had made him the master of a very powerful wand. Voldemort would never have known about Draco if Harry hadn't told him - at which point, it did not matter because Harry had already become master of the Elder wand by defeating Draco.

Harry becoming master of the Elder wand was a lucky break. Dumbledore never intended for that to happen, but it worked out to Harry's advantage because it prevented Voldemort from being able to use the wand against him.


__________________

Reform must come from within, not from without. ~ James Cardinal Gibbons

"So, if people want information on my characters, then they have to accept that I'm going to give them the information on the characters. And if they don't like it, that's the nature of fiction. You have to accept someone else's world because they made that world, so they probably know a little better than you do what goes on there." ~ J.K. Rowling


All posts are my opinions and interpretations based on reading the Harry Potter books and interviews with J.K. Rowling.


Last edited by meesha1971; January 18th, 2013 at 4:39 pm.
Reply With Quote
  #847  
Old January 18th, 2013, 4:47 pm
OldMotherCrow's Avatar
OldMotherCrow  Female.gif OldMotherCrow is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 4238 days
Location: Here. I'm pretty sure of it.
Posts: 1,297
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
The Elder wand may have been protected by similar enchantments, but as we see with the ring, the Hallows would not be completely destroyed by things like basilisk venom. That demonstrates that the Hallows were protected by something more than the type of enchantments used to create a Horcrux.
The Stone was cracked but still worked. That it was damaged proved that the Sword could damage it. If it was hit again with the Sword and split completely in two, would it still work?

I think we were shown enough about damaged wands to know that they tend not to work well when cracked-- Ron's cracked wand in CoS often malfunctioned, and Harry's cracked wand in DH wouldn't work at all. So I imagine that if the Elder wand was cracked or split completely in two that it would suffer similar problems. The Elder Wand was also shown to have the extraordinary power to repair another wand that was broken. But if it was broken, how could it repair itself?

So, that's my problem--or two problems, actually-- when it comes to believing that the Hallows were indestructible. First is the introduction of what can beat protective enchantments, and the second is how damaged wands are supposed to work.

Quote:
The ring had minor damage with a crack in the stone - it was not destroyed at all. The band was still intact and it could still be worn as a ring - Harry put the ring on his finger when he used it in fact. The stone had a crack, but still functioned to summon the spirits of the dead
.

Mirrormere already pointed out that Harry did not wear the Ring. Was the band still intact, without a crack or dent in it? I don't think the fact that Dumbledore could wear it on his finger proves anything, since the Diary could still be put on a bookshelf if one wanted to do such a thing.

Quote:
Dumbledore only kept the wand to protect others from it - having it in his possession was the safest hiding place there was. If it had been possible to destroy the wand, Dumbledore would have done so back in 1945 because he had come to consider the wand dangerous.
I don't think Dumbledore ever expressed a plan to destroy the Elder Wand as soon as it came into his possession, or that his plan was thwarted in 1945 by the indestructibility of the Wand. With Grindelwald defeated and the Wand in his possession to be used for Good, and no one aware that Dumbledore possessed the Wand (other than Grindelwald, who seems to have kept that a secret), I don't actually see that destroying the Wand was a priority for Dumbledore. It is only at the end of GoF that Dumbledore realizes that Voldemort will likely start looking for a powerful wand, and only since the beginning of HBP that Dumbledore finds himself in immediate danger of being killed by Voldemort. I think those two points would be more likely for Dumbledore to start considering what should be done about the Elder Wand.

Quote:
I would agree that Dumbledore maintained an academic interest in the Hallows so it is likely that he would have wanted to study the wand before destroying it, but he would have destroyed it after studying it if it were possible to do so. As far as I'm concerned that is 100% fact and completely indisputable. Dumbledore would have destroyed the wand if it were possible.
I think he would have wanted to keep his wand to use for as long as possible-- Dumbledore had been using that wand for decades, and he knew it and it knew him. He came up with contingency plans to protect it from Voldemort, but in my opinion Dumbledore was too confident in his plans, and that was the downfall. Sometimes the best laid plans just don't work out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mirrormere View Post
I think the logic here might be a bit flawed. If DD intended to break the power of the Elder Wand by assisted suicide, why didn’t he warn Snape that the power of the wand was still active? Upon his death DD knew that Draco had become the master of the wand – why didn’t DD’s portrait warn Snape that the wand needed to be hidden and kept away from LV? DD failed to inactivate the wand’s power and the portrait would have known how dangerous that was to Snape and ultimately to Harry’s mission. DD’s overriding goal was to get rid of LV. Snape was the one that had to tell Harry he was a horcrux to that end. To endanger Snape would be to endanger the entire mission.
I'm not entirely sure what Dumbledore's plan was, but it is a certain thing that it went wrong. I think the simple explanation about why Dumbledore's Portrait did not try to fix the Wand Plot (whatever it was) is that it just didn't know that it had gone wrong. Ghosts are created as an imprint at the time of a persons death, and know all about the events leading up to their death. Headmaster Portraits however seem to come into being at the time of the person's death, but are imprints of the time spent in the headmaster's office. I think the Portrait would know all about what the person did in the office, but I don't know that Hogwarts castle has a level of awareness beyond that. I'd say that Dumbledore's Portrait did not know that Draco disarmed Dumbledore, unless someone thought to mention it to the Portrait.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
In both examples, the ring itself was intact with only a crack in the stone - which we are later shown had no impact on the function of the stone at all. The text gives us a very clear example of someone attempting to destroy a Hallow and failing to do so.
I think Dumbledore was attempting to destroy a Horcrux. The Hallow had been incorporated into the Ring, and the Ring had been made into a Horcrux. Tom Riddle had acquired the Ring when it was already like that, and never knew that the Ring's setting was a Hallow. I think Dumbledore was willing to risk destroying the Hallow because it was part of the Ring that had been turned into a Horcrux, and so needed to be destroyed to kill the soul-bit in it. I think the fact that the Hallow still worked is proof that the Ring was the Horcrux, and as long as it was destroyed beyond magical repair, an individual component part like the Hallow setting did not need to be destroyed. The ring part does not seem to be something that the Hallow needed to function, since it did its Resurrection Stone bit fine without the gold band.

"The Prince's Tale", DHMarvollo Guant's ring lay on the desk before Dumbledore. It was cracked; the sword of Gryffindor lay beside it.


That's a third description of the Ring. That time it is said to be cracked.

Quote:
If Snape died, nothing would change beyond Dumbledore's portrait having to come up with a different way to tell Harry that he was a Horcrux - and there were numerous ways that could be accomplished. Snape was never the only option there - and he was actually the least likely to succeed. It was only luck that enabled Snape to give Harry those memories. If Harry had not chosen to go to the Shrieking Shack at that time - or had just left after Voldemort killed Snape - he would never have seen Snape's memories. That wouldn't change anything because there were other ways for him to find out.
I agree that there were plenty of (much easier and less convoluted) ways to get the information to Harry. This makes me wonder if Dumbledore wanted Snape in place to save Harry after Voldemort failed to kill him and soul-bit in Harry was destroyed, since Voldemort would I think just try again once he discovered Harry still lived. I can't help but think Dumbledore must have had some sort of role in mind for Snape to fulfill considering how much effort Dumbledore went to to place Snape there. Perhaps it was just another part of the plan that went wrong. I really wish Dumbledore had been more clear on what his intended plans were!


__________________
".... You've chosen your way, I've chosen mine."
I love Lily because she chooses a path to match her convictions, and chooses to live her life fighting for what is right. It is our choices that show who we truly are.

"UNTIL THE VERY END"
-- JK Rowling to Harry Potter fans at the beginning of Deathly Hallows, and James Potter to his son at the end of Deathly Hallows.
Reply With Quote
  #848  
Old January 18th, 2013, 5:57 pm
Goddess_Clio  Female.gif Goddess_Clio is offline
Seventh Year
 
Joined: 3165 days
Location: The pirate ship Revenge
Age: 35
Posts: 1,853
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by decaye23 View Post
The backup plan I gathered from the books was if Harry had died...two more people had knowledge of how to kill Voldemort - Ron and Hermione...Harry even gave Neville a little bit of knowledge, as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mirrormere View Post
Ron and Hermione only had knowledge of what horcruxes were and how to destroy them, they would have no idea how to get rid of Voldemort himself. As DD told Harry . . .
The way I interpret this is that Ron and Hermione knew how to destroy the horcruxes and bring about a situation wherein Voldemort is capable of being killed, not necessarily that they were the one meant to do that killing or had any additional secret knowledge about how to kill Voldemort themeselves. So, in a way, I agree with both of you: Ron and Hermione did have knowledge of how to kill Voldemort, or at least bring about his vulnerability to death, but that they themselves were probably not powerful enough to perform the act themselves.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mirrormere View Post
DD says in HBP that he had proof with Riddle diary, which Harry handed him about 3 years previous to their battle. And Voldemort is the one who broke off the battle and left, btw.
That sounds like a defeat to me. If I'm playing a game with someone and we get to a mutually inadvancable position than it would be a stalemate. If I'm playing that game and I'm whoopin' their heiny and they give up and walk away then I'm the winner. In the OOTP duel, LV gave up the fight and forfeited his chance of winning by, I don't know, disapparating from the Minstry or however he left, than Dumbledore was the default winner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by decaye23 View Post
I explained that and you agreed. But, now you seem to be saying DD wanted Snape to descecrate his grave, get the Elder Wand and kill Voldemort with it. Like Voldemort did.
It wasn't Snape's choice to bury Dumbledore with the wand, though. We don't know if it's wizard custom to bury a wizard with his wand, if that was a specific directive in Dumbledore's will or anything else. Had Snape known he was the master of the wand (it appears that he did not know) I don't think he would have allowed the wand to be buried with Dumbledore's body, or he would have created a fake and buried the fake, as he created the fake sword of Gryffindor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mirrormere View Post
Snape would have been in a perfect position to finish off LV. He would have mostly unguarded access to the Dark Lord. He could occlude his intentions from LV. He could probably have done it with his own wand. If Harry didn't make it, I believe DD's portrait would have sent Snape to finish off LV.
I agree with this. It seems far more likely to me that Dumbledore was intending for Snape to do the deed that Harry wouldn't be able to do it Harry died when the horcrux inside him was destroyed. Snape was perfectly placed, had earned the trust of Voldemort and had, I think, the most unguarded access to Voldemort of any of the other Death Eaters.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
The Elder wand may have been protected by similar enchantments, but as we see with the ring, the Hallows would not be completely destroyed by things like basilisk venom. That demonstrates that the Hallows were protected by something more than the type of enchantments used to create a Horcrux.
I agree that the hallows weren't suceptible to destruction by things like Basilisk Venom. But that's because, IMO, the hallows weren't former bits of a human being. The main difference between a horcrux and a hallow to me is that one is literally a sentient bit of a person's soul (with the ability to interact with someone trying to destroy it) that is magically bound to an object, container or vessel whereas the other is a magically created tool or device, sentience arguable. A hallow would no more be susceptible to destruction by venom or poison than my stapler would be. It's entirely reasonable to me to see how an indisputably sentient thing like a horcrux could be destroyed by venom that would destroy any other living thing while not destroying the object that horcrux was bound to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
I would agree that Dumbledore maintained an academic interest in the Hallows so it is likely that he would have wanted to study the wand before destroying it, but he would have destroyed it after studying it if it were possible to do so. As far as I'm concerned that is 100% fact and completely indisputable. Dumbledore would have destroyed the wand if it were possible.
I understand that this is your opinion but, IMO, it is no where near 100% fact, nor completely indisputable as there are several people in this thread who are disputing it with reasonable arguments right now.

Additionally, under this assumption, how do we know that Dumbledore had completed his studies of the Elder Wand? There are people who study one thing their whole life and barely scratch the surface of what they could learn about that subject or object or whatever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
Dumbledore passed the cloak along to Harry because it was rightfully his and never once considered keeping it for himself.
How can you make this assertion when we, as readers, are never privvy to Dumbledore's thoughts? I absolutely believe that it would have crossed Dumbledore's mind to keep the cloak for himself and that it did, for a time.

DH, King's Cross"You have guessed, I know, why the cloak was in my possession on the night your parents died. James had showed it to me just a few days previously. It explained much of his undetected wrong-doing at school. I could hardly believe what I was seeing. I asked to borrow it to examine it. I had long since given up my dream of uniting the hallows but I could not resist, could not help taking a closer look.

"It was a cloak the likes of which I had never seen. Immensely old, perfect in every respect. And then your father died and I had two hallows at last, all to myself."

His tone was unbearably bitter.


I have a feeling you're going to point to the line "I had long since given up my dream of uniting the hallows but I could not resist, could not help taking a closer look" as your evidence that Dumbledore wasn't intending to keep the cloak and probably state that this is your proof that Dumbledore had given up the Hallows hunt long ago, which by his own admission in the above quote is true, but I don't see that it follows that you can say with absolute, irrefutable, 100% certainty that it never ever even crossed Dumbledore's mind to keep the cloak.

I see Dumbledore's discovery that James was the owner of the cloak as a kind of reawakening of his passion for the Hallows, a passion that was dormant for decades, and, luckily, a passion that was tempered enough by the wisdom he had gained about himself in those intervening decades that he could give up the cloak when it came time to gift it to Harry. To say that Dumbledore, upon James's death and finding himself the unwitting owner (albeit temporary owner) of two of the hallows, never even for a second considered keeping the cloak and making his long dormant dream of reuniting the hallows come true is, IMO, an extremely narrow, closed-minded view on this subject when there's no way to know whether this was a thought that did or didn't occur to Dumbledore. Even if it flitted across Dumbledore's mind in the second after he learned of James's death, he still thought about it. He still considered it. But to his credit, he rejected it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
It is not possible for Dumbledore to have intended for Snape to be master of the wand because Dumbledore would have known that giving Snape permission to kill him nullified any defeat. For Snape to become master of the Elder wand, he would have had to defeat Dumbledore against Dumbledore's will. Dumbledore telling Snape to kill him guaranteed that Snape could not become master of the wand so we know for certain that was not his intention.
How is it not possible for Dumbledore to have intended such a thing? He could have intended for any number of things to happen. Dumbledore himself admits several times in the books that he is not infallible and he doesn't know everything. Dumbledore couldn't have known everything there was to know about the Elder Wand because there was no way to test every conceivable outcome of every dual and ever encounter the wand would have over its lifespan. How could Dumbledore have known absolutely that arranging his death with Snape would nullify a defeat of himself? Or that Snape would be garaunteed not to become the wand's next master after having committed that act? At most it's a thought experiment.

I contend that it is absolutely possible that Dumbledore could have intended for Snape to end up with the wand because there's no way for Dumbledore to know with absolute certainty whether an arranged death would or wouldn't consitute a real defeat and that his intentions were thwarted by actual events.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
The text shows that the Hallows could not be destroyed
The text shows that the hallows weren't detructable by the same means that could detroy a horcrux, but as I outlined above a horcrux and a hallow are fundamentally different and would, therefore, not necessarily be susceptible to destruction by the same means.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
Harry was not as powerful as Dumbledore so trying to hide the wand by keeping the wand in his possession would be a mistake. Even his best friends were having difficulty resisting the temptation of the wand so it was in Harry's best interest to hide it somewhere else and make sure nobody could figure out where it was.
Except that Harry hid the wand in the most obvious place imaginable to anyone who knew anything about Harry's character and his admiration for Dumbledore. Everyone in the Great Hall during Harry and Voldemort's standoff would know that Harry had become the wand's latest master and the story would spread far and wide throughout the magical world, in Britain and elsewhere, and anyone with half a brain and a desire to steal the wand would be able to figure out that Harry might have hidden the Elder Wand in Dumbledore's tomb.

(Hello, sequel!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
Dumbledore had no problem trying to destroy the ring. He may have given in to the temptation to try and use it first, but he did attempt to destroy it. He only managed to damage it enough to destroy the fragment of soul encased in it because the Hallows were shown to be indestructible.
There is no textual statement that stating that the ring wasn't destroyed because it couldn't be destroyed. IMO it was stated that it was damaged but not rendered magically innert because it wasn't completely severed in two. If we had canon evidence that the stone was split entirely in two pieces but still worked when the two pieces were put back together or even as separate pieces, as in two resurrection stones, then I think there's a lot of room for a discussion about the stone's indestructibility. But until we have more than a damaged hallow there's not enough evidence to say that they are indestructible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
The bottom line was that Dumbledore did not want anyone to be able to master the wand - which is why it is indisputable that he would have destroyed the wand if it were possible to do so.
Argument from ignorance again.


__________________
"I could have been in politics 'cause I've always been a big spender."
Reply With Quote
  #849  
Old January 18th, 2013, 6:31 pm
decaye23  Undisclosed.gif decaye23 is offline
Second Year
 
Joined: 3047 days
Posts: 108
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by mirromere
Btw - you haven't answered my question. Why would DD want Snape to master the EW if there wasn't a possible need for him to use it? Why not destroy or hide the wand?
First, some quotes.

Quote:
"You alone know whether it will harm your soul to help an old man avoid pain and humiliation," said Dumbledore. "I ask this one great favor of you, Severus, because death is coming for me as surely as the Chudley Cannons will finish bottom of this year's league. I confess I should prefer a quick, painless exit to the protracted and messy affair it will be if, for instance, Greyback is involved...I hear Voldemort has recruited him? Or dear Bellatrix, who likes to play with her food before she eats it."
Quote:
"Professor Black," said Hermione, "couldn't you just tell us, please, when was the last time the sword was taken out of its case? Before Ginny took it out, I mean?"

Phineas snorted impatiently.

"I believe that the last time I saw the sword of Gryffindor leave its case was when Professor Dumbledore used it to break open a ring."
Quote:
"Maybe a man in a million could unite the Hallows, Harry. I was fit only to possess the meanest of them, the least extraordinary. I was fit to own the Elder Wand, and not boast of it, and not to kill with it. I was permitted to tame and use it, because I took it, not for gain, but to save others from it."

Quote:
"If you planned your death with Snape, you meant him to end up with the Elder Wand, didn't you?"

"I admit that was my intention," said Dumbledore, "but it did not work as I intended, did it?"

"No," said Harry. "That bit didn't work out."
So, I quote those for a reason. Lets start off with Dumbledore. He is not omniscient. He can guess, most of the time correctly, but he cannot see the future. In fact, in Order Of The Phoenix he specifically says he has never even studied Divination. That is to say that there is no way he could have known Voldemort would find out about the Elder Wand. Voldemort had no interest in any other wand, until a short time before the unusual event in "The 7 Potters" - we all know what happened.

The first quote simply put is that DD figured Draco would succeed eventually, in getting close to DD, with the help of DE's. DD knew Draco wouldn't have killed him, but that there was no way he was going to die a natural death and at the same time the wand's power die with him. Therefore he was forced to figure out another way to have the wand's power die - and definitely not transfer to, for example, Greyback, had Fenrir killed DD.

He planned for Snape to become the Wands' master, but Snape would be ignorant of this, of course. DD, even as a portrait, would not tell him about the wand. If he had wanted Snape to have the wand, he could have said so, in his office while Quote #1 was going on. "After you kill me, get my wand, it's the Elder Wand, go nuts."

Quotes 3 and 4 can at first glance, sound like a contradiction. If DD felt he was the only one who was worthy to possess the wand, why would he give it to Snape? That is a major contradiction in the same chapter. I don't think Jo is that thick. So, basically, I do not think it means physically own the wand, even though it says that. Just means "secret" Master of the Wand.

If "that bit had worked out" the wand, should be in DD's grave and stayed there forever, no one being the wiser. (Excluding Voldemort, for the moment) If Snape dies naturally, wand power dies with Snape. Even if he doesn't die naturally, no one knows where the wand is or that Snape is the master of anything...so whoever kills Snape, wouldn't have a clue about any wand ownership. He/She was just killing Snape because he refused to wash that greasy hair.

Quote #5

There was talk that DD being cursed would make Voldemort master of the wand.

Quote:
"I'm putting the Elder Wand," he told Dumbledore, who was watching him with enormous affection and admiration, "back where it came from. It can stay there. If I die a natural death like Ignotus, its power will be broken, won't it? The previous master will never have been defeated. That'll be the end of it."
If a person dies naturally, without being defeated, wand power dies. By the way, that is the keyword, "defeated" by show of strength. Not some 20 year old curse on a stone. That is not a show of strength. That is not a display of power nor is it a defeat. You don't have to be killed, just a form of defeat and the Elder Wand is yours...i.e. "snatching wands out of Draco's hand".
That curse theory, to me, is like saying if DD is walking down the corridor and Peeves accidentally drops an ink bottle on his head and DD dies unnaturally, Peeves is the master of the wand. It just doesn't make sense.

Why didn't DD just destroy the wand? Hence, the second quote. So far, the only evidence or lack of evidence there is about destroying a Hallow, is that one of them can be cracked. DD didn't strike the stone repeatedly, he only needed to hit it once. Its only theory as to what would happen, if he continued whacking it with the sword. Would it be destroyed...or would you simply only be able to put more cracks in it, but never actually destroy it and it still works? Can't say. Would Fiendfyre do in the wand, cloak or the stone? Don't know. However, clearly destroying the wand wasn't an option or DD could have done that at any time.

So, I cannot answer why DD didn't destroy the wand. He either didn't want to, or he couldn't do it, even if he tried.



Last edited by decaye23; January 20th, 2013 at 12:29 am.
Reply With Quote
  #850  
Old January 20th, 2013, 3:51 am
mirrormere's Avatar
mirrormere  Undisclosed.gif mirrormere is offline
The Potions Master
 
Joined: 3212 days
Location: En route to Lothlorien
Posts: 1,358
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
Actually, they incurred quite a bit more damage than the ring because none of them were usable insofar as their orginal purpose. The diary could not be written in with a large hole burned through the center of the book. The locket could no longer be worn after it was shattered. The cup was merely a mangled hunk of metal. Those objects were completely useless after being exposed to basilisk venom - no more than garbage. The ring was still a ring with the band intact and only minor damage to the stone that did not prevent it from working as it was supposed to work.
I really think this a moot point. As OldMotherCrow points out - if the Resurrection Stone can be and remain damaged by the Sword of Gryffindor, another few whacks would finish the job. The presence of that crack in the Stone is sufficient evidence to indicate the Hallows can suffer damage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
In both examples, the ring itself was intact with only a crack in the stone - which we are later shown had no impact on the function of the stone at all. The text gives us a very clear example of someone attempting to destroy a Hallow and failing to do so.
But DD wasn't trying to destroy the Hallow, he was trying to destroy the horcrux. If anything, he would have done everything possible to save the Hallow. I don't think this is proof that Hallows cannot be destroyed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
That is also why the Elder wand did not transfer allegiance when Voldemort "killed" Harry in the forest. Harry allowed that to happen so he remained master of the Elder wand. Jo has confirmed all of that.
I would appreciate the reference where JKR confirms that Harry allowed himself to be killed so that he could remain master of the Elder Wand. The books say he went to his death so that LV could be destroyed and he could protect his friends and loved ones.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
If Snape died, nothing would change beyond Dumbledore's portrait having to come up with a different way to tell Harry that he was a Horcrux - and there were numerous ways that could be accomplished. Snape was never the only option there - and he was actually the least likely to succeed. It was only luck that enabled Snape to give Harry those memories. If Harry had not chosen to go to the Shrieking Shack at that time - or had just left after Voldemort killed Snape - he would never have seen Snape's memories. That wouldn't change anything because there were other ways for him to find out.
When, before his death, DD set up his plans for LV's demise, I don't think he believed Harry would be back at Hogwarts - as DD was unaware that the last horcrux was hidden at the school. I think he realized that Harry would be on the run and in hiding for most of his mission and would have to stay away from wherever people were gathered. This would make it nearly impossible for the portrait to contact him. DD would need a person to do that. Snape, as an excellent Occlumens, would have been the best choice to send after Harry. Also, DD didn’t want Harry to know of his fate - “otherwise how could he have the strength to do what must be done?” - until LV started protecting Nagini, indicating he was losing horcruxes and Harry’s mission was nearing it’s end. Snape was the only person who would be able to know when that occurred. Even the portrait wouldn’t know when the time was right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
Likewise, Dumbledore had always limited how much information he gave Snape because he knew there was always a risk of Voldemort finding out any information Snape had. That's why Dumbledore never told Snape anything about the Horcruxes or the Elder wand from what we're shown. Dumbledore never told Snape anything that he did not want Voldemort to know.
I don’t believe DD limited info he gave to Snape because he thought there was a risk LV would find out. DD gave Snape the most dangerous piece of information he possibly could: that there was a piece of LV’s soul attached to Harry. Though Snape would not know what that would mean, LV certainly would have. Snape had that bit of information for nearly two years and LV never found out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
Hiding the wand was not going to work. Voldemort would find it eventually because he wasn't going to give up until he did.
If DD had hidden it randomly at the bottom of the Atlantic ocean there is no possibility of LV finding it. None. If it wasn’t for a couple of coincidences, LV wouldn’t have found the wand in the regular story either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meesha1971 View Post
If that meant ripping Snape's mind to shreds, he would have done so because finding that wand and mastering it was far more important to him than the life of a single Death Eater. Once Snape had killed Dumbledore, Voldemort was going to believe that he was the master of the Elder wand. If the wand had not been in Dumbledore's tomb, Voldemort would have then turned to Snape to discover where it was hidden. If Snape were the one to hide the wand, that would only make it easier for Voldemort to discover where it was hidden. That's why Dumbledore never told Snape anything that he did not want Voldemort to know - there was too much risk of Voldemort being able to get that information from Snape.
Snape was better at Occlumency than LV was at Legilimency. LV would not have been able to crack him.

But let’s look at the sequence of events if this were scenario were played out. LV opens DD tomb and finds the wand is missing. Just as in the regular story when it took him awhile to find out the wand didn’t work properly for him, at this point he is not concerned about mastery of the wand - only finding it. What is his next step? Snape is in the castle and was on the scene when DD died. LV would have immediately gone to see him. Would he directly tell Snape that he was after the Elder Wand? Don’t think so. Would he immediately try to torture the info out of him? Unlikely. But he would probably try to find out where the wand was. Snape would have obliged and asked DD’s portrait where the wand was. DD’s portrait would need to fess up that he hid it somewhere - even if Snape did it - not to do so would put Snape and/or McGonagall in danger. The portrait could flout LV’s requests with impunity, refusing to reveal where it was. What can LV do? Nothing but search aimlessly and endlessly for the wand. Harry would finish his mission before the wand was found. It would never even got to the point of who had mastery.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldMotherCrow View Post
The Stone was cracked but still worked. That it was damaged proved that the Sword could damage it. If it was hit again with the Sword and split completely in two, would it still work?

I think we were shown enough about damaged wands to know that they tend not to work well when cracked-- Ron's cracked wand in CoS often malfunctioned, and Harry's cracked wand in DH wouldn't work at all. So I imagine that if the Elder wand was cracked or split completely in two that it would suffer similar problems. The Elder Wand was also shown to have the extraordinary power to repair another wand that was broken. But if it was broken, how could it repair itself?
This explanation makes the most sense to me from the facts we are given.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldMotherCrow View Post
I'm not entirely sure what Dumbledore's plan was, but it is a certain thing that it went wrong. I think the simple explanation about why Dumbledore's Portrait did not try to fix the Wand Plot (whatever it was) is that it just didn't know that it had gone wrong. Ghosts are created as an imprint at the time of a persons death, and know all about the events leading up to their death. Headmaster Portraits however seem to come into being at the time of the person's death, but are imprints of the time spent in the headmaster's office. I think the Portrait would know all about what the person did in the office, but I don't know that Hogwarts castle has a level of awareness beyond that. I'd say that Dumbledore's Portrait did not know that Draco disarmed Dumbledore, unless someone thought to mention it to the Portrait.
The portraits possess the knowledge that their owners knew when they died (else DD’s portrait would not have all the details of the plan he so carefully put together before he died, which we are shown it does.). So DD’s portrait knew that Draco had mastered the Elder Wand. If DD wanted the power of the wand broken, knowing how dangerous it was, he could have easily directed Snape to take care of it (hide or destroy the wand). If DD had wanted Snape to master the Elder Wand but didn’t want Snape to know unless Harry died and someone else had to kill LV, then the portrait would recognize that Snape would have access to Draco every day 24/7 and could have won the wand from him at the portrait’s direction - essentially his original plan. There would be no need to tell Snape about the wand unless absolutely necessary. That is what I believe happened. The portrait never found out that LV had the Elder Wand. Snape found out only seconds before his death.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldMotherCrow View Post
I agree that there were plenty of (much easier and less convoluted) ways to get the information to Harry.
Except that it would only be Snape who would be able to know when to tell Harry. I think DD was correct in his assessment that Harry would have a hard time carrying out his mission if he knew he had to die from the beginning. He had a very difficult time of it heading to the forest knowing at the last minute and even accompanied by his loved ones.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldMotherCrow View Post
This makes me wonder if Dumbledore wanted Snape in place to save Harry after Voldemort failed to kill him and soul-bit in Harry was destroyed, since Voldemort would I think just try again once he discovered Harry still lived. I can't help but think Dumbledore must have had some sort of role in mind for Snape to fulfill considering how much effort Dumbledore went to to place Snape there. Perhaps it was just another part of the plan that went wrong. I really wish Dumbledore had been more clear on what his intended plans were!
I think DD originally had two functions for Snape: inform the portrait of the goings-on and to take the Elder Wand and kill LV if Harry died. As it turned out, Draco’s attack came sooner than DD expected and Snape had to get the Sword of Gryffindor to Harry as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goddess_Clio View Post
I agree that the hallows weren't susceptible to destruction by things like Basilisk Venom. But that's because, IMO, the hallows weren't former bits of a human being. The main difference between a horcrux and a hallow to me is that one is literally a sentient bit of a person's soul (with the ability to interact with someone trying to destroy it) that is magically bound to an object, container or vessel whereas the other is a magically created tool or device, sentience arguable. A hallow would no more be susceptible to destruction by venom or poison than my stapler would be. It's entirely reasonable to me to see how an indisputably sentient thing like a horcrux could be destroyed by venom that would destroy any other living thing while not destroying the object that horcrux was bound to.
Now this is something that has never occurred to me before: that Basilisk poison would not work on inanimate objects. It certainly make sense once I stop to think of it. Of course the delivery system (basilisk fang, Sword of Gryffindor) would probably damage the physical object in and of itself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goddess_Clio View Post
I see Dumbledore's discovery that James was the owner of the cloak as a kind of reawakening of his passion for the Hallows, a passion that was dormant for decades, and, luckily, a passion that was tempered enough by the wisdom he had gained about himself in those intervening decades that he could give up the cloak when it came time to gift it to Harry. To say that Dumbledore, upon James's death and finding himself the unwitting owner (albeit temporary owner) of two of the hallows, never even for a second considered keeping the cloak and making his long dormant dream of reuniting the hallows come true is, IMO, an extremely narrow, closed-minded view on this subject when there's no way to know whether this was a thought that did or didn't occur to Dumbledore. Even if it flitted across Dumbledore's mind in the second after he learned of James's death, he still thought about it. He still considered it. But to his credit, he rejected it.
I can readily see such thoughts afflicting DD where the Hallows were concerned. I think this explains his demeanor when Harry broaches the subject in King’s Cross: “For the first time since Harry had met Dumbledore, he looked less than an old man, much less. He looked fleetingly like a small boy caught in wrongdoing.” DD still has guilty feeling about the Hallows even after he is dead!

Quote:
Originally Posted by decaye23 View Post
So, I quote those for a reason. Lets start off with Dumbledore. He is not omniscient. He can guess, most of the time correctly, but he cannot see the future. In fact, in Order Of The Phoenix he specifically says he has never even studied Divination. That is to say that there is no way he could have known Voldemort would find out about the Elder Wand. Voldemort had no interest in any other wand, until the unusual event in "The 7 Potters" - we all know what happened.
DD didn’t have to study Divination to figure out that LV might look for more powerful wands everytime he confronted Harry and Harry escaped him. It was something DD thought he circumvent by coming up with the Seven Potters scenario. It almost worked. If Harry hadn’t tried to protect Stan Shunpike, LV would never had found out about the wand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by decaye23 View Post
The first quote simply put is that DD figured Draco would succeed eventually, in getting close to DD, with the help of DE's. DD knew Draco wouldn't have killed him, but that there was no way he was going to die a natural death and at the same time the wand's power die with him. Therefore he was forced to figure out another way to have the wand's power die - and definitely not transfer to, for example, Greyback, had Fenrir killed DD.
If DD wanted the power of the EW to be broken he could simply have hidden the wand in some random place and LV (and no one else) would have ever found it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by decaye23 View Post
He planned for Snape to become the Wands' master, but Snape would be ignorant of this, of course. DD, even as a portrait, would not tell him about the wand. If he had wanted Snape to have the wand, he could have said so, in his office while Quote #1 was going on. "After you kill me, get my wand, it's the Elder Wand, go nuts."
So DD must have had a reason not to tell Snape about the wand. In my opinion, he would have told him about the EW if Harry had died (or, more accurately, had stayed dead.) I think DD felt there was no reason to burden Snape that he was master of the Elder Wand unless absolutely necessary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by decaye23 View Post
Quotes 3 and 4 can at first glance, sound like a contradiction. If DD felt he was the only one who was worthy to possess the wand, why would he give it to Snape? That is a major contradiction in the same chapter. I don't think Jo is that thick. So, basically, I do not think it means physically own the wand, even though it says that. Just means "secret" Master of the Wand.
I don’t see a contradiction at all. DD doesn’t say he was the only one fit to possess the EW, he says he was only fit to possess the EW - the meanest of all the Hallows. He also says that he was “permitted” to tame and use it. Who permitted DD this honor? I think the wand itself.

Again - there is no reason for DD to make Snape master of the EW when the wand could have been destroyed or hidden. And at the point that the transfer is supposed to occur, the war is coming to it’s most dangerous point and there is no expectation that Snape would survive it and die a natural death, as he is in such a hazardous position - longevity as a Voldemort lieutenant was never a stable post and he would have the Order gunning for him as well - thus transferring the mastery of the wand to heaven knows who. Making Snape master of the wand would have to have another reason.


__________________


Mugglenet.com Editorial: The Flaw in the Plan
Potion notes: noxspell.org

NoxSpell7790 on Pottermore and still Slytherin!
Ebony, Phoenix Feather, 11-3/4" . . . Unyielding

Reply With Quote
  #851  
Old January 20th, 2013, 4:22 am
canismajoris  Male.gif canismajoris is offline
The Forums Red Hypergiant Star
 
Joined: 5214 days
Location: əɹəɥ
Age: 36
Posts: 2,766
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goddess_Clio View Post
A hallow would no more be susceptible to destruction by venom or poison than my stapler would be.
That depends, as I'm sure Dumbledore would also be aware, upon whether it's a Swingline.


Reply With Quote
  #852  
Old January 20th, 2013, 7:32 am
HRW  Male.gif HRW is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 2877 days
Location: Under Fidelius Charm
Posts: 410
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by mirrormere View Post
I really think this a moot point. As OldMotherCrow points out - if the Resurrection Stone can be and remain damaged by the Sword of Gryffindor, another few whacks would finish the job. The presence of that crack in the Stone is sufficient evidence to indicate the Hallows can suffer damage.
But it does not suggest that the Hallow could be destroyed. And on the other hand you have the cloak which is in pristine condition despite it being continually used for over thousand years and it's use must have been quite rough use as well. Dumbledore's fascination was quite clearly with the stone and not the wand. Any fascination he might have had with the wand would have almost disappeared after him using it for over 50 years. If the power of the elder wand could have been broken just by breaking the wand then Dumbledore would have done it.

Quote:
I would appreciate the reference where JKR confirms that Harry allowed himself to be killed so that he could remain master of the Elder Wand. The books say he went to his death so that LV could be destroyed and he could protect his friends and loved ones.
I am not sure if Harry intentionally does it (In fact I am sure that's not the case as he does not even know he's the master of the elder wand at that point) but the fact that he lets himself be killed is the reason why he remains the master of the elder wand and it's not transferred to Voldemort.


Quote:
When, before his death, DD set up his plans for LV's demise, I don't think he believed Harry would be back at Hogwarts - as DD was unaware that the last horcrux was hidden at the school.
I have to say I disagree. I think Dumbledore expected Harry to come back to Hogwarts. Dumbledore did not think the horcrux was at Hogwarts but he did not completely rule it out. And more than that Dumbledore was aware of of how much Hogwarts meant to Harry and imo he expected Harry to come back at some point during the mission. And the very first place Harry wanted to go in DH to hunt for Horcruxes was Hogwarts but Hermione didn't agree.

Quote:
I don’t believe DD limited info he gave to Snape because he thought there was a risk LV would find out. DD gave Snape the most dangerous piece of information he possibly could: that there was a piece of LV’s soul attached to Harry. Though Snape would not know what that would mean, LV certainly would have. Snape had that bit of information for nearly two years and LV never found out.

Snape was better at Occlumency than LV was at Legilimency. LV would not have been able to crack him.
Is it ever mentioned anywhere that Snape was better at occlumency than Voldemort was at Legilimency because I see no evidence of that in the books, all the evidence is to the contrary in the books.

Dumbledore pretty much tells us indirectly that the only reason he does not tell Snape everything is because of how much time he spends in the company of Voldemort. Also from what Dumbledore tells us in the Prince's tale, it's clear that Snape never blatantly lied to Voldemort but, just that he never told him the complete truth.

My conclusion from the above is obvious. Dumbledore knew Snape was good at occlumency but he obviously did not have complete confidence in Snape to conceal everything from Voldemort.


Quote:
If DD had hidden it randomly at the bottom of the Atlantic ocean there is no possibility of LV finding it. None. If it wasn’t for a couple of coincidences, LV wouldn’t have found the wand in the regular story either.
That's true but I think Dumbledore wanted to end the power of the wand forever and not just hide it.



Quote:
I think DD originally had two functions for Snape: inform the portrait of the goings-on and to take the Elder Wand and kill LV if Harry died. As it turned out, Draco’s attack came sooner than DD expected and Snape had to get the Sword of Gryffindor to Harry as well.
I don't agree. Dumbledore's plan revolved around not killing Voldemort but making him mortal so that he could be killed by anyone who had the skill or power. I don't think Snape had the power to kill Voldemort anyway with or without the elder wand. As it turned out Harry ogt lucky with the elder wand.



Quote:
I can readily see such thoughts afflicting DD where the Hallows were concerned. I think this explains his demeanor when Harry broaches the subject in King’s Cross: “For the first time since Harry had met Dumbledore, he looked less than an old man, much less. He looked fleetingly like a small boy caught in wrongdoing.” DD still has guilty feeling about the Hallows even after he is dead!
The cloak yes, because it was a hallow even though he had no use for it himself. The cloak didn't work for him and nor did he need it. The wand he had for more than 50 years and he didn't seem to be particularly enthralled at having it either. The stone was the only hallow that had a real grip on him - at 18 and at 115.


Quote:
If DD wanted the power of the EW to be broken he could simply have hidden the wand in some random place and LV (and no one else) would have ever found it.
That would never have broken the power of the elder wand forever as Dumbledore wanted. It would merely have hidden the wand whee it could have been found by anyone. Dumbledore wanted to break the power not just hide the wand.

Quote:
So DD must have had a reason not to tell Snape about the wand. In my opinion, he would have told him about the EW if Harry had died (or, more accurately, had stayed dead.) I think DD felt there was no reason to burden Snape that he was master of the Elder Wand unless absolutely necessary.
If Dumbledore's plan had been successful then the only person to know that the elder wand was in his grave would have been Grindelwald. Dumbledore had no intention of telling anyone he had the elder wand. he knew the power of the wand and did not truest anyone not to be seduced by it's power least of all Snape who had a dark past.

For me the fact that Dumbledore and then Harry go to such extreme lengths to destroy the elder wand's power is proof enough that, it was the only way to destroy it's power.


Reply With Quote
  #853  
Old January 20th, 2013, 4:56 pm
Goddess_Clio  Female.gif Goddess_Clio is offline
Seventh Year
 
Joined: 3165 days
Location: The pirate ship Revenge
Age: 35
Posts: 1,853
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by mirrormere View Post
Snape was better at Occlumency than LV was at Legilimency. LV would not have been able to crack him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRW View Post
Is it ever mentioned anywhere that Snape was better at occlumency than Voldemort was at Legilimency because I see no evidence of that in the books, all the evidence is to the contrary in the books.

Dumbledore pretty much tells us indirectly that the only reason he does not tell Snape everything is because of how much time he spends in the company of Voldemort. Also from what Dumbledore tells us in the Prince's tale, it's clear that Snape never blatantly lied to Voldemort but, just that he never told him the complete truth.

My conclusion from the above is obvious. Dumbledore knew Snape was good at occlumency but he obviously did not have complete confidence in Snape to conceal everything from Voldemort.
Responded to in Snape's thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRW View Post
The cloak yes, because it was a hallow even though he had no use for it himself. The cloak didn't work for him and nor did he need it.
Where does it say that Harry's cloak wouldn't have worked for Dumbledore? I only recall him saying that he had no use for it, being able to make himself invisible without a cloak.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRW View Post
That would never have broken the power of the elder wand forever as Dumbledore wanted. It would merely have hidden the wand whee it could have been found by anyone. Dumbledore wanted to break the power not just hide the wand.
I disagree. If Dumbledore had, as mirrormere suggested, encased the wand in concrete and sunk it in the deepest, darkest, most remote recesses of the ocean where no human would ever stumble upon it, the wand's power would eventually die as a result of some future master not even knowing they're its master and happening to die of natural causes.

For instance, had Dumbledore sunk the wand in the ocean in the books and Harry were unable to use his mastery trick at the end of the story to defeat Voldemort, Voldemort would probably still have died, whether at Harry's hand (by having to cast a deadly curse) or at the hand of the hundreds of other people in the Great Hall who wouldn't have allowed Voldemort to live past that point. If the second scenario is the one that happened, no one would know whose curse it was that killed Voldemort, if it had been Flitwick's or McGonagall's or Harry's or Ron's or Molly's or Neville's or Luna's... no one would know who the new master of the wand was and the likelihood of the wand's power continuing forever and ever would be greatly diminished as, eventually (and perhaps as soon as one or two generations of new masters) the latest master would die undefeated and the power of the wand would have been broken.

What Dumbledore and Harry do in the books (keeping the wand in play and hiding it in a very obvious and easily accessed place) is incredibly irresponsible and I think it's clear that Dumbledore didn't try everything to destroy the wand since he never tried sinking it to the bottom of the ocean or throwing it in a lava lake or anything like that. And never trying a pretty simple method of getting rid of the wand such as that, it makes me wonder if Dumbledore even ever tried to destroy the wand at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRW View Post
For me the fact that Dumbledore and then Harry go to such extreme lengths to destroy the elder wand's power is proof enough that, it was the only way to destroy it's power.
To what extreme lengths did Harry go to destroy the wand? As far as I recall he didn't even try. He didn't even try mundane things like snapping it in half or stepping on it or running it through a table saw or setting it on fire, or even, indeed, fiendfyre. He more or less discovered that he was its master, took advantage of that mastery to kill Voldemort in a very tricksy way and then reintered the wand back with Dumbledore in his tomb. Harry never even seemed to think about destroying the wand, he makes the dangerous decision to not even try anything and hope that he'll live the next 50? 60? 70+ years of his life and never be defeated.


__________________
"I could have been in politics 'cause I've always been a big spender."
Reply With Quote
  #854  
Old January 20th, 2013, 6:50 pm
HRW  Male.gif HRW is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 2877 days
Location: Under Fidelius Charm
Posts: 410
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goddess_Clio View Post

Where does it say that Harry's cloak wouldn't have worked for Dumbledore? I only recall him saying that he had no use for it, being able to make himself invisible without a cloak.
Quote:
"But the Cloak, I took out of vain curiosity, and so it could never have worked for me as it works for you, it's true owner"

Quote:
I disagree. If Dumbledore had, as mirrormere suggested, encased the wand in concrete and sunk it in the deepest, darkest, most remote recesses of the ocean where no human would ever stumble upon it, the wand's power would eventually die as a result of some future master not even knowing they're its master and happening to die of natural causes.
See, I don't disagree with that. But such a scenario would not make good reading, would it? What played out in the books is more interesting than dumping the wand in some ocean. And technically speaking Dumbledore still wouldn't have broken the power of the wand, he would have just hidden it and hope that no one ever came across it.

What Dumbledore tried wasn't very irresponsible at all. The only person alive who knew that the Elder Wand belonged to Dumbledore was locked up in prison and had no intentions of revealing his secret.



Quote:
To what extreme lengths did Harry go to destroy the wand? As far as I recall he didn't even try. He didn't even try mundane things like snapping it in half or stepping on it or running it through a table saw or setting it on fire, or even, indeed, fiendfyre. He more or less discovered that he was its master, took advantage of that mastery to kill Voldemort in a very tricksy way and then reintered the wand back with Dumbledore in his tomb. Harry never even seemed to think about destroying the wand, he makes the dangerous decision to not even try anything and hope that he'll live the next 50? 60? 70+ years of his life and never be defeated.
But the thing is were such a thing possible would Dumbledore not have suggested it to Harry? Dumbledore had the wand for more than 50 years, he had plenty of time to study the wand and figure out ways to end it's power. Dumbledore is pretty much a genius and if it was possible to get rid of the wand's power by just snapping it in half why would he have gone through all that trouble. I don't for a second believe that Dumbledore just sat around in all those years wielding it's wand and only when he realised he was dying he plotted to end the wand's power.

And then there's the cloak. Undamaged and in pristine condition after all those years of use


Reply With Quote
  #855  
Old January 20th, 2013, 8:59 pm
Goddess_Clio  Female.gif Goddess_Clio is offline
Seventh Year
 
Joined: 3165 days
Location: The pirate ship Revenge
Age: 35
Posts: 1,853
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRW View Post
See, I don't disagree with that. But such a scenario would not make good reading, would it? What played out in the books is more interesting than dumping the wand in some ocean.
I don't disagree; had Dumbledore dumped the wand in the ocean the books would have been very boring had they played out in the exact same way. But dumping the wand in the ocean would have, from a literary or story-telling standpoint, have necessitated story changes to keep things interesting. Like Harry not being able to pull of the tricky way Voldemort got killed, Harry, or someone else, would have had to directly kill Voldemort.

Quote:
And technically speaking Dumbledore still wouldn't have broken the power of the wand, he would have just hidden it and hope that no one ever came across it.
Which is why in my post I said that it would eventually lead to the power of the wand dying out. It may have taken two generations of new owners to happen, it could have taken ten generations, or twenty. The point is, if the wand is physically taken out of the equation and no one who is its master is able to use it or even knows they are its master, one of those people would eventually come to a natural death purely by not having a hoard of wand-chaser after them trying to kill them to gain mastery of the wand. So long as the wand was in play, in use and it could be tracked from owner to owner as a physical object, it was a liability and it was a danger to society and to its master of the moment.


__________________
"I could have been in politics 'cause I've always been a big spender."

Last edited by Goddess_Clio; January 20th, 2013 at 9:02 pm.
Reply With Quote
  #856  
Old January 22nd, 2013, 4:35 am
mirrormere's Avatar
mirrormere  Undisclosed.gif mirrormere is offline
The Potions Master
 
Joined: 3212 days
Location: En route to Lothlorien
Posts: 1,358
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRW View Post
But it does not suggest that the Hallow could be destroyed. And on the other hand you have the cloak which is in pristine condition despite it being continually used for over thousand years and it's use must have been quite rough use as well.
The use of the cloak is only normal, almost Muggle, wear and tear. We never see an attempt to destroy it magically. Until that occurs, we don’t actually know it cannot be destroyed. It cannot ward off all magical spells and charms, as we have seen. In fact, I suspect Fiendfyre could probably do it in, and probably the wand as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRW View Post
I have to say I disagree. I think Dumbledore expected Harry to come back to Hogwarts.
Before he finishes off Voldemort? Why? Harry believes Snape, the current headmaster, to be his mortal enemy and would not desert his mission to take revenge. There is no reason for Harry to go back to Hogwarts and DD knew that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRW View Post
Dumbledore did not think the horcrux was at Hogwarts but he did not completely rule it out.
I think he did rule it out because he never once suggests to Harry that Hogwarts possibly harbored a horcrux (other than the obvious Riddle Diary, but that was an import.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRW View Post
And more than that Dumbledore was aware of of how much Hogwarts meant to Harry and imo he expected Harry to come back at some point during the mission.
Why would DD expect Harry to take a trip down memory lane right in the middle of his mission? And with Snape in place as headmaster? Just not seeing it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRW View Post
Dumbledore pretty much tells us indirectly that the only reason he does not tell Snape everything is because of how much time he spends in the company of Voldemort. Also from what Dumbledore tells us in the Prince's tale, it's clear that Snape never blatantly lied to Voldemort but, just that he never told him the complete truth.
But later that night he gives Snape the worse possible information he could: that Harry must die because of the piece of soul attached to his. If LV ever saw that memory, it’s all over. Snape could easily hide information about the Elder Wand from LV, if it was necessary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goddess_Clio View Post
I disagree. If Dumbledore had, as mirrormere suggested, encased the wand in concrete and sunk it in the deepest, darkest, most remote recesses of the ocean where no human would ever stumble upon it, the wand's power would eventually die as a result of some future master not even knowing they're its master and happening to die of natural causes.

For instance, had Dumbledore sunk the wand in the ocean in the books and Harry were unable to use his mastery trick at the end of the story to defeat Voldemort, Voldemort would probably still have died, whether at Harry's hand (by having to cast a deadly curse) or at the hand of the hundreds of other people in the Great Hall who wouldn't have allowed Voldemort to live past that point. If the second scenario is the one that happened, no one would know whose curse it was that killed Voldemort, if it had been Flitwick's or McGonagall's or Harry's or Ron's or Molly's or Neville's or Luna's... no one would know who the new master of the wand was and the likelihood of the wand's power continuing forever and ever would be greatly diminished as, eventually (and perhaps as soon as one or two generations of new masters) the latest master would die undefeated and the power of the wand would have been broken.
Precisely! With the EW hidden where it could never be found, eventually one of its unknowing masters would die a natural, undefeated death and the power of the wand would be broken.

Quote:
What Dumbledore and Harry do in the books (keeping the wand in play and hiding it in a very obvious and easily accessed place) is incredibly irresponsible and I think it's clear that Dumbledore didn't try everything to destroy the wand since he never tried sinking it to the bottom of the ocean or throwing it in a lava lake or anything like that. And never trying a pretty simple method of getting rid of the wand such as that, it makes me wonder if Dumbledore even ever tried to destroy the wand at all.
That DD didn’t destroy (if possible) or irretrievably hide the Elder Wand indicates to me that he wanted to keep the wand in play, because one or the other of those options was available to him. DD was a genius, a brilliant tactician and, of any of those who had ever mastered the Elder Wand, he knew how dangerous that wand was.

If it had been DD’s intent to break the power of the wand by having Snape kill him, he would have known that was no longer possible as soon as Draco disarmed him. Portraits know what their owners know at the time of their deaths, so why did DD’s portrait do nothing to rectify that mistake? He knows Snape is capable of hiding the wand (if it couldn’t be destroyed) and was uniquely qualified to keep that information from LV.

Quote:
To what extreme lengths did Harry go to destroy the wand? As far as I recall he didn't even try. He didn't even try mundane things like snapping it in half or stepping on it or running it through a table saw or setting it on fire, or even, indeed, fiendfyre. He more or less discovered that he was its master, took advantage of that mastery to kill Voldemort in a very tricksy way and then reintered the wand back with Dumbledore in his tomb. Harry never even seemed to think about destroying the wand, he makes the dangerous decision to not even try anything and hope that he'll live the next 50? 60? 70+ years of his life and never be defeated.
There is no evidence that Harry did anything to get rid of the wand (by destroying it or hiding it.) If by “putting the Elder Wand back where it came from” Harry meant DD’s tomb, it raises an interesting question. Here’s what Hermione tells Harry after finding out the EW is real and LV took it from DD’s grave:
DH: Shell Cottage “You could never have done that, Harry,” she said again and again. “You couldn’t have broken into Dumbledore’s grave.”
Harry seems to agree. But now, at the end of the story, Harry will break into DD’s grave to return the wand? Seems odd.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRW View Post
See, I don't disagree with that. But such a scenario would not make good reading, would it? What played out in the books is more interesting than dumping the wand in some ocean. And technically speaking Dumbledore still wouldn't have broken the power of the wand, he would have just hidden it and hope that no one ever came across it.
Good reading? It’s the author’s responsibility to make sure her story hangs together in a logical, but interesting way. The wand could have been hidden. Not to do so indicates the author (and DD) had other plans.

Quote:
But the thing is were such a thing possible would Dumbledore not have suggested it to Harry? Dumbledore had the wand for more than 50 years, he had plenty of time to study the wand and figure out ways to end it's power. Dumbledore is pretty much a genius and if it was possible to get rid of the wand's power by just snapping it in half why would he have gone through all that trouble. I don't for a second believe that Dumbledore just sat around in all those years wielding it's wand and only when he realised he was dying he plotted to end the wand's power.
Exactly – which is why his failure to destroy or hide it indicates he choose to keep it active.


__________________


Mugglenet.com Editorial: The Flaw in the Plan
Potion notes: noxspell.org

NoxSpell7790 on Pottermore and still Slytherin!
Ebony, Phoenix Feather, 11-3/4" . . . Unyielding

Reply With Quote
  #857  
Old January 22nd, 2013, 7:48 am
HRW  Male.gif HRW is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 2877 days
Location: Under Fidelius Charm
Posts: 410
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by mirrormere View Post
The use of the cloak is only normal, almost Muggle, wear and tear. We never see an attempt to destroy it magically. Until that occurs, we don’t actually know it cannot be destroyed. It cannot ward off all magical spells and charms, as we have seen. In fact, I suspect Fiendfyre could probably do it in, and probably the wand as well.

What is suggests to me is that the cloak had some kind of magic working on it to keep it as good as knew. The cloak had existed for more than a 1000 years, years of not only rough use but more than likely years where magic had been used on the cloak. Personally I see nothing in the books that suggests that the cloak could have been destroyed.


Quote:
But later that night he gives Snape the worse possible information he could: that Harry must die because of the piece of soul attached to his. If LV ever saw that memory, it’s all over. Snape could easily hide information about the Elder Wand from LV, if it was necessary.
True. But there are reasons that can easily explain this. The next time Snape was going to see Voldemort was after he had killed Dumbledore and Snape would more than likely have his full trust again (or as much as it was possible) greatly reducing his chances of getting caught. Then you have the fact that Dumbledore was short of time and he had to take certain risks if he had to put his plan in action and there was no one else that could have told Harry that information other than Snape. Dumbledore did not have much of a choice when it came to choosing the person who was to deliver that particular message to Harry.



Quote:
Harry seems to agree. But now, at the end of the story, Harry will break into DD’s grave to return the wand? Seems odd.
There's a passage right after that where Harry says that the idea of breaking into Dumbledore's tomb scared him less than the idea of having misinterpreted Dumbledore's instructions (I am paraphrasing here). To me that suggests that had he needed to break into the tomb he would have. After Dobby died Harry decides to completely follow Dumbledore's instructions.


Quote:
Good reading? It’s the author’s responsibility to make sure her story hangs together in a logical, but interesting way. The wand could have been hidden. Not to do so indicates the author (and DD) had other plans.
Logical? There are major/important parts of the HP story that are not logical but can be ignored because it leads to a good story.

And this isn't even that big of an issue because technically speaking hiding the wand is not still not breaking the wand's power. Yes the chances of someone locating the Elder wand in the depths of the Atlantic ocean is very remote but there's still a chance. If Dumbledore's plan had come to fruition then the wand's power would have been broken forever.


Quote:
Exactly – which is why his failure to destroy or hide it indicates he choose to keep it active.
Dumbledore had no intention of hiding the wand, that much is quite clear. He imo wanted to break the wand's power and I fail to see why he would hatch such an elaborate plan when all he had to do was snap the wand in half.


Reply With Quote
  #858  
Old January 22nd, 2013, 3:10 pm
mirrormere's Avatar
mirrormere  Undisclosed.gif mirrormere is offline
The Potions Master
 
Joined: 3212 days
Location: En route to Lothlorien
Posts: 1,358
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRW View Post
What is suggests to me is that the cloak had some kind of magic working on it to keep it as good as knew. The cloak had existed for more than a 1000 years, years of not only rough use but more than likely years where magic had been used on the cloak. Personally I see nothing in the books that suggests that the cloak could have been destroyed.
Nor is there anything that suggests that the cloak could not have been destroyed. The stone was damaged magically. It is possible the cloak could have been also.

Quote:
True. But there are reasons that can easily explain this. The next time Snape was going to see Voldemort was after he had killed Dumbledore and Snape would more than likely have his full trust again (or as much as it was possible) greatly reducing his chances of getting caught. Then you have the fact that Dumbledore was short of time and he had to take certain risks if he had to put his plan in action and there was no one else that could have told Harry that information other than Snape. Dumbledore did not have much of a choice when it came to choosing the person who was to deliver that particular message to Harry.
DD doesn't choose Snape because Snape is his only option. He tells Harry that he trusts Snape completely. And . . . emphasis mine:
DH: TPT“And you do it extremely well. Do not think that I underestimate the constant danger in which you place yourself, Severus. To give Voldemort what appears to be valuable information while withholding the essentials is a job I would entrust to nobody but you.
This sentiment DD expresses does not seem to be of the "oh well, I guess you'll have to do" variety.

As far as Snape not coming in contact with LV between the twilight scene and after he killed DD . . . since this is Harry's story we are rarely privy to what DD and Snape are doing in the background, particularly Snape. LV was paranoid enough, I think, to maintain consistent contact with Snape on one level or another and to regularly use Legilimency on him. He was not the trusting type.

Quote:
There's a passage right after that where Harry says that the idea of breaking into Dumbledore's tomb scared him less than the idea of having misinterpreted Dumbledore's instructions (I am paraphrasing here).
Correct. But just because it was less doesn't mean it was insufficient to give him pause about desecrating DD's tomb or prevent him from doing so altogether.

Quote:
Logical? There are major/important parts of the HP story that are not logical but can be ignored because it leads to a good story.
Hmm. What would that be? Assuming that, relative to this world, magic is logical.

Quote:
Dumbledore had no intention of hiding the wand, that much is quite clear. He imo wanted to break the wand's power and I fail to see why he would hatch such an elaborate plan when all he had to do was snap the wand in half.
But this is my point. He could have taken the wand out of the equation by destroying it or hiding it. He did not. Therefore I believe his intention was to make Snape master of the EW as a backup plan to Harry's mission.


__________________


Mugglenet.com Editorial: The Flaw in the Plan
Potion notes: noxspell.org

NoxSpell7790 on Pottermore and still Slytherin!
Ebony, Phoenix Feather, 11-3/4" . . . Unyielding


Last edited by mirrormere; January 22nd, 2013 at 3:22 pm.
Reply With Quote
  #859  
Old January 22nd, 2013, 4:19 pm
HRW  Male.gif HRW is offline
Third Year
 
Joined: 2877 days
Location: Under Fidelius Charm
Posts: 410
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by mirrormere View Post
Nor is there anything that suggests that the cloak could not have been destroyed. The stone was damaged magically. It is possible the cloak could have been also.
Fair enough. I don't agree but I can see why you might think that.



Quote:
DD doesn't choose Snape because Snape is his only option. He tells Harry that he trusts Snape completely. And . . . emphasis mine:
DH: TPT“And you do it extremely well. Do not think that I underestimate the constant danger in which you place yourself, Severus. To give Voldemort what appears to be valuable information while withholding the essentials is a job I would entrust to nobody but you.
This sentiment DD expresses does not seem to be of the "oh well, I guess you'll have to do" variety.

As far as Snape not coming in contact with LV between the twilight scene and after he killed DD . . . since this is Harry's story we are rarely privy to what DD and Snape are doing in the background, particularly Snape. LV was paranoid enough, I think, to maintain consistent contact with Snape on one level or another and to regularly use Legilimency on him. He was not the trusting type.
I think I didn't explain myself well enough. Dumbledore trusted Snape, there's no doubt about that but the reason I said he had no other choice is because there was no one else who was more knowledgeable than Snape was on all things concerning Harry. I mean I am sure Dumbledore trusted McGonagall as well but there was too much to be explained to give that kind of job to her.

Quote:
Correct. But just because it was less doesn't mean it was insufficient to give him pause about desecrating DD's tomb or prevent him from doing so altogether.
True. But Harry's outlook had changed after Dobby died. He had spent lot of the previous months grumbling at Dumbledore but after Dobb's death he decided to follow Dumbledore's path. The idea would have scared him but imo if he thought Dumbledore wanted it to be done, he would have. He had decided to stop questioning DD's plan.

Quote:
Hmm. What would that be? Assuming that, relative to this world, magic is logical.
Would this be on topic? In any case, you have James and Lily using Sirius as the secret 'keeper when they could have used themselves and remained safe. Voldemort hatching one heck of an elaborate plan in GoF when there was no real need for it.


Quote:
But this is my point. He could have taken the wand out of the equation by destroying it or hiding it. He did not. Therefore I believe his intention was to make Snape master of the EW as a backup plan to Harry's mission.
You are not wrong in your interpretation based on the text but I don't I am either.


Reply With Quote
  #860  
Old January 22nd, 2013, 5:04 pm
Goddess_Clio  Female.gif Goddess_Clio is offline
Seventh Year
 
Joined: 3165 days
Location: The pirate ship Revenge
Age: 35
Posts: 1,853
Re: Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

Quote:
Originally Posted by mirrormere View Post
There is no evidence that Harry did anything to get rid of the wand (by destroying it or hiding it.) If by “putting the Elder Wand back where it came from” Harry meant DD’s tomb, it raises an interesting question. Here’s what Hermione tells Harry after finding out the EW is real and LV took it from DD’s grave:
DH: Shell Cottage“You could never have done that, Harry,” she said again and again. “You couldn’t have broken into Dumbledore’s grave.”

Harry seems to agree. But now, at the end of the story, Harry will break into DD’s grave to return the wand? Seems odd.
Perhaps this is a rationalization on my part but desecrating a tomb by wishing to rob it is different, to me, than opening the tomb to replace something that had been stolen from it. I agree in essentials with what Hermions says, that Harry most likely wouldn't have "desecrated" Dumbledore's tomb by stealing the EW from it, but I can certainly see that Harry might have opened the tomb back up in order to replace the wand or return it to its rightful owner, in Harry's opinion.

Also, would Harry be desecrating Dumbledore's tomb by returning the wand if Voldemort had already cracked the tomb open and, presumably, left it in that condition after he had gotten what he wanted? Or did Voldemort repairo the tomb after he cracked it open? That doesn't sound like Voldemort...

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRW View Post
I think I didn't explain myself well enough. Dumbledore trusted Snape, there's no doubt about that but the reason I said he had no other choice is because there was no one else who was more knowledgeable than Snape was on all things concerning Harry. I mean I am sure Dumbledore trusted McGonagall as well but there was too much to be explained to give that kind of job to her.
Saying Dumbledorehad no other choice than to chose Snape over McGonagall is meaningless, IMO, because either way he would have had to explain something to someone.

And what about Snape made him so much more knowledgable about Harry than another Order member like McGonagall? Snape knew Lily in a more personal way than McGonagall, no argument there (they were the same age, grew up together, etc. whereas McGonagall was much older and not a likely confidant for Lily because of that age difference) but what does that have to do with knowledge about Harry? Knowing someone's parent doesn't mean you're automatically privvy to everything about their kid, especially when that parent dies when the kid is still a toddler and you're not the one charged with raising said kid.

I'm willing to bet that most of what Snape knows about Harry himself, beyond what he learned of Harry while he was in Snape's class (and someone like McGonagall would have been on equal footing in that regard, also having Harry as a student), was probably told to him by Dumbledore since Snape wasn't hanging out with Harry before he came to Hogwarts. Keeping that in mind, Dumbledore would have needed some other rationale for choosing Snape over someone like McGonagall to carry out his end game strategy and, IMO, that rationale was that Snape was perfectly qualified to become a double (or triple?) agent already, something that McGonagall could never have done.

HRW, you say "Dumbledore did not have much of a choice when it came to choosing the person who was to deliver that particular message [I presume you're referencing the message that Harry had to sacrifice himself] to Harry." I think Dumbledore did have a choice and he chose the person who was best placed to make a judgement call on when that message should be delivered because that person was intimately involved in knowing both sides' business. And the reason Snape knew all of that information is because he was uniquely qualified for the job Dumbledore gave him: spying on Voldemort. That's why Snape was the one trusted with all this knowledge, that's why Dumbledore chose him, and not McGonagall or anyone else, to deliver the message to Harry and that's why someone like McGonagall wouldn't have been a good choice - but she was a choice.


__________________
"I could have been in politics 'cause I've always been a big spender."
Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back  Chamber of Secrets > Harry Potter > The Stone > Legilimency Studies

Bookmarks

Tags
albus dumbledore, character analysis


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 Off


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 3:29 am.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Original content is Copyright © MMII - MMVIII, CoSForums.com. All Rights Reserved.
Other content (posts, images, etc) is Copyright © its respective owners.