Why did the Triwizard Cup return Harry to Hogwarts?

[tayequalsyay]

Originally Posted by willfitz

I disagree. Crouch Jr. saying "I turned the cup into a portkey" is the same as Jo saying "Crouch knows that he turned the cup into a portkey."

There is no explicit proof that only one person can turn an object into a portkey. That remains to be pure speculation.

I have to disagree with you here. Crouch Jr. was underneath a truth spell and he said, "I turned the cup into a portkey." If you asked Jo who turned the cup into a portkey she would say, "Crouch Jr." It isn't speculation and meesha didn't say that only one person can turn it into a portkey she just said that Crouch Jr. was the only one who did in this example.

[willfitz]

A_Muggle, thanks for the support, and you give rise to a new idea. I'm not sure if this is what you are saying, but it occurred to me that Moody (Crouch Jr.) may have convinced Dumbledore and the others at the last minute to let him turn the cup into a portkey to take the winner back to the outside of the maze. He then proceeded to turn the cup into two separate portkeys, which would activate on the next two touches of the cup by a human. Dumbledore wasn't involved in creating a portkey at all, Crouch Jr. did everything himself, and we don't need to make assumptions about the first-in-last-out method of stacking spells.

That is only if we were to find that dead bodies can indeed be transported by portkey, about which I am still in doubt. I still believe that my original theory is the best one, but this alternate theory should satisfy those who believe that dead people can travel by portkey.

[wickedwickedboy]

well maybe Crouch did just make it go to the graveyard, then mum and pop ghost changed it into one that would lead back to the outside of the maze. Or maybe Harry did it, unknowingly with his touch based in that power of love he has - it just went where he needed it to go and his parents knew it would.

That is the other factor - his parents knew where it would go... (tunes up twilight zone music) - I haven't read all of the posts, but has that little factor been debated?

[willfitz]

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

That is the other factor - his parents knew where it would go... (tunes up twilight zone music) - I haven't read all of the posts, but has that little factor been debated?

Well, the fact that we don't really know what they are and what they know makes us not really able to use it as ammo. They could be omniscient, like I believe, or only know what they could glean from inside of the wand, as Meesha has suggested.

I think that these ghosts do have a connection to the dead souls though, which are as far as we can see, omniscient.

Originally Posted by tayequalsyay

I have to disagree with you here. Crouch Jr. was underneath a truth spell and he said, "I turned the cup into a portkey." If you asked Jo who turned the cup into a portkey she would say, "Crouch Jr." It isn't speculation and meesha didn't say that only one person can turn it into a portkey she just said that Crouch Jr. was the only one who did in this example.

The thing is, we don't know how much Moody knew. If he didn't know that anyone else had turned the cup into a portkey previously, he still would have said the same thing under the truth potion's influence.

By the way, saying what Jo would say if we asked her a question is definitely speculation, unless we actually do ask her. And actually, Meesha did say that only one person could turn the cup into a portkey:

Originally Posted by meesha1971
You can't turn an object into a portkey twice. Once it's turned into a portkey - it's a portkey.

This statements was one of those which supported the fact that my idea was ridiculous. Yes, this is speculation.

[wickedwickedboy]

Originally Posted by willfitz

Well, the fact that we don't really know what they are and what they know makes us not really able to use it as ammo. They could be omniscient, like I believe, or only know what they could glean from inside of the wand, as Meesha has suggested.

I think that these ghosts do have a connection to the dead souls though, which are as far as we can see, omniscient.

Right, what could they glean from inside the wand? Do you mean they were able to glean all that Peter did before delivering it and all that Voldy did up to that point? Umm...I rather think they were embodied by their afterworld selves and that is how they knew - cuz those folk seemed to have presceince.

I still like the idea of Harry's innate power directing it...

[willfitz]

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

Right, what could they glean from inside the wand? Do you mean they were able to glean all that Peter did before delivering it and all that Voldy did up to that point? Umm...I rather think they were embodied by their afterworld selves and that is how they knew - cuz those folk seemed to have presceince.

I still like the idea of Harry's innate power directing it...

Yes, I agree. Are you serious about it being down to Harry's love protection, or are you mocking? I can't tell.

[wickedwickedboy]

Not the old magic protection. I am referring to the fact that Harry was able to pull off some rather amazing things in canon due to the abundance of love that Dumbledore said he had inside - which he confirmed with Voldemort, was a power 'greater than magic'. Perhaps a great magician could eject a person that was possessing them from their body, but Harry managed it with love - and a very talented magician could issue a patronus that would drive away 100 dementors, but not a rank novice that had never issued a full patronus before - but Harry did it, finding love inside (his dad in himself) and blew them all away. And so on... so perhaps the love (we have the symbols again in his parents being there) was enough for him to be able to touch the portkey and it deliver him whereever he needed to be. Or not... . I dunno, it was just a thought.

[tayequalsyay]

Originally Posted by willfitz

And actually, Meesha did say that only one person could turn the cup into a portkey

How I interpreted her quote was obviously different. I see it as you can't do it two times not that only one person can do it.

[willfitz]

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

Not the old magic protection. I am referring to the fact that Harry was able to pull off some rather amazing things in canon due to the abundance of love that Dumbledore said he had inside - which he confirmed with Voldemort, was a power 'greater than magic'. Perhaps a great magician could eject a person that was possessing them from their body, but Harry managed it with love - and a very talented magician could issue a patronus that would drive away 100 dementors, but not a rank novice that had never issued a full patronus before - but Harry did it, finding love inside (his dad in himself) and blew them all away. And so on... so perhaps the love (we have the symbols again in his parents being there) was enough for him to be able to touch the portkey and it deliver him whereever he needed to be. Or not... . I dunno, it was just a thought.

It's an interesting idea, but I'm not convinced. In all of the examples you listed, Harry still had to perform the magic, it was just the love that gave him the power and extra ability, if you will, to accomplish it. I can't see how suddenly Harry could do magic without doing magic. It would open up far too many loopholes, in my opinion.

[wickedwickedboy]

Originally Posted by willfitz

It's an interesting idea, but I'm not convinced. In all of the examples you listed, Harry still had to perform the magic, it was just the love that gave him the power and extra ability, if you will, to accomplish it. I can't see how suddenly Harry could do magic without doing magic. It would open up far too many loopholes, in my opinion.

Well I don't think this was the answer either, but actually he didn't do any magic when Voldy was ejected from his body, he just felt love, .

[willfitz]

Well, if there is one type of magic about which we are most unclear, I believe it is this business of possession. We don't really know a whole lot about how it works, and whether it is actually magic, or just an ability of magical beings.

[tayequalsyay]

I don't think possession is magical but rather an ability IMO.

[meesha1971]

Originally Posted by willfitz

I disagree. Crouch Jr. saying "I turned the cup into a portkey" is the same as Jo saying "Crouch knows that he turned the cup into a portkey."

There is no explicit proof that only one person can turn an object into a portkey. That remains to be pure speculation.

Which is the same thing as saying "Crouch Jr. turned the cup into a portkey." The text explicitly states that Crouch Jr. was the one who turned the cup into a portkey. Once the object is a portkey, that's it - it's a portkey. It cannot be turned into a portkey again without undoing the charm and starting all over.

By the same token, if Hermione transfigures a gerbil into a pincushion - she has a pincushion. If she wants to turn the gerbil into a pincushion again, she would have to reverse the spell to turn the pincushion back into a gerbil and start from scratch. An object can only be turned into something else once. If someone else wants to come along and do it again, then they are going to have to undo what was done before and start from scratch to do that.

The portkey was not definitely two-way. That is also speculation. The cup could feasibly be two separate one-way portkeys, as MrSleepyHead was also trying to say. There is nothing to confirm or deny it.

That is what is shown in the text. Crouch Jr. turned the cup into a portkey that was activated by physical contact - and he was the only one who did so. That was Voldemort's plan - to use a portkey to get Harry away from Hogwarts without anyone being aware of it and return his body back to Hogwarts so it would appear that he died because of the tournament. All of that is explained on page in both GOF and OOTP.

It is debatable whether the cup was a two-way portkey by design or simply because all portkeys that were activated by physical contact worked that way, but it doesn't really matter which it is because that is what Voldemort needed the portkey to do regardless.

The bottom line is that the cup returned Harry to Hogwarts because that was what Voldemort wanted.

Originally Posted by tayequalsyay

How I interpreted her quote was obviously different. I see it as you can't do it two times not that only one person can do it.

Right. An object can only be turned into something once. Once that has been done, the only way to turn it into something again would be to remove the charm and start from scratch.

Simply put - if Dumbledore had turned the cup into a portkey it would still be irrelevant because Crouch Jr. would have had to remove that charm before he could turn the cup into a portkey himself. The Triwizard Cup did what Voldemort wanted it to do - take Harry to the graveyard and return him to Hogwarts. What went wrong is the fact that Harry was still alive when he returned to Hogwarts. The text tells us explicitly that Crouch Jr. did that on Voldemort's orders. And it is explained that Voldemort planned this out because he wanted his return to be a complete secret. The only way to accomplish that was to get Harry out of Hogwarts, kill him, and return his dead body without anyone ever being aware that he had left.

Dumbledore didn't have anything to do with it. It was Voldemort's plan and Crouch Jr. acting on Voldemort's orders to carry out that plan.

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

Not the old magic protection. I am referring to the fact that Harry was able to pull off some rather amazing things in canon due to the abundance of love that Dumbledore said he had inside - which he confirmed with Voldemort, was a power 'greater than magic'. Perhaps a great magician could eject a person that was possessing them from their body, but Harry managed it with love - and a very talented magician could issue a patronus that would drive away 100 dementors, but not a rank novice that had never issued a full patronus before - but Harry did it, finding love inside (his dad in himself) and blew them all away. And so on... so perhaps the love (we have the symbols again in his parents being there) was enough for him to be able to touch the portkey and it deliver him whereever he needed to be. Or not... . I dunno, it was just a thought.

That makes sense based on what we see in the text though. I think that Harry returning outside of the maze was very likely due to the fact that he wanted that. He wanted to tell Dumbledore that Voldemort had returned.

I still think it is most likely that all portkeys activated by touch would be two-way portkeys. That is the most logical scenario because there would be no restriction on the portkey as to the date or time - nothing that would cause it to expire. That type of portkey would most likely work forever - continuously going back and forth between those two locations - unless the charm was manually removed from it. The other type of portkey would expire because it would be restricted to a specific date/time of departure. Once that time had passed, the portkey would not work anymore.

But I do agree that it is very possible that Harry influenced where the cup landed on the return trip because he was certainly feeling very powerful emotions there and urgently wanted to tell Dumbledore that Voldemort was back. That would be very similar to him finding himself on the roof as a child when he was running away from Dudley's gang because he was afraid of what would happen if they caught him. That type of accidental "power surge" would decrease as he got older and learned more control over his magic, but in a situation like he was facing at the graveyard, it would make sense for the strong emotions he was feeling to cause some kind of "power surge" and have an influence on what happened there.

[SusanBones]

Originally Posted by meesha1971

Simply put - if Dumbledore had turned the cup into a portkey it would still be irrelevant because Crouch Jr. would have had to remove that charm before he could turn the cup into a portkey himself..

I think we have textual evidence that an object can have more than one spell on it. The twins and a few other people hit Malfoy with several different spells at once and turned him into some sort of slimy slug-like thing. I don't remember anywhere in the text that says you can only put one spell on an object. The dragon handlers got together to stun the dragons, otherwise, one stunning spell isn't strong enough. If multiple stunning spells could be put on a dragon, then I would think that the evidence in the book would clearly allow someone to put multiple spells on anything, including a portkey.

That's just my opinion.

[meesha1971]

Originally Posted by SusanBones

I think we have textual evidence that an object can have more than one spell on it. The twins and a few other people hit Malfoy with several different spells at once and turned him into some sort of slimy slug-like thing. I don't remember anywhere in the text that says you can only put one spell on an object. The dragon handlers got together to stun the dragons, otherwise, one stunning spell isn't strong enough. If multiple stunning spells could be put on a dragon, then I would think that the evidence in the book would clearly allow someone to put multiple spells on anything, including a portkey.

That's just my opinion.

The Dragon Handlers all using the exact same spell to stun the dragon simply made the stunning spell stronger - it didn't change the effect of the spell because they were using the same one. We see the same thing with the trio using Expelliarmus on Snape simultaneously - as well as Harry and Cedric both using a stunning spell simultaneously to stun the giant spider.

However, when Malfoy, Crabbe, and Goyle were all hit with a myriad of different spells, that altered what those spells were supposed to do. That's why they ended up looking like "giant slug things" instead of showing the actual effects of the spells.

In other words, if Dumbledore had turned the cup into a portkey and then Crouch Jr. came along and tried to turn into a portkey again with a different destination, then that would alter both spells and the portkey would not work the way either of them intended - if it would work at all. The only way the portkey would work the way it was supposed to would be to completely remove the first charm and put a new charm on it.


ETA -

I just remembered a very good example for what I'm talking about here. In the movie Stardust, they had the concept that a person could travel by candlelight using a magical black candle. Two people could use one candle to travel, but they had to be thinking of the same destination or it would not work properly. In one scene, the guy lights the candle and tells the girl to think of "home". She's a star so her home is in space and that's what she thinks of - he thinks of his home on Earth. They end up at a midway point between the two - trapped on a cloud in the sky because the candle was only good for one trip.

That is what would most likely have happened if the Triwizard Cup had already been turned into a portkey when Crouch Jr. took it into the maze and set it to take whoever touched it to the graveyard. The conflicting "programming" - for lack of a better word - would confuse the portkey so it wouldn't know where it needed to go. In that event, the portkey would not have taken Harry and Cedric to the graveyard because it would have been confused by the conflicting destinations - it would either have gone to some point between the two destinations or simply not worked at all.

[SusanBones]

Originally Posted by meesha1971

In other words, if Dumbledore had turned the cup into a portkey and then Crouch Jr. came along and tried to turn into a portkey again with a different destination, then that would alter both spells and the portkey would not work the way either of them intended - if it would work at all. The only way the portkey would work the way it was supposed to would be to completely remove the first charm and put a new charm on it.

I believe that Dumbledore put multiple spells on Hogwarts to protect it from invasion. Over the course of the series, he added protections as the danger grew. I have trouble remembering an example in the books that shows when two of the same spell are added to an object, it changes the way the spell works.

[meesha1971]

Originally Posted by SusanBones

I believe that Dumbledore put multiple spells on Hogwarts to protect it from invasion. Over the course of the series, he added protections as the danger grew. I have trouble remembering an example in the books that shows when two of the same spell are added to an object, it changes the way the spell works.

Protective enchantments don't have any effect on Hogwarts itself though - they don't make the castle do anything and they don't actually change anything about the castle - they just keep people out.

The difference here is that we're talking about spells designed to make an object perform as specific task. One will set the object to take a person to a specific location at a specific date/time. The other will set the object to take a person to a location when physical contact is made - and likely will continuously go back and forth between the starting point and destination point whenever physical contact is made.

As I said in the ETA above - to set two conflicting destinations would confuse the object. It wouldn't know where it needed to go if that was done. In that event, it would either go to some location between the two or not work at all because of the conflict.

[OldMotherCrow]

Originally Posted by meesha1971

As I said in the ETA above - to set two conflicting destinations would confuse the object. It wouldn't know where it needed to go if that was done. In that event, it would either go to some location between the two or not work at all because of the conflict.

I disagree. The object (the Cup) had two destinations programmed, and did not confuse them. To me it seems obvious that regardless of how the Cup came to have two different destinations placed upon it, there is a way of making the spell to override one destination in favor of the other. How this came about is unknown.

I also don't know anywhere in the books that says only one Portkey spell can be on an object at a time, or anly one spell can be on an object at a time. If Hermione turned a gerbil into a green pincushion for an hour, and then decided she wanted it to be a red pinpushion for a five minutes, after five minutes would the red pincushion turn back into a green pincushion or a gerbil? I don't have an answer to this. And that's the problem I have with Portkeys. There should be enough information in the books to have the GoF Portkey make sense, but I don't find that to be the case.

The only thing I am certain of is that the Cup was programmed to go to Tom Riddle's grave, and to the edge of the maze in front of the stands. The locations seem to be specifically chosen, so whoever put the spells on there wanted the Cup to take its passenger to those spots in particular.

I also know that Apparation in and out of Hogwarts is restricted, and only the Headmaster can alter the restriction. Hogwarts is supposed to be one of the securest places in the Wizarding World. So what about Portkeys? They are either allowed, which opens all kinds of plot holes, or they are not, which means Dumbledore must have authorized the GoF Portkey, even though it doesn't say so in the book. I prefer the latter scenario because it provides the simplest expanation, while the former still leads to having to come up with all sorts of explanations not in the books to close the now open plot holes.

I agree that Crouch's explanation should have been definitive, but all he gives us is a couple of clipped sentences. He turned it into a Portkey, on Voldemort's orders, presumably to take Harry to Tom Riddles grave. The Portkey to in front of the stands by the edge of the maze is not explained in any way. If it was part of Voldemort's plan, Crouch sheds no light on it.

[RemusLupinFan]

Originally Posted by OldMotherCrow

They are either allowed, which opens all kinds of plot holes, or they are not, which means Dumbledore must have authorized the GoF Portkey, even though it doesn't say so in the book.

I think I'd have to agree here. It would seem that Dumbledore programmed the cup to transport the winner out of the maze where he/she would be visible to the spectators and judges of the Tournament. One scenario that seems possible to me is that Crouch charmed the cup first, and then Dumbledore charmed it later, such that its first destination was Riddle's grave and its second destination was Hogwarts. In general, I could see portkeys working this way: multiple spells could essentially just add destinations, so that the first time it's used, it takes you to location A, the second time takes you to place B, and so on, depending on how many spells have been put on the portkey. This is the way I see it happening; of course I could be wrong though.

[wickedwickedboy]

Originally Posted by meesha1971

Which is the same thing as saying "Crouch Jr. turned the cup into a portkey." The text explicitly states that Crouch Jr. was the one who turned the cup into a portkey. Once the object is a portkey, that's it - it's a portkey. It cannot be turned into a portkey again without undoing the charm and starting all over.

By the same token, if Hermione transfigures a gerbil into a pincushion - she has a pincushion. If she wants to turn the gerbil into a pincushion again, she would have to reverse the spell to turn the pincushion back into a gerbil and start from scratch. An object can only be turned into something else once. If someone else wants to come along and do it again, then they are going to have to undo what was done before and start from scratch to do that.



That is what is shown in the text. Crouch Jr. turned the cup into a portkey that was activated by physical contact - and he was the only one who did so. That was Voldemort's plan - to use a portkey to get Harry away from Hogwarts without anyone being aware of it and return his body back to Hogwarts so it would appear that he died because of the tournament. All of that is explained on page in both GOF and OOTP.

It is debatable whether the cup was a two-way portkey by design or simply because all portkeys that were activated by physical contact worked that way, but it doesn't really matter which it is because that is what Voldemort needed the portkey to do regardless.

The bottom line is that the cup returned Harry to Hogwarts because that was what Voldemort wanted.



Right. An object can only be turned into something once. Once that has been done, the only way to turn it into something again would be to remove the charm and start from scratch.

Simply put - if Dumbledore had turned the cup into a portkey it would still be irrelevant because Crouch Jr. would have had to remove that charm before he could turn the cup into a portkey himself. The Triwizard Cup did what Voldemort wanted it to do - take Harry to the graveyard and return him to Hogwarts. What went wrong is the fact that Harry was still alive when he returned to Hogwarts. The text tells us explicitly that Crouch Jr. did that on Voldemort's orders. And it is explained that Voldemort planned this out because he wanted his return to be a complete secret. The only way to accomplish that was to get Harry out of Hogwarts, kill him, and return his dead body without anyone ever being aware that he had left.

Dumbledore didn't have anything to do with it. It was Voldemort's plan and Crouch Jr. acting on Voldemort's orders to carry out that plan.



That makes sense based on what we see in the text though. I think that Harry returning outside of the maze was very likely due to the fact that he wanted that. He wanted to tell Dumbledore that Voldemort had returned.

I still think it is most likely that all portkeys activated by touch would be two-way portkeys. That is the most logical scenario because there would be no restriction on the portkey as to the date or time - nothing that would cause it to expire. That type of portkey would most likely work forever - continuously going back and forth between those two locations - unless the charm was manually removed from it. The other type of portkey would expire because it would be restricted to a specific date/time of departure. Once that time had passed, the portkey would not work anymore.

But I do agree that it is very possible that Harry influenced where the cup landed on the return trip because he was certainly feeling very powerful emotions there and urgently wanted to tell Dumbledore that Voldemort was back. That would be very similar to him finding himself on the roof as a child when he was running away from Dudley's gang because he was afraid of what would happen if they caught him. That type of accidental "power surge" would decrease as he got older and learned more control over his magic, but in a situation like he was facing at the graveyard, it would make sense for the strong emotions he was feeling to cause some kind of "power surge" and have an influence on what happened there.

That is what I was thinking - but not so much accidental magic (I agree that pretty much dissapates as one matures) - more that other bit of power that was very similar in nature that he showed even when older based in his compassion. Harry's compassion was shown to do just what Dumbledore said - in many ways. Not just the depossession and instant patronus and other magics - but also, his loving nature was what caused him to be able to earn Buckbeaks loyalty and compassion, earn Fawkes understanding of his nature, retain and build on the wary respect that the Centaurs had for him, allow him audience with Aragog, enable him to remain mounted with his friends on the Gringott's dragon's back - and all that stuff too. It isn't like others couldn't do this stuff, but Harry was the only one shown in canon doing it - which was for our benefit, so relevant in my judgment.

While I agree with you that it was most likely in this case a two way Portkey - that just makes the most sense to me - it was just an idea that would lend to Harry ending up exactly where he needed to be etc. and even empowering the cup if necessary, but I don't think either was necessary in this instance.