Quick Synopsis: After an abortive attempt to return to Grimmauld Place, the Trio instead end up in a forest. Yaxley was able to hold on long enough to get within the protective charms on the house, but Hermione shakes him off and goes to where the Quidditch Cup was held in Goblet of Fire. Ron is splinched and has a gaping wound in his arm and is in danger of bleeding to death. Tense moments pass until first aid is applied. Ron appears to be okay, but the Trio decide to stay put for a spell. The Trio have the Locket Horcrux but only have vauge ideas on how to destroy it. Caution and watchfulness become the order of the day. Hermione puts up several protective spells and Harry suggests he and she take turns watching. As he takes the first watch, Harry begins heading into the doldrums again which leaves him open to seeing another vision from Voldemort’s head. The Dark Lord has finally found Gregorovitch and learns that the object he seeks was stolen years ago by the curly haired, wild, merry youth. The vision ends with Gregorovitch’s death and Harry is left to ponder what he has seen.
This chapter seems like a transitional one. It’s fairly short and not much goes on compared to other chapters. But it is the beginning of the wilderness wanderings of the Trio, otherwise known as all that camping stuff. It deepens the spiritual turmoil Harry has been undergoing ever since he read Skeeter’s article on Dumbledore at the start of the book. His dark night of the soul as St. John of the Cross calls it or the long dark tea time of the soul as Douglas Adams calls it. Harry is back in full mope mode after the success of retrieving the Locketcrux. He has no direction. He continually questions Dumbledore and his plans or lack of them. After his vision, he also is left wondering what Voldemort is pursuing. However, Harry does worry about Kreacher and feels genuine affection for him.
Ron is terribly wounded and appears to have lost a lot of blood from the splinching. I would think the blood loss would make him even more susceptible to hunger later on and also the effects of the Locketcrux. Ron also shows some of his unintentional intuitiveness in this chapter. He feels, rightly, that the name of Voldemort has been turned into a jinx/tracking device. He also is the first to sense the living nature of the Locketcrux. Plus, Ron is agonizing over the fate of the Cattermoles. A bit of foreshadowing of his concern for the house-elves in the end?
Hermione is both well prepared and totally unprepared for the exile the Trio are thrown into in this chapter. She has Dittany on hand for first aid. She has a tent stuffed into her bag. But somehow she has no food at all. Not even a candy bar, because she expected to be back at Grimmauld Place after the Ministry raid. But she’s got a huge tent stuffed in her bag? Sounds like a plot device, not having food, for how else are we to believe that Hermione, who thinks of everything, overlooks something as important as food. Plus, as a Muggle-born, one would think Hermione would be best qualified to live in both worlds of magic and the mundane. But it seems as if when a Muggle becomes a wizard or witch, they immediately forget the things Muggles do to compensate for not having magic. So, she remembers the rule about using magic to produce food but can’t remember to throw some MRE’s or emergency ration bars in her bag ‘o many things?
Other thoughts on the chapter:
Anyone besides me getting a bit tired of Harry always immediately believing anything he sees in his Voldemort visions and Hermione immediately discounting everything he sees?
I thought a bit of foreshadowing was going on when Harry notes such a look of tenderness on Hermione’s face toward Ron that he believes he’s surprised her in the act of kissing Ron.
Thoughts on Harry’s vision: Anything to Grindelwald being described as like a bird sitting on the windowsill and then leaping off with a “crow” of laughter? I know some people have had a problem with wand lore and the story of the Hallows in this book, thinking it’s been added in too late to the story and being used as a deus ex machina, but I don’t really see it that way. First off, it’s not as if Rowling introduces two totally unfamiliar items as Hallows. The Invisibility Cloak has been around from the start and the Resurrection Stone was seen last book as the ring. For what it’s worth, we weren’t even really introduced to Horcruxes until Book 6, and if, as Rowling claims, Deathly Hallows is just Part 2 of Half-Blood Prince, then it makes perfect sense that one be about Horcruxes and one be about the Hallows, for that becomes the question for Harry. Does he pursue Hallows or Horcruxes?
Anyway, I solicit your thoughts on this chapter. What stands out for you? What do you think either works well in this chapter or doesn’t? How does it play in the overall structure and plot of the book? Especially what are your thoughts on Harry’s vision into Voldemort’s activities? Finally, any significance to Gregorovitch being described as looking like a “trussed up Father Christmas?”
Jonathan on 
korg20000bc on 
Arabella Figg on 
revgeorge on 
Red Rocker on 
Dave the Longwinded on 
Fricka on 
Loading ...
{ 118 comments… read them below or add one }
The first thing that struck me on reading this chapter was why Ron splinched. In earlier books, the person who splinched was the person casting the apparating spell. Not here. Hermione cast the spell. Was this just a plot device, or is there some logical reason for it?
A possible clue might be found in Book 1, PS/SS. When the trio went down the trap door, they landed on Devil’s Snare. Hermione told them to relax and they would fall through it. Harry was able to do this, but not Ron. Why? Was he too scared or nervous? Did he not trust Hermione’s instructions? Was he reluctant to follow orders after having been subjected to Fred and George all his life? Any or all could have been the reason in Book 1, but only being scared or nervous would seem to apply here. Any thoughts on this, or is it just a plot device that does not seem to be worth analyzing?
Charlie, you raise some interesting questions about Ron being splinched. I always thought that it happened because of the situation – Hermione’s panic at having accidentally brought along Yaxley, adrenaline from their escape from the ministry.
revgeorge, An excellent post! You shouldn’t have been so hard on yourself before
. I’m glad that you touched on Harry’s remembrance of Kreacher – I always thought this one of the most poignant lines in the book. I have to get back to work now – just wanted to send you some praise 
. I’ll add more thoughts later.
Nice writeup, revgeorge. I’ll probably comment more later, but I do want to address what you say about Hermione and food.
I don’t think it’s a plot device for Hermione not to have food. Having the tent and dittany and the whatever were things she packed before the wedding, when she had nothing to think about but packing. After the wedding, and all the events following, she never unpacked the bag, so they were still there and ready to be used, and carrying the bag was not a hindrance so she continued to carry it around with her.
But food is one of those things that you pack last, since it spoils. She didn’t pack food when they left the wedding either. Both times the need to leave was immediate. Had she known, she would’ve been prepared, but her focus here had been on infiltrating the Ministry, not on ad-hoc camping trips.
The first thing that came to mind when I finished this chapter now – was this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSrLDHDQ2eo
The Thieving Magpie – Rossini’s Opera Overture – A Clockwork Orange – Alex – the amoral Grindewalt – as queer as a clockwork orange – behavior modification – leading to the Chaplain proclaiming the Ludovico Technique a failure – Goodness must come from within – Harry giving Voldemort the option to find the goodness from within in the final chapter.
Also – in the Opera itself, La Gazza Ladra, by Rossini, it is the Magpie which saves Ninetta from death by demonstrating it’s thievery.
Was A Clockwork Orange something that stuck in Ms. Rowling’s head regarding Grindewald? The writer in the story is Frank Alexander, who says,
“recruiting brutal young roughs into the police; proposing debilitating and will-sapping techniques of conditioning. Oh, we’ve seen it all before in other countries; the thin end of the wedge! Before we know where we are, we shall have the full apparatus of totalitarianism.”
Charlie – that’s curious about the source of splinching for Ron. Ron does seem to be the one who innocently gets the brunt of violence in these books. Sacrificing himself in the chess game, getting his leg broke in PoA, getting splinched.
Looking at my last post – as usual – my mind goes through a strange labyrinth of different topics when searching for answers. Maybe my stream of consciousness is a bit much with this and I’m making more of it than it really is. Sorry.
Interesting comments about Hermione not remembering to put in foodstuff as she’s packing. I don’t fault her for this, as Derek D notes, food is one of those things you pack in last because it spoils. Anyone who’s gone on a camping trip and put the food in too soon can attest to that, and while we don’t know that Hermione has gone on camping trips with her parents, there’s nothing to say that she didn’t, either. The thought that She, Harry, and Ron would be going back to Grimmauld Place before starting their journey makes sense too. Now, I have to wonder this: The trio is in the same place as GOF, that is, in a wooded area. Shouldn’t there be some wild plants they could use for food? Don’t know if it would be the right time of the year for nuts, but there could be plants, and Hermione would be the one who could tell if a plant was poisonous or not.Things like grass and bugs could be fodder for food, too. After all, rice and wheat are just types of grass, if you stop to think about it. It would make more sense to me if that happened and Ron and Harry refused to eat the stuff, instead of the implication that there was nothing edible around. Just my two knuts.
Frika et al.
Regarding the crow imagery for Grindelwald. Two things that occur to me when I read this description – I’m reminded of Voldemort flying at the beginning of the book and the portrayal of evil as animalistic (Voldemort-snake, Grindelwald-bird). Both Voldemort’s and Grindelwalds explorations of dark magic mark them both as being slightly less human. I think that there is an interesting juxtaposition between the crow-like laughter of Grindelwald as he steals the wand and the boy-ish laughter in the picture with young Dumbledore. I see a similar contrast in the young, handsome Riddle and the cold, snake-faced Voledmort.
Sorry, ignore the first line of that post – was in the middle of saying something else and it got deleted!
Frika just wanted to say that I’m in agreement about the food issue. I do remember them eating mushrooms (and I think fish) that they find around them. I just assumed that they didn’t want to venture too far away from the tent during their first night for fear of having been followed.
Here’s a strange association for Grindelwald: Peter Pan. Peter Pan is a chaotic character, quick with a smile or laugh, above the law, and he crows. The scene of Grindelwald stealing the wand seems like you could replace him with Peter Pan without any other modification.
Good one, revgeorge! I’ll have to add my two knuts later, although I think Ron’s splinching happened because they were apparating together (therefore Ron was part of Hermione’s spell) and were off balance; Ron got sort of caught at an angle, I think.
I urge everyone to not get on the bunny trail of the Hallows subject right now, as we can look forward to a full discussion later with Ch. 22.
Well worth the wait, revgeorge, who’d have thunk there was so much meat to that chapter?
I can’t comment long now – the Caps are about to play the Habs – but here’s a few immediate thoughts.
It’s not “all that camping stuff”. It’s “endless hanging about in tents.” If they actually camped (made bonfires, roasted weiners and marshmallows, went canoeing and had some fun) I would have enjoyed it more. Instead they sit about in tents and obsess and argue.
Totally with you about the divine Ms. H who remembers to pack a tent but somehow forgets to pack food. Plot device.
Whoever made the analogy between Grindelwald and Peter Pan, above: spot on. That’s exactly the kind of imagery JKR evokes, down to perching and then leaping off with a “crow” of laughter. Just checked: it was Derek D: good call!
I love the expression long dark tea time of the soul
I will accept responsibility for being one of those people who think the wand stuff and the hallows were tacked on at the end. I still believe it. But I give full credit to JKR for trying to retrofit it to the existing story so it doesn’t look so last-minute.
More later. Got to go. Goals are being scored and I’m not there to see them.
The Long Dark Teatime of the Soul is a title of a book by Douglas Adams. It’s a sequel to his Dirk Gently, Holistic Detective book. If you haven’t read it, you might want to check it out–very Douglasesque humor throughout.
Grindlewald as Peter Pan? I’ll have to think about that a bit more.
I think I am the only person I know who actually *likes* the “hanging about in tents” sequence of the story….
The big “action sequences” in DH (what we in the biz would call the set pieces) are on a scale far beyond most of what we’ve seen through the series, and the stakes are also incredibly high. If we kept at that level of tension throughout, DH might just be too much to take.
In addition, the trio is going to split apart soon, largely over Harry’s inability to succeed in his quest for the Horcruxes. So we need to see that inability. If we went from the episode at the Ministry straight to Godric’s Hollow, we wouldn’t feel the trio’s sense of despair, we wouldn’t understand Ron’s leaving Harry and Hermione as he does.
And we need the time to contemplate the stakes, to understand the nature of the Locketcrux, to try to assess where we’ve been and where we still need to go. We’re almost at the midpoint of the book , and slowing down for a sec to catch our breath (especially with the horror sequence of Godric’s Hollow coming up) is, to my mind, great pacing.
Cutting out the “forest” scenes would be, to my mind, like the suggestions made, when Lord of the Rings was first published and Hollywood first considered how to make a movie out of it, that they dispense with all the walking and just have the hobbits fly everywhere on eagles.
I think the fact that so many people find the forest chapters so draggy, so painful, just speaks to how successful they are at conveying the slow torture of despair that the trio are going through at that time.
And come on, the “forest” section is only 2 chapters anyway, plus “The Silver Doe,” (which is so eventful, we can’t really count it as a “hanging-about-in-tents” chapter). And this one’s a short chapter at that, as RevGeorge points out.
So… I realize I’m likely alone here… But I like the forest chapters, I do…
A couple of tiny questions. So – does Mrs. Cattermole’s lack of wand prevent her from Apparating alongside her husband? I got the impression it did. I did not know that and don’t remember anything about that in previous canon. And why is Apparating as a verb capitalized?
Though I noticed it – the fact that Hermione thought they would be returning to Gimmauld and thus didn’t pack food didn’t really bother me much. Plot device or not. But she should have packed some non-perishable staples of a pantry – oil, salt, spices and a good cookbook because nothing is better than some beautiful chanterelles cooked down with a little butter, wine and sea salt.
And did Voldmort really push his soul-splitting to the limit technically, as Hermione said?
Hey Janet – you’re right! It does only last two chapters. I never thought of it that way. Maybe it’s not so much the tent-habitation as it is missing Hogwarts. It reminds me that when one goes off to war – they must leave home. At least until the war comes to your home – as it does at the end of DH.
The only thing all this talk about surving off the land by the eating of mushrooms does for me is remind me of the fate of the doomed lovers in Elvira Madigan, a movie most of you here are too young to have seen, but trust me, nothing good comes from the eating of mushrooms. And no amount of beautiful music makes it anything less than horrible.
And it is the same sense of futility, dread and helplessness in the face of indifferent fate that I get from the tents chapters as I get from Elvira Madigan
Janet, I like the “camping” chapters, too. They’re a critical part of the plot. The Trio is used to action in stress; they’ve never had to rely solely on each other under such unforgiving monotony, despair, isolation, and frustration, without relief in sight. It’s not pretty, but it has a lot to do with character.
Red Rocker, I remember Elvira Madigan (and the famous theme, which promptly began playing in my brain), but never saw it. I’ll have to read up on the plot; you’ve got me curious.
The more I start to think about Hermione’s very unfortunate packing, the more I realized how unprepared the trio really is! (Why is she doing all the packing? Why not ask the guys to help? Not a sexist thing – just an all-for-one, one-for-all question.) And it’s not just food. I assumed that there was no limit to her bag in terms of items packed. I started to make a mental list of things I would need if Lord Voldemort was after me and I had to hide out in the woods for a few months and this is what I come up with:
Food (obviously) – Protein: Canned tuna and chicken, assorted salumi, beef jerky, and the ever enduring Spam. Dairy (a bit problematic): boxed soy milk, Cheeses encased in wax will keep without refrigeration until opened – so small balls of Comte, Gruyere, Edam, Chedder, or any of the hard cheeses, like Romano and Parmigiano-Reggiano, there’s the never-goes-bad velveeta and cheese whiz. Carbs: Crackers, Pasta, lots of it. Fats: Olive oil, Spices: herbs de Provence, salt, pepper, Canned goods: Beans, Garbanzo, Red, Haricort verts, Corn, Tomatoes, Peas, Asparagus, Beets, Jarred fruits, mandarin oranges, peaches, Peanut Butter, Pasta Sauce, Garlic (not great in jars, but will do) Sugar, Nutella and the long shelf life of the almighty twinkie.
Comfort and Cleanliness – Shower puffs, soap, shampoo, toothbrushes, toothpaste, deodorant, toilet paper, baby wipes, fresh towels, two sets of sheets, glade candles or febreeze to get that nasty cat smell out of the tent, underwear, socks, jackets, rain gear and three sets of clothes.
Health – Dittany, ibuprofen and a bezoar.
This took me 5 minutes of thinking and I’m sure I’ve left something out.
Thanks for all the comments and compliments.
Janet, I also like the camping chapters, and for pretty much the exact reasons you outlined in your post. Very good analysis of it.
The idea of Hollywood contemplating, at any time in history, having the Hobbits in LOTR flying around on eagles turns my stomach. I’m glad that never happened!
Just to clarify my thoughts on Hermione and the lack of food. I don’t care if it’s a plot device or not but it does seem awfully out of character for Hermione to not include something so vital. Surely even in the wizarding world there are foods that have long term storage and could’ve been thrown into her bag which apparently can hold everything in the world. Plus, it also seems that once one enters the wizarding world, one forgets how to do things the Muggle way or just never thinks of it. I just bought today for $2 two packs of crackers, one filled with cheese and one with peanut butter. If kept in their wrappings, these packs of crackers will probably outlive me.
So, just a few packs of crackers and candy bars and granola bars thrown into the bag would’ve alleviated a lot of the problems with food the Trio had. Plus, one would think Hermione would know better than to eat mushrooms one finds in the woods; even experts in mushrooms are wary of eating mushrooms found in the wild.
Joivre, that’s actually a very good and thorough list. Water would be one thing to include as well. But for wizards and witches finding water shouldn’t be too hard and neither would purifying it.
Granted the Trio would’ve had a hard time buying or finding these things once they were ensconced in Grimmauld Place, but I just can’t imagine Hermione not including something prior to them leaving the Burrow. Apparently Hermione had her bag with her during the wedding itself and the dancing afterward; otherwise she ran into the house during the attack, got it, ran back out, and found Ron & Harry, but didn’t things happen a bit too quickly for that to happen?
You’re absolutely right too, Joivre, that it’s Hermione doing all the preparatory work. I don’t think there’s anything sexist to it per se; just more a testament to Harry and Ron’s total lack of thought & initiative towards practical matters. They’ve let themselves fall into the bad and inconsiderate habit of always leaving the solutions to Hermione. Harry after all is more likely to make some huge intuitive leap & then rush off to do something. Ron is content to follow along. Plus, expecting Ron to think of practical matters is like expecting Snape to start handing out sweets.
Joivre, I’d rather face Voldemort and all his Death Eaters than have to eat canned green beans. Ditto for the mandarin oranges.
Well, I am going to speak in defense of Hermione(and Harry and Ron too). These are what, SEVENTEEN year olds? When have they ever had to prepare a meal for themselves, let alone anyone else? I do like Joivre’s list, but again, let’s remember that just because one is female does not make one an automatically good cook(Re: Deborah, Ray’s wife on Everybody Loves Raymond!). They’ve spent all of their young lives being taken care of, insofar as food is concerned. On top of that, coming back to Hermione, it’s possible, since her parents are both dentists(that is, both working in a profession that may be the teeniest bit anti-food, as it causes cavities) that most of their meals are taken at restaurants or take-out. Even someone so brilliant as Hermione may simply not have thought of what roughing it would really be like. She may not have gone grocery shopping with her mother,either, so where would she have the chance to learn all this stuff? Most people don’t find out about what work planning a meal is until they are out of their parents’ homes, graduated from college, and/or married. None of these apply to any of the trio.
In addition, Ron and Harry might not have been that great in helping Hermione think of what kinds of food stuffs to include. Ron’s got the handicap of having been coddled(at least in the culinary sense, lol) by Molly, and Harry? Aunt Petunia would hardly have been a good cooking coach! I rest my case, ladies and gentlemen, and ask that you declare my clients, um, favorite characters, innocent of the charges brought against them!
And might I add that Hermione came with a most important supply–Muggle money (her own savings!) to help them obtain what they needed. And integrity to leave money, when they had to be under the Invisibility cloak or nicked food from farmers.
I think she did a pretty great job; perhaps she planned on packing food after the wedding. She was resourceful where the boys were not.
Their struggling for food was an important component of character-producing tension and struggle of the long camping trip (which extended to close to Easter).
Fricka and Arabella – I am not on Hermione’s case at all – I’m just saying it was an unfortunate choice of equipment. And as Revgeorge pointed out, they had time and an ample pantry to draw items from with Mrs. Weasley’s stores before the wedding when they were not under immediate threat. And Fricka, (re, E.L.R. – ugh, they’re so nasty to each other on that show, I think all of them are wearing horcruxes around their necks) I don’t think just because one is female that automatically makes them a good cook. (Just smarter than the other half
) Yes – Arabella, Hermione is smart enough to remember the moolah. But can’t she apparate into a Vons with it?
And Red – I don’t see your list. You’re sounding a lot like Ron. You try packing for three months without electricity.
By the way – you wouldn’t have to eat the mandarin oranges or the mushy green beans because I forgot the can opener.
Fricka, you make some excellent points in your defense of the Trio, particularly Hermione, and I would be inclined to agree with them completely but for one little thing. Hermione includes everything else in her little bag. She’s got clothes, books, first aid supplies, Muggle money, toothbrushes (I believe she pulls them out at Grimmauld Place.), a tent, even Phineas Nigellus’ portrait is stuffed in there!
It’s not so much a complaint about Hermione but about the author, that Rowling writes Hermione in such an out of character way when seemingly everything else but food is included. But, as Arabella points out, I can see & appreciate why Rowling sets it up that way.
Getting back to the chapter points that Revgeorge brought up. Hermione’s dismay at Harry’s complete capiltulation to his visions of Voldemort is understandable and in keeping with her character. The rule was stated by Albus that Harry learn occlumens and block out the access. Hermione wants Harry to abide by that rule.
It’s interesting to me that in some ways – Hermione’s thinking is so – well, for lack of a better word in my vocabulary – provincial. I’m not saying she is not creative – just not as creative as Harry. For instance, Hermione in Slughorn’s class would not have deviated from the textbook recipes even if she did have the Half Blood Prince’s potions notes in front of her. Is it an aversion to risk? Which is the most necessary item in creativity. Yet, here she is – risking everything. It’s enigmatic to me. Here we have a conduit to Lord Voldemort’s actions and thought processes and because of a stated rule – she forbids it.
I do think Hermione is creative. If Hermione was a composer – I think she would be Bach. Bach loved the form of the fugue. It was old-fashioned even in his time, but he didn’t care. The fugue has the most complex set of rules to follow of all the compositional forms. In order to complete it you must be able to create a stretto out of your statements. This is no easy task to put it lightly. Even Mozart had trouble with the fugue. But inside all these strict tenets, Bach excelled in his ingenuity. He needed a frame for his creativity. Maybe that’s the case with Hermione.
I think, Ron brought the can opener “his wand!”
I notice that all, Harry, Ron, and Hermione are way out of their comfort zones and are all written out of character Miss H with the lack of food and provisions, Ron with being so out of sorts (hungry) Harry, thinking the two are talking behind his back.
Camping is a great learning experience, IME I do bet that they (the collective trio) never again go on an outing or vacation ever again in later years without packing the boot with snacks and food and a can opener.
That’s the first and last time I will ever use a smiley.
Yes, I see your point, revgeorge, that JKR basically needed for Hermione to not remember to put in foodstuff as part of a plot device, and as Joivre points out, they certainly had enough access to pantry ingredients that Hermione could have put some non- perishable foods in. And, come to that, why couldn’t Harry have ordered Kreacher to come to them with food? Anyway, I’ve had the thought that it would be funny if the characters could interact with Jo.
Sample dialogue:
Hermione: Why did you write that I didn’t get any food supplies in my bag? You know I would have thought of that!
Jo: Well, sorry, Hermione, but I needed for you and the other two to have to learn to rely on each other without food.
Hermione: Why?
Harry: –and why couldn’t I have had Kreature sneak out to us with food? huh?
Ron: Yeah, that going without food was rotten.
(Trio glares at Jo)
Jo: Too bad, but that’s the way I wanted it to play out.
Trio: **%%$@**!
Ha! Fricka – Good thing for Ms. Rowling this is fiction.
R. Ross I’ll smiley for you!
Well, they do consider calling Kreacher to bring them food but decide against it because they’re still not sure whether or not the Death Eaters would be able to get into the house. Hermione is fairly sure that by bringing Yaxley to the door of Grimmauld Place that she’s given him the secret and thus invalidated the Fidelius charm.
Which brings up the Fidelius charm. I know we’ve talked about it before but it does seem to be another plot device in itself. Most spells seem very straightforward in how they work, but the Fidelius charm seems to be a bit more flexible or harder to understand how it works and how it is broken or stretched. Any thoughts on the Fidelius charm?
Fricka — I love your dialogue between the trio and Jo — I wouldn’t be surprised if she had something very close to that discussion with them when she was writing the forest sequence!
And I agree with you totally about these kids having never had to provide for their own food. Harry might know how to put together a piece of bread and cheese, since I’m sure he had to scrounge for dinner when living under the stairs, but the others? When they live for most of the year in a world where food magically appears on their table? I’m not surprised at all. (Especially when I think of my own college students…. My sophomores invited me to an end-of-the-year barbecue last May, then when we were all there, they all looked around and asked, “Does anyone know how to cook hamburgers?”!!!)
And let’s face it, that evening bag of Hermione’s is already pushing believability as far as it can. If the tent hadn’t been set up in Goblet of Fire, I would have been very unhappy. If she started pulling out a fully equipped kitchen and three meals a day, I would have been very disappointed in how easy Jo was making it for them. I think she may have pushed the believability of the bag too far as it is….
Now there’s a tangent I could follow for a day or two:
If Hermione were a composer, who would she be? I’m thinking Rossini, or Mendelssohn: very clear structure, limpid notes, quick pace, beautiful melodies, but nothing to shake your soul. Not saying they couldn’t – just that they chose not to.
But take it a step further: if Ron was a composer, who would he be? A little voice whispers in my ear: Ringo Starr. I’d like to be under the sea. In an octopus’ garden with you. Pretty song, catchy beat, absolutely no depth to it whatsoever. And having its origins in an order of fish and chips.
And Harry?
Ha! Ron as Ringo?! That was a two minute laugh out loud. Why stop with just Ron and Hermione? How about Voldemort, Snape, Harry, Dumbledore, Luna, et al.? I see I’m going to have to think about this because you are including all genres and eras in music. Hmmmm – now who would be Lady Gaga?
R. Ross. that was an astute observation about each of the Trio being out of character. This has a major impact later.
Ron as Ringo. Now that’s killer. “We all live in a Yellow Submarine…and our friends are all abooard….”
Here the most obvious one -
Snape=Beethoven – Both are a bit hasty with their morning ablutions, both have strong themes, both can be ornery and downright mean, both had rough beginnings in childhood, both dress from the romantic era, both had unrequited love rob them from their rest, both were entrusted care for a young boy, both turned away from initially supporting of a dictator (Napoleon for Beethoven, Voldemort for Snape), both never married, both were powerful in their fields, both were advocates of freedom from tyranny. Beethoven’s fifth is very Snape to me. Alternating between C major and c minor – never knowing which side he is on until the final cadence.
revgeorge, I missed the last discussion about the Fidelius charm, but here’s my take on the way it works.
The charm works, as I understand it, where a charm is cast, and suddenly no one can say or write or otherwise communicate a certain piece of information (is it exclusive to locations?) except a Secret Keeper. The Secret Keeper is then the arbiter of who gets to know the Secret, and thus have access to the information/location.
But in the case of a location, there seems to be a bit of a loophole. Say someone does the Fidelius Charm on Florida. Sure, you drive south and end up stuck in Georgia or Alabama and totally miss the huge tracts of land right in front of you. But if you side-along Apparate with someone who knows the Secret and takes you straight to Disney World, then it seems you’ve found a loophole. If you’re at Disney World, then you’re inside Florida, but you’re not supposed to know about Florida. And what’s to keep you from Disapparating and re-Apparating now that you’ve been there? What’s to keep you from bringing a friend of yours along who also doesn’t know the Secret? Seems to me to be a loophole.
I suppose this is why it’s important to choose a good Secret Keeper. Not only does he need to be trustworthy enough not to blab, but he needs to be able to correctly discern who might be untrustworthy enough to try to find a backdoor into the secret.
Derek D, nice thoughts on the Fidelius charm. I think that’s the main thing they were going with in the books, that the more people know the secret, the harder it is to keep & the weaker the protection the spell offers from detection.
Definitely having one secret keeper would be the way to go…if you could trust them. However, there’s still a lot of questions about the spell. Regarding the Potter’s concealment in Godric’s Hallows, was this their house to begin with or did they rent it? Otherwise if it was common knowledge the Potters lived there, then even if an enemy couldn’t see the house per se, wouldn’t they be able to tell in general where it was from the location of the other houses & thus fire a bazooka or some other equivalent spell into that general direction, thus maybe destroying the house even while the concealment still holds?
Plus, how does Bathilda Bagshot become visitors with the Potters while they’re under the Fidelius charm? Did they invite her over, thus making her a secret keeper? I’m sure there’s no hard and fast answers because the spell needed to work in exactly the way JKR needed it to work for her purposes.
Snape as Beethoven? I can see some of the similarities in their behaviours and characters (ablutions, social skills, Voldemort/Lily – Napeleon/Liberty, nasty to children), but if we’re focusing on the music, not as much. Beethoven’s music is so out there, passionate, romantic, stirring, overpowering, grabbing you by the throat. Snape is totally withdrawn, opaque, barely putting out one emotion every seventeen years. You need someone whose music smoulders ominously on and on, and then suddenly explodes into passionate chords, and then retreats. Haven’t listened to Shostokovich in years. Would he fit the bill?
Shostokovich – Hmmm… did you ever see the Met’s production of Lady MacBeth of the Mtsensk District? The outrageous sex in the music made me blush – I’m not sure I hear Snape coming out of Dmitri’s works. But I can see where you might draw that allusion with some of the movements in his string quartets. Did you have some pieces in mind regarding it though?
But – now I see where you are headed with the character inherently in the composition itself. So on that note – Snape as Gustav Mahler. What say you?
Von Karajan’s Mahler Symphony No. 5 Adagietto
Part 1 and 2
Exquisite beyond belief.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUatY-id-xQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoEDFL754ZQ&feature=related
I think you chose the right word: exquisite. Also, incredibly moving. Brought me to tears.
Which having said, I think the music might represent a Snape whom we never see, but are given hints of existing. He exists in the conversation with Dumbledore, after Lily’s death. Funny that Mingella should have used the same music to show Almasy’s despair after Katharine’s death.
Rickman is quite capable of depicting this Snape, but he hasn’t yet, because it hasn’t been written for him yet. Will be interesting to see how he handles it. All that control torn away.
And there is a side of me which says that Mahler taps into sources of emotion which are beyond JKR’s reach as a writer and an artist. But yes, we could say they are about the same thing.
Joivre Thanks for the link to the Adagietto. It is my favorite symphonic movement. It always destroys me! My wife and I will be hearing it live at Carnegie Hall on Dec. 20 with Levine and the Met orchestra.
The former music director at our church used to play an organ transcription of it. If you are interested, I can see if I can find the publisher of the music.
I believe the Potters were living in the Dumbledores’ home in Godric’s Hollow. It just fits. Dumbledore knew where they were, or Hagrid couldn’t have gotten there so quickly to rescue Harry.
Sorry Revgeorge and moderators, this will be my last digression on this subject here, because it really deserves it’s own thread – but I’m completely overly-enthused on the Snape/Music issue and having found some Mahlerite companions I must respond or I’ll burst.
Dearest Charlie – you lucky dog, you! It will be such a sublime moment to hear our greatest music director conducting the Mahler in December at Carnegie – I hope that Maestro Levine is completely recovered, he’s gone through so much health-wise lately. I would love to know the publisher of that transcription. How prescient of you to offer. Thank you! I grew up a pianist, but developed carpal tunnel my first year in undergrad and then switched to Opera (with a side trip into film), which served me well, but now am back at the keyboard quite often with my job and have been studying organ (quite different and more difficult for me than piano) for my own pleasure. I would think that Mahler transcriptions would work exceptionally well for the organ, given the incredible intensity of sustaining such long phrases that would normally decay on the piano.
Red Rocker, Schatzi, how dear the Mahler brought a tear to your eye as it does mine, you old softie.
But you’re right in that perhaps it is more than Ms. Rowling bestows onto the character of Snape. Characterizations are difficult to wrap one’s mind around. I know that performing certain roles in which not much is given internally about a character, I must artistically find one. And Snape’s presence in the books and films are limited and rarely show what’s going on inside for sure. So I look at Snape as a character where I must fill in the blanks. Create an internal history. And Mahler’s tortured slow motion twisting of tonalities and painful thematic contortions seems analogous to one who harbors long term guilt, love and loyalty over decades. Snape is the quintessence of the phrase still waters run deep and to the casual listener, Mahler might seem interminable – but to those who seek meaning, it is fraught with import and poignancy. But you are right – it is a Snape we never really see and I think only exists in my mind.
I’ve been visiting the Hog’s Head for a bit, but this is the first time I’ve been brave enough to speak up.
Regarding Post #6 of this discussion, we do know in fact that Hermione has been camping with her parents in the past. Early in Chapter 19, “The Silver Doe,” Harry and Hermione Disapparate on a snowy night. When Harry asks where they’ve landed, Hermione replies: “The Forest of Dean…. I came camping here once with my mum and dad.”
What we aren’t told, of course, is how long ago it was, and whether this was the Granger family’s one and only camping trip!
And since I’m new here, can someone tell me how to replace the image by my name with a photo file of my own? (I’m not a monster, really!)
Hi Mavis! A warm welcome to you and glad you’ve joined in. Thanks for the camping Hermione reference.
I got my avatar, at http://en.gravatar.com. It was far easier than giving a cat a pill. >^..^<
The crow frequently symbolises the arrival of news. I will suggest that Grindlewald’s “crow” of triumph forshadows the news the trio receives in the next chapter from Ted Tonks, Dean and the goblins.
Arabella – that does seem to fit, being Albus’ home. The only thing is that would make the structure about 130 years old and in the films the house does appear to be a more modern structure. Godric’s Hollow doesn’t seem to easily fit visually in my head from the books or the films. I just can’t seem to picture it like Hogsmeade or Privet Drive.
Mavis – Welcome! And you’re right! She has gone camping before. I forgot about that. And yes, you do have the most unfortunate little monster there for an avatar at the moment, don’t you. Ah, luck of the draw.
RR – can you believe I’ve never seen the English Patient? I know, I know – disgraceful. I was in Europe at the time it came out and never got around to it. But man, Mr. Fiennes is a DISH in the clips with the Mahler that I’m now just seeing on Youtube. Even when I see him as Voldemort I have to sometimes force myself to concentrate.
I’m not one to cast stones, never having seen Casablanca, Gone with the Wind, or the Olivier/Oberon version of Wuthering Heights
But here’s a sacrilegious thought: can you see Fiennes and Rickman reversing their Potter roles? I can easily see Fiennes as a cold, sneering bully tormented by lost love (he practically reinvented that one). And Rickman as the sneering, megalomaniacal murderer (ditto).
Joivre, one can’t go by the films for accuracy. A 130-year old house in an English village is nothing. Why did the Potters go to Godric’s Hollow? Why was their house so close to Bathilda? How did Hagrid get there so quickly? They had to be at the Dumbledore house, before (of course) they made Peter Secret-Keeper.
No Arabella – I’m agreeing with you. And just pointing out the weird portrayal of the house in the films.
Nice post revgeorge. A few thoughts on people’s comments . . .
Lack of a wand should not prevent side-along apparition, which is used with children. However, the one doing the apparating will need to be magically strong enough to be able to apparate two people.
Ron’s splinching probably was a result of a lack of focus and being at the end of the “chain” (remember, Harry is holding both of their hands so the apparator (Hermione) is not directly holding Ron). In future apparitions Hermione is in the middle. Also, Ron has splinched before — he failed his apparition test b/c he left behind half an eyebrow. I also think the splinching is symbolic – Ron’s body is split, Voldy’s soul is split, and soon the trio will be split.
I feel obliged to correct comment #1 – the part about “relaxing” into Devil’s Snare is taken from the movie. In the book, what they need to do is light a fire to get the vines to retreat.
It strikes me that Harry has the most cooking experience since he used to make the Dursleys’ breakfast every morning. By leaving it to Hermione because she’s the best at magic, they seem to forget how to do things the muggle way, and yet I get the impression that Harry is catching the fish the muggle way and not thinking to use accio like the people they overhear (I know, that’s next chapter). Also, even if food can’t be conjured per Gamp’s law of transfig., the quantity can be increased; you’d think they’d use that to increase quanties of their food before eating, perhaps saving a small portion of the food as a starter for their next meal.
Fidelius – Not every person who is told a location becomes a secret keeper. With Grimmauld Place, DD was secret keeper. He could show the address in writing to someone and then they’d know and could find and see the place, but he remained the secret-keeper and those who had learned the address could not repeat anything.
About Grindelwald as a bird – Here is an excerpt from Milton’s Paradise Lost regarding Satan’s entrance into the garden of Eden (my copy has archaic spelling and wording):
“Due entrance he disdaind, and in contempt,
At one slight bound high overleap’d all bound
Of Hill or highest Wall, and sheer within
Lights on his feet. . . .
. . .
So clomb this first grand Thief into Gods Fould:
. . .
Thence up he flew, and on the Tree of Life,
The middle Tree and highest there that grew,
Sat like a Cormorant; yet not true Life
Thereby regaind but sat devising Death
To them who liv’d; . . .”
I’m too sleepy now to add something sensible about why I quoted Milton – maybe later.
Many thanks for the link, Arabella! I feel a bit like a Muggle-Born in her first year at Hogwarts, so bear with me, everyone, as I learn my way around.
I suppose I should introduce myself a bit. I’m a stay-at-home mom with deep roots in a religious tradition that has not looked kindly on Harry Potter in the past, so for many years I had several reasons to be embarrassed about how much I enjoyed the series. (Here I was reading children’s books – and children’s books that allegedly glorified the occult at that.) Fortunately, I discovered this site and John Granger’s books, and I no longer have a guilty conscience! (Sad to say, some moms in my peer group still will not let their kids read Harry Potter.)
Thank you Lily Luna – I feel better thinking Mrs. Cattermole lived. And yes – Harry, raised as a muggle, cooked breakfast many a time for his cousin. Yes, the accio – salmon moment of the next chapter was a slap-my-forehead-d’oh! moment. I really like that Milton quote and though you were too sleepy to finish – I think there’s something there. When you remember, tell me what it is.
Mavis – I reeeeeeaaallllly love your dog. You now have gone from the most unfortunate avatar to the very best avatar on this site. What’s you dear puppy’s name? I’ve never read any of John Granger’s books, but if they helped you discover the goodness of these books then good for Granger and very good for you!
Red Rocker – yes! Now that you pointed it out – I could definitely see Mr. Rickman and Mr. Fiennes in opposite roles. In fact – I wonder if I’d see Snape with a little more vulnerability if Mr. Fiennes was playing the role. And I dare say Mr. Rickman would be a more powerful Voldemort in my mind. But alas – Mr. Rickman’s smooth as silk baritone voice is an instant manly attraction to me and I would wind up like Bellatrix fawning over him as Voldemort. No, no. Unacceptable. It’s not a reflection on his talent, he can’t help it if he’s too sexy.
Mavis, love your collie–a definite improvement. Before I changed to our cat I was a little turquoise creature with three eyes.
More of us HP-lovers than you might realize have colored outside the lines within faith communities, so we sympathize. To have THH, HogPro, and fhsProf, where we can discuss books we love and have any sort of literary conversation is wonderful. So take your shoes off and pull up a chair.
Joivre, our former music director sends the following message re the organ transcription of the Mahler Adagietto:
“As for your request regarding the Mahler adagietto. There is a solo organ version published in The Complete Organist, Book one published by Kevin Mayhew Ltd. Rattlesden, Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk IP30 0SZ Phone: 0449 737978. This volume has one hundred pieces mostly transcriptions. You may not wish to purchase the whole book. A second arrangement is one for harp (optional) and organ published by Rob.Forberg available through C F Peters Corporation 373 Park Avenue South, NY, NY 10016 Cat. No. F248. Lastly, you might want to look at
“Sheet Music Plus on the internet, as they may have something.”
I hope that this is helpful.
Lily Luna , thanks for correcting my recollection about the Devil’s Snare. I actually checked the book to make sure that I had the name “Devil’s Snare” correct, but I did not read any further. I am afraid that much in the movies has over-ridden my recollections in the books. That’s inevitable, I suppose, because visual plus audio memory usually trumps the written words.
Joivre , a slight addendum to my previous message. The web cite for sheet music plus is
Joivre , sorry, the web cite didn’t come out in my provious post. It is notes@e.sheetmusicplus.com. I had to delete the sideways carat and sideways reverse carat for the web cite genie to reproduce it.
Shoot. I just wrote a really long comment and either the faithful spamcatcher ate it or I accidentally hit Preview instead of Post and departed the site. I suspect the latter.
In condensed form, I believe I:
… complimented Revgeorge on an excellent summary and echoed his comments on the Hallows storyline and the lovely moment of romantic foreshadowing
… looked with horrified fascination at Red Rocker’s suggestion that Rickman and Fiennes could have successfully swapped roles (surprisingly plausible)
… considered R. Ross’s recommendation of using a wand as a can opener (Diffindo? Relashio? Defodio? I am sure this can be done … Reducto! *blam* … mess)
… looked with approval at Joivre’s packing list
… welcomed Mavis, who is like so many of us in coming from a Harry-Hating perspective into defending him (however unsuccessfully) to our friends
… apologized for my lateness in coming to the conversation. I gave a wrock concert at a Yule ball Saturday night, and it sucked up my focus for most of the weekend. But I had lot of fun. Pictures have made it to Myspace.
Great discussion anyone. Thanks, revgeorge, for a concise, evocative summary.
But, as an Adams nut and a student of mysticism, I beg to observe that the ‘dark night of the soul’ and the ‘dark tea-time of the soul’ are actually not the same thing. Adams coined the term ‘dark tea-time of the soul’ to refer to that unique point in the life of an immortal when immortality stops being fun. When not dying becomes insufferably boring. He gives an excellent description in chapter one of ‘Life, the Universe, and Everything’.
The ‘dark night of the soul’ is, of course, as it sounds–deep spiritual crisis. I’m not familiar with St. John of the Cross to go on further. But it wouldn’t be off topic–in all likelihood, a study of Harry’s spiritual journey alongside the works of John of the Cross would be very rewarding. And, yes, DH is his ‘dark night’. I think it probably begins, though, in GoF, and the return of Voldemort.
In re the weekend discussion:
Welcome, Mavis. I, too, picked up HP with some concern for my immortal soul. It didn’t last too long into the series. Glad to have you here.
Lily Luna–yeah that. Thanks for making all my observations for me! Why did you quote Milton? (Other than to reveal a fascinating connection to CSL’s The Magician’s Nephew?)
Janet–I like these chapters, too! You are not alone. I think some of JKR’s brilliance is that, where we Hollywoodized peoples are expecting escalating action, she points out that life seldom happens that way. There’s a lot of tedious arguments about what to have for dinner and what to open the can with and where should we put the tent anyway and who has the remote–the little mundane things of life keep comprising our lives even in the middle of momentous events. A lesser writer would have given us nonstop action. Rowling realizes the profundity of the mundane.
Everyone else–interesting stuff. Wouldn’t choose Fiennes for Snape, though. Too delighted with Rickman. And I’m not convinced on Mahler, either. I see his music being a little less large in scale–more focused–Lutoslawski, or Chopin. Notice that we’re all going for Romantics, though, and mostly Russians?
Ok…making up for the weekend. I’m done.
So interesting that you named two Polish composers, Chopin and Lutoslawski. A lot of heartbreakingly beautiful music comes out of Poland. What works are swirling around in your mind? I would love to listen to them.
It’s interesting about the Snape/Music issue. Such restraint – yet such passion. I would say more the German Romantics as opposed to the Italians. And I think that……Whoops! I’m digressing again!
Charlie – thank you so much. I just ordered it through Sheet Music Plus. Can’t wait to get it!
Thanks, Lilly Luna, I was also contemplating that Hermione could have brought a small case with a cache of various dry food stuffs as dry beans, instant potatoes, dried fruits, etc. You all see and get the picture! All the items that can be “enlarged” to make a suitable lunch or evening meal. I would have been able to believe this section of the story, If true to Hermione’s character in fact did look and pack all essential items possible for this camp out. This scenario could have been written-in without a drag or lag-time on the plot. The famous horrendous weather in the UK like a driving rain or a quick flash flood could have washed away and destroyed their provisions. I do realize that JKR wanted dread, mistrust, tension, and fear distress oozing out of in her plot line.
About the Fidelius Charm, there was a very long discussion named “Question About Fidelius Charm” in Sept. 2008 at the Hogwarts Professor many here at hog’s head also contributed comments. It was very a helpful to clear up a very complicated charm. thanks
From the book
“Filius described the Fidelius Charm as “An immensely complex spell . . . involving the magical concealment of a secret inside a single, living soul. The information is hidden inside the chosen person, or Secret-Keeper, and is henceforth impossible to find—unless, of course, the Secret-Keeper chooses to divulge it. As long as the Secret-Keeper refuses to speak, You-Know-Who could search the entire village where Lily and James were staying for years and never find them, not even if he had his nose pressed against their sitting room window!” (US HBP page 205).”
I forgot to add “Fidelis” is Latin, meaning trusty and faithful.
For the record, I like my monster avatar. And I am absolutely not influenced by the fact that the supposedly very simple process of changing avatars was beyond me.
I have always been annoyed with the idea that Hermione would forget food. The given reason, that she expected to be returning to Grimmauld Place that night, is silly. Why would she have the tent then? And she does have tea. Of course, any good Brit wouldn’t forget the tea, but wouldn’t that remind one to pack some munchies to go with it. Sigh.
But overall I too like the “camping trip.” What amazes me is how Ms. Rowling makes it feel like it lasts forever, when it actually takes up fairly little of the books. I remember noticing the same phenomenon when I reread GOF. I felt like the estrangement between Harry and Ron had lasted much longer than the actual number of pages involved. I think this due to an excellent writing technique. To use a musical analogy, and we do have alot of musical types around, good music often uses dissonance or discord to build a feeling of discomfort and a yearning to have harmony restored. The rift between Harry and Ron and the aimlessness and arguing of the camping trip are moments of discord. It is not just that they are crises in the story, but that the characters are not properly together. The discord is so uncomfortable that it seems to last longer than it does. Then when the discord is resolved, and harmony returns, the relief is amazing!
Ha! Estrunk – now you are a literary critic I can understand! Your analogy is perfect. Ms. Rowling does seem to use large intervalic leaps into these particular unstable tone combinations which does tend to lead one to expect an aural resolve. But Ms. Rowling, ever the clever musician, chooses instead to insert false cadences and rhythmic augmentation almost to the point of acceptance of non-harmonic timbres and tunings until finally Ron returns as the Tonic easing the tension between the Dominant and the Subdominant in chapter 19 and completes the resolution of the Trio.
And you’re are absolutely right when you say -
the relief is amazing!
ahhhhhhhhhhh….
What EStrunk said. Not about the munchies but about the hugely uncomfortable discord. That’s why I hate it so much. No matter how much of a dimwit Ron is, how unworthy of the affections of the divine Ms. H, how inadequate compared to both of his companions, they started this journey together, and they should stay together till the end. The sense of relief when they make up is amazing.
R.Ross, thank you for bringing up the discussion of the Fidelius charm on the Hogwarts Professor site, that’s the discussion I was thinking of. But even it didn’t fully answer my questions although it was very helpful. The link to that discussion is here. For thoughts on the Fidelius charm I would encourage everyone to go there and comment on it. I’m sure John would love to see an old topic resurrected!
So which composer does that make Jo Rowling? Perhaps J.S. Bach?
I’m thinking something closer to Tchaikovsky. I know that she is not bisexual, did not live a life of unrequited love, and did not throw herself into the cholera-infested waters of a river. She did not dedicate one of her best works to a pianist who rejected it, only to rise to glory by playing it after. However, there are similarities.
First, they are both highly popular, and sneered at by the arbiters of taste. According to Wikipedia:
Although enduringly popular with concert audiences across the world, Tchaikovsky has at times been judged harshly by critics, musicians and composers. However, his reputation as a significant composer is now generally regarded as secure.[2] In the early and mid-20th century, Western critics dismissed his music as vulgar and lacking in elevated thought, but this disdain has largely dissipated.[3]
Second, they both take a bit of this and a bit of that, combining fairy tales and folk lore, and pulling it together into something altogether individual and delightful (I’m thinking of Tchaikovsky’s ballet music more than his instrumental works)
And last, they both appeal strongly to the emotions, but in such a direct way that they could be accused of lack of subtlety.
Yes I agree RevGeorge, I still have questions also, I feel as if my head is spinning after apparating I spent yesterday after church, going through the comments trying to get a sense to the various seemingly conflicting interpretations. I found another article with 147 comments titled: The Secrets of the Fidelius Charm by Christine Kendrick at Beyond Hogwarts here.
Above link did not work let’s see try this:
here
Yikes R. Ross – I read that great article by Christine Kendrick. What a complex, convoluted charm the Fidelius is! How in the heck did Ms. Rowling come up with that? I’m wondering if this isn’t just a convenient plot device – but even if it is – it’s ingenious. I admit – I never really understood it fully and just went along for the ride. Thanks for the links explaining it.
Red Rocker – Good use of the Tchaik! A tiny-bit of a back-handed compliment to Ms. Rowling though. But yes, he was learned yet popular. Mozart also was learned and popular – especially with his Singspiele (which is a popular form of entertainment that usually involves magical characters). Die Zauberfloete was presented as a singspiel along with The Abduction from the Harem and Zaide. Actually I think of Ms. Rowling’s view of the world is closer to that of Herr Mozart’s. Also – her humanity, humor, imaginary world (Mozart created imaginary worlds very similar to Ms. Rowling’s where he was the benign ruler), balance and classical restraint lead me to compare the two. It might seem too much to some musicians on this site – I’m surely not calling her a true literary genius, the way Mozart was an absolute true genius in music – but there are enough similarities in outlook that I like.
Harry, Ron, and Hermione inadvertently took Yaxley past the protections of the Fidelius Charm. The trio subsequently abandoned the house as a hideout. I personally do not think that Yaxley and the death-eaters were able to get past the original protections and the extra spells and the tongue-tying safeguards Moody had placed to prevent entrance of the residence. Because we didn’t hear anything about another raid or the torturing of Kreacher, Harry does worry about the house-elf. And it was very wise of them not to go back to #12 Grimmauld Place.
Just wanted to return to Joivre’s comment #25 in response to revgeorge’s original post regarding Harry’s visions of Voldy and Hermione’s reaction to them.
Joivre, I think that your analysis of Hermione’s character is true – she is definately abides by the rules, but she does allow herself a certian amount of flexibility within those rules (i.e. starting the DA). Additonally, she will put her own moral compass ahead of the rules if necessary. I think that it is appropriate for her to warn Harry not to instantly believe and/or act upon what he sees of Voldemort’s thoughts (based on the false vision of Sirius), but I don’t agree with her trying to persuade Harry to block out the visions as they could (and do) provide the trio with important information on his thoughts and actions. This is also similar to her disbelief in the Hallows as real objects. Since she learns about them in a child’s fairy story, they clearly cannot be true or have any real-world value. How wrong she was! (Take that anyone who calls Harry Potter just a kids book…)
Also, thanks all for the discussion of the Fidelius Charm – I was away all weekend and have yet to catch up on reading through all the comments. Hope to be able to jump in on that when I’ve read all your thoughts!
Joivre, it’s true what you say about Mozart, but I can’t make the analogy to JKR because of what you said: she shows flashes of genius sometimes, but she is not a literary genius. And Mozart is about the closest thing that humanity has produced to a musical genius.
Have you ever read Anthony Burgess’ tribute On Mozart? The composers have died and are in heaven. They are preparing for a concert. Mozart will perform. These are the last lines of the book/play:
MENDELSSOHN: …He will appear in a moment. Not walk on, appear. Look, he appears.
BEETHOVEN: God, no, no. The vulgarity., the sentimentality -
MENDELSSOHN: This I did not expect. How old is he? Five, Four? He climbs onto the stool as if it were a hillock.
BEETHOVEN: Ach, mein Gott – the infant prodigy.
MENDELSSOHN: And now his father appears, presumably to turn the pages. Strange. It does not seem to be Leopold Mozart.
BEETHOVEN: Oh God.
MENDELSSOHN: Precisely.
I also appreciated the link to the Fidelius Charm article. Is there anything similar out there on the Patronus Charm?
Yes, that’s my own collie there in my avatar image now. I decided to appropriate her name and image for my posts here as a tip of the hat to a certain other large, shaggy, black dog. (Though I’m pretty certain my collie isn’t an animagus!)
I do love Sirius, even though he is not perfect. Or perhaps it would be more accurate to say that I love him because he is not perfect. It never ceases to amaze me how JKR can take these characters with supernatural abilities, strange backstories, and weird and wonderful names and make them seem as complex, multifaceted, and real as the living, breathing people we meet day to day. Yes, she may not be a literary genius, but she certainly has some “magical” abilities of her own!
RR is right. Rowling is not Mozart. But then, who is? JKR is Boccherini maybe. Or Michael Haydn, to stay with contemporaries. And that’s not so bad.
Speaking of Mozart, the theme to Elvira Madigan (that depressing movie!) is the Andante from his Piano Concerto No. 21, K. 467. Some years ago, I got an impromptu opportunity to conduct that concerto in a rehearsal when the assigned conductor was indisposed, and it was quite a treat.
I like the camping trip very much, especially after Ron leaves (the prat). It was the first part of DH I re-read after I finished the book. I tend to ship my two favorite characters a little more than is healthy, I suppose.
Mavis! Lovely name for a lovely canine – and yes Sirius is a rascal isn’t he? I bet he was fun at a party pre-Azkaban days. I love the fact that he owned a motorcycle. And it certainly doesn’t hurt that he’s portrayed by the hair-toussled Gary Oldman.
Yes, Red Rocker, I’ve read it. It’s such a fun and quirky little book. I love it. But stripping away the huge genius issue (and I do not use that word lightly) I do see a catholicity and humor in Rowling’s works (by catholicity, I mean universality) that Mozart had in spades. Actually – I could very easily see Wolfgang picking up one of the books and enthusiastically turning it into an Opera! I think he would love it – all the themes are his – the Triumph of Good over Evil through Love and Forgiveness. (With the exception of one little work, which happens to be my favorite – K. 527).
Ah music. A magic beyond all we do here!
Deacondon!?! Where have you been? I was worried about you!
Maestro!!! I did not know you were a Conductor! I hope you’re one of those nice, kind Maestri who are sweet and accomodating to your singers. Ok – here’s a joke:
How many Conductors does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
One, but who cares because nobody’s really watching.
Ok – one more:
What’s the difference between a bull and an orchestra?
The bull has the horns in front and the ass in the back.
Hi Joivre! Revgeorge got me hooked on fanfiction. I’ve been wasting way too much time reading Harmony ships online (How come the best written ones are smutty?), instead of perusing this site.
I’m no maestro, but a school orchestra teacher who doesn’t get to conduct stuff like Mozart PCs very often.
I like Don Giovanni very much as well, if not quite as much as Figaro.
My favorite conductor joke:
You are driving down the road, and you see a violist and the Maestro crossing the street. Who do you run over first?
The violist. Business before pleasure.
K 527 eh? I prefer K 492, where love and forgiveness triumph perhaps not over evil, but over mundane, everyday meanness. Here’s a taste:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wd5nFd3utLg
Of course Mozart would love the Potterverse. And would turn it into an opera faster than you can say libretto! Dumbledore? Sarastro. Bellatrix? QotN! Hermione? Susanna. Ron? Leporello. Harry? Tamino. And Voldemort? I think we might have the Don himself for that one.
Back to “The Thief”: did anyone else get shivers from the pre-view of the motif from “The Forest Again” (still a musical allusion there) in the ticking of the Horcrux against Harry’s chest “ticking away the time he had left”?
Sorry Revgeorge and Moderators – I’ll stop after this. I promise! I just get so carried away sometimes.
Red Rocker and Deacondon – so glad to hear you love Figaro – I do as well. That’s my little Westie’s name! That was my Fach. I was a Mozart specialist and sang mostly the Mozart soprano roles. I was mainly contracted for the Contessa, Donna Anna, Donna Elvira, Fiordiligi, Vitellia, Pamina, Susanna and some others. I love that duet Red, Sull’aria seems simple – but it ain’t. You never stop learning with Mozart. I had a professor who was in his early 70s once tell me – “When I was in my 20s I thought I knew all about Mozart, when I was in my 30s I knew nothing about Mozart, when I was in my 40s I finally learned Mozart, and it’s only now that I think I really know Mozart. “
This shows the power of Mozart as the gift God gave to humanity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAJ2skOJvdY
PS Ha! Deacondon – that joke is a keeper!!!!
I love Shawshank Redemption and that is my favorite scene: the glory of Mozart juxtaposed with its human face.
EStrunk: I’d forgotten about the heartbeat in the locket. Yes, it is a very powerful reminder of Harry’s looming fate, because of course he too has that tiny heartbeat in him, and he too will be destroyed before the end. Shivers galore.
Definitely, EStrunk. And right before that the locket is described as being cold, as though it had just been pulled out of icy water, which foreshadows another part of the story.
How does it happen that so many regular commentators here are also classical music buffs? (And yes, I know that’s a specific era, after the Baroque and before Romanticism–I’m using a form of shorthand.)
Joivre–the parallel was unintentional, maybe say subconscious. Perhaps because I’m ethnically Polish myself? I wasn’t thinking of any specific work, rather the artistic colouring they brought to their work. I see Snape as capable in his own arts as they were in their, the emotional self-expression, the staggering combination of emotional sensitivity (more than you’d almost think humanly possible) with technical complexity (also more than you’d think possible). To switch mediums, Snape, I suspect, would have admired Van Gogh.
Just find anything by Chopin and listen to it, if you’re in the mood for a spiritual experience.
Red Rocker — Voldemort as the Don?? Really? I think custom demands that the Dark Lord be a bass. Think, Nick Shadow.
I’m breaking my promise. Ah, but Mr. Pond, many a bass has sung Giovanni. Furlanetto (who by the way is one of the sexiest Don Giovanni I’ve ever drooled over) and Ramey used to alternate roles (Leporello and Giovanni). But actually now that you mention it – Rowling does describe Voldemort’s voice as high – so maybe Voldemort is not Nick but may have the tessitura of Verdi’s Duke of Mantua from Rigoletto – but the evil of the Don.
Point well taken–I wondered about that as soon as I clicked Post. I still think the Don is a little too intent on having fun to be a good Dark Lord. Maybe I’m too influenced by Camus, and not enough by Mozart?
I know that the Don is altogether a too upbeat character to be a successful Voldemort. The point of similarity I fixed upon was the way they walked to their deaths unrepentant.
RevGeorge I was wondering more about The Five Exceptions to Gamp’s Law of Elemental Transfiguration Should I hold off until Chapter 15 to ask a question?
I hope all that are going to celebrate Thanksgiving have a happy and fruitful day. I will be with family away from a computer. God Bless everyone.
Joivre, I love Westies! How appropriate that you gave yours a musical name!
I have no idea whether Voldemort is similar to Don Giovanni.
Judging from some of the above posts, I need to brush up on my operas.
I think maybe I have the Don mixed up with Casanova which is why I would never have thought of comparing the two. Mea Culpa!
I join R. Ross in wishing everyone a very wonderful Thanksgiving Day!
This is the first time we’ve really “met” Grindelwald. What do people make of him?
Certainly a different kettle of fish than Voldemort. The way JKR presents him makes him seem like a charming scamp, a miscreant, a mischievious school boy. He perches and soars like a bird, his face is handsome, he jumps neatly backwards and gives a crow of laughter. His face is merry, wild, he has a Fred and George-ish air of triumphant trickery about him. He is described as a laughing boy.
Although we are led to believe elsewhere that he was a Dark Wizard who wanted to subjugate Muggles and killed many people, there is nothing in the picture JKR draws to make him seem evil or frightening.
What’s up with that?
Grindelwald. He’s tricky. He’s definitely bad to the bone having murdered many witches and wizards, including the relatives of Viktor Krum. I think of him as the Wagner before Hitler. (here we go again) – He is gorgeous, tantalizing, brilliant, powerful, seductive, racist – and I’m talking about Grindelwald. Same exact words can be said of Wagner.
What is interesting to me, and I’m not equating racism with homosexuality obviously, but what’s up with all this secrecy. Wagner writes a treatise on the elimnation of Jews in his Ring Cycle – but never mentions the word Jew. He publishes essays all over the place about this. It’s no secret! Wagner is out and racist! Gellert literally seduces Albus – but there’s never a mention of the word gay. Gellert gives his life so that Albus’ grave is not disturbed. I think they loved each other very much at one time. Albus was “inflamed” by Gellert – he’s “immoderate” with Gellert – so why in the heck doesn’t he say in King’s Cross – “I was so in love with Gellert that it completely blinded me to reason!”?
Mind you – I don’t want to stir up a whole gay debate. I looked at the last one in this site’s history and it made me want to vomit. Maybe I’m being naive and that’s why Ms. Rowling didn’t out him until after. But this secrecy thing bugs me. And by the way – I see Gellert as a gay Don Giovanni. Charming, funny, bad, bad, bad. But Gellert repents in the end.
Anyways….
Happy Thankgiving! Today I am very thankful. I am sitting in the cancer ward at the hospital with my mother who has had leukemia for four and a half years. She’s been here for a couple of months and will be going home next week. I am thankful for that. She started hallucinating this week. She was throwing crumbs on the floor this morning – when I asked why, she said it was for the little goats. How very Aberforth of her. I’m thankful she doesn’t see Aragog! This site is not only a source of insight into books that I love, and a civil discourse on these works, but also a welcome balm and divertimento for me. I am thankful for that too.
Previewed comment:
I’m very sorry, as I’m sure we all are, to hear about your mother, Joivre. I hope she does and feels better out of the hospital. This must be very painful for you and I’ll pray. God bless you and your family.
We see Gellart as Albus first knew him–handsome, charming, bright, appealing, a scamp. It’s very helpful for Harry to see him this way so he can understand his draw for Albus. Gellart gave his life as an atonement not only for his crimes. I believe this was personal, for killing Ariana. It was the only sacrifice he could make, and it was a way of hindering his mirror image in Voldemort.
Joivre, I’ll echo Arabella on the sympathies and prayer for you and your mother and family. I am sorry to hear you are having to go through that and glad you have things to be thankful for.
While I can’t answer outright for Ms. Rowling’s motives in waiting to out Dumbledore until asked by a fan, the sense I get is that she has some vagueness in her own mind as to Albus and Gellert’s relationship. She outed Albus, but not necessarily Gellert. As for why Albus didn’t tell Harry flat out … I think, if I were explaining past failures to a much younger person, I would hesitate before admitting I had been in love with the person who inspired those actions, particularly if those feelings were unreturned. That can be a very private thing for some people. If my understanding is correct, in the not too distant past of our own society, talking openly about being in love with someone without officially courting or being engaged simply wasn’t done, at least not among the mannerly–and we all know Dumbledore had manners.
Red Rocker, merry, wild, charming, miscreant, laughing trickster … it seems to me that a guy like that has loads of potential and will go very strongly in whatever direction he goes. If his bad inclinations are let go too far, they get destructive very quickly. If he goes into politics, God help him and everyone else.
I join in sending my sympathies to Joivre. So glad that thinking of something related to Harry Potter brought you some humor in a time of difficulty. Hope your mom will get to go home soon.
Switching gears, I have to say that as I was reading the descriptions of the young Gellert Grindewald, the thought that came to me was–that was uncomfortably close to Fred and George Weasley! What if one or both of them had gone to the Dark Side??? Brrrrr! Don’t want to go there!
Joivre, life sucks sometimes. Thank God for the things that can help us bear the pain: beautiful music and the company of friends – even virtual ones.
About Grindelwald: I like Arabella Figg’s idea: that he gave his life in atonement for being the cause of Ariana’s death. We don’t know who fired the lethal bullet/spell, and there is a real possibility that it was Dumbledore, but without GG, Ariana would not have died then.
I also like Library Lily’s thoughts: that JKR outed Dumbledore but not necessarily GG. And of course why DD wouldn’t have told Harry – why would an adult talk to a child about such matters? Which brings me to one of the reasons why JKR didn’t out DD in the books: to go back to an earlier – and in retrospect rather unfortunate – analogy, openly saying that DD was gay would have been one heck of an undigestible piece of candied fruit in an otherwise well concocted fruitcake.
Ouch.
Thank you everyone for the kind notes. I really didn’t mean to illicit such sympathy – but I’ll take it.
Mom and I are both fighters, both have our faith and I got my sense of humor (goats?!)from from her – so we’re well-equipped for the battle. Mainly – I was trying to thank you guys for putting up with my crazy Diva antics. 
Back to topic – yes, yes, yes to all of you. I agree that there’s an elemet of atonement for Arianna. But it’s a round-about way I get to that.
I was thinking about Gellert last night and specifically the Ms. Rowling describes him. Outside of the charismatic politico who can sway others to his side – he was a Utilitarian. His motto is “For the Greater Good.” emblazoned on the prison he constructed to hold his political opponents. This is also the motto for Utilitarianism. (wikipedia)
Utilitarianism is the idea that the moral worth of an action is determined solely by its contribution to overall utility: that is, its contribution to happiness or pleasure as summed among all people. It is thus a form of consequentialism, meaning that the moral worth of an action is determined by its outcome.
Utilitarianism is often described by the phrase “the greatest good for the greatest number of people”, and is also known as “the greatest happiness principle”. Utility, the good to be maximized, has been defined by various thinkers as happiness or pleasure (versus suffering or pain), although preference utilitarians define it as the satisfaction of preferences. It may be described as a life stance, with happiness or pleasure being of ultimate importance.
Perhaps – he really thought he was do good by killing and imprisoning all those opposed to his rule. Maybe he was acting for the greater good in his mind. Even torture is a valid ethical action in Utilitarianism if it provides for “The Greater Good”.
Also perhaps – by sacrificing himself to Voldemort – it was for “The Greater Good”. And also to distance his philosophy from that of Voldemort. Utilitarianism vs. Facism. Maybe – and I’m not sure – it had nothing to do with Albus and Arianna. Maybe he was a Utiliarian to the bitter end.
Or maybe he realized that Utilitarianism was fruitless….
The Wittgensteinian Critique
Contemporary philosophers such as Matthew Ostrow have critiqued utilitarianism from a distinctly Wittgensteinian perspective. According to these philosophers, utilitarians have expanded the very meaning of pleasure to the point of linguistic incoherence. The utilitarian groundlessly places pleasure as his or her first principle, and in doing so subordinates the value of asceticism, self-sacrifice or any other “secondary” desire. Of course, the utilitarian will deny this contention altogether, claiming that ascetics also seek pleasure, but have merely chosen an alternative path in which to achieve it. Yet such an argument is implicitly tautological (“What is it that people want? Pleasure. But what is pleasure? What people want.”). The utilitarian therefore has no ultimate justification for primarily valuing pleasure, other than to say that “this is the way it should be.” In this critique, utilitarianism is thus ultimately reduced to a form of dishonest ethical intuitionism, unable to recognize or acknowledge its own groundlessness.
…and now we’re back to him atoning for his many sins – not just Arianna, but all those he killed and imprisoned.
PS Red Rocker, I wouldn’t eat a piece of fruitcake even if it was for the greater good. Blech!
Oh – one more thing Red – Yes, I can see why Albus would hesitate, perhaps, revealing something more personal about Gellert. But I think that the second Harry walked into the forrest again – he was no longer a child. He was a man. And I think this man, much younger or not, very English or not, deserved the absolute truth from start to finish. No lies anymore, no cover-ups anymore, no truths omitted, no pulling strings, no more damned secrecy – one hundred percent truth. Harry earned it a thousand fold.
But alas, that’s just my humble opinion – and Ms. Rowling thought otherwise, so (and I say this very sincerely) who am I to question. But I would bet money that somewhere in Ms. Rowling’s laptop is an alternate draft of King’s Cross and in it Albus reveals all – but Ms. Rowling chickened out. I wonder.
Joivre, you’re not going to get an argument from me that Harry deserved the truth – or rather more of the truth than he got. I don’t think, however, that anyone deserves the absolute truth. But I don’t want to go any further with this thought because this is probably going to be the main theme for my write-up for Chapter 18, when Harry finally gets a big serving of truth, thanks to Skeeter. And any of you who malign the media as blood sucking vampires, remember that: the main reason why Harry does have some inkling of the truth is through that vulgar and classless chaser of the truth, Ms. Rita Skeeter.
Joivre, I add my voice to those who have sent you sympathy on hearing of your mother’s illness. At times like this, some spiritual music is in order. I recommend the Sanctus from Faure’s Requiem.
I realized that I didn’t address Joivre’s point about the Greater Good. Utilitarianism aside, I think that what people often mean when they invoke that term is that others should sacrifice themselves for what the person doing the reasoning has determined to be good. In other words, it’s used to get others to act in ways the person who’s making the rules wants them to, often against their own wishes. In other words, it’s a form of authority or interpersonal control. Because let’s face it: no one needs to be told to act in their own best interests.
By the pricking of my thumbs, something Randish this way comes.
R.Ross, perhaps we should hold off on specific discussion of Gamp’s Laws since they are specifically mentioned next chapter.
Joivre, sorry to hear about your mother; I hope things are going well for you all. Btw, feel free to bring in any music connections. Anyway, if you haven’t noticed yet, we do tend to go wildly off topic at times with no harm done.
Going back to Arabella’s comment #10, in regards to the Hallows, I was mainly going to ask what people thought of the scene with Voldemort & Gregorovitch & Grindelwald. Did anyone guess or have an inkling that this scene was about Voldemort trying to find an ultimate wand? We should have been thinking in different directions after Harry mulls it over & wonders why Voldemort would kill Gregorovitch without asking for information on wand lore when he thought that’s what Voldy was after. Did anybody think, maybe Voldy’s going after a Super Wand?!
Red Rocker wrote: “…the main reason why Harry does have some inkling of the truth is through that vulgar and classless chaser of the truth, Ms. Rita Skeeter.”
And the truth really does Harry no good at all in his assigned quest. He eventually decides to trust Dumbledore without knowing the truth. And I’d say the last thing Skeeter was after, in regard to anyone, was the truth.
Now, whether or not Dumbledore should’ve been more forthcoming with certain facts in regard to Harry & his mission, well, that’s another story.
Regardless of who goes after it, and for what reason, and what they do with it, and what people do with it after they know it, the truth is pretty important. Even if does no one any good, it’s still important. It’s one of those core values that some people like to build their lives on. The reason Harry decides to trust Dumbledore is because that seems to be the best course given the information he has available to him. That decision would have been easier had he had more information, if the great man had found the intestinal fortitude to say to him, sometime before he died: “Harry, when I was your age I was a fool for love, and my sister paid the price for it. And Harry, when Voldemort zapped your mum I think a piece of him landed in you, and to defeat him you’ve got to die too, although I think there’s a chance you’ll survive.”
I understand that Faith is important in man’s relationship with God. But I don’t think that makes faith a virtue in every other context and every other relationship. And I don’t think the fact that Harry had to trust in Dumbledore was a good thing or good for him, unless you’re prepared to argue that hardship is good for the soul in and of itself.
Looking at it from another perspective, Dumbledore didn’t withold the truth from Harry in order to make him into a better person. The reason why he didn’t level with him was to spare himself the shame and anguish of telling the truth. Which is entirely human. Which I guess, was one of Harry’s life lessons: that grown-ups are not perfect.
Oh dear, there goes the write up for Chapter 18.
Red, just picture Jack Nicholson playing Dumbledore screaming, “You want the truth, Harry? You can’t handle the truth!!!”
Will reply a bit more tomorrow.
Been thinking about this.
The fact that Harry was able to take a huge leap of faith and jump into the unknown without knowing all the facts – go with his best guess – showed a lot of courage. Pretty much the same reckless courage he’s shown all his life: when the need is there, Potter’s your man. It’s what makes him a hero.
Not everyone would have done what he did: repeatedly commit himself to a rather drastic course of action in the face of mounting evidence that the man who started him out on that path was a deceptive sob who had witheld major chunks of information from him. A lot of people, Hamlet for example, would have been paralyzed by indecision. But not Harry.
Which says a lot of positive things about Harry. But it also says a lot of less than positive things about Dumbledore: that he would put Harry in this position because he didn’t have the guts to tell him the truth.
In partial defense of Dumbledore, what good would it have done Harry to know “the truth” (whatever it may have been – we don’t really know) about DD’s relationship with Gellart? Where DD is clearly subject to criticism is his failure to tell Harry that he was reasonably certain that Harry contained a piece of LV’s soul and that the only way to destroy it was to subject Harry to the killing curse. DD had no way of knowing that LV would use the AK curse on Harry using the elder wan that Harry had become the master of, and that, therefore, Harry would probably survive the curse.
Revgeorge and Charlie – I see you point – the game has always been about destroying the horcruxes and you destroy Voldemort. But all 759 pages of it? The book is not called The Seven Horcruxes – it’s called The Deathly Hallows. And yes, in the end – the Deathly Hallows did not allow Harry to triumph over Voldemort. The Deathly Hallows is the biggest red herring of all literature. Horcruxes or Hallows. Horcruxes win. So why confuse Harry – why tell him about the Hallows? He doesn’t need to hear the truth about it – besides, it’s a messy truth – and he’s too young – and frankly, I’m a little embarrassed about it. It doesn’t really matter in the end. What Harry doesn’t know – won’t hurt him about Gellert.
And what happens? Once again – Harry is let down by a father figure who is less than perfect. Harry’s father figures seem to show a lot of imperfections in his life, Sirius was a bully and headstrong to a fault, Lupin abandoned his family willingly, Albus wanted to rule the world (Utilitarianism = Facism) and didn’t tell Harry about it, and Harry’s own father, James, was the sort of person Harry disliked in his own life. The only person who doesn’t let Harry down – the only one who ultimately tells him the absolute truth about everything (including the messy truths of his heart and doesn’t hold back) is Severus Snape. And why did Snape tell Harry about his love for Lily? Because it mattered to Harry.
The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
PS Thanks Revgeorge for the kind words – and dear sweet Charlie, thank you for the Faure Sanctus. I hadn’t listened to that in a long time and you were right – it transports you to a very beautiful place. Thank you.
Now that I’m thinking about it – how very Utilitarian of Albus not to tell Harry about the Hallows. It seems Gellert rubs off on Albus – more than we realize.
It doesn’t matter because the end justifies the means to an Act Utilitarian.
Utilitarian theories, on the other hand, must answer the charge that ends do not justify the means. The problem arises in these theories because they tend to separate the achieved ends from the action by which these ends were produced. One implication of utilitarianism is that one’s intention in performing an act may include all of its foreseen consequences. The goodness of the intention then reflects the balance of the good and evil of these consequences, with no limits imposed upon it by the nature of the act itself — even if it be, say, the breaking of a promise or the execution of an innocent man. Utilitarianism, in answering this charge, must show either that what is apparently immoral is not really so or that, if it really is so, then closer examination of the consequences will bring this fact to light. Ideal utilitarianism (G.E. Moore and Hastings Rashdall) tries to meet the difficulty by advocating a plurality of ends and including among them the attainment of virtue itself, which, as John Stuart Mill affirmed, “may be felt a good in itself, and desired as such with as great intensity as any other good.”
Albus says -
“Harry must not know, not until the last moment, not until it is necessary, otherwise how could he have the strength to do what must be done?”
Boy! Does he underestimate Harry! Harry has shown more strength throughout this series than anyone – except Severus Snape. And it shows the fatal flaws of Utilitarianism – who is Albus to tell Harry what he should know and when in order to achieve the greater good? Where is the freedom of the will in all of this?
“who is Albus to tell Harry what he should know and when in order to achieve the greater good? Where is the freedom of the will in all of this?”
He’s the man with the plan. And he knows that he himself mightn’t pass that test and he can’t conceive of a child choosing to do so either.
If you’re talking about free will why not assume that Albus is exercising his free will by not telling Harry?
He does underestimate Harry, though.
Joivre, I really appreciate your contributions on utilitarianism. We love the Potter books because within them we can explore so many ideas and philosophies, and interpretations in the books therein.
You’re spot-on about Harry’s father figures. Sirius was also reckless and a bit delusional, too. I think these father figures’ faults helped Harry avoid their pitfalls.
We’ll be extensively discussing the Hallows and their importance later. But I assure you, they weren’t a red herring and were important in giving Harry the strength he needed to walk to his death.
Red Rocker, I think you are missing my point. I’m not saying the truth is unimportant or that Dumbledore should not have been more forthcoming with some things. I’m simply saying the matter of the “truth” is very complicated and in the end it’s not the one “truth” about Dumbledore that Harry runs with, i.e. all the unanswered questions and deceptions and failings of DD, but Harry runs with the other “truth” he knows personally about DD, that Dumbledore, no matter what else he may have been, was working for Voldemort’s defeat and that the destruction of the horcruxes was the way to go. He has faith in that one truth about DD and his plans despite all the other truths out there.
Really, as a post-modern, I’m surprised that you think that Dumbledore could or even should provide one absolute, all encompassing account of the “truth.” If Harry is a proper post-modern, then he’s not going to totally believe anything Dumbledore tells him; he will always have his hermeneutic of suspicion going on. And unless Dumbledore essentially gives Harry a complete account of his life down to the last little detail, something will always be missing , for from a human you’re never going to get “the truth, the whole truth & nothing but the truth.”
Think of another similar situation between a wise old mentor and a headstrong, impetuous young hero. Obi-Wan Kenobi tells Luke that Darth Vader killed his father, Anakin Skywalker. It’s true, as Kenobi admits, from a certain point of view, and he goes on to tell Luke that many things in life depend on one’s point of view. Now, I’ll buy that to a certain extent. I’m certainly not a relativist, although I admit & know that a lot of relativity goes on in the world. But the point being, I don’t think Dumbledore is doing anything different than what Kenobi does.
Again, whether either one should have done something different or shared more information is another matter. Who knows if telling Harry or Luke a whole bunch of information right off the bat would’ve been the good thing to do or whether it would’ve caused more problems. Imagine, if you will, what might’ve happened if when Luke asked Obi-Wan in Episode IV, what happened to my father, Obi-Wan immediately launched into the whole latter history of the Republic, the saga of Anakin Skywalker, and the rise of Darth Vader. Imagine, if when Harry asks questions at the end of HPSS, Dumbledore immediately tells him every single thing he knows.
What parent when their child asks where babies come from, immediately shares everything in the world about baby making, or what general when asked by a soldier what his orders are, immediately starts laying out the whole plan of battle & the whole strategy of the war? I would say Dumbledore’s greatest sin was not in telling Harry all the truth but in underestimating him and also in not being able to overcome his Machiavellian ways. And, and it’s just possible that DD didn’t realize Harry was the better man & could’ve handled more until it was too late & he, DD, was dead.
Ha! I think I’m going to force myself to wait for chapter 18 to respond – for the greater good!
Good points revgeorge. And I agree. But in the back of my mind there’s Gandalf not sparing Frodo the evil of The Ring and giving him the opportunity to say “I will take the ring, but I do not know the way.” Of course Frodo wasn’t a child -50 something (not Elijah Woods).
Korg, good points about Frodo & Gandalf. But then Gandalf operates in a different way than Dumbledore anyway.
I don’t know about you revgeorge, but I’m not prepared to accept George Lucas as the ultimate arbiter of morality, I will admit however that Alec Guinness does put on a pretty potent cloak of moral authority.
Funny, I could have sworn that I said earlier that absolute truth was not a very realistic goal. Yep, I did:
I don’t think, however, that anyone deserves the absolute truth. (see above: Comment #100).
Comment #100? Wow!
Anyways, this is totally a Chapter 18 discussion, so I’m not going to go after the many tempting baits that have swam past me. But they are soooooo tempting, especially the one about the birds and the bees, and the one about the Hallows and red herrings.
I will be patient.
Red, sorry I missed your comment in #100 about anyone deserving the absolute truth. However, from the general thrust of your other comments, it certainly sounded like this is what you were demanding of Dumbledore. And again the question remains, which truth?
Anyway, I offered up the various examples not necessarily because I agree with them but because I think they point out the very complicated nature of what people mean when they say they want the truth & what people who are asked to tell the truth actually say & still consider to be the truth. Anyway again, we’ve had this particular discussion on truth lots of times before, & from what I remember is that we were in agreement about much of it, except we perhaps came at it from different ways.
So, again, I don’t disagree with you that Dumbledore should’ve been much more forthcoming about things to Harry. And I don’t disagree that Skeeter reveals parts of the truth, but not because she’s really after the truth. So, I think it’s a matter of degrees, treating Dumbledore too harshly and giving Skeeter too much credit. But as you say, waiting for Ch. 18 sounds good and appropriate.