I got this comment under a recent post a couple days ago:
I read a letter at John Granger’s site, asking what the gleam in Dumbledore’s eye meant in GOF (among other things). I just did not understand the answer completely. Would you shed some light on it, please? Thanks so much!
According to the comments under the post at Hogwarts Professor, John plans to return to the thread to give more explanation of the theory. I’ll try to shed a little light both on the content of the post and why I think the theory implausible, even if fun. In short, John is speculating the following:
- Dumbledore and Snape have known about horcruxes for a very long time
- Dumbledore knew Harry’s scar was a horcrux, producing the possibility of a mind-link between the two, if it can be forged by Voldemort and Harry becoming the same person, though “in essence divided.”
- Dumbledore’s plan was to allow Voldemort to use Harry’s blood all along, which forged the mind-link.
- Mind-link created, Dumbledore and Snape spend the majority of Books 5 and 6 acting out a certain script in front of Harry for Voldemort to see, the point of which was to send Voldemort in the wrong direction and not let him know just how much Dumbledore and Snape really do know about the horcruxes.
- While deceiving Voldemort, who is watching through Harry’s scar-o-scope, Dumbledore and Snape are off destroying the horcruxes, so, as John writes, “By the time in Prince that Horace hands over the memory…Snape and Dumbledore already have them in hand and have destroyed them.”
- The last horcrux, Harry’s scar (according to John), is destroyed by Snape in his little duel with Harry at the end of Book 6.
- Dumbledore’s death on the tower was entirely an act (in fact, Dumbledore has long been dead, and Slughorn is playing the role) to convince Voldemort, through the scar-o-scope, once and for all that Snape is on his side.
Creative, but implausible, in my opinion. I have multiple issues with it, and I’ll continue bullet-pointing to express them:
- My biggest problem with the theory is that it makes Harry’s entire journey a charade. He’s just a tool in Dumbledore’s manipulative hands. It doesn’t fit Dumbledore, and it doesn’t fit how Rowling is writing Harry.
- It’s narrative misdirection on steroids. Not only have we all been tricked by Harry’s point of view, Dumbledore and Snape have been creating misdirection in the very story for Voldemort. Really, it’s narrative misdirection that pulls us away from the central character of the story: Harry Potter. Suddenly, the whole story is about Dumbledore and Snape, and poor Harry is just a pawn in their game.
- Regarding point #2 above, all of Dumbledore’s genuine love and care for Harry looks a little silly if this is true, doesn’t it? Kind of makes Dumbledore a manipulative monster, which I’ve argued extensively (here and here) he most certainly is not.Â
- Regarding #3, a few months ago, I planned to write a post, the intention of which was to sort of make fun of the way some people really twist facts in the book to make up wild theories. It was going to be a satirical post, arguing that Dumbledore actually planned the whole deal in Goblet, and that he really wanted Harry to be whisked off to the graveyard to become the key element in Voldemort’s rebirth. I never knew someone would propose the idea for real…
- Continuing with #3, Dumbledore is once again a lying monster if this is true. Rowling has written Dumbledore as the parent-figure who cares for Harry when the Dursleys would not. If #3 is true, Dumbledore is nothing of the kind.
- If #s 5-6 are true, Snape and Dumbledore are lousy planners. To create the situation in which the chosen one can defeat Voldemort by eliminating the horcruxes while simultaneously sending the kid on a major horcrux hunt is silly. How many more people will Voldemort kill before Harry realizes? Do Snape and Dumbledore care nothing for human life? If not, why do they care about defeating Voldemort? And furthermore, if Voldemort can be killed now, why bother with book 7? Snape has fully proved his ability to deceive Voldemort; why not head back to camp and send an AK when he has a chance? It destroys the entire storyline.
- Regarding #7, read this essay at Felicity’s Reflections; it does a nice job of demonstrating that all the “weird” stuff that apparently happened on the Astronomy Tower wasn’t so weird after all.
So there’s my short-version, bullet-point response to scar-o-scope. Creative, but implausible. I am looking forward to John’s return to his blog to comment further.
Red Rocker on 
Ally on 
korg20000bc on 
aerisflowers on 
Jeremy on 
Loading ...
{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }
OK! Thanks, Travis! Awesome, as usual! It’s impossible for me to see Dumbledore in that light, also. However, it is well within Dumbledore’s experience with Harry to manipulate the truth about things in order to protect him. He’s admitted his mistakes concerning this.
So, in your opinion, what was that gleam in Dumbledore’s eye? What did he know, or think he knew? It just seems to me that he saw some physical flaw to LV’s invincibility because of the blood. He obviously did not share his thoughts with Harry, but I think Dumbledore was trying to protect him, yet again, not use him. I don’t understand why Dumbledore did not share this information (about his thoughts on the blood) with Harry before he died. He was trying to prepare Harry for what was coming, so why not lay everything on the table and tell him about this? I have issues with Harry being a horcrux, so maybe that’s why this whole thing confuses me.
I’m off to read Felicity’s essay, but thanks again for your thoughts.
I hope your nights are going more smoothly, now, and your precious Sophia is feeling better…we just used the cold water teething toys, but that was 18 (and 32) years ago.
Blessings to all three of you!
My latest is “up,” Travis! Thank you for giving this theory such serious consideration. I like it, despite it’s seeming implausibility, because it is nigh on impossible even to understand without a strong grip on narrative misdirection as a key to unlock Harry Potter.
Something we’ll have to discuss later is, if Dumbledore has been sending Harry into harm’s way intentionally book after book, could this mean he knows Harry is somehow bullet-proof? Certainly his awareness of the Prophecy and the shared wand cores gives the Goblet finish a different spin. The Headmaster knows about Priori Incantantem, after all.
Go ahead and re-read the first chapters of Phoenix with thought that Harry has to be kept in isolation because he is a walking Volde-cam. It makes his escape to the House of Black a two-part adventure (there had ton have been a diversion to keep Lord Thingy out of Harry’s head until he’s inside 12 Grimmauld Place) and it makes Sirius’ gambit in the kitchen that night, telling Harry what is going on, a chilling exercise. What can they tell Harry without helping Voldemort? No wonder Molly just about has a cow with Black.
Anyway, silly or not, the Scar-o-Scope Staged Drama requires the serious reader have a firm grasp on narrative misdirection. It works with the alchemy and postmodern keys as well, but I’ll have to write that up later.
It’s Theophany! Off to prayers.
Dawn, right – if you have issues with Harry as a horcrux (as I do), then the very baseline assumptions of this theory are faulty for you. As for the “gleam of triumph” – I know this is not a popular answer, but here goes: the “gleam of triumph” is an absolutely essential clue to figuring out book 7, and as such, she’s protected it to the point that we can’t know. If we knew the gleam of triumph, we’d know the answers to book 7, and Rowling just won’t have that. She hasn’t given us enough to make an intelligent guess about the gleam of triumph. All we can say is that there’s something positive about Harry’s blood being in Voldemort.
John, thanks for the reply! I’ve been over and read your newest post; very interesting stuff about Riddle’s “in-text” narrative misdirection. I’ll try to get some response in later at your blog. In short response to what you’ve written here:
I’m not convinced Dumbledore would trust in priori incantatem as something that would save Harry, even though he knew about it. I don’t think he’d take a chance that Voldemort would get his AK off quicker than Harry had the chance to fire off a spell simultaneously. And why would Dumbledore assume Harry would be able to retrieve his wand? Surely he’d know Voldemort would disarm him. It leaves too much to chance, and even if we can construe Dumbledore as someone who doesn’t actually care much about human life (and, we can’t), he definitely cares more for Harry than anyone else. I just don’t seem him taking that risk.
I always assumed Harry was being kept in isolation for that very reason. I don’t think a Staged Drama necessarily follows.
I don’t think that Dumbledore “used” Harry, per se…because its not his style. However, I do believe that he and Snape had a plan that did not involve Harry. Why is there a rule that anything and everything that involves the battle against Voldemort has to be known to Harry? I don’t think the existence of a plan that Harry is ignorant of would indicate that Dumbledore doesn’t trust him. As Dumbledore has already said, he has kept a few things from Harry for the sake of his well-being. Any secrets of Snapes are probably, in Dumbledore’s mind, Snape’s alone. If they do not matter at the present time and belong in the past, it really isn’t Harry’s business. Of course, why he trusted Snape he has already explained, but Harry has been skeptical and a little thick-headed. I suspect that Dumbledore has been dropping hints that Snape felt remorse over Harry’s PARENTS being in danger for an eternity. Isn’t love the key to defeating Voldemort? Pity Hermione couldn’t be there for those conversations…for all we know Dumbledore has been lightly inflecting the words “parents” and “mother” for quite some time now.
I can just picture J.K. Rowling sitting and drumming her fingers against eachother with a mischevious, all-knowing smile. Waiting for the truth is so much more fun than actually knowing the truth, but we want to know it anyways.
Interesting, but much of it breaks my Golden rule of theories which is “Does it make the story better or worse if true?” Admittedly, that’s a rather subjective criterion. It’s what I have against almost all of Joyce Odell’s deconstructions — not to say she’s not a great writer like John G.; she’s an absolute riot to read!
I do think that Dumbledore pretty much knows what’s going on with Harry, Snape, Voldemort et al, but if he’s somehow causing it all to happen, that would be a bit antiheroic for him, IMHO.
I read a theory about DD’s “gleam the idea was that since LV had Harry’s blood, he also had Lily’s blood and would not be able to harm Harry on that account. And perhaps the gleam faded quickly because DD knows that protection will cease on Harry’s 17th birthday.
You know, Travis, it’s looking like the effects of your anti-SPAM incantation might be wearing off. ;?
It does look that way, doesn’t it? I need to learn an anti-trackback-spam incantation. The regular spam seems to still be blocked.
About that gleam.
My first thought was that Lily Potter’s blood in Voldemort would act like holy water in the veins of a vampire. That it would somehow destroy him from within.
But a year has gone by, and as far as we know, old snake-eyes is still up and active.
Maybe it’s slow-acting anti-evil-venom.
What puzzles me about the gleam is to what extent Dumbledore foresaw the blood transfusion and allowed it to happen. And along the same lines, to what extent he foresaw the events in HPB – Draco’s impotent plotting, the breaching of Hogwarts by the Death Eaters, and of course, his own death.
If he knew these things and let them happen, what does that make him?
I’ve been thinking that perhaps Dumbledore is even wiser than we can know. That he has mastered the art of bringing about the desired outcome not by opposing but by letting things happen.
In the Tarot deck, the Magician symbolizes conscious action, focus, and power. Everything Harry is. One of its opposites is the Hanged Man. This is from Joan Bunning’s site on the Internet:
“The main lesson of the Hanged Man is that we “control” by letting go – we “win” by surrendering. The figure on Card 12 has made the ultimate surrender – to die on the cross of his own travails – yet he shines with the glory of divine understanding. He has sacrificed himself, but he emerges the victor. The Hanged Man also tells us that we can “move forward” by standing still. By suspending time, we can have all the time in the world.
In readings, the Hanged Man reminds us that the best approach to a problem is not always the most obvious. When we most want to force our will on someone, that is when we should release. When we most want to have our own way, that is when we should sacrifice. When we most want to act, that is when we should wait. The irony is that by making these contradictory moves, we find what we are looking for.”
It kind of describes what Dumbledore has been doing: letting Voldemort re-create himself with blood which will by-and-bye destroy him; letting Draco find out that he’s not a killer by refusing to defend himself; letting Harry find out that he is strong enough to lead the fight by sacrificing himself.