Dumbledore's not dead
I. INTRODUCTION
I assume that you have already read Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, if not please read the book first, because it is vital for understanding this post. For the sake of simplicity, this 'essay' will be split into 3 parts: I. Introduction; II.Main Questions and answers; III. Explanation of the answers.
Yes! You continued reading, so this may mean that you have read the book. Congratulations! I might aswell assume, that you have been shocked whilst reading chapter 27, The Lighting-Struck Tower. Well.. it is quite normal to be grief stricken after reading such a dreadful chapter... the death of the key person of the novels, the greatest wizard Harry knew and my personal favourite character.
There are some questions you might have stated after reading the book, like these ones: What is Harry going to do without him? Is Snape a bad guy? -and most of all- Is Dumbledore really dead? ...
I belive that these questions shall be answered in the last, seventh novel... officially.
Fortunately, for us, JKR has left dozens of clues hidden in all around the 'books' from which we can easily abstract the truth (at least I think so). So first of all, let's see the questions...
-
II. MAIN QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
1.Q: What is Harry Potter going to do without the help of the only wizard Voldemort ever feared?
A: Nothing, because Dumbledore isn't really dead. Most likely Harry would die without Dumbledore though, if you ask me.
~~~~~
2.Q:Is Snape a bad guy?
A:Definitely NOT, and I'm sure that he did, whatever he did on the direct order of Dumbledore. As for being so nasty with Harry.. I can't really blame him, after seeing what James Potter had been doing to him while they were young.
~~~~~
3.Q:Is Dumbledore dead?
A:I'm sure he isn't, and there are plenty of clues in the novel pointing at this.
-
III. EXPLANATION OF THE ANSWERS
1. I know that you'll kill me for this, but in my opinion Harry isn't even near of being a good wizard, he may be brave and lucky.. but that's all...Oh, and he is doted with higher-than-avarage magical powers (only for performing the patronus in part 3:P )
~~~~~
2. Dumbledore trusts him, and he definitely has good reasons to do so. Yes, I know, he makes the Unbreakable Vow in the first part of the novel. So what? Does it say any concrete stuff about killing Dumbledore? He promises to help Malfoy to accomplish his task, to take care of him, but he did NOT say that he's going to kill anybody. Furthermore we can see two interesting moments during the death eaters' visit. First, he was a bit shocked when Narcissa asked him to do the Vow: "Snape's expression was blank, unreadable". Isn't this a bit strange? I mean why on earth should he be shocked if he really was Voldemort's man? Secondly: "And should it prove necessary.. if it seems Draco will fail- whispered Narcissa (Snape's hand twitched within hers, but he did not draw away) - will you carry the deed...". Snape's struggle can be seen clearly; if he draws his hand away he risks the trust of the Dark Lord, if he does not, he risks his own life for possibly breaking the Vow.
Remember the scene, where Hagrid accidentally told Harry that Dumbledore was having an argue with Snape. I guess that Dumbledore was actually asking Snape to kill him (at least to pretend doing so) or to injure him if the time will come (perhaps Dumbeldore foresaw at least part of what's going to happen, afterall he knew that Malfoy was behind all the attempts at murdering him).
At the tower scene D. "was pleading for the first time". Does this mean that he was begging for his life? NO, and NO again. He was pleading so Snape would perform the curse on him.
Another clue is the introduction of the non-verbal spells in the 6th novel. Now, why on earth would JK put such a big accent on the non-verbal curses if this wasn't the reason? I mean the first thing I tought when I read the part when Snape performed AK on D was that he didn't really perform the mentioned unforgiveable curse, while saying Adava Kedavra, he used a non-verbal spell, that pushed D off the tower and made him to be like he was dead.
~~~~~
3. If you have read the previous part, you already know a few arguments of mine for the answer.
Every single time Adava Kedavra was performed, the victim simply fell over dead, but this time Dumbledore was pushed down from the tower, so it is likely that Snape had used the non-verbal spell I've just mentioned.
In the tower scene D states that he knew about Malfoy's plan, he knew that he was in mortal danger. He saw the dark mark, so he knew that there was something happening in Hogwarts. After all this, do you really think that he would just waste his posibilites of defending himself and Harry to 'petrify' him? Let us not forget that Harry was kinda safe under the invisibility cloack. After abstracting from all this we can surely state, that Dumbledore wasn't even near mortal danger.. I mean not even Voldemort could defeat Dumbledore, so how could one think that he couldn't have saved himself and Harry from the attack an avaragely talented 17 year old wizard? He petrified Harry, because he wanted him to see and hear everything that has happened up there. He didn't want to protect him by that, because Harry was in perfect safety under the cloack already, he did it so H couldn't have interrupted them. It all makes sense. D knew what's going to happen, and he planned everything out with Snape for such a case.
There is also possible that Dumbledore had made a Horcrux. I mean he was battling evil for quite a time and I suppose he might have even killed during these battles. "Dumbledore is particularly famous for his defeat of the dark wizard Grindlewald in 1945" says the famous wizard card. It isn't mentioned nowhere that Grindlewald had ever gone to Azkaban, so in this case "defeated" could mean "killed". Despite of all this, i don't really belive that Dumbledore would have performed such evil magic... we'll see in part 7:)
-
If you have any questions related to this please make a post, and I'll be glad to answer to it as soon as possible.
I assume that you have already read Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, if not please read the book first, because it is vital for understanding this post. For the sake of simplicity, this 'essay' will be split into 3 parts: I. Introduction; II.Main Questions and answers; III. Explanation of the answers.
Yes! You continued reading, so this may mean that you have read the book. Congratulations! I might aswell assume, that you have been shocked whilst reading chapter 27, The Lighting-Struck Tower. Well.. it is quite normal to be grief stricken after reading such a dreadful chapter... the death of the key person of the novels, the greatest wizard Harry knew and my personal favourite character.
There are some questions you might have stated after reading the book, like these ones: What is Harry going to do without him? Is Snape a bad guy? -and most of all- Is Dumbledore really dead? ...
I belive that these questions shall be answered in the last, seventh novel... officially.
Fortunately, for us, JKR has left dozens of clues hidden in all around the 'books' from which we can easily abstract the truth (at least I think so). So first of all, let's see the questions...
-
II. MAIN QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
1.Q: What is Harry Potter going to do without the help of the only wizard Voldemort ever feared?
A: Nothing, because Dumbledore isn't really dead. Most likely Harry would die without Dumbledore though, if you ask me.
~~~~~
2.Q:Is Snape a bad guy?
A:Definitely NOT, and I'm sure that he did, whatever he did on the direct order of Dumbledore. As for being so nasty with Harry.. I can't really blame him, after seeing what James Potter had been doing to him while they were young.
~~~~~
3.Q:Is Dumbledore dead?
A:I'm sure he isn't, and there are plenty of clues in the novel pointing at this.
-
III. EXPLANATION OF THE ANSWERS
1. I know that you'll kill me for this, but in my opinion Harry isn't even near of being a good wizard, he may be brave and lucky.. but that's all...Oh, and he is doted with higher-than-avarage magical powers (only for performing the patronus in part 3:P )
~~~~~
2. Dumbledore trusts him, and he definitely has good reasons to do so. Yes, I know, he makes the Unbreakable Vow in the first part of the novel. So what? Does it say any concrete stuff about killing Dumbledore? He promises to help Malfoy to accomplish his task, to take care of him, but he did NOT say that he's going to kill anybody. Furthermore we can see two interesting moments during the death eaters' visit. First, he was a bit shocked when Narcissa asked him to do the Vow: "Snape's expression was blank, unreadable". Isn't this a bit strange? I mean why on earth should he be shocked if he really was Voldemort's man? Secondly: "And should it prove necessary.. if it seems Draco will fail- whispered Narcissa (Snape's hand twitched within hers, but he did not draw away) - will you carry the deed...". Snape's struggle can be seen clearly; if he draws his hand away he risks the trust of the Dark Lord, if he does not, he risks his own life for possibly breaking the Vow.
Remember the scene, where Hagrid accidentally told Harry that Dumbledore was having an argue with Snape. I guess that Dumbledore was actually asking Snape to kill him (at least to pretend doing so) or to injure him if the time will come (perhaps Dumbeldore foresaw at least part of what's going to happen, afterall he knew that Malfoy was behind all the attempts at murdering him).
At the tower scene D. "was pleading for the first time". Does this mean that he was begging for his life? NO, and NO again. He was pleading so Snape would perform the curse on him.
Another clue is the introduction of the non-verbal spells in the 6th novel. Now, why on earth would JK put such a big accent on the non-verbal curses if this wasn't the reason? I mean the first thing I tought when I read the part when Snape performed AK on D was that he didn't really perform the mentioned unforgiveable curse, while saying Adava Kedavra, he used a non-verbal spell, that pushed D off the tower and made him to be like he was dead.
~~~~~
3. If you have read the previous part, you already know a few arguments of mine for the answer.
Every single time Adava Kedavra was performed, the victim simply fell over dead, but this time Dumbledore was pushed down from the tower, so it is likely that Snape had used the non-verbal spell I've just mentioned.
In the tower scene D states that he knew about Malfoy's plan, he knew that he was in mortal danger. He saw the dark mark, so he knew that there was something happening in Hogwarts. After all this, do you really think that he would just waste his posibilites of defending himself and Harry to 'petrify' him? Let us not forget that Harry was kinda safe under the invisibility cloack. After abstracting from all this we can surely state, that Dumbledore wasn't even near mortal danger.. I mean not even Voldemort could defeat Dumbledore, so how could one think that he couldn't have saved himself and Harry from the attack an avaragely talented 17 year old wizard? He petrified Harry, because he wanted him to see and hear everything that has happened up there. He didn't want to protect him by that, because Harry was in perfect safety under the cloack already, he did it so H couldn't have interrupted them. It all makes sense. D knew what's going to happen, and he planned everything out with Snape for such a case.
There is also possible that Dumbledore had made a Horcrux. I mean he was battling evil for quite a time and I suppose he might have even killed during these battles. "Dumbledore is particularly famous for his defeat of the dark wizard Grindlewald in 1945" says the famous wizard card. It isn't mentioned nowhere that Grindlewald had ever gone to Azkaban, so in this case "defeated" could mean "killed". Despite of all this, i don't really belive that Dumbledore would have performed such evil magic... we'll see in part 7:)
-
If you have any questions related to this please make a post, and I'll be glad to answer to it as soon as possible.
posted by DevOne at
12:35
|
7 comments
