Bebo

hp7remix <hp7remix>

"see all my Harry Potter pages"

	Dumbledore STUFF	751 jours il y a
	Dumbledore Is Not Dead! I was Ccught up in the roller coaster of J.K.'s marvelous and fantastic mysteries, Snape's betrayal and the death of Dumbledore caught me completely by surprise. Dumbledore was dead, and on top of that, Snape had done it. My brand-new copy of Half-Blood Prince became as tear-stained as one of Hagrid's notes, and I remained upset about it all the rest of the day. But after sleeping on it, the next day I realized that there were important clues about Snape and Dumbledore that I had missed. And the more I looked back, the more clues I found, realizing that they had been there all along. And all of the clues point to two possibilities, that Dumbledore's not really dead, or at the very least, that Snape's not really a Death Eater, and he killed Dumbledore because Dumbledore ordered him to, as part of a grand plan. I've created this web site for Harry Potter fans who were just as upset as I was upon first reading the new book, to help them understand and feel better about the mysterious "death" of Dumbledore. Think of this site as Half-Blood Prince therapy. While of course only J.K. knows for sure, at least we can comfort ourselves with the possiblity that there's more going on at the end of Half-Blood Prince than meets the eye. I don't think finding these clues is wishful thinking. We know J.K. intentionally hides many clues in her books, daring her readers to be what our friends at Wizarding World Press call "HP Sleuths", uncovering the details of the mystery she so masterfully weaves into the fabric of the Harry Potter books. If you need more convincing that J.K. hides clues in her books, take a look at this non-Dumbledore-death-related example, which uses actual quotes from the book as we will be doing throughout this website (page numbers from US edition/UK edition): This left Harry, Ron and Hermione to share a table with Ernie. They chose one nearest a gold-colored cauldron that was emitting one of the most seductive scents Harry had ever inhaled: Somehow it reminded him simultaneously of treacle tart, the woody smell of a broomstick handle, and something flowery he thought he might have smelled at the Burrow. (HBP pg 183/174) "You recognized it, I suppose, by its distinctive mother-of-pearl sheen?" "And the steam rising in characteristic spirals," said Hermione enthusiastically, "and it's supposed to smell differently to each of us, according to what attracts us.." (HBP pg 185/176) "Hang on," a voice said to Harry's left ear and he caught a sudden waft of that flowery smell he had picked up in Slughorn's dungeon. He looked around and saw that Ginny had joined them. (HBP pg 192/182) There, in the span of approximately nine pages, J.K. has laid out clues that Harry likes Ginny, and we know now that in the course of the book he does come to that conclusion. On this site we'll discuss the various clues all throughout Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince that will help us get through the tragedy at the end of the book. And while we do this, we will be declaring our love and admiration for Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore, and stand together with Harry in declaring that we're "Dumbledore's man" (or woman), never giving up on him, and never forgetting what he means to Harry, Hogwarts and us. As Harry so poignantly reminded us upon Scrimgeour's insistance that Dumbledore was dead: "Such loyalty is admirable, or course," said Scrimgeour, who seemed to be restraining his irritation with difficulty, "but Dumbledore is gone, Harry. He's gone." "He will only be gone from the school when none here are loyal to him," said Harry, smiling in spite of himself. (HBP pg 648/604) These are some of the excellent clues contained in the pages of Harry Pottter and the Half-Blood Prince which support the possibility that Dumbledore is not really dead, or at least Snape killed Dumbledore on Dumbledore's orders, and that everything that happened that night was planned well in advance by Dumbledore himself. Each one of these clues is perhaps, by itself not completely convincing, but if you put them all together... 1. Dumbledore's Big Chill Harry and Dumbledore are up on the top of the tower underneath the Dark Mark. Harry is wearing his invisibility cloak, Dumbledore ordered him to put it on before they mounted their brooms to ride to the top of the tower. Harry hears footsteps and looks around, but Dumbledore orders him with a gesture to retreat. Harry draws his wand and backs away: The door burst open and somebody erupted through it and shouted, "Expelliarmus!" Harry's body became instantly rigid and immobile, and he felt himself fall back against the tower wall, propped like an unsteady statue, unable to move or speak.(HBP pg 584/545) It's interesting to note that things are happening so fast, even Harry is momentarily confused: He could not understand how it happened -- Expelliarmus was not a Freezing Charm -- Then, by the light of the Mark, he saw Dumbledore's wand flying in an arc over the edge of the ramparts and understood... Dumbledore had wordlessly immobilzed Harry, and the second he had taken to perform this spell had cost him the chance of defending himself. (HBP pg 584/545) Why did Dumbledore freeze Harry? Harry was already invisible to their attackers and in no danger. The only explanation could be that Dumbledore already knew, had already planned, that he would die this night (or appear to die), and not only did he not want Harry to become involved and possibly be injured himself, he needed Harry to be a witness, to be able to tell everyone else what happened. Dumbledore might have also promised Snape that he would make sure that Harry would not be able to interfere, knowing how Harry feels about Snape and what Snape was about to have to do. The supposition that it was Dumbledore's plan to do this all along is supported by the fact that he acted so quickly to do it, almost without thinking, when Draco burst in on the scene. Harry's own assumption that the Freezing Charm was done by Dumbledore is supported by the fact the curse lifted when Dumbledore left the tower minutes later. 2. Let's All Play Dead Together [Updated 5/27/07] While Dumbledore is trying to talk Draco out of killing him, Dumbledore proposes an interesting way out for Draco: "I can help you, Draco." "No, you can't," said Malfoy, his wand shaking very badly indeed. "Nobody can. He told me to do it or he'd kill me. I've got no choice." "He cannot kill you if you are already dead. Come over to the right side, Draco, and we can hide you more completely than you can possibly imagine." (HBP pg 591/552) Dumbledore then offers to expand his mother in the protection, and even Lucius when he gets out of Azkaban. This is very interesting, isn't it? Draco doesn't take him up on it, but Dumbledore is saying he has ways that could make it appear that Draco died when he really hadn't. If we believe that Dumbledore is about to fake his own death, doesn't what he's suggesting for Draco sound exactly like what we suspect that Dumbledore has planned for himself? At the very least, if Dumbledore's planning his own death, he's suggesting Draco follow a similar, yet not as drastic, plan, that he disappear as well. This clue in Half-Blood Prince is especially interesting when placed next to another passage written much earlier. In the introduction to Quidditch Through The Ages, which was released between Goblet of Fire and Order of the Phoenix, J.K. writes as Dumbledore: She [Madam Pince] suggested several alternatives, such as telling the people from Comic Relief U.K. that the library had burned down, or simply pretending that I had dropped dead without leaving instructions. (QttA pg viii) Not only does J.K. mention fire in this passage (see clue #9 below), she also very clearly describes Dumbeldore himself suggesting using his own death as part of a plan. Again, exactly what we suspect Dumbledore did at the end of Half-Blood Prince. IMPORTANT REVELATION! UK Edition Missing Important Text! The UK edition of Half-Blood Prince is missing some text that is included in the American edition, and it's text that is very important to this clue! This is the text as it appears in the UK edition: "He told me to do it or he'll kill me. I've got not choice." "Come over to the right side, Draco, and we can hide you more completely than you can possibly imagine. What is more, I can send members of the Order to your mother tonight to hide her likewise. Your father is safe at the moment in Azkaban...when the time comes we can protect him too...come over to the right side, Draco...you are not a killer..." Malfoy stared at Dumbledore. (HBP UK Edition pg 552) But this is the same passage from the American edition (text missing from the UK edition highlighted): "He told me to do it or he'll kill me. I've got no choice." "He cannot kill you if you are already dead. Come over to the right side Draco, and we can hide you more completely than you can possibly imagine. What is more, I can send members of the Order to your mother tonight to hide her likewise. Nobody would be surprised that you had died in your attempt to kill me -- forgive me, but Lord Voldemort probably expects it. Nor would the Death Eaters be surprised that we had captured and killed your mother -- it is what they would do themselves, after all. Your father is safe at the moment in Azkaban...When the time comes we can protect him too. Come over to the right side, Draco...you are not a killer..." Malfoy stared at Dumbledore. (HBP US Edition pg 591) Both of the ommissions are directly related, they are about having Draco appeared to have died, so it would seem the ommisions are intentional. Did J.K. include those lines originally, and then decide she had gone too far and made the clue too transparent and obvious? Is it possible she decided to remove them, but the lines got accidentally included in the American edition anyway? IMPORTANT REVELATION UPDATE! We have learned that the US paperback edition of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince DOES NOT contain the extra text that the hardcover edition does. This confirms our supposition that it was an edit made by J.K. that failed to make it into the US edition. The US edition now (at least in paperback form) has the originally intended edit. Also, according to reports, the phrase He cannot kill you if you are already dead was also not included in the French version of the book. 3. Fawkes doesn't try to save Dumbledore We've seen Fawkes come in at the last moment and save Harry's life in Chamber of Secrets: As Harry trembled, ready to close his eyes if it turned, he saw what had distracted the snake. Fawkes was soaring around its head, and the basilisk was snapping furiously at him with fangs long and thin as sabers -- Fawkes dived. His long golden beak sunk out of sight and a sudden shower of dark blood spattered the floor. (CoS pg 318/234) And he also saved Dumbledore in Order of the Phoenix: ... one more jet of green light had flown at Dumbledore from Voldemort's wand and the snake had struck -- Fawkes swooped down in front of Dumbledore, opened his beak wide, and swallowed the jet of green light whole. He burst into flame and fell to the floor, small, wrinkled and flightless. (OotP pg 814/719) We know Fawkes was nearby the tower, as he shows up after Dumbledore's "death". So, why didn't Fawkes come to save Dumbledore this time? I think the fact that he didn't makes it possible to believe that Dumbledore didn't want his life to be saved, and this supports the theory that it was Dumbledore's plan all along to die up on that tower that night. 4. The Flying Avada Kedavra [Updated 3/9/06] As soon as I read the description of exactly what happened the moment that Snape killed Dumbledore, little red flags were popping up in my brain, but I didn't pay attention to them at first. This was actually the very first clue that alerted me to this whole thing. Every other time we've seen the Avada Kedavra performed, the victim simply falls over dead: He was screaming so loudly that he never heard the words the thing in the chair spoke as it raised a wand. There was a flash of green light, a rushing sound, and Frank Bryce crumbled. He was dead before he hit the floor. (GoF pg 15/19) From high above his head, he heard a high, cold voice say, "Kill the spare." A swishing noise and a second voice, which screeched the words to the night: "Avada Kedavra!" A blast of green light blazed through Harry's eyelids, and he heard something heavy fall to ground beside him. Cedric was lying spread-eagled on the ground beside him. He was dead. (GoF pg 638/553) However, in Half-Blood Prince, when Snape curses Dumbledore with the same spell, Dumbledore violently flies up and away from the tower: Snape raised his wand and pointed it directly at Dumbledore. "Avada Kedavra!" A jet of green light shot from the end of Snape's wand and hit Dumbledore squarely in the chest. Harry's scream of horror never left him; silently he was forced to watch as Dumbledore was blasted into the air. For a split second, he seemed to hang suspended beneath the shining skull, and then he slowly fell backward, like a great rag doll, over the battlements and out of sight. (HBP pg 596/556) Why would this application of the Avada Kedavra be so different from every other time we've seen it? Perhaps his spell was different because even though those were the words Snape said, he didn't perform the killing curse at all. Remember all the importance this book gave to "nonverbal" spells? Perhaps Snape said Avada Kedavra, but the curse he was really thinking, the nonverbal one, was a different curse, one that only made it appear that Dumbledore was dead. The possibilty that Snape said one curse and cast another nonverbally might not be as likely if we couldn't recognize the curse that was really cast, but we can! Thanks to Brave Sir Blogger and Lindsay for bringing these passages to my attention: Both of them swung their wands above their heads and pointed them at their opponent; Snape cried: "Expelliarmus!" There was a dazzling flash of scarlet light and Lockhart was blasted off his feet: He flew backward off the stage, smashed into the wall, and slid down it to sprawl on the floor. (CoS pg 190/142) Harry made up his mind in a split second. Before Snape could take even one step toward him, he had raised his wand. "Expelliarmus!" he yelled -- except that his wasn't the only voice that shouted. There was a blast that made the door rattle on its hinges; Snape was lifted off his feet and slammed into the wall, then slid down it to the floor, a trickle of blood oozing from under his hair. He had been knocked out. Harry looked around. Both Ron and Hermione had tried to disarm Snape at exactly the same moment. (PoA pg 361/265) In these examples from Chamber of Secrets and Prisoner of Azkaban, different wizards are issuing the Expelliarmus spell with the results being described almost exactly the same way, the victim being voilenty blasted up and backwards. This also happens to be similar to the description of when Dumbledore is attacked up in the tower. So, even though Snape said Avada Kedavra, the evidence from the books shows that the nonverbal curse he cast was Expelliarmus! Even the title of the chapter this all takes place in is suspicous, "The Lightning-Struck Tower". Even though this is the name of the ominous tarot card that Trelawney was worried about back on page 543/507 in chapter 25, is it possible that J.K. is hinting here that the spell was not Avada Kedavra, but some other spell that had lightening-type effects instead? But there is even another clue that Dumbledore's flying off the tower that night was a prearranged ruse between himself and Snape. Back in chapter nineteen, when Harry orders Dobby and Kreacher to follow Malfoy around in an effort to figure out what he was up to, Dobby replies: "Yes, Harry Potter!" said Dobby at once, his great eyes shining with excitement. "And if Dobby does it wrong, Dobby will throw himself off the topmost tower, Harry Potter!" (HBP pg 422/395) Notice, Dobby says "throw himself", not something like "you can throw me". Also, Dobby specifically mentions "the topmost tower", exactly the place where the "death" of Dumbledore later occurs in the same way. Now, even though we know Dobby gets around and probably hears a lot of things he shouldn't in the castle, we're not suggesting Dumbledore could so easily slip up and let Dobby be privy to such a secret plan. But what we are suggesting is that J.K. is not above using something Dobby says to plant a clue for us that later on in the story it would be Dumbledore, himself, who planned the whole death cherade, and caused himself, or arranged for himself, to be thrown from the top of the tallest Astronomy tower. 5. Don't Point That At Me Unless You Mean It Several times in the course of the Harry Potter books, J.K. has told us that the Avada Kedavra is not a curse you can make lightly. In Goblet of Fire, the fake Mad Eye Moody tells his DADA class: "Avada Kedavra's a curse that needs a powerful bit of magic behind it -- you could all get your wands out now and point them at me and say the words, and I doubt I'd get so much as a nosebleed." (GoF pg 217/192) And in Order of the Phoenix, we learn more about Avada Kedavra when Harry tries to curse Bellatrix: Hatred rose in Harry such that he had never known before. He flung himself out from behind the fountain and bellowed "Crucio!" Bellatrix screamed. The spell had knocked her off her feet, but she did not writhe or shriek with pain as Neville had -- she was already on her feet again ... "Never used an Unforgivable Curse before, have you, boy?" she yelled. "You need to mean them, Potter! You need to really want to cause pain -- to enjoy it ..." (OotP pg 810/715) If Snape was really working on Dumbledore's orders to make it look to the world as if Snape had killed him, even if he had used the real Avada Kedavra, if he had not really meant it, if he really didn't want to kill Dumbledore, then isn't it possible that the curse didn't kill Dumbledore, but only injured him badly? 6. Fawkes' Lament Directly after Dumbledore's murder, as everyone assembled in the hospital wing, Harry tells everyone Snape did it. He stops, overcome with emotion, and right then, something very important happens: Madame Pomfrey burst into tears. Nobody paid her any attention except Ginny, who whispered, "Shh! Listen!" (HBP pg 614/573) Everyone was there, Ron and his parents, Hermione, Lupin, Tonks. Yet it is Madame Pomfrey who J.K. tells us is struck by this turn of events. Continuing: Gulping, Madame Pomfrey pressed her fingers to her mouth, her eyes wide. Somewhere out in the darkness, a phoenix was singing in a way Harry had never heard before; a stricken lament of terrible beauty. (HBP pg 614/573) J.K. spends another paragraph on how the phoenix song echos their grief, but while doing so mentions: Harry felt, as he had felt about the Phoenix song before, that the music was inside him, not without ... How long they stood there, listening, he did not know, nor why it seemed to ease their pain a little to listen... (HBP pg 615/573) And then McGonagall enters, changes the subject, and the phoenix song is forgotten. Many minutes later, after all the retelling of the night's affair, J.K. mentions Fawkes is still at it: They all fell silent. Fawkes's lament was still echoing over the dark grounds outside. (HBP pg 621/579) ...but Harry's thoughts move right on to other things, like wondering where Dumbledore's body is now. Many minutes later still, as this meeting breaks up and Harry is following McGonagall up to what is now her office, J.K. interjects: The corridors outside were deserted and the only sound was the distant phoenix song. (HBP pg 625/583) Whatever it was he was doing, Fawkes was working hard at it, and not giving up. Yet we are supposed to believe, as in the title of this chapter, "The Phoenix Lament", that it is only Dumbledore's pet echoing everyone's grief? Are we so easily to forget that phoenix tears have powerful healing powers? Significantly, it is the healer, Madame Pomfrey, who is brought to tears by the phoenix song. She knows the healing power of the phoenix well. She gulps with eyes wide. She recognizes something special is going on. Also, J.K. goes out of her way to point out the healing qualities of the phoenix song, Harry feels it inside, the way he did last time he was healed by one, and most importantly, it seems to ease their pain! From these passages, it certainly seems that J.K. wants us to know that Fawkes is doing some healing! Perhaps Fawkes is not powerful enough to bring someone back from the Avada Kedavra, but what if Dumbledore was not really hit by an Avada Kedrava, and instead hit with half a spell, or a spell to make him appear dead (as explained in the clues above)? 7. Anyone Seen Dumbledore's Wand Lately? At the very begining of the big scene between Draco, Dumbledore and Snape, one of the first things that happens is Dumbledore loses his wand: The door burst open and somebody erupted through it and shouted, "Expelliarmus!" ... by the light of the Mark, he saw Dumbledore's wand flying in an arc over the edge of the ramparts ... (HBP pg 584/545) But where is his wand now? We know a wizard's wand is very important to him, and a wand that belonged to a wizard as powerful as Dumbledore would be a very important item to know the whereabouts of, something you wouldn't want falling into the wrong hands. This clue might not mean as much if we didn't know the customs of wizards in such occasions, but we do! Five chapters ago, when Harry and Slughorn were consoling Hagrid over the death of Aragog, Hagrid and Sluggy sang a song about a wizard called Odo, and Sluggy sang the lines: And Odo the hero, they bore him back home, To the place that he'd known as a lad, They laid him to rest with his hat inside out And his wand snapped in two, which was sad. (HBP pg 488/456) But as far as we know, they didn't snap Dumbledore's wand in two. After the scene at the top of the tower, Dumbledore's wand is simply never mentioned again. Is it possible that Dumbledore's wand is missing because Dumbledore still has his wand, still needs his wand, because he's not dead? Or if he is dead, was the plan very carefully crafted so that Dumbledore's wand would be hidden away for safe-keeping, preventing the Death Eaters, who's arrival on the grounds of the school was imminent, from getting their hands on it? 8. No Body, No Crime The last time we really saw Dumbledore's body was when Harry is kneeling over it shortly after he has been killed by Snape the previous day. Now, we see Hagrid carry the body of Dumbledore into his funeral, but it's covered: Hagrid was walking slowly up the aisle between the chairs. He was crying quite silently, his face gleaming with tears, and in his arms, wrapped in purple velvet spangled with golden stars, was what Harry knew to be Dumbledore's body. (HBP pg 643/599) We never really see Dumbledore's body at the funeral. How do we know it was there at all? 9. Caution: Dumbledore Is Flammable As part of the funeral service, a fire ignites around the body of Dumbledore, and when it subsides, his body is encased in a white marble tomb. Again, we don't see the body, either before or after the fire. But more importantly, no one lights the fire, it just happens on its own. A body bursting into flame on its own. That sound like anyone we know? We've seen Fawkes do that several times now in the course of the Harry Potter books, and you know what happens to Fawkes after every time it does. Earlier in the book, we saw several instances where Dumbledore uses fire, an important aspect of the symbol of a phoenix. When he first meets Tom Riddle in the orphanage, to demonstrate he's a wizard, he sets Tom's wardrobe on fire. And he conjures fire to protect Harry and himself from the infiri in the cave. And after all this, in case we didn't get the allusions to a phoenix, J.K. reminds us just in case: White smoke spiraled into the air and made strange shapes: Harry thought, for one heart-stopping moment, that he saw a phoenix fly joyfully into the blue, but next second the fire had vanished. (HBP pg 645/601) All these clues seem to suggest that if Dumbledore really did die, he has the ability to be reborn out of the ashes of his death, either under his own power, or with the help of the healing powers of Fawkes. Besides, even if Dumbledore's body was there when it erupted into flame, we know that doesn't mean anything to a wizard! Non-magic people (more commonly known as muggles) were particularly afraid of magic in medieval times, but not very good at recognizing it. On the rare occasion that they did catch a real witch or wizard, burning had no effect whatsoever. The witch or wizard would perform a basic Flame Freezing Charm and then pretend to shriek with pain while enjoying a gentle, tickling sensation. (PoA pg 2/7) So, who do they think they were fooling at the funeral? If you believe that Snape is acting on Dumbledore's orders to kill him (or possibly just make it look like he killed him, although he'd probably still be hurting him), then Snape's demeanor and Dumbledore's final words take on a whole new meaning. ...somebody else had spoken Snape's name, quite softly. "Severus..." The sound frightened Harry beyond anything he had experienced all evening. For the first time, Dumbledore was pleading. Snape said nothing, but walked forward and pushed Malfoy roughly out of the way. ... Snape gazed for a moment at Dumbledore, and there was revulsion and hatred etched in the harsh lines of his face. "Severus... Please..." (HBP pg 595/556) In that passage the reader is supposed to believe that Snape hates Dumbledore and feels revulsion for him. But to help us understand the real meaning of Snape's feelings of revulsion and hatred, J.K. used almost the exact same words for what Harry was feeling just one chapter previous: "You...you can't stop, Professor," said Harry. "You've got to keep drinking, remember? You told me you had to keep drinking. Here..." Hating himself, repulsed by what he was doing, Harry forced the goblet back toward Dumbledore's mouth ... (HBP pg 571/534) Even though Snape was to kill Dumbledore on Dumbledore's orders, it must have been something that was still really emotional and difficult for Snape to do, exactly as it was for Harry to make Dumbledore drink the potion. The feeling of revulsion on Snape's face was not for Dumbledore, but the act he knew he had to commit. The hatred was not for Dumbledore, but for what Dumbledore was making him do. And when Dumbledore said, "Severus... Please..." he wasn't begging "please don't". What he was really saying was, "Severus, please kill me, as you promised you would." Way back at the end the first book, when Dumbledore confirms for Harry that Flamel would die now that the philosopher's stone was gone, Dumbledore explained: "To one as young as you, I'm sure it seems incredible, but to Nicolas and Perenelle, it really is like going to bed after a very, very long day. After all, to the well-organised mind, death is but the next great adventure." (SS/PS pg 297/215) Does that sound to you like someone who would beg to save his own life? Dumbledore's Horcrux How does a wizard learn about the existence and properties of Horcruxes? Who knows what they are, how to make them, what they can do? What wizard would make a Horcrux? Under what circumstances? And for what reasons? And why are they so evil? Hermione is working very hard to answer these questions. As Hogwarts virtual library search-engine, she is coming up empty - no answers to these questions can be found at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry so far. Fifty years ago, Tom Riddle, while still a student at Hogwarts, somehow learned of Horcruxes. How he did this is something of a mystery since Tom has no wizarding family, no connection with anyone in the wizarding world outside of Hogwarts (that we know of), and attended a school where Horcruxes were a banned subject, where Dumbledore at the time was, as Slughorn explains, (HBP, US version p. 499) "particularly fierce about it..." ("it" being the ban on Horcruxes). And yet by the end of Book 6, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, we believe that Tom Riddle-turned-Voldemort had probably divided his soul into seven parts and created six external Horcruxes in his lifetime. How do we learn of the Voldemort Horcruxes? Through Dumbledore's suspicions. Dumbledore is the only wizard who suspected that Voldemort created Horcruxes. When the Avada Kedavra curse Voldemort used against Harry backfired and diminished Voldemort, Dumbledore suspected that Voldemort had made a Horcrux. Then Tom Riddle's diary came along in Chamber of Secrets and Dumbledore's theory gained some support. No mere memory, the being in Tom Riddle's diary began to come to life and behave like a Horcrux, restoring Voldemort to life. But then Tom Riddle's diary was destroyed when Harry stabbed it with the poison basilisk fang, and Voldemort did not perish. So here Dumbledore must have begun to realize that either he was wrong about his theory that Voldemort had made a Horcrux or that there may have been more than one Horcrux. What an astounding idea this must have seemed! And in Book 6 when Harry returned from the graveyard and reported what Voldemort told his followers at the end of Goblet of Fire about having gone further than any other wizard, Dumbledore believed that this information provided support for the possibility that Voldemort may have been using Horcruxes, but had been using more than one of them. Remember, it wasn't until Harry finagled that bit of memory from Slughorn (in HBP) that we got any confirmation at all of Dumbledore's Horcrux theory. Slughorn's memory shows the first hard evidence linking Voldemort with the Horcruxes. But Dumbledore suspected the possibility of a Horcrux from the beginning. Why? Why suspect a Horcrux? Was it because he was familiar with the concept? Was it because he had already created one? Dumbledore create something as evil as a Horcrux! Impossible! Or is it? (Hmmm, perhaps I should write for the Quibbler...) Here's a thought: perhaps it is not the Horcrux itself that is evil, but killing someone in order to create a Horcrux that is evil. Slughorn explains that the Horcrux is created: "By committing murder. Killing rips the soul apart. The wizard intent upon creating a Horcrux would use this damage to his advantage: He would encase the torn portion (of his soul in a Horcrux)" (HBP p. 49 . Killing rips the soul apart. This is important: Killing rips the soul apart -- whether one makes a Horcrux or not. The evil act is in the killing. If a wizard had killed another person, regardless of his intent, the ripping of the soul would have occurred. There are three possible forms of intent involved in the act of killing. The first is malice, the desire to inflict harm and affect a killing. We usually associate this with anger or hatred and Muggle and Wizard societies both punish this type of act. The second form of intent is self-preservation. Here the person who affects the murder is justified in doing so because he, his family, his friends or even his society as a whole are in danger from the person who is about to be killed. In this case the killer is not punished by society. And the third form of intent is actually lack-of-intent. This is the case when a person or persons are killed inadvertently, or accidentally. In the Muggle world this is sometimes punished, sometimes not. If the killer's lack of due diligence caused the death(s) -- as in drunken driving -- we tend to punish it, even though it was not intended by the killer. If the killer shows due diligence -- and someone simply jumps out onto the road in front of a moving car -- we tend not to punish the killer. I do believe that killing under any of the three forms of intent causes damage to the soul. Maybe there is no blame to be laid, no guilt to be levied, but there would still be great anguish to the soul of someone who realizes he has taken a life. Whether through malice, self-defense, or completely by accident, the person who kills is diminished in some way by having taken a life. I believe this is the damage to the soul. It is not a punishment by society, but a natural result of destroying life. And I think this damage occurs no matter how good or evil the person who affects the killing is as a person. In fact, it is easy to imagine that the anguish of a good person who is pressed to kill is far greater than that of someone who feels no loss at ending someone's life. The damage to the soul would be irreversible. And here a wizard could use this damage "to his advantage (by) encasing the torn portion in a Horcrux." Creating a Horcrux, in and of itself, is not evil. It is the murder that precedes the Horcrux creation that causes the soul to be ripped apart that is evil. Killing is, as Slughorn explains, "the supreme act of evil." The evil is done. And then you have a damaged soul. Encasing your now-damaged soul in a Horcrux neither extends nor eradicates the evil born of the murder. A Horcrux is simply a container for that already-damaged portion of the soul. We know, from Albus Dumbledore's chocolate frog card (Philosopher's Stone, UK edition, p. 77), that "Dumbledore is particularly famous for his defeat of the dark wizard Grindlewald in 1945, for the discovery of the twelve uses of dragon's blood and his work on alchemy with his partner Nicolas Flamel." So, in 1945 Dumbledore defeated the evil wizard Grindlewald. How might he have "defeated" Grindlewald? Did he need to kill him as perhaps Harry needs to kill Voldemort? There is no mention of Grindlewald in Azkaban. I suspect that the defeat did involve a killing. If Dumbledore had killed Grindlewald, then perhaps Dumbledore might have created a Horcrux. Not necessarily an evil Horcrux, but the product of opportunity rather than the product of an evil act. Dumbledore is a very intelligent, logical being. If the killing of Grindlewald was necessary, then the possibility of creating a Horcrux might be a logical follow-up. And if the killing was a positive event eliminating evil from the wizard world, then perhaps Dumbledore's Horcrux -- though borne through dark magic -- would not be an evil thing. Not creating a Horcrux would not have changed his need to kill Grindlewald. Why would Dumbledore even consider making a Horcrux? In Book 1, McGonagall has a conversation with Dumbledore in which she points out that he knows all of the Dark Magic, but that she believes he chooses not to use any of it. Perhaps he has had good reason to use Dark Magic for some positive purposes. And remember, Dumbledore's old friend, Nicholas Flamel, sought eternal life with the Philosopher's Stone. Why is it hard to suppose that Dumbledore may have sought eternal life as well? A different means to that end, yes, but still with a goal to the same end. But would Dumbledore have committed this supreme act of evil? If Dumbledore has committed a killing, he would have to have a damaged soul. The damage done by killing another is absolute. Does Dumbledore have a damaged soul? Having a soul like Harry's that is "untarnished and whole" (p. 511) is certainly wonderful but may not be something that every witch and wizard can claim. Dumbledore is 150 years old and has been battling evil in the wizarding world for quite some time. Is it possible that his soul is still untarnished and whole? That he has never harmed another witch or wizard, evil or otherwise? I think not. Only youth has such purity and innocence. As people go through life, wizards and Muggles alike, we are confronted with difficult choices and obstacles, points in our lives at which there is no easy answer. So let's assume Dumbledore did need to finish Grindlewald to remove his evil influence from the world. What Horcrux would hold Dumbledore's damaged bit of soul? Gryffindor's Sword perhaps? One of the many silvery spindly objects in his office? I don't think so. I think Dumbledore's Horcrux is the phoenix Fawkes. Isn't it most interesting that Dumbledore suspected that Nagini was one of Voldemort's Horcruxes? We know Voldemort to be a friendless person who collects inanimate artifacts and objects for his Horcrux keepers. Why would Dumbledore think that Voldemort might choose Nagini to guard a portion of his soul? Why suppose that a wizard would choose any animal as a Horcrux, unless of course you had already done the very same thing yourself. There is no comparison between Nagini and Fawkes as viable soul-keepers, or Horcruxes. Nagini is a snake, a magical creature with questionable moral values. Fawkes is a magical creature known for extreme loyalty, the ability to heal wounds and transport very heavy loads for long distances. Fawkes seems to be all positive attributes. And even more importantly: Nagini can be destroyed. Fawkes, a phoenix, cannot be killed. He will continue to rise anew from the ashes, reborn to continue on. Fawkes is an excellent choice for a Horcrux. Fawkes will live forever. All right, so let's say we allow the assumption that Dumbledore has made a Horcrux. And let's go on to the next step and allow that Harry discovers it. This is, by the way, quite necessary since the Harry Potter stories are all told from Harry's point of view and we would certainly not know of the Horcrux unless Harry knew of it as well. How would this Horcrux work itself into the story in Book 7? What would be the value and difficulty of discovering that Dumbledore had created a Horcrux? The value is easy to spot. There is then the possibility that Dumbledore isn't gone for good. He may have died physically, but he could be reborn through the use of his Horcrux. This is, for everyone except Voldemort and the Death Eaters, a very uplifting possibility. Dumbledore's abrupt departure from the quest to destroy Voldemort at the close of Book 6 is quite disturbing. It is as though, after so many, many years of his research and discovery to identify Voldemort's weakness(es), Dumbledore simply vanishes. What if Harry is not the only one to learn of Fawkes's role as a Horcrux? Then what? Who else might be trying to recover Fawkes at the same time as Harry? The most likely wizard to join Harry in the pursuit of Fawkes would be Severus Snape. Somehow, Snape will know that Fawkes was Dumbledore's Horcrux and will be trying to get Fawkes. Harry will discover this. Not knowing whether Snape is good or evil, we won't know whether Snape should get Fawkes or not. Hermione will tell us we should trust Dumbledore's faith in Snape; Harry will be convinced Snape is up to something evil. It is possible Snape is supposed to acquire Fawkes, that Dumbledore wants him to, and that Snape was aware -- at the moment of the Avada Kedavra curse on top of the tower -- that there would be further steps to having Dumbledore return to make sure that Voldemort was vanquished. Furthermore: How would Dumbledore have protected Fawkes from Voldemort? Surely Dumbledore would have foreseen that someone on the Dark Side might have discovered Fawkes's value as a Horcrux. How might he have provided protection for Fawkes? Perhaps in was in the same way he protected the Philosopher's Stone. Remember the protection Dumbledore placed on the Stone in the Mirror of Erised? "You see, only one who wanted to find the Stone -- find it, but not use it -- would be able to get it..." (PS p.217) Perhaps Harry will need to want to recover Fawkes, but not activate Dumbledore's Horcrux in order to gain Fawkes. Maybe when Harry discovers that Dumbledore has a Horcrux -- Fawkes -- a choice has to be made about bringing Dumbledore back or going on without Dumbledore's help. What if the choice was there and Harry has to decide whether to rely on Dumbledore's help or to move on as a now-adult wizard (Harry comes of age at the start of Book 7 on July 31) and accept his role as The Chosen One? A choice between what is right and what is easy, perhaps. Somehow, I have found it hard to believe that Dumbledore would so easily leave the battle with Voldemort. Dumbledore has spent many years researching Voldemort's background and looking for ways to finish him. Why would he bow out so easily, before he could see his work brought to closure? Completed by Harry, yes, but brought to closure. And the wording of Professor Trelawney's prophecy is curious, as well, "one cannot live while the other survives..." If Harry, himself, does not directly cause Voldemort's death, Harry will retain his pure, untarnished, virgin soul. He will remain in many ways childlike and pure. Is this desirable? Or does Harry need to pass through a gauntlet of sorts to become an adult? Perhaps Harry must kill Voldemort to become an adult. Perhaps this is a painful process that must be done. Harry came awfully close to damaging his soul with the Septumsempra curse on Malfoy. It is not impossible to believe that Harry will have to suffer the consequences of his anger and hatred toward Voldemort (and maybe Snape). As a minor (under the age of 17) Harry still has a pure untarnished soul. But is it realistic to expect that this will continue throughout his adult life? I think not. Life is not that simple. Meanwhile, there is one other important player in this search: Hagrid. Rubeus Hagrid, Keeper of Keys and Grounds at Hogwarts, is our resident expert in Magical Creatures. That's Fawkes, a magical creature. Hagrid will know how to recover and capture Fawkes (just like Hagrid knew how to lull Fluffy to sleep) because Dumbledore would have told him. Dumbledore tells Professor McGonagall in Book 1, "I would trust Hagrid with my life," and he has. Dumbledore has shared with Hagrid Fawkes's secret. So while we know there will be a search going on for Voldemort's Horcruxes in Book 7, we may learn that a parallel search will commence for Dumbledore's Horcrux, Fawkes. I really do believe that Dumbledore does have a Horcrux. The Horcrux is Fawkes, his soul mate, literally. And Hagrid is the Secret keeper of the Horcrux secret. Hagrid will likely die protecting this information. And what does that mean? Hopefully we'll find out soon, because J.K. chose this topic as one of the three FAQ questions she would like to answer on her web site: What happens to a Secret after the Secret keeper dies? I don't think this is of terribly vital importance to 12 Grimmauld Place, but I do think it will matter even more when it comes to losing Hagrid. We learn of the existence of Horcruxes out of the blue in Book 6 of the seven book series. No mention of them in any of the thousands of pages preceding Half-Blood Prince in Books 1 through 5. Will we learn in Book 7 that there is another Horcrux? Dumbledore's Horcrux? Jan-Marie Spanard is a visual artist who tends to notice many of the small details in light, color, language, people's expressions, coins in the parking lot, and life in general. She says she is over-educated (with two masters degrees and a PhD) and has read each of J.K.'s Harry books at least a half-dozen times (so far). J.K.'s surprising revelation about Dumbledore by David Haber Just a little over a year ago, on August 2, 2006, J.K. Rowling made a statement at her reading in New York City, at Radio City Music Hall, that was big news and related directly to what we talk about on this web site. She said Dumbledore was dead, and even mentioned this web site (which used to be called dumbledoreisnotdead.com) by name. Well, tonight she's done it again. This evening, again in New York City, this time at Carnegie Hall, J.K. Rowling dropped a bombshell on the Harry Potter fan community. When asked by a fan if Dumbledore ever loved anyone, J.K. Rowling replied Dumbledore was gay. Reports from the scene say a hush fell over the crowd and then it broke out in applause, to which J.K. replied that if she had known that would be the response, she would've revealed her thoughts on Dumbledore earlier. She went on to say that while she was reading Steve Kloves' script for Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, she came across a passage in which Dumbledore was reminiscing about past loves, and she corrected it by crossing it out and scrawling "Dumbledore is gay" in the margin. I, personally, was very surprised by this news. Not that I thought there couldn't be gay Wizards and not that I'd have anything against them if they were. (Lockhart is obviously gay, for example, and I think fans assume the whole Wizarding world knows it, and doesn't care... And he's one of our favorite characters.) It's just that I never for minute suspected it about Dumbledore. But, looking back, should we have seen clues that this was true? We learned a great amount about Dumbledore in the final book that we never knew before, especially about his past. J.K. herself tonight said Dumbledore's being gay explains why he was originally taken in by Grindelwald, that it started off as an infatuation. Looking back at the book, the clues hinting at this are all there. In the excerpt from The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore, Rita Skeeter says Bathilda Bagshot says, about the young Grindelwald: "He seemed a charming boy to me," babbles Bathilda, "whatever he became later. Naturally I introduced him to poor Albus, who was missing the company of lads his own age. The boys took to each other at once." (DH pg 356/291) Also in her book, Skeeter says Grindelwald was expelled from Durmstrang at sixteen years old, and was forced to leave the country, "traveling abroad for some months". We know Durmstrang isn't shy about teaching the dark arts. Is it possible more than experimenting with dark magic caused Grindelwald's falling out with Durmstrang? And then later, Bathilda says something funny about Ariana's funeral: "Albus was beside himself at Ariana's death ... A shame Gellert could not have stayed for the funeral... He would have been a comfort to Albus, at least..." (DH pg 358/292) Was Grindelwald gay too? Or was he just good at stringing people along, telling them what they wanted to hear, for his own purposes? And in Deathly Hallows, one of the earliest things we learn about Dumbledore's past is told to us by Elphias Doge, in his eulogy of Dumbledore, when he says that after graduation from Hogwarts, he and Dumbledore had, in his words, "intended to take the then-traditional tour of the world together". In my first readings of the book, I took that phrasing to mean that it was traditional for Wizards to do that together. But is it possible that it was the trip itself that was the tradition, and that there was more than just a friendship between Elphias and Dumbledore? Were there other, earlier signs in the books that Dumbledore was gay? In Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, after Sirius has died, Dumbledore tells Harry, "You fought a man's fight. I was ... prouder of you than can say." (OotP pg 837/73 "I cared about you too much. I cared more for your happiness than knowing the truth." (OotP pg 838/739) "I never dreamed that I would have such a person on my hands." (OotP pg 839/739) I'm not suggesting that anything ever happened between Dumbledore and Harry, nor am I suggesting Dumbledore ever wanted something to happen. But in the same way it sparked his relationship with Grindelwald, can we not say that his homosexuality allowed Dumbledore to feel a special bond between Harry and himself, a bond normally reserved for a boy and a relative, like a father or older brother? And what of Dumbledore's relationships with other men? We know Snape is heterosexual because of his undying feelings for Lily. But could Dumbledore's platonic affection for Snape help to explain why he trusted Snape when everyone else thought he was a fool to do so? Ironically, of all the characters in the Harry Potter story, it was Harry himself who was the brunt of the rumors of being gay, as he had grown up "in the closet". Also, had he not gone to Hogwarts, the Dursleys told him he would attend Stonewall High. The Stonewall, a bar in New York City that was raided by the police in 1969, is an icon in the history of gay rights. But ever since the first book, the Harry Potter story has gained a great number of fans who are gay, because of how the story deals with Harry's feeling "different", and never understanding "what was wrong with him", until he finally got to find out that there were others like him, when he went to Hogwarts. J.K.'s admission about Dumbledore tonight opens up a whole part of the Wizarding world that we previously could only guess about. Can we infer from the way Lockhart was treated that the Wizarding world was generally permissive of homosexuality? If so, why did Dumbledore hide that he was gay? Does the fact that Dumbledore was gay help to explain how and why he did what he did? Were you surprised by J.K.'s announcement? From what we were told in the book, should we have been able to guess that Dumbledore was gay?
	posté par hp7remix