Harry Potter: A Death That Made No Sense
It has been a couple of years since the release of Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince, and now it is Harry Potter time again with the scheduled release on 21st July of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows. I had a nagging thought since Harry Potter & Half Blood Prince (Rowling, please make your future book names shorter), you guessed it, about the death of Albus Dumbledore. The death simply made no sense even in the nonsensical (but with semblence of logic) world of Harry. Here are three reasons why:
1. The death was way too convenient. Snape made a unbreakable promise to help the twerp (what's his name again) kill Albus and that's what happens helping Snape prove his faithfullness to Voldy (I don't like long names). And yet Dumbledore had unbreakable faith in Snape. It must be for a good reason. He did prove his innocence in the past. The only logical way would be that Albus and Snape are in cahoots and made a plan to fake the death.
2. Albus doesn't look like a dimwit. He innovatively (I love the word) blocks Voldy's attacks in "HP & Order of Phoenix". He is the mastermind for the good guys (and gals). He also successfully discovered few other horcruxes before. And the first and only time he takes Harry along he drinks some nasty stuff knowing fully well it will render him weak! He was strong enough to prevent Harry from protecting him and yet he couldn't protect himself from that twerp (Malfoy right?). Even Harry, the newbie, knows hows to fetch his wand from a distance and Dumbledore doesn't? Is he really that dumb?
3. Albus knows Voldy created horcruxes, being of nearly equivalent capability it is very conceivable that he too can create a few of those. Additionally he knows very well how to go back in time, which he guided Hermione to do to save Harry's Godfather. Why wouldn't he think of such a plan before? Why didn't Harry think of it either? He doesn't look that dumb either.
If killing Albus is really permanent then I have to admit that it is the weakest link in the Harry Potter series and most likely forced upon by publishers or someone who believe in mandatory number of killings to make a story interesting. Rowling simply didn't make much sense with this killing so far. Hopefully she redeems herself in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows.
BTW: My bet is that Harry won't die, Malfoy & Snape will most likely die along with Voldy.
Filed under Fiction, Harry Potter | 
| 
RSS 2.0 |
Trackback this Article
| 
Email this Article
You may also like to read |
February 7th, 2007 at 1:01 am
J K Rowling has expressly stated that Dumbledore is dead FULL STOP!
February 7th, 2007 at 9:30 am
1. The death was necessary. A hero must eventually stand without his mentor behind him in order to complete his transition to fully mastery.
2. You are thinking like Tom Riddle, thinking that death is the worst possible thing that could happen. Dumbledore has already made very clear that he does not fear death, but only considers it the next great adventure.
3. Good heavens. You have absolutely no understanding of Dumbledore’s or Harry’s characters at all if you think that either of them would ever be willing to destroy his own soul in order to create horcruxes. Harry’s own parents were murdered! You think he would be willing to become a murderer himself? “It is our choices that make us who we are, far more than our abilities.”
February 7th, 2007 at 10:06 am
> You are thinking like Tom Riddle, thinking that death is the worst possible thing that could happen. Dumbledore has already made very clear that he does not fear death, but only considers it the next great adventure.
Next great adventure where? As a ghost like Nearly-Headless-Nick? That doesn’t sound like fun!
> destroy his own soul in order to create horcruxes
Why would you have to destroy your soul to create horcruxes?
Also what happened to going back in time gizmo? Why didn’t Harry use that to save Albus?
February 7th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
Why would you have to destroy your soul to create horcruxes?
Dumbledore specifically answered your question: because you have to murder someone in order to do it. He called that “destroying your soul.”
Dumbledore would NEVER do it.
February 7th, 2007 at 12:22 pm
“What happened to going back in time gizmo?” The time turner, you mean. You may have missed that the trio read a report in the newspaper in book six that all of the Ministry of Magic’s time turners were destroyed during the Battle at the Ministry (which took place in Book 5). Rowling has thus removed the time turner as an option.
July 19th, 2007 at 11:41 am
انا اعتقد ان هاري سيلجأ لهيرميون لتعيد الزمن قبل ان
يقتل سناب دمبلدور وان هاري سيدمر الهوركورس
July 19th, 2007 at 11:48 am
I Think Harry Need Help From Hermony To ReWard
The time Before Snapp Kill Demeldor and Harry
Destoryed the Horcross And Fight Foldemort And Harry Wins By The Helps Thers Belongs To Harry Parents and his Friends Like:ron weysley -Hermony Grenger-Nevel longbottom
July 23rd, 2007 at 6:42 am
Being the only one Voldy ever feared, Dumbledore had to die in order for Harry to in the end meet Voldy for a final battle.
Although I was deeply traumatized by Dumbledore’s death, and felt angry wih Snape for months after reading it, it still made sense that Dumbledore had to go.
July 23rd, 2007 at 12:40 pm
@pegkerr
I missed that part. However the own given to Hermy belonged to Hogwarts and so it has no reason to be destroyed.
Mohamed, I don’t understand you. Please clarify.
MissMo, I too didn’t like Dumle’s death in the least. In the Deathly Hallows Rowling provides a convincing explanation for his death. It now makes sense
July 24th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
what i don’t understand in the last book is that she never really explained about Petunia, Rowling said that there was more than meets the eye with P, but all she said was at the beginning when they were leaving to go into hiding, she gave a “look” to potter. then at the end, we learn that petunia wanted to be a witch when she was younger. but i really thought there was more to it!!
Second question i had about the last book was what happened to Sirius Black??? I know he fell through the veil in book5, but there’s gotta be more!! Forexample, why is it that only Harry and Luna could hear voices behind the veil while others couldn’t? I thought that Sirius must be like stuck somewhere, or he could be died, but there’s got to be more explanation to his death!!! It just seems that there’s a lot Harry should have learned about James that he didn’t, and it felt that Sirius, being James’ best friend and all, should have been the one to tell him.
Lastly, how can dumbledore come back at the end in the office on the paiting? like i understand how the p ictures all work and stuff, but how can harry think that by telling the painting that he won’t be going back for the rock that is the same as telling the prof himself?
July 27th, 2007 at 3:06 am
Linda, in the first book, she said her sister was a freak and she despised magic. However, in the last book, you read that she didn’t like magic before she sent and received the letter to the headmaster proving that she was interested in becoming a witch. However, due to Snape’s and Lily’s invasion of her privacy, she decided to step away from magic completely.
I do agree with you on the second point. I too thought there would be more on it.
Dumbledore had a painting of himself in his office. Snape, still loyal to Dumbledore, didn’t take the portrait down and left him up there. At the end, Harry was communicating with the portrait. Much like he would with the portrait of the large lady who guards Gryffindor Tower.
July 29th, 2007 at 2:21 pm
your theories have huge gaping holes in them why type them if its just a rant i think the books name should be fitting not small for small-minded people.
one: not obvious to all: not me and im 16 i might be dumb (thats wat u’d think not matter what my arguement) but there is a broad base of young readers so lighten up ur J K Rowling bash trip will you?
two: there was a set order of things and could not be prevented so albus was ready to take the hit and he was limited maybe even intoxicated to the point that he could only save harry potter as a last didtch hope for killing voldemort and saving the world (ultimately)
three: horcruxes are very dark magic - Rowling being very explicit in the plot that splitting ones soul shatters all good in a person and diminishes purity which dumbledore represented (why would u even suggest he make one!?) he cannot go back in time unless he is to live in that time and being discovered could mean a complete twist on the plot that wouldnot be reasonable and btw all the time-turners were smashed in HP 5 u oblviously never thought this out - just a rant
P.S. thx linda for getting way off topic and jimbo for encouraging her (not lyk u’ll ever see this)
August 27th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
Well…
you really look stupid now that the last book as come out don’t you?
All i want to know is why Sirius never became a painting?
August 27th, 2007 at 9:32 pm
Well actually it still doesn’t make sense. Dumbledore had a time travel device. When he was infected, he could himself or with the help of someone go back in the past and undo the damage so he didn’t get infected in the modified timeline.
You have to understand that the author has the sole capability of controlling the plot. She added some sense to it in the last book of the series but it still has gaping holes. Have you also looked at all the wand theory stuff to explain how non-violent Harry still manages to kill Voldy?
Sirius posters were all over the place when he escaped from Azkaban.
September 1st, 2007 at 11:17 am
First off, the time turner that Hermione had in book three did not belong to Hogwarts. If you read/remember clearly, she told Harry that Professor McGonall had to write incessant letters to the Ministry on her behalf to get one. And as you have read, they were all destroyed in book 5.
Sirius never became a painting due the obvious fact that he was never a headmaster.
As for talking to Dumbledore in the painting…did you miss the million coversations that Sirius’ ancestor has with both Dumbledore and Harry? How many times has he been asked to tell someone something who’s in a house where another painting of him is?
I think it’s wise to remember all those little details or at least look them up before bashing one of the best sequential writers this century has ever seen.
September 1st, 2007 at 10:24 pm
At the time Dumby was supposedly infected, the time travel device was still available. Don’t you think he could have got one when Minerva could get one for Hermione?
I don’t think anyone is bashing Ms. Rowling who has done an admirable job as her bank accounts will attest far more forcibly than me. A logical mind is however well within his rights to point out logical fallacies in her works.
September 3rd, 2007 at 8:10 am
Um…I’m not sure what books you’ve been reading, but the Time Tuners were killed in book 5. Dumbledore had not been traveling far and wide yet looking for Horcuruxes at that point.
And I never said there weren’t holes in her plot. But so many questions that have been raised have black and white answeres clearly spelled out.
November 14th, 2007 at 3:29 pm
“Sirius never became a painting due the obvious fact that he was never a headmaster.”
- There are other paintings in Hogwarts that have not been Headmaster/mistress.
December 21st, 2007 at 7:22 am
well ok i think he death made perfect sense once YOU READ DH! alus was dying and severus needed the wand so therefor severus needed to be the one that killed albus…albus taught harry everything he could and it was his time to leave this earth
December 21st, 2007 at 8:44 am
In 20/20 maybe to some extent. The whole ending looks so contrived to me hinging on wand magic to defeat voldy to show Harry’s pacifist agenda by having him use only expeliarmas.