Home
Latest images
Register
Log inTreason in Book 6 and/or 7
Page 1 of 1
Treason in Book 6 and/or 7
Elanor Sat May 21, 2011 8:54 am
Treason in Book 6 and/or 7
Hogs Head - Mar 15, 2004 11:06 pm
Edited by Kip Carter Aug 30, 2007 5:19 am
Who will be the big surprise traitors on either side. (Bode is already dead so he can't count.) Please explain why you think so. That's the best part.
I'd like to hold my guesses until I've heard several, although I've got my thoughts in the ready and won't change.
Ready, set, go!
Treason in Book 6 and/or 7 thread index
This topic serves as an archive of a thread from the Harry Potter Lexicon Forum as hosted on World Crossing which ceased operation on April 15, 2011. Elanor
Hogs Head - Mar 15, 2004 11:06 pm
Edited by Kip Carter Aug 30, 2007 5:19 am
Who will be the big surprise traitors on either side. (Bode is already dead so he can't count.) Please explain why you think so. That's the best part.
I'd like to hold my guesses until I've heard several, although I've got my thoughts in the ready and won't change.
Ready, set, go!
Treason in Book 6 and/or 7 thread index
| [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] |
Last edited by Elanor on Sat May 21, 2011 9:09 am; edited 1 time in total
Elanor- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 51
Location : France
Treason in Book 6 and/or 7 (Post 1 to 50)
Elanor Sat May 21, 2011 9:02 am
Luanee - Mar 16, 2004 2:13 am (#1 of 359)
I think a lot of people have speculated Neville will be a traitor, so that would not be considered as a surprise.
I will put my bet on.... Tonks!! I know a lot of people like her, but really, her character is not very well fleshed out in the books for us to be really certain she is loyal to the Order. And she is young and impressionable too.... may well turn out to be a surprise traitor!! OK I am ready for all your peltings... Ouch! LOL
Edit: Yeah! I got the first post!
- - - - - - - - - -
Neville Longbottom - Mar 16, 2004 3:56 am (#2 of 359)
There's no way Neville will be the traitor. I think most people who think he will, are thinking abozt the comparison between him and Wormtail in Harry's dream. But Harry also has similarities with Tom Riddle, and probably won't become the new Evil Overlord. I think the point is, that on first look Neville indeed has some similarities with Wormtail, but that he made different choices from the beginning. Wormtail just hid behind the Marauders, Neville is able to stand up to the trio. Like Dumbledore said: "It are the choices that clearly define us." And I must admit, that it's a mystery how some people even after book 5 can still think, that he will become a traitor. IMO, Neville is as likely to turn evil as Harry himself.
I also can't see Tonks being evil. She risked her life in the DoM for the good cause after all. There is one point, however, that leaves open a possibility for her turning traitor. And that is that she's a metarmorphmagus. I mean, can you think of a better ability to use for a spy job? But I rather think that she will either use this to spy on the Death Eaters, or that another Metamorphmagus will be the villain in one of the upcoming books.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Mar 16, 2004 7:06 am (#3 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Who besides Neville? I also consider him to be very unlikely as a traitor.
- - - - - - - - - -
Loopy Lupin - Mar 16, 2004 7:10 am (#4 of 359)
Sorry Neville, but I kind of lean toward Neville being a traitor even if it is only temporary and he realizes the error of his ways in the end. I just think that Neville makes the most sense in some ways. I mean, would we really care all that much if Seamus or Dean betrayed everyone?
- - - - - - - - - -
prof sprout - Mar 16, 2004 8:05 am (#5 of 359)
IMO, IF Neville becomes a traitor (I highly doubt it) it wouldn't be intentional. Kind of like how Ginny was feeding Tom Riddle information through the diary. He would unknowingly tell something that he shouldn't to someone he considered a friend.
I like Neville's opinion that Tonks could be a spy (for the good side) being the metamorphus she is.
- - - - - - - - - -
alexa - Mar 16, 2004 8:32 am (#6 of 359)
My guess is still on Fudge. He would be oust from MOM and have no way to go. He needs someone powerful, so he might join Voldemort and seek his revenge on Dumbledore.
- - - - - - - - - -
Mellilot Flower. - Mar 16, 2004 9:05 am (#7 of 359)
Pixie led
I don't think JKR would revisit the story line of Neville accidentally betraying them- just because last time he gave info to sirius who turned out to be good, she's already been there and so she'd have nothing to gain by repeating it. Neville is too strong now to go betray Harry et al out of fear, he faced up to Malfoy, he faced up to the trio, he faced up to the DE- and he's been too hurt by Voldemort and their lot to help them. How about Cho? She's not quite inner circle, and I think that after the last book she never will be, but she's still pretty close to Harry. We've already seen that she hangs around with people who can't be entirely trusted... and she could be a little sore about things not working out between her and harry. She jumps to conclusions and gets spitefull, we've seen her defend the wrong people in the face of all the facts out of pride...? I agree that JKR did seem to make quite a lot of Tonk's abilities, there would always be a reference to it when she was around... I don't think JKR would just let that drop.
- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Librarian - Mar 16, 2004 9:30 am (#8 of 359)
Hey, I don't have a real answer here, but I do have a related question--how "safe" is JKR going to play it. If there is a traitor on the good side (i.e., one who feeds info to the DEs), will she make it someone like Cho or Seamus who is most definitely a b-list character? We'd be a little bit shocked, but not fall out of our favorite reading chairs. If, however, it is someone from the a-list (and this includes members of Order who we've really met and formed opinions about, F & G, Tonks, Neville, Luna, etc.), it would be huge, and this and other Forums would light up three major continents with all the frenentic discussions. I mean, the FBI, CIA, NASA, MI5 and all those folks would not be able to log on things would be so hot.
I do exaggerate terribly, but you get my point, I hope.
Ciao. Barb
- - - - - - - - - -
Rosariana - Mar 16, 2004 5:35 pm (#9 of 359)
I will not pretend to have a clue as to who will be a traitor, but I do have an idea which characters will NOT be traitors. I do not think Ron, Hermione, Dumbledore, Hagrid, Neville, Lupin, or any of the Weasleys (minus Percy)will betray the Order. If one of these characters did, Rowling would be teaching us that essentially no one can be trusted. Furthermore, trust, as portrayed by Albus Dumbledore, is not a weakness.
I do not think it will be Tonks either, because Rowling said in the chat that she likes Tonks. I believe this indicates that Tonks is only what she appears to be and will remain that way.
I agree that if there is a traitor it will be a b-list character, possibly one we have not yet met.
By the way, how do we know for a fact that there will be betrayal? Can someone tell me where it says that?
- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Librarian - Mar 16, 2004 5:38 pm (#10 of 359)
Rosariana, we're just having a little debate on one of those "if" situations. As far as I know there's no canon evidence of an up and coming traitor. We're a suspicious bunch, arent' we?
Ciao. Barb
- - - - - - - - - -
alexa - Mar 16, 2004 6:07 pm (#11 of 359)
Bard, we are indeed too suspicious. I should learn to be more trusting and remind myself of Rosariana's words: trust is not a weakness. , but I still think there will be a traitor. Constant Vigilance!
- - - - - - - - - -
Bash - Mar 17, 2004 9:32 am (#12 of 359)
Umbridge - but that is obvious.
Fudge, but that would be no great surprise either...
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Mar 17, 2004 10:54 am (#13 of 359)
I'm wondering if the treason may be connected more to a group, like the giants.
The double-dealing that went on with the gift-giving and the fact that Grawp is still part of the story makes me think the giants will be a factor.
- - - - - - - - - -
Julia. - Mar 17, 2004 3:29 pm (#14 of 359)
74% obsessed! Uconn Jew Crew says: is it August yet?
I am already convinced that Fudge is working for Voldemort. Check out this thread. If you have not yet done so, it's definatly worth a read. Jimmy Bell "I have figured out Cornelius Fudge's dirty little secret!" 11/19/03 11:01am
- - - - - - - - - -
alexa - Mar 18, 2004 1:09 am (#15 of 359)
Just adding my thoughts that Tonks shouldn't be the traitor. She has a muggle father and is half-blood. I should think Voldemort's followers are all pure-blood, they are obsess with getting rid of the muggle born and half-blood. I know I have no proofs that Voldemort's followers are all pure bloods, just a guess, just a guess. (No, please! I like Tonks too much.)
- - - - - - - - - -
Q. Trimble - Mar 18, 2004 1:06 pm (#16 of 359)
I don't think any of the main members of the order or Harry's close circle of friends are betraying them (yet) because Crookshanks would have sniffed them out by now. Deliberate attention was drawn to his presence in Grimmauld Place during key scenes where almost everyone was present. Still we can't rule out a change of heart. And then there's the imperius curse...
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Mar 18, 2004 2:25 pm (#17 of 359)
There was a definite change in Mr. Crouch's behavior when he was under the Imperius Curse. Even Krum seemed to be different under Barty's control in the maze.
I just think members of the Order would be able to tell if someone that was close to them was under someone else's control for a long period of time.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Mar 18, 2004 3:42 pm (#18 of 359)
Let it snow!
Alexa: Just adding my thoughts that Tonks shouldn't be the traitor. She has a muggle father and is half-blood.
Actually, alexa, her father's a Muggle-born wizard, not a Muggle. Sorry, just a pet-peeve of mine.
I don't know if their behavior would change that much. Crouch's behavior didn't change that much until he started to really fight the curse. (He was already under the curse when he was at Hogwarts during the beginning of term and didn't seem that different than when we saw him during the World Cup, only more tired.) The Order might not know that anyone near them was under the curse until it's almost too late to do anything about it....
- - - - - - - - - -
alexa - Mar 18, 2004 5:42 pm (#19 of 359)
Sarah, I didn't know that. I always thought Tonks has a Muggle father. Thanks for the clarification.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Mar 19, 2004 8:58 am (#20 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
As I've said before, I do not think Neville will be a traitor in either Book 6 or 7 and I do not mean to start up that whole discussion again (at least not here.) Serious advocates of that theory might find a better audience in the "Neville might betray them" thread. However, since some have mentioned it here, IF Neville were tempted to betrayal, I think it would be because Voldemort (or maybe Bellatrix) holds out the promise (perhaps false promise) of restoring Neville's parents to health. I do think, however, that Neville would see through that temptation, resist, and that his parents will ultimately be cured due to his resistence (and maybe Dumbledore's or someone else's kind intervention). So, at least in my view, Neville should be eliminated as a traitor, but I will read the other thread and respect the views of those who still think he might be.
Of more interest to me -- now that Bellatrix has the seeds out doubt planted upon just learning, at the end of OoP, that Voldemort is only a half blood, is she a candidate for treason from the DE side? No one turns so quickly or thoroughly as a disillusioned admirer (or, in Bellatrix's case, dare we say wanna-be-lover?) Keep an eye her -- she is dangerous to all concerned!
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Mar 19, 2004 9:04 am (#21 of 359)
I asked that question on the Bellatrix thread - did she already know that Voldemort was not a pure-blood or was this new info? I think she might have confronted Voldy with that info instead of cowering over losing the Prophesy.
I tend to think the traitor bit was already done with Peter Pettigrew.
- - - - - - - - - -
Mellilot Flower. - Mar 19, 2004 11:19 am (#22 of 359)
Pixie led
The order wouldn't know who was the traitor in their midst, they may know there was one... but we saw before with wormtail and sirius, no one knew who it was. And now that Sirius is gone, who else is going to pay attention to crookshanks in the same way that he would have done. The trio have a tendancy to forget details like a cats ability to sniff out traitors... and with VWII going on Dumbledore is hardly going to have the time to sit around and notice a cat acting strangely... Perhaps if we keep an eye on him in the next few books we might be able to spot the traitor before any one else
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Mar 19, 2004 9:57 pm (#23 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Haymoni says, " I tend to think the traitor bit was already done with Peter Pettigrew. " Well, maybe so, but I personally think good drama requires a new traitor in each generation. A Simon Peter who will fall away, repent and return; a Judas Iscariot who will betray for reasons known only to him (or her).
Yes, we've had Wormtail, Barty, Jr., and, so long as his covert status holds up (if it is in fact holding up), we have Snape as a spy against the DE camp (or see other Snape theories on other threads).
But someone in the DE camp will accidentally or on purpose spill some beans, get sick of Voldemort, or otherwise turn on him. The obvious one for this is Wormtail (life debt, already a traitor once, etc.), but Bellatrix seems the less obvious and therefore may be the one -- does that make sense?
As to the ranks of the OoP, they all seem to be trying very hard right now to be "good," but then every book or so someone succumbs to the Imperius Curse, etc. I think the richest story line would be if someone in the ranks of the OoP was an undiscovered traitor back yon and who has remained as a sleeper ever since. No evidence for that, of course, it would just make good fiction. But who should we watch for telltale signs?
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 20, 2004 8:51 am (#24 of 359)
Mundungus Fletcher. I'm sure it has been discussed before, but I'm just going to voice something I find quite weird. As soon as Dung abandoned his post, Umbridge's dementors arrive. At the first DA meeting in the Hog's Head, Dung is present dressed as a Hag and the next day, Umbridge issues her infamous "Educational Decree Number 24." So, I think that:
1. Umbridge is paying Dung handsomely for his information.
2. Mundungus has been working for Umbridge all along.
3. Mundungus is casusally discussing information to someone, on of his "business partners" who is working for Umbridge and that is how she is getting the dirt on and the access to Harry.
4. Umbridge is working for Fudge, who is "working" for Malfoy, who is working for Voldie.
5. Mundungus is intentionally working for Umbridge, who will eventually turn to the Dark Side and take Mundungus with her.
Mundungus will turn traitor, if he hasn't already, either by his own accord or like Bagman did (inadvertantly leaked information to DEs).
If this has been discussed someplace before, please pardon the repetition. Yet, that is my opinion on who will commit treason.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Mar 20, 2004 10:22 am (#25 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
The Mundungus/Umbridge theory is not bad, but I have some questions about it.
1. I'll bet we haven't seen the last of Dolores Umbridge. From the ending of Book 5 (OoP), I doubt she is still working for Fudge. From the JKR interview(s), we all have reason to suspect that Fudge will not be Minister for long in Books 6 or 7. While it is very feasible that Umbridge will go "over to the dark side" or perhaps has already done so, who on the "good side" will put her again in any position of trust or responsibility that she might betray? Won't she simply be just a plain `ol "bad guy" from now on?
2. Could Mundungus simply be selling his information to any and all? And perhaps he takes a powder (i.e., disappears from the scene of responsibility but does not participate overtly in evil deeds that ensue after his departure, eg., as with the dementors at Privet Drive) for a bribe? That would still make him a traitor, a leak and a rat, but could render his immediate motive simply good old fashioned greed. It might dispense with the need to explain any loyalty by him to Umbridge without alleviating the possibility that they have been of mutual use to one another.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Mar 20, 2004 1:13 pm (#26 of 359)
Let it snow!
Or, could it also be that Mundungus just happens to hang out in places where a lot of spies and cheats hang out? Dodgy places like the Hogs Head Inn, perhaps? Maybe he didn't sell information, but someone near him did, and the fact that he hangs out in these places increases the likelihood that there will be someone near him who will be in league with an enemy.... I don't think Dung is a traitor, personally....
- - - - - - - - - -
Mellilot Flower. - Mar 20, 2004 2:10 pm (#27 of 359)
Pixie led
I think you're all doing what JKR expects but hopes you won't do. And that's judge a person by his immeadiate appearance. We know that he's a crook, we know that he isn't the most honest of people in the world, but think about it, their must be dozens of wizards like Mundungus in wizarding Britain- why would Dumbledore approach him in particular? Most likely because he trusts him. Dung is deliberately a "bad sort" I always thought that by introducing someone like him JKR was trying to say that people aren't two dimensional, you can't pigeon hole them and leave it at that. He's the sort of character whose character is so questionable that you can't expect him to around doing things like this because he wouldn't get away with it- people would be questioning them too much!
- - - - - - - - - -
Emily - Mar 20, 2004 3:52 pm (#28 of 359)
Dung in league with Umbridge... I like it, it's a good theory, but I don't think he's a spy.
Chloe - DD trusted Petigrew and Quirrel too.
- - - - - - - - - -
Mellilot Flower. - Mar 20, 2004 4:28 pm (#29 of 359)
Pixie led
But DD had no reason at all to doubt wormtail and Quirrel... where's as Dung's character is so questionable you'd have to be stupider than Rita Skeeta's photographer not to question him
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 20, 2004 5:10 pm (#30 of 359)
It seems an awful coincidence that Dung leaves his post right before the dementors arrive. It seems even more a coincidence that Dung is the veiled hag in the bar, that the trio and DA sit near him though far away from everyone else, and then the next thing you know, both Umbridge and Sirius know about this little meeting.
Speaking of Sirius, when he and Harry are having their conversation in the fire and Umbridge swipes around, she doesn't seem the least bit surprised that Harry is in contact with this alleged mass murderer. Dung knows Sirius, knows where he is, knows of his relationship to Harry. I don't know about you, but if I were an ambitious Ministry employee and there was some crazed escaped con who the Ministry had been searching for high and low for over two years, and suddenly it is discovered, rather I discover that he is communicating with a student, right under my nose and I have the opportunity to catch him; Don't you think that news would warrant a grand, excited reaction? But quite the contrary occurs, for she is uncharacteristically calm, indeed, she seems to expect to find Sirius in the fire. Even when she can't catch him, she doesn't bring it up to Harry until she is questioning him over DD's whereabouts while feeding him fake Veritaserum. Knowing Umbridge's thirst for power and control, knowing how thrilled she is with herself when she discovers something new, and based upon her calm, patient reaction, I am willing to bet all the galleons in Gringotts that she was tipped off about Sirius...by Mundungus.
Edit - I think it is even more perfect that Dung is a suspicious character. So far, no shady person has been a traitor, it has only been those we would never expect. (I'm meaning we didn't expect Moody to be the traitor and though he turned out to be Crouch Jr., we didn't expect him either) So now we wouldn't suspect Dung because we're too busy looking for someone "clean" or "honest." Dung flies right under the radar. He also has a good rapport with the Weasley boys, and you said it Chloe, DD trusts him. Though I am the last to admit that DD is fallible, I think Dung is in a perfect place to decieve.
Chloe: DD trusts Snape.
- - - - - - - - - -
Dr Filibuster - Mar 20, 2004 6:31 pm (#31 of 359)
Sue, from Northwich, England.
Did Fudge tell Umbridge about Harry's version of events at the end of PoA? ie Pettigrew is the bad guy, not Sirius. If so, it would be old news, or a long held suspicion that Harry was in league with Sirius Black.
Also, it was a heavily bandaged Willy Widdershins who told Umbridge what he overheard about the DA at the Hogs Head.
"Oh, so that's why he wasn't prosecuted for setting up all those regurgitating toilets!" said Professor McGonagall, raising her eyebrows. "What an interesting insight into our justice system!"
Sorry to go back to it, but the thing that intrigues me most is the DUNG! UMBRIDGE! shouts from the enchanted picture of Harry on the Gryffindor notice board. Is it just a red herring or a clue?
- - - - - - - - - -
Eponine - Mar 20, 2004 7:08 pm (#32 of 359)
There is the possibility that the dementers were told that there could be other wizards in the area and to wait to make sure that the coast was clear before they struck. Umbridge could have had a suspicion that Harry was being watched. It's a thought.
- - - - - - - - - -
Denise P. - Mar 20, 2004 8:32 pm (#33 of 359)
Ravenclaw Pony
I think Dung's only loyalty is to Dung himself. It would not surprise me to find he was supplying info to Umbridge while working with the Order.
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 20, 2004 9:30 pm (#34 of 359)
Dr. Filibuster, good catch about the "Dung! Umbridge!" Was it really Willy Widdershins, or is that what we are led to believe?
I agree, Denise. Dung is certainly a character to be watched.
On further examination, I'm not sure if DD really trusts Dung, or if he has no other choice. Like Snape, Dung is able to play a double agent role, he is able to communicate with the crooks and put in a good word for DD. Unlike Snape, I don't believe he did anything dramatic or that put him "at great personal risk" to earn DD's trust. Although Sirius claims that "he's ...very loyal to Dumbledore, who helped him out of a tight spot once," I'm not convinced. Sirius' word is not DD's, so unless I hear it from the Headmaster himself, I'm not confident in his so-called loyalty.
Plus, as I've said before, it is that we are led to believe (though not beyond a shadow of a doubt) he is loyal that gives him the advantage to be a traitor.
Edit: Chloe, I overlooked something you previously posted. The reason Dung, not just any old crook, is in the Order is because "Dumbledore...helped him out of a tight spot once." That doesn't mean he trusts Dung, it simply means he helped him and earned Dung's loyalty at the moment. Dung's mood and loyalty seems to be wherever it "pays" him to be, and I'm betting he's getting paid from somewhere, and I'm certain it's not from DD.
- - - - - - - - - -
MrsGump - Mar 21, 2004 8:35 am (#35 of 359)
What about the Senior Crabbe or Goyle? Which one wasn't at the MoM? Or even Narcissa? They might turn traitor to protect their children. There is a difference between what you'll risk for yourself compared to the risk you'd except for your kids.
If the DE plans include attacking Hogwarts, might one of them tell DD in order to protect their own? I can't imagine Narcissa, who wouldn't let Draco go all the way to Durmstrang, knowingly have him at the center of a battleground between DD and LV.
- - - - - - - - - -
Mellilot Flower. - Mar 21, 2004 9:56 am (#36 of 359)
Pixie led
That could be why some of the slytherin's parents might move them to a different school. If Narcissa has to choose between her son being in a battle ground and being far away, I think she'll send him to Durmstrang- all depending on who's head there now, we don't know if Karkaroff went back or who replaced him if he didn't. I admit though, having children could greatly affect some of the alleigences.
I can't believe I'm the only one defending Dung! And yes, DD trusts snape, but just because Harry doesn't get on with Snape does not mean that he's a bad person... I don't think Dung is the type of person to give his loyalty to easily, money or no. When money is involved, trust isn't and I don't think that money has anything to do with Dung becoming a member of the order- sure he's tried to make the best of it now he's there, but if anything that just shows he wasn't there for money in the first place. It's almost like he was exploitng a bad situation...
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 21, 2004 12:01 pm (#37 of 359)
Chloe, Snape is not an issue here. However, I never said he was a bad person, I was simply stating that DD trusts Snape, no matter what he seems to Harry to be. On the flip side, it is never said that DD trusts Mundungus; it is only implied that Dung is loyal to DD. DD's feelings about Dung are never explored. So what I'm saying is DD doesn't trust Dung, but he is valuable to the Order because of the "business" he's in. So DD has no choice but to use him as a go-between.
I never said Dung is in the Order for money, I said he is in the Order because DD bailed him out of a tight spot once and DD found him in a useful position to use as a spy. I assume that after whatever Dumbledore did to clear Dung, he later approached him with a "favor," which turned out to be supplying the Order with information about the crooks and the information they obtain by dealing with creepy characters, some of whom may be DEs, or some of whom may know DEs. Dumbledore is a smart man and he is covering all his bases. Nonetheless, this does not mean he trusts Dung in the way he trusts Snape, or that he even trusts Dung at all. Sorry if I didn't make my meaning clear.
Back to the money situation. What I'm proposing is that Dung was bailed out by DD, DD in turn asked Dung to keep him informed about the crooks and what they hear. This has worked for awhile, but Dung likes money... a lot. So he is approached by Umbridge, or a DE, or some other sinister character who is working with Umbridge, and offered a nice sum of money for any information he can provide about Harry or the Order. The approacher probably was very casual in his/her offer, making it seem less like a betrayal and more like a "good business opportunity." Because I do not think Dung is the brightest bulb in the box, and because I think he is driven by money, not loyalty, I am inclined to believe that he would do just about anything for a buck.
You know, when I first ventured this idea, I didn't entirely believe it myself. Now it has grown on me and the more I think about it, the more it appeals to me and the more I think it's possible!
- - - - - - - - - -
Mellilot Flower. - Mar 21, 2004 1:33 pm (#38 of 359)
Pixie led
Ok, as far as being a member of the order, I think that Dung has to be in it out of loyalty, not out of money. If he were in the order for monetary gain then I don't think he'd bunk off his duties do buy stolen cauldrens- he's not at all interested in the meetings, which if there was money involved as far as information was going, he would be, "'Sirius,' said Mundungus, who did not appear to have paid any attention to the conversation, but had been closely examining an empty goblet. 'This solid silver, mate?'"
The explanation for him being in the order that we get is; "'How come he's in the order?' Harry said, very quietly. 'He's usefull,' Sirius muttered. 'Knows all the crooks- well, he would, seeing as he's one himself. But he's also very loyal to Dumbledore, who helped him out of a tight spot once. It pays to have someone like Dung around, he hears things we don't.'" No mention of money crossing hands, but much emphasis on loyalty. And with the rest of the order not so trusting as DD they would all be watching his movements, who he was dealing with etc. Snape for one would be wary of him, and Molly we know deffinately is. I doubt that he'd have the chance to double cross them...
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Mar 21, 2004 2:16 pm (#39 of 359)
Let it snow!
Sherbie Lemon: ....it is never said that DD trusts Mundungus; it is only implied that Dung is loyal to DD.
Well, if Dumbledore didn't trust Dung, why would he position him to guard/follow Harry again (and I'm assuming there were other times in the book that we just didn't hear about) after he left his post and left Harry vulnerable to attack over the summer? Dumbledore's trusting but he's not stupid, he wouldn't leave Harry open again like that....
As for the Dementors showing up just after Dung disappears, that's not true. The Dementors actually show up much, much later. Dung disappears while Harry is lying under the window seal, safe at Privet Drive, listening to the news. He doesn't see the fight between Harry and Vernon that results in Harry storming off. He walks around town, finally ending up at the playground, sits there for a while till the sun starts to go down, then follows Dudley home. Several hours have past by this time. I'd say the Dementors were told to watch for other wizards (they can see through invisibility cloaks, remember) and to wait for it to get dark (notice they attack them in a dark alley where no nearby wizards would see), and take the first open opportunity. For all we know the Dementors may have been watching him for weeks. I don't think it had anything to do with Dung.
As for who could have heard the kids talking in the Hogs Head, Harry actually mentions the having the feeling that he's being overheard by the barkeep as well as the veiled witch and a few other customers. The place isn't that crowded, or that loud, and they were hardly the regular clientele. Keep in mind there were about 30 kids there.
Your argument just has too many holes in it to me....
- - - - - - - - - -
timrew - Mar 21, 2004 4:35 pm (#40 of 359)
Middle-aged Harry Potter fan
Nonetheless, I think Dung needs to be watched. I don't think he has any conception of loyalty, especially when there is money to be earned.
Like Sherbie Lemon said, 'I do not think Dung is the brightest bulb in the box, and because I think he is driven by money, not loyalty, I am inclined to believe that he would do just about anything for a buck.'
I think there are a lot of people like Dung, who don't see beyond the next dollar to be earned. They don't see that they are hurting people, or betraying them, money is all that counts.
Dung may think he's totally innocent; he cannot, after all, see why Arabella is so mad at him. I can totally see him as an unwitting traitor.....
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Mar 21, 2004 5:01 pm (#41 of 359)
Let it snow!
I'd like to know just where this perception of Dung is coming from. From his leaving Harry to go after the stolen cauldrons? I have to say that that is the only instance I can see in the books of him willingly, possibly hurting someone for money. However, as I pointed out above, when he left Harry, the kid was safely sitting under the window listening to the news. He had no way of knowing that the "pop" sound of his Disapparating would lead to an argument between Vernon and Harry that would lead to Harry storming off away from the safely of Privet Drive. We have no other instance in OotP of him doing anything else that would really put anyone at risk. I agree that he is someone who may take advantage of a situation, but not at the expense of hurting someone or betraying someone. I just haven't seen anything that would suggest that to me....
- - - - - - - - - -
Czarina - Mar 21, 2004 6:19 pm (#42 of 359)
Dung was just BORED watching Harry at Privet Drive and thought he could make some extra money on the cauldrons. Harry was perfectly safe and doing NOTHING; he'd just been lying there all afternoon. How boring is that?
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 21, 2004 6:45 pm (#43 of 359)
Tim, you are absolutely right in your assesment: "Dung may think he's totally innocent; he cannot, after all, see why Arabella is so mad at him. I can totally see him as an unwitting traitor....." Me too. But could this stupidity/innocent act be a ruse to throw people off track?
How's this Sarah: The reason the dementors did not appear immediately is because Dung had to go tell Umbridge that it was safe to send the dementors. Or how about, Dung's "business" partner (the one with the stolen cauldrons) is working for Umbridge and sent Dung an owl telling him that if he wanted the goods, he'd better come right over. This gives Umbridge a clear shot to send the dementors without Dung's supervision (who knows how well he ever supervised, anyway). She had to have known that Harry was being so closely monitored, she had to have known that the "guard" was away, the timing of the dementors is just too perfect.
Also, the fact that Dung was on guard duty doesn't prove a thing. Arabella was also on watch, or at least had been told to keep her eye out. And she is a squib. So probably, DD didn't really anticipate much action around Harry during the early evening hours, that late in the summer, and besides, they all knew Voldie was trying to get at that prophesy, he probably wanted to hear it before he made another move (wouldn't want another blunder like the re-birthing party). Plus, the blood charm should have kept him and his DEs at bay. The Order members were being stretched quite thin around that time, what with spying on the Ministry (Tonks, Kingsley, Shacklebolt), trying to plan Voldie's next move, guard duty at the DoM, and negotiating with goblins, giants, and cauldron-stealing crooks. Perhaps August 2nd was an especially busy night. It is a wonder anyone had time to babysit Harry at all, ever. DD was happy for any help he could get, I'm sure, and I'm sure too, that Dung was likely a last resort.
Sarah, selling two 17 year-old boys Venomous Tentacula seeds, which are a "Class C Non-Tradeable Substance", seems it could certainly put them "at risk" and it is something he does intentionally for money. If Fred and George were to be caught with them, they would at the very least be fined, they might even be held in a cell somewhere. Not to mention the harmful properties of the seeds, who knows the side-effects of them? They are venomous after all. They were made "Non-Tradeable" for a reason.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Mar 21, 2004 7:46 pm (#44 of 359)
Let it snow!
Sherbie Lemon: She had to have known that Harry was being so closely monitored, she had to have known that the "guard" was away, the timing of the dementors is just too perfect.
Again, it isn't "too perfect"; it happens hours apart. As I said before, the Dementors could've been watching him for weeks, waiting for the wizards who follow him around in invisibility cloaks (which they can see through, so they'd know when other wizards were there) to disappear. It was opportune, I'll grant you, but it wasn't planned, in my opinion. Also, I doubt Dung was a last resort because he's used again when a wise man would know better (and, though trusting, Dumbledore is still a wise man); if you assume he was indeed a last resort or had sold Harry out, Dumbledore wouldn't have used him.
...selling two 17 year-old boys Venomous Tentacula seeds, which are a "Class C Non-Tradeable Substance", seems it could certainly put them "at risk" and it is something he does intentionally for money.
Yes, quite true, these two innocent children could've been hurt. Of course, they are the same innocent children who apparently arranged the transfer, and who, only chapters before, were pocketing doxies to harvest doxy venom to experiment with and who stole a box of Wartcap powder out of a cabnet full of Dark Magic items to experiment with as well to put into chocolates that they were going to give to other children... Perhaps Dung knows them better than you do?.....
Also, the seeds grow Venomous Tentaculas went planted, I doubt the seeds, themselves are venomous. However, the twins probably planned to plant them, grow them, and harvest the venom. You can grow them, just not trade them; there's one growing in the Hogwarts' greenhouses. Also, the "Class C Non-Tradeable Substance" probably just means you can't buy it in the open market, but have to have a special permit and license which the twins probably wouldn't be able to get or didn't want to dish the money out for....
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 21, 2004 8:29 pm (#45 of 359)
Sarah, true, very true. Yet I never said the Weasley twins were innocent, quite the contrary. Nonetheless, their mischievious nature should not make it acceptable that they were given these seeds while still young students, right under their mother's disaproving nose. Dung has them off in a corner to make the transaction, away from prying eyes (except Moody's, of course ) because he knows what he is doing is wrong. Remember too, that this is the same Mundungus Fletcher who attempted to hex Arthur Weasley when his back was turned (CoS p. 38 US). That doesn't sound like a nice, trust-worthy man to me.
Where is it written that "hours" passed during the time Dung was away and the dementors arrived? It was dusk (approximately 7:45 - 8:00, the 7:00 news had recently concluded and take about 10 minutes to allow his heart-rate to slow down in the flower bed and 5-10 for the fight with the Dursley's) when Harry stormed off from the Dursley's and night (shortly after 9:00, according to Figgy's testimony) when the dementors appeared. That means that the total time elasped was about an hour to an hour and a half at most. A perfect amount of time for Dung to seal the deal with the cauldron thief and report his absense to Umbridge. Plus, I don't think the dementors can just hover around, waiting indefinately for Harry to be alone. Wouldn't they suck some life from their surroundings? Wouldn't Harry feel blasts of cold air occasionally? Doesn't a Ministry offical have to send them (prior to Voldie busting people out of Azkaban)?
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Mar 21, 2004 8:59 pm (#46 of 359)
Let it snow!
Actually, it seems to me that Dung returned to his patrol and, finding that Harry was no longer at the Dursleys, went looking for him along Harry's usual route, at which time he meets Figg, Harry, and Dudley. If you consider the time it would take him to get back, see that Harry was no longer there and go in search for him, that might take off about another 30 minutes or so....
And I think you're missing something in my argument if you think he'd still hex Arthur now as he did then. I think Dung is a scoundrel, certainly, but one with a saving grace. His loyalty to Dumbledore wouldn't keep him from hexing Arthur in CoS because there was no connection between Arthur and Dumbledore then. I've never argued that he was an nice upstanding citizen, just a man with certain loyalties.....
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 21, 2004 9:33 pm (#47 of 359)
Dung did not just happen across Figg and the boys, he apparated to wherever she was at the moment. Though I do not understand the ins and outs of apparation and disapparation, I think that when she yelled, "MUNDUNGUS FLETCHER, I AM GOING TO KILL YOU!" he "heard" her and apparated to her side. Or it could have been that their (Figg and the boys) position on Wisteria Walk was his normal apparation post.
I'm a little confused about your argument. I thought that when you said earlier that "hours" had passed, you were using that length of time to support your position that it was more coincidental that the dementors showed up. A shorter amount of time would support my argument, because that shows a stronger connection between Dung's absense and the dementors appearance. Since only an hour had elapsed, it seems more clear that room for a coincidence is slim. It takes only a second to apparate, a few minutes to talk to Umbridge, maybe 20 minutes at the most to gather the dementors, and maybe 10 for them to arrive close to Harry. The attack probably lasted around 5 minutes, then cue Figg who arrived in time to see the last 2 minutes or so. Anything longer than an hour, an hour and a half at the most, would point more toward a coincidence, at least to me.
About Dung's hex on Arthur, I say once a criminal, always a criminal. If he can stab Arthur in the back (a person who it seems he was pretty friendly with) over a busted business deal, what's stopping him from stabbing the Order in the back over a nice wad of money? Or inadvertantly stabbing them in the back by unwittingly supplying information to the wrong people?
Plus, the passage that Dr. Filibuster found, about the poster of Harry shouting "Dung' and 'Umbridge" seems like a darn good, albeit subtle, clue. I'm sold!
- - - - - - - - - -
Mellilot Flower. - Mar 22, 2004 8:23 am (#48 of 359)
Pixie led
How do Dementors travel? Can they apparate instantaneously like house elfs? Obviously they have some degree of autonomy and the ability to move around with out being detected or else Someone would have noticed that two dementors had been missing aside from Umbridge, Figg, Harry and Dung. And how do they sense people, we know they don't see them- for all we know a wizard and a muggle could look very different to a dementor and we don't know from how far they can sense a wizard... It would also be quite easy for Umbridge to be "watching" Little Winging for wizarding activity herself- we know that the ministry has a way of telling when magic is being used when its not supposed to and due to Umbridges station she should have access to those facilities.
And isn't one of the main points of the book that people are there choices, and that everyone deserves a second chance, your "once a criminal, always a criminal" attitude doesn't really fit into the sensibilities of the books
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 22, 2004 11:38 am (#49 of 359)
Chloe, second chances are certainly an integral part of the septology. But so are choices. "It is our choices...that show what we truly are." Dung did not have a dramatic reawakening ala Severus Snape. He did not come to Dumbledore asking forgiveness, he did not vow to change his ways and henceforth alter his choices. Instead, Dung continues to behave as a thief, he continues to make the choices and decisions of a thief, and those choices and decisions are almost always made to serve Dung, and Dung alone.
I have not said that Dung is not a loveable character. I have said that his character is that of a crook.
He does not wish to walk the straight and narrow. He does not sacrifice himself for anyone else's benefit. He makes concious choices to pursue his interests. After all, Dung did not hesitate to abandon his post on August 2nd to achieve monentary gains. He is a crook and he will stay a crook because he likes being a crook.
Edit: Incidentally, Sarah, I went to your homepage and was blown away by your new wallpaper of Voldie's rebirth! Is that a promo poster for the movie? Where on earth did you find it? It's brilliant!
- - - - - - - - - -
virgoddess1313 - Mar 22, 2004 11:48 am (#50 of 359)
But it was also mentioned that Dung is extremely loyal to Dumbledore. Crook or not, I think he will stay faithful to Dumbledore. He strikes me as a small time crook, not a good guy, but essantially harmless, and also pretty laid back, "whatever happens, happens" kind of guy. If he does become a traitor, I don't think it will be intentional.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I think a lot of people have speculated Neville will be a traitor, so that would not be considered as a surprise.
I will put my bet on.... Tonks!! I know a lot of people like her, but really, her character is not very well fleshed out in the books for us to be really certain she is loyal to the Order. And she is young and impressionable too.... may well turn out to be a surprise traitor!! OK I am ready for all your peltings... Ouch! LOL
Edit: Yeah! I got the first post!
- - - - - - - - - -
Neville Longbottom - Mar 16, 2004 3:56 am (#2 of 359)
There's no way Neville will be the traitor. I think most people who think he will, are thinking abozt the comparison between him and Wormtail in Harry's dream. But Harry also has similarities with Tom Riddle, and probably won't become the new Evil Overlord. I think the point is, that on first look Neville indeed has some similarities with Wormtail, but that he made different choices from the beginning. Wormtail just hid behind the Marauders, Neville is able to stand up to the trio. Like Dumbledore said: "It are the choices that clearly define us." And I must admit, that it's a mystery how some people even after book 5 can still think, that he will become a traitor. IMO, Neville is as likely to turn evil as Harry himself.
I also can't see Tonks being evil. She risked her life in the DoM for the good cause after all. There is one point, however, that leaves open a possibility for her turning traitor. And that is that she's a metarmorphmagus. I mean, can you think of a better ability to use for a spy job? But I rather think that she will either use this to spy on the Death Eaters, or that another Metamorphmagus will be the villain in one of the upcoming books.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Mar 16, 2004 7:06 am (#3 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Who besides Neville? I also consider him to be very unlikely as a traitor.
- - - - - - - - - -
Loopy Lupin - Mar 16, 2004 7:10 am (#4 of 359)
Sorry Neville, but I kind of lean toward Neville being a traitor even if it is only temporary and he realizes the error of his ways in the end. I just think that Neville makes the most sense in some ways. I mean, would we really care all that much if Seamus or Dean betrayed everyone?
- - - - - - - - - -
prof sprout - Mar 16, 2004 8:05 am (#5 of 359)
IMO, IF Neville becomes a traitor (I highly doubt it) it wouldn't be intentional. Kind of like how Ginny was feeding Tom Riddle information through the diary. He would unknowingly tell something that he shouldn't to someone he considered a friend.
I like Neville's opinion that Tonks could be a spy (for the good side) being the metamorphus she is.
- - - - - - - - - -
alexa - Mar 16, 2004 8:32 am (#6 of 359)
My guess is still on Fudge. He would be oust from MOM and have no way to go. He needs someone powerful, so he might join Voldemort and seek his revenge on Dumbledore.
- - - - - - - - - -
Mellilot Flower. - Mar 16, 2004 9:05 am (#7 of 359)
Pixie led
I don't think JKR would revisit the story line of Neville accidentally betraying them- just because last time he gave info to sirius who turned out to be good, she's already been there and so she'd have nothing to gain by repeating it. Neville is too strong now to go betray Harry et al out of fear, he faced up to Malfoy, he faced up to the trio, he faced up to the DE- and he's been too hurt by Voldemort and their lot to help them. How about Cho? She's not quite inner circle, and I think that after the last book she never will be, but she's still pretty close to Harry. We've already seen that she hangs around with people who can't be entirely trusted... and she could be a little sore about things not working out between her and harry. She jumps to conclusions and gets spitefull, we've seen her defend the wrong people in the face of all the facts out of pride...? I agree that JKR did seem to make quite a lot of Tonk's abilities, there would always be a reference to it when she was around... I don't think JKR would just let that drop.
- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Librarian - Mar 16, 2004 9:30 am (#8 of 359)
Hey, I don't have a real answer here, but I do have a related question--how "safe" is JKR going to play it. If there is a traitor on the good side (i.e., one who feeds info to the DEs), will she make it someone like Cho or Seamus who is most definitely a b-list character? We'd be a little bit shocked, but not fall out of our favorite reading chairs. If, however, it is someone from the a-list (and this includes members of Order who we've really met and formed opinions about, F & G, Tonks, Neville, Luna, etc.), it would be huge, and this and other Forums would light up three major continents with all the frenentic discussions. I mean, the FBI, CIA, NASA, MI5 and all those folks would not be able to log on things would be so hot.
I do exaggerate terribly, but you get my point, I hope.
Ciao. Barb
- - - - - - - - - -
Rosariana - Mar 16, 2004 5:35 pm (#9 of 359)
I will not pretend to have a clue as to who will be a traitor, but I do have an idea which characters will NOT be traitors. I do not think Ron, Hermione, Dumbledore, Hagrid, Neville, Lupin, or any of the Weasleys (minus Percy)will betray the Order. If one of these characters did, Rowling would be teaching us that essentially no one can be trusted. Furthermore, trust, as portrayed by Albus Dumbledore, is not a weakness.
I do not think it will be Tonks either, because Rowling said in the chat that she likes Tonks. I believe this indicates that Tonks is only what she appears to be and will remain that way.
I agree that if there is a traitor it will be a b-list character, possibly one we have not yet met.
By the way, how do we know for a fact that there will be betrayal? Can someone tell me where it says that?
- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Librarian - Mar 16, 2004 5:38 pm (#10 of 359)
Rosariana, we're just having a little debate on one of those "if" situations. As far as I know there's no canon evidence of an up and coming traitor. We're a suspicious bunch, arent' we?
Ciao. Barb
- - - - - - - - - -
alexa - Mar 16, 2004 6:07 pm (#11 of 359)
Bard, we are indeed too suspicious. I should learn to be more trusting and remind myself of Rosariana's words: trust is not a weakness. , but I still think there will be a traitor. Constant Vigilance!
- - - - - - - - - -
Bash - Mar 17, 2004 9:32 am (#12 of 359)
Umbridge - but that is obvious.
Fudge, but that would be no great surprise either...
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Mar 17, 2004 10:54 am (#13 of 359)
I'm wondering if the treason may be connected more to a group, like the giants.
The double-dealing that went on with the gift-giving and the fact that Grawp is still part of the story makes me think the giants will be a factor.
- - - - - - - - - -
Julia. - Mar 17, 2004 3:29 pm (#14 of 359)
74% obsessed! Uconn Jew Crew says: is it August yet?
I am already convinced that Fudge is working for Voldemort. Check out this thread. If you have not yet done so, it's definatly worth a read. Jimmy Bell "I have figured out Cornelius Fudge's dirty little secret!" 11/19/03 11:01am
- - - - - - - - - -
alexa - Mar 18, 2004 1:09 am (#15 of 359)
Just adding my thoughts that Tonks shouldn't be the traitor. She has a muggle father and is half-blood. I should think Voldemort's followers are all pure-blood, they are obsess with getting rid of the muggle born and half-blood. I know I have no proofs that Voldemort's followers are all pure bloods, just a guess, just a guess. (No, please! I like Tonks too much.)
- - - - - - - - - -
Q. Trimble - Mar 18, 2004 1:06 pm (#16 of 359)
I don't think any of the main members of the order or Harry's close circle of friends are betraying them (yet) because Crookshanks would have sniffed them out by now. Deliberate attention was drawn to his presence in Grimmauld Place during key scenes where almost everyone was present. Still we can't rule out a change of heart. And then there's the imperius curse...
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Mar 18, 2004 2:25 pm (#17 of 359)
There was a definite change in Mr. Crouch's behavior when he was under the Imperius Curse. Even Krum seemed to be different under Barty's control in the maze.
I just think members of the Order would be able to tell if someone that was close to them was under someone else's control for a long period of time.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Mar 18, 2004 3:42 pm (#18 of 359)
Let it snow!
Alexa: Just adding my thoughts that Tonks shouldn't be the traitor. She has a muggle father and is half-blood.
Actually, alexa, her father's a Muggle-born wizard, not a Muggle. Sorry, just a pet-peeve of mine.
I don't know if their behavior would change that much. Crouch's behavior didn't change that much until he started to really fight the curse. (He was already under the curse when he was at Hogwarts during the beginning of term and didn't seem that different than when we saw him during the World Cup, only more tired.) The Order might not know that anyone near them was under the curse until it's almost too late to do anything about it....
- - - - - - - - - -
alexa - Mar 18, 2004 5:42 pm (#19 of 359)
Sarah, I didn't know that. I always thought Tonks has a Muggle father. Thanks for the clarification.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Mar 19, 2004 8:58 am (#20 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
As I've said before, I do not think Neville will be a traitor in either Book 6 or 7 and I do not mean to start up that whole discussion again (at least not here.) Serious advocates of that theory might find a better audience in the "Neville might betray them" thread. However, since some have mentioned it here, IF Neville were tempted to betrayal, I think it would be because Voldemort (or maybe Bellatrix) holds out the promise (perhaps false promise) of restoring Neville's parents to health. I do think, however, that Neville would see through that temptation, resist, and that his parents will ultimately be cured due to his resistence (and maybe Dumbledore's or someone else's kind intervention). So, at least in my view, Neville should be eliminated as a traitor, but I will read the other thread and respect the views of those who still think he might be.
Of more interest to me -- now that Bellatrix has the seeds out doubt planted upon just learning, at the end of OoP, that Voldemort is only a half blood, is she a candidate for treason from the DE side? No one turns so quickly or thoroughly as a disillusioned admirer (or, in Bellatrix's case, dare we say wanna-be-lover?) Keep an eye her -- she is dangerous to all concerned!
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Mar 19, 2004 9:04 am (#21 of 359)
I asked that question on the Bellatrix thread - did she already know that Voldemort was not a pure-blood or was this new info? I think she might have confronted Voldy with that info instead of cowering over losing the Prophesy.
I tend to think the traitor bit was already done with Peter Pettigrew.
- - - - - - - - - -
Mellilot Flower. - Mar 19, 2004 11:19 am (#22 of 359)
Pixie led
The order wouldn't know who was the traitor in their midst, they may know there was one... but we saw before with wormtail and sirius, no one knew who it was. And now that Sirius is gone, who else is going to pay attention to crookshanks in the same way that he would have done. The trio have a tendancy to forget details like a cats ability to sniff out traitors... and with VWII going on Dumbledore is hardly going to have the time to sit around and notice a cat acting strangely... Perhaps if we keep an eye on him in the next few books we might be able to spot the traitor before any one else
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Mar 19, 2004 9:57 pm (#23 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Haymoni says, " I tend to think the traitor bit was already done with Peter Pettigrew. " Well, maybe so, but I personally think good drama requires a new traitor in each generation. A Simon Peter who will fall away, repent and return; a Judas Iscariot who will betray for reasons known only to him (or her).
Yes, we've had Wormtail, Barty, Jr., and, so long as his covert status holds up (if it is in fact holding up), we have Snape as a spy against the DE camp (or see other Snape theories on other threads).
But someone in the DE camp will accidentally or on purpose spill some beans, get sick of Voldemort, or otherwise turn on him. The obvious one for this is Wormtail (life debt, already a traitor once, etc.), but Bellatrix seems the less obvious and therefore may be the one -- does that make sense?
As to the ranks of the OoP, they all seem to be trying very hard right now to be "good," but then every book or so someone succumbs to the Imperius Curse, etc. I think the richest story line would be if someone in the ranks of the OoP was an undiscovered traitor back yon and who has remained as a sleeper ever since. No evidence for that, of course, it would just make good fiction. But who should we watch for telltale signs?
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 20, 2004 8:51 am (#24 of 359)
Mundungus Fletcher. I'm sure it has been discussed before, but I'm just going to voice something I find quite weird. As soon as Dung abandoned his post, Umbridge's dementors arrive. At the first DA meeting in the Hog's Head, Dung is present dressed as a Hag and the next day, Umbridge issues her infamous "Educational Decree Number 24." So, I think that:
1. Umbridge is paying Dung handsomely for his information.
2. Mundungus has been working for Umbridge all along.
3. Mundungus is casusally discussing information to someone, on of his "business partners" who is working for Umbridge and that is how she is getting the dirt on and the access to Harry.
4. Umbridge is working for Fudge, who is "working" for Malfoy, who is working for Voldie.
5. Mundungus is intentionally working for Umbridge, who will eventually turn to the Dark Side and take Mundungus with her.
Mundungus will turn traitor, if he hasn't already, either by his own accord or like Bagman did (inadvertantly leaked information to DEs).
If this has been discussed someplace before, please pardon the repetition. Yet, that is my opinion on who will commit treason.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Mar 20, 2004 10:22 am (#25 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
The Mundungus/Umbridge theory is not bad, but I have some questions about it.
1. I'll bet we haven't seen the last of Dolores Umbridge. From the ending of Book 5 (OoP), I doubt she is still working for Fudge. From the JKR interview(s), we all have reason to suspect that Fudge will not be Minister for long in Books 6 or 7. While it is very feasible that Umbridge will go "over to the dark side" or perhaps has already done so, who on the "good side" will put her again in any position of trust or responsibility that she might betray? Won't she simply be just a plain `ol "bad guy" from now on?
2. Could Mundungus simply be selling his information to any and all? And perhaps he takes a powder (i.e., disappears from the scene of responsibility but does not participate overtly in evil deeds that ensue after his departure, eg., as with the dementors at Privet Drive) for a bribe? That would still make him a traitor, a leak and a rat, but could render his immediate motive simply good old fashioned greed. It might dispense with the need to explain any loyalty by him to Umbridge without alleviating the possibility that they have been of mutual use to one another.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Mar 20, 2004 1:13 pm (#26 of 359)
Let it snow!
Or, could it also be that Mundungus just happens to hang out in places where a lot of spies and cheats hang out? Dodgy places like the Hogs Head Inn, perhaps? Maybe he didn't sell information, but someone near him did, and the fact that he hangs out in these places increases the likelihood that there will be someone near him who will be in league with an enemy.... I don't think Dung is a traitor, personally....
- - - - - - - - - -
Mellilot Flower. - Mar 20, 2004 2:10 pm (#27 of 359)
Pixie led
I think you're all doing what JKR expects but hopes you won't do. And that's judge a person by his immeadiate appearance. We know that he's a crook, we know that he isn't the most honest of people in the world, but think about it, their must be dozens of wizards like Mundungus in wizarding Britain- why would Dumbledore approach him in particular? Most likely because he trusts him. Dung is deliberately a "bad sort" I always thought that by introducing someone like him JKR was trying to say that people aren't two dimensional, you can't pigeon hole them and leave it at that. He's the sort of character whose character is so questionable that you can't expect him to around doing things like this because he wouldn't get away with it- people would be questioning them too much!
- - - - - - - - - -
Emily - Mar 20, 2004 3:52 pm (#28 of 359)
Dung in league with Umbridge... I like it, it's a good theory, but I don't think he's a spy.
Chloe - DD trusted Petigrew and Quirrel too.
- - - - - - - - - -
Mellilot Flower. - Mar 20, 2004 4:28 pm (#29 of 359)
Pixie led
But DD had no reason at all to doubt wormtail and Quirrel... where's as Dung's character is so questionable you'd have to be stupider than Rita Skeeta's photographer not to question him
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 20, 2004 5:10 pm (#30 of 359)
It seems an awful coincidence that Dung leaves his post right before the dementors arrive. It seems even more a coincidence that Dung is the veiled hag in the bar, that the trio and DA sit near him though far away from everyone else, and then the next thing you know, both Umbridge and Sirius know about this little meeting.
Speaking of Sirius, when he and Harry are having their conversation in the fire and Umbridge swipes around, she doesn't seem the least bit surprised that Harry is in contact with this alleged mass murderer. Dung knows Sirius, knows where he is, knows of his relationship to Harry. I don't know about you, but if I were an ambitious Ministry employee and there was some crazed escaped con who the Ministry had been searching for high and low for over two years, and suddenly it is discovered, rather I discover that he is communicating with a student, right under my nose and I have the opportunity to catch him; Don't you think that news would warrant a grand, excited reaction? But quite the contrary occurs, for she is uncharacteristically calm, indeed, she seems to expect to find Sirius in the fire. Even when she can't catch him, she doesn't bring it up to Harry until she is questioning him over DD's whereabouts while feeding him fake Veritaserum. Knowing Umbridge's thirst for power and control, knowing how thrilled she is with herself when she discovers something new, and based upon her calm, patient reaction, I am willing to bet all the galleons in Gringotts that she was tipped off about Sirius...by Mundungus.
Edit - I think it is even more perfect that Dung is a suspicious character. So far, no shady person has been a traitor, it has only been those we would never expect. (I'm meaning we didn't expect Moody to be the traitor and though he turned out to be Crouch Jr., we didn't expect him either) So now we wouldn't suspect Dung because we're too busy looking for someone "clean" or "honest." Dung flies right under the radar. He also has a good rapport with the Weasley boys, and you said it Chloe, DD trusts him. Though I am the last to admit that DD is fallible, I think Dung is in a perfect place to decieve.
Chloe: DD trusts Snape.
- - - - - - - - - -
Dr Filibuster - Mar 20, 2004 6:31 pm (#31 of 359)
Sue, from Northwich, England.
Did Fudge tell Umbridge about Harry's version of events at the end of PoA? ie Pettigrew is the bad guy, not Sirius. If so, it would be old news, or a long held suspicion that Harry was in league with Sirius Black.
Also, it was a heavily bandaged Willy Widdershins who told Umbridge what he overheard about the DA at the Hogs Head.
"Oh, so that's why he wasn't prosecuted for setting up all those regurgitating toilets!" said Professor McGonagall, raising her eyebrows. "What an interesting insight into our justice system!"
Sorry to go back to it, but the thing that intrigues me most is the DUNG! UMBRIDGE! shouts from the enchanted picture of Harry on the Gryffindor notice board. Is it just a red herring or a clue?
- - - - - - - - - -
Eponine - Mar 20, 2004 7:08 pm (#32 of 359)
There is the possibility that the dementers were told that there could be other wizards in the area and to wait to make sure that the coast was clear before they struck. Umbridge could have had a suspicion that Harry was being watched. It's a thought.
- - - - - - - - - -
Denise P. - Mar 20, 2004 8:32 pm (#33 of 359)
Ravenclaw Pony
I think Dung's only loyalty is to Dung himself. It would not surprise me to find he was supplying info to Umbridge while working with the Order.
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 20, 2004 9:30 pm (#34 of 359)
Dr. Filibuster, good catch about the "Dung! Umbridge!" Was it really Willy Widdershins, or is that what we are led to believe?
I agree, Denise. Dung is certainly a character to be watched.
On further examination, I'm not sure if DD really trusts Dung, or if he has no other choice. Like Snape, Dung is able to play a double agent role, he is able to communicate with the crooks and put in a good word for DD. Unlike Snape, I don't believe he did anything dramatic or that put him "at great personal risk" to earn DD's trust. Although Sirius claims that "he's ...very loyal to Dumbledore, who helped him out of a tight spot once," I'm not convinced. Sirius' word is not DD's, so unless I hear it from the Headmaster himself, I'm not confident in his so-called loyalty.
Plus, as I've said before, it is that we are led to believe (though not beyond a shadow of a doubt) he is loyal that gives him the advantage to be a traitor.
Edit: Chloe, I overlooked something you previously posted. The reason Dung, not just any old crook, is in the Order is because "Dumbledore...helped him out of a tight spot once." That doesn't mean he trusts Dung, it simply means he helped him and earned Dung's loyalty at the moment. Dung's mood and loyalty seems to be wherever it "pays" him to be, and I'm betting he's getting paid from somewhere, and I'm certain it's not from DD.
- - - - - - - - - -
MrsGump - Mar 21, 2004 8:35 am (#35 of 359)
What about the Senior Crabbe or Goyle? Which one wasn't at the MoM? Or even Narcissa? They might turn traitor to protect their children. There is a difference between what you'll risk for yourself compared to the risk you'd except for your kids.
If the DE plans include attacking Hogwarts, might one of them tell DD in order to protect their own? I can't imagine Narcissa, who wouldn't let Draco go all the way to Durmstrang, knowingly have him at the center of a battleground between DD and LV.
- - - - - - - - - -
Mellilot Flower. - Mar 21, 2004 9:56 am (#36 of 359)
Pixie led
That could be why some of the slytherin's parents might move them to a different school. If Narcissa has to choose between her son being in a battle ground and being far away, I think she'll send him to Durmstrang- all depending on who's head there now, we don't know if Karkaroff went back or who replaced him if he didn't. I admit though, having children could greatly affect some of the alleigences.
I can't believe I'm the only one defending Dung! And yes, DD trusts snape, but just because Harry doesn't get on with Snape does not mean that he's a bad person... I don't think Dung is the type of person to give his loyalty to easily, money or no. When money is involved, trust isn't and I don't think that money has anything to do with Dung becoming a member of the order- sure he's tried to make the best of it now he's there, but if anything that just shows he wasn't there for money in the first place. It's almost like he was exploitng a bad situation...
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 21, 2004 12:01 pm (#37 of 359)
Chloe, Snape is not an issue here. However, I never said he was a bad person, I was simply stating that DD trusts Snape, no matter what he seems to Harry to be. On the flip side, it is never said that DD trusts Mundungus; it is only implied that Dung is loyal to DD. DD's feelings about Dung are never explored. So what I'm saying is DD doesn't trust Dung, but he is valuable to the Order because of the "business" he's in. So DD has no choice but to use him as a go-between.
I never said Dung is in the Order for money, I said he is in the Order because DD bailed him out of a tight spot once and DD found him in a useful position to use as a spy. I assume that after whatever Dumbledore did to clear Dung, he later approached him with a "favor," which turned out to be supplying the Order with information about the crooks and the information they obtain by dealing with creepy characters, some of whom may be DEs, or some of whom may know DEs. Dumbledore is a smart man and he is covering all his bases. Nonetheless, this does not mean he trusts Dung in the way he trusts Snape, or that he even trusts Dung at all. Sorry if I didn't make my meaning clear.
Back to the money situation. What I'm proposing is that Dung was bailed out by DD, DD in turn asked Dung to keep him informed about the crooks and what they hear. This has worked for awhile, but Dung likes money... a lot. So he is approached by Umbridge, or a DE, or some other sinister character who is working with Umbridge, and offered a nice sum of money for any information he can provide about Harry or the Order. The approacher probably was very casual in his/her offer, making it seem less like a betrayal and more like a "good business opportunity." Because I do not think Dung is the brightest bulb in the box, and because I think he is driven by money, not loyalty, I am inclined to believe that he would do just about anything for a buck.
You know, when I first ventured this idea, I didn't entirely believe it myself. Now it has grown on me and the more I think about it, the more it appeals to me and the more I think it's possible!
- - - - - - - - - -
Mellilot Flower. - Mar 21, 2004 1:33 pm (#38 of 359)
Pixie led
Ok, as far as being a member of the order, I think that Dung has to be in it out of loyalty, not out of money. If he were in the order for monetary gain then I don't think he'd bunk off his duties do buy stolen cauldrens- he's not at all interested in the meetings, which if there was money involved as far as information was going, he would be, "'Sirius,' said Mundungus, who did not appear to have paid any attention to the conversation, but had been closely examining an empty goblet. 'This solid silver, mate?'"
The explanation for him being in the order that we get is; "'How come he's in the order?' Harry said, very quietly. 'He's usefull,' Sirius muttered. 'Knows all the crooks- well, he would, seeing as he's one himself. But he's also very loyal to Dumbledore, who helped him out of a tight spot once. It pays to have someone like Dung around, he hears things we don't.'" No mention of money crossing hands, but much emphasis on loyalty. And with the rest of the order not so trusting as DD they would all be watching his movements, who he was dealing with etc. Snape for one would be wary of him, and Molly we know deffinately is. I doubt that he'd have the chance to double cross them...
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Mar 21, 2004 2:16 pm (#39 of 359)
Let it snow!
Sherbie Lemon: ....it is never said that DD trusts Mundungus; it is only implied that Dung is loyal to DD.
Well, if Dumbledore didn't trust Dung, why would he position him to guard/follow Harry again (and I'm assuming there were other times in the book that we just didn't hear about) after he left his post and left Harry vulnerable to attack over the summer? Dumbledore's trusting but he's not stupid, he wouldn't leave Harry open again like that....
As for the Dementors showing up just after Dung disappears, that's not true. The Dementors actually show up much, much later. Dung disappears while Harry is lying under the window seal, safe at Privet Drive, listening to the news. He doesn't see the fight between Harry and Vernon that results in Harry storming off. He walks around town, finally ending up at the playground, sits there for a while till the sun starts to go down, then follows Dudley home. Several hours have past by this time. I'd say the Dementors were told to watch for other wizards (they can see through invisibility cloaks, remember) and to wait for it to get dark (notice they attack them in a dark alley where no nearby wizards would see), and take the first open opportunity. For all we know the Dementors may have been watching him for weeks. I don't think it had anything to do with Dung.
As for who could have heard the kids talking in the Hogs Head, Harry actually mentions the having the feeling that he's being overheard by the barkeep as well as the veiled witch and a few other customers. The place isn't that crowded, or that loud, and they were hardly the regular clientele. Keep in mind there were about 30 kids there.
Your argument just has too many holes in it to me....
- - - - - - - - - -
timrew - Mar 21, 2004 4:35 pm (#40 of 359)
Middle-aged Harry Potter fan
Nonetheless, I think Dung needs to be watched. I don't think he has any conception of loyalty, especially when there is money to be earned.
Like Sherbie Lemon said, 'I do not think Dung is the brightest bulb in the box, and because I think he is driven by money, not loyalty, I am inclined to believe that he would do just about anything for a buck.'
I think there are a lot of people like Dung, who don't see beyond the next dollar to be earned. They don't see that they are hurting people, or betraying them, money is all that counts.
Dung may think he's totally innocent; he cannot, after all, see why Arabella is so mad at him. I can totally see him as an unwitting traitor.....
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Mar 21, 2004 5:01 pm (#41 of 359)
Let it snow!
I'd like to know just where this perception of Dung is coming from. From his leaving Harry to go after the stolen cauldrons? I have to say that that is the only instance I can see in the books of him willingly, possibly hurting someone for money. However, as I pointed out above, when he left Harry, the kid was safely sitting under the window listening to the news. He had no way of knowing that the "pop" sound of his Disapparating would lead to an argument between Vernon and Harry that would lead to Harry storming off away from the safely of Privet Drive. We have no other instance in OotP of him doing anything else that would really put anyone at risk. I agree that he is someone who may take advantage of a situation, but not at the expense of hurting someone or betraying someone. I just haven't seen anything that would suggest that to me....
- - - - - - - - - -
Czarina - Mar 21, 2004 6:19 pm (#42 of 359)
Dung was just BORED watching Harry at Privet Drive and thought he could make some extra money on the cauldrons. Harry was perfectly safe and doing NOTHING; he'd just been lying there all afternoon. How boring is that?
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 21, 2004 6:45 pm (#43 of 359)
Tim, you are absolutely right in your assesment: "Dung may think he's totally innocent; he cannot, after all, see why Arabella is so mad at him. I can totally see him as an unwitting traitor....." Me too. But could this stupidity/innocent act be a ruse to throw people off track?
How's this Sarah: The reason the dementors did not appear immediately is because Dung had to go tell Umbridge that it was safe to send the dementors. Or how about, Dung's "business" partner (the one with the stolen cauldrons) is working for Umbridge and sent Dung an owl telling him that if he wanted the goods, he'd better come right over. This gives Umbridge a clear shot to send the dementors without Dung's supervision (who knows how well he ever supervised, anyway). She had to have known that Harry was being so closely monitored, she had to have known that the "guard" was away, the timing of the dementors is just too perfect.
Also, the fact that Dung was on guard duty doesn't prove a thing. Arabella was also on watch, or at least had been told to keep her eye out. And she is a squib. So probably, DD didn't really anticipate much action around Harry during the early evening hours, that late in the summer, and besides, they all knew Voldie was trying to get at that prophesy, he probably wanted to hear it before he made another move (wouldn't want another blunder like the re-birthing party). Plus, the blood charm should have kept him and his DEs at bay. The Order members were being stretched quite thin around that time, what with spying on the Ministry (Tonks, Kingsley, Shacklebolt), trying to plan Voldie's next move, guard duty at the DoM, and negotiating with goblins, giants, and cauldron-stealing crooks. Perhaps August 2nd was an especially busy night. It is a wonder anyone had time to babysit Harry at all, ever. DD was happy for any help he could get, I'm sure, and I'm sure too, that Dung was likely a last resort.
Sarah, selling two 17 year-old boys Venomous Tentacula seeds, which are a "Class C Non-Tradeable Substance", seems it could certainly put them "at risk" and it is something he does intentionally for money. If Fred and George were to be caught with them, they would at the very least be fined, they might even be held in a cell somewhere. Not to mention the harmful properties of the seeds, who knows the side-effects of them? They are venomous after all. They were made "Non-Tradeable" for a reason.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Mar 21, 2004 7:46 pm (#44 of 359)
Let it snow!
Sherbie Lemon: She had to have known that Harry was being so closely monitored, she had to have known that the "guard" was away, the timing of the dementors is just too perfect.
Again, it isn't "too perfect"; it happens hours apart. As I said before, the Dementors could've been watching him for weeks, waiting for the wizards who follow him around in invisibility cloaks (which they can see through, so they'd know when other wizards were there) to disappear. It was opportune, I'll grant you, but it wasn't planned, in my opinion. Also, I doubt Dung was a last resort because he's used again when a wise man would know better (and, though trusting, Dumbledore is still a wise man); if you assume he was indeed a last resort or had sold Harry out, Dumbledore wouldn't have used him.
...selling two 17 year-old boys Venomous Tentacula seeds, which are a "Class C Non-Tradeable Substance", seems it could certainly put them "at risk" and it is something he does intentionally for money.
Yes, quite true, these two innocent children could've been hurt. Of course, they are the same innocent children who apparently arranged the transfer, and who, only chapters before, were pocketing doxies to harvest doxy venom to experiment with and who stole a box of Wartcap powder out of a cabnet full of Dark Magic items to experiment with as well to put into chocolates that they were going to give to other children... Perhaps Dung knows them better than you do?.....
Also, the seeds grow Venomous Tentaculas went planted, I doubt the seeds, themselves are venomous. However, the twins probably planned to plant them, grow them, and harvest the venom. You can grow them, just not trade them; there's one growing in the Hogwarts' greenhouses. Also, the "Class C Non-Tradeable Substance" probably just means you can't buy it in the open market, but have to have a special permit and license which the twins probably wouldn't be able to get or didn't want to dish the money out for....
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 21, 2004 8:29 pm (#45 of 359)
Sarah, true, very true. Yet I never said the Weasley twins were innocent, quite the contrary. Nonetheless, their mischievious nature should not make it acceptable that they were given these seeds while still young students, right under their mother's disaproving nose. Dung has them off in a corner to make the transaction, away from prying eyes (except Moody's, of course ) because he knows what he is doing is wrong. Remember too, that this is the same Mundungus Fletcher who attempted to hex Arthur Weasley when his back was turned (CoS p. 38 US). That doesn't sound like a nice, trust-worthy man to me.
Where is it written that "hours" passed during the time Dung was away and the dementors arrived? It was dusk (approximately 7:45 - 8:00, the 7:00 news had recently concluded and take about 10 minutes to allow his heart-rate to slow down in the flower bed and 5-10 for the fight with the Dursley's) when Harry stormed off from the Dursley's and night (shortly after 9:00, according to Figgy's testimony) when the dementors appeared. That means that the total time elasped was about an hour to an hour and a half at most. A perfect amount of time for Dung to seal the deal with the cauldron thief and report his absense to Umbridge. Plus, I don't think the dementors can just hover around, waiting indefinately for Harry to be alone. Wouldn't they suck some life from their surroundings? Wouldn't Harry feel blasts of cold air occasionally? Doesn't a Ministry offical have to send them (prior to Voldie busting people out of Azkaban)?
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Mar 21, 2004 8:59 pm (#46 of 359)
Let it snow!
Actually, it seems to me that Dung returned to his patrol and, finding that Harry was no longer at the Dursleys, went looking for him along Harry's usual route, at which time he meets Figg, Harry, and Dudley. If you consider the time it would take him to get back, see that Harry was no longer there and go in search for him, that might take off about another 30 minutes or so....
And I think you're missing something in my argument if you think he'd still hex Arthur now as he did then. I think Dung is a scoundrel, certainly, but one with a saving grace. His loyalty to Dumbledore wouldn't keep him from hexing Arthur in CoS because there was no connection between Arthur and Dumbledore then. I've never argued that he was an nice upstanding citizen, just a man with certain loyalties.....
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 21, 2004 9:33 pm (#47 of 359)
Dung did not just happen across Figg and the boys, he apparated to wherever she was at the moment. Though I do not understand the ins and outs of apparation and disapparation, I think that when she yelled, "MUNDUNGUS FLETCHER, I AM GOING TO KILL YOU!" he "heard" her and apparated to her side. Or it could have been that their (Figg and the boys) position on Wisteria Walk was his normal apparation post.
I'm a little confused about your argument. I thought that when you said earlier that "hours" had passed, you were using that length of time to support your position that it was more coincidental that the dementors showed up. A shorter amount of time would support my argument, because that shows a stronger connection between Dung's absense and the dementors appearance. Since only an hour had elapsed, it seems more clear that room for a coincidence is slim. It takes only a second to apparate, a few minutes to talk to Umbridge, maybe 20 minutes at the most to gather the dementors, and maybe 10 for them to arrive close to Harry. The attack probably lasted around 5 minutes, then cue Figg who arrived in time to see the last 2 minutes or so. Anything longer than an hour, an hour and a half at the most, would point more toward a coincidence, at least to me.
About Dung's hex on Arthur, I say once a criminal, always a criminal. If he can stab Arthur in the back (a person who it seems he was pretty friendly with) over a busted business deal, what's stopping him from stabbing the Order in the back over a nice wad of money? Or inadvertantly stabbing them in the back by unwittingly supplying information to the wrong people?
Plus, the passage that Dr. Filibuster found, about the poster of Harry shouting "Dung' and 'Umbridge" seems like a darn good, albeit subtle, clue. I'm sold!
- - - - - - - - - -
Mellilot Flower. - Mar 22, 2004 8:23 am (#48 of 359)
Pixie led
How do Dementors travel? Can they apparate instantaneously like house elfs? Obviously they have some degree of autonomy and the ability to move around with out being detected or else Someone would have noticed that two dementors had been missing aside from Umbridge, Figg, Harry and Dung. And how do they sense people, we know they don't see them- for all we know a wizard and a muggle could look very different to a dementor and we don't know from how far they can sense a wizard... It would also be quite easy for Umbridge to be "watching" Little Winging for wizarding activity herself- we know that the ministry has a way of telling when magic is being used when its not supposed to and due to Umbridges station she should have access to those facilities.
And isn't one of the main points of the book that people are there choices, and that everyone deserves a second chance, your "once a criminal, always a criminal" attitude doesn't really fit into the sensibilities of the books
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 22, 2004 11:38 am (#49 of 359)
Chloe, second chances are certainly an integral part of the septology. But so are choices. "It is our choices...that show what we truly are." Dung did not have a dramatic reawakening ala Severus Snape. He did not come to Dumbledore asking forgiveness, he did not vow to change his ways and henceforth alter his choices. Instead, Dung continues to behave as a thief, he continues to make the choices and decisions of a thief, and those choices and decisions are almost always made to serve Dung, and Dung alone.
I have not said that Dung is not a loveable character. I have said that his character is that of a crook.
He does not wish to walk the straight and narrow. He does not sacrifice himself for anyone else's benefit. He makes concious choices to pursue his interests. After all, Dung did not hesitate to abandon his post on August 2nd to achieve monentary gains. He is a crook and he will stay a crook because he likes being a crook.
Edit: Incidentally, Sarah, I went to your homepage and was blown away by your new wallpaper of Voldie's rebirth! Is that a promo poster for the movie? Where on earth did you find it? It's brilliant!
- - - - - - - - - -
virgoddess1313 - Mar 22, 2004 11:48 am (#50 of 359)
But it was also mentioned that Dung is extremely loyal to Dumbledore. Crook or not, I think he will stay faithful to Dumbledore. He strikes me as a small time crook, not a good guy, but essantially harmless, and also pretty laid back, "whatever happens, happens" kind of guy. If he does become a traitor, I don't think it will be intentional.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Elanor- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 51
Location : France
Treason in Book 6 and/or 7 (Post 51 to 100)
Elanor Sat May 21, 2011 9:03 am
Mellilot Flower. - Mar 22, 2004 12:16 pm (#51 of 359)
Pixie led
who knows whether he hesitated before going or not...? I think he must have been anxious about it to some extent because he told Figg where he was going, he was also very repentent afterwards, and not just because he was being hit by a bag full of cat food. Yes, Dung is a theif, always has been and always will be, but haven't you ever heard of honour amongst theives? In almost all childrens books of the fantasy genre- which is what this is- the thieves are the ones whose loyalty, once won, is unwavering.
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 22, 2004 12:30 pm (#52 of 359)
"If he does become a traitor, I don't think it will be intentional." Very possible, Virgogoddess. As I said earlier, I think Dung was bailed out by DD, DD in turn asked Dung to keep him informed about the crooks and what they hear. That worked for awhile, but Dung likes money... a lot. So eventually he is approached by Umbridge, or a DE, or some other sinister character who is working with Umbridge, and offered a nice sum of money for any information he can provide about Harry or the Order. The approacher may have been very casual in his/her offer, making it seem less like a betrayal and more like a "good business opportunity." Because I do not think Dung is the brightest bulb in the box, and because I think he is driven by money, not loyalty, I am inclined to believe that he would do just about anything for a buck.
So the position I am going to take today is that Dung will likely betray the Order intentionally for money. The part about Dung being "very loyal to Dumbledore is coming from Sirius, not the Headmaster, and though I love Snuffles, I don't neccessarily believe everything he says. Besides, when did DD help Dung? It could have been years ago and a lot can change within that length of time. Plus, as I've said many times, just because he's loyal doesn't mean DD trusts him. To me, that is a big difference.
I like this little theory because I think it's fun and has some evidence to support it. All in all, I find I like discussing theories that I don't completely believe better than those I am adament about. This way I'm not dissapointed if someone puctures it with holes.
- - - - - - - - - -
Leviosa - Mar 22, 2004 12:46 pm (#53 of 359)
I don't see Dung becoming a traitor. There is a lot of evidence that he would sell the Order out, like Sherbie Lemon already showed. But that's exactly the reason why I think Dung won't be a traitor. It's just so obvious. We are immediately suspicious of him. I think this is a red herring.
If there is really another traitor (after Wormtail) in the Order, it would make a huge plot twist. I just can't see JK going the most obvious way (she never does and this is why we all like the series so much). She makes us very suspicious of Dung from the first minute on (he wanted to curse Arthur, he left Harry, he isn't reliable, he likes money way too much, etc.). I think she does this on purpose to lead us in the wrong direction. If someone becomes a traitor, it will be someone we never suspected.
- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Librarian - Mar 22, 2004 2:30 pm (#54 of 359)
One possibility that works well if the character involved is Dung is the device of the bumbling traitor. He reports to the DEs, but gets it wrong, so unintentionally giving the bad guys bad information. We do see that Dung is not always on top of his game, so to speak, and he tends to hit the bottle.
I do think he's too funny a character to turn out this way, but if anyone can make it work, JKR can.
Ciao. Barb
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Jun 3, 2004 9:16 pm (#55 of 359)
Let it snow!
Ah, finally got back around to this thread. A very interesting possiblility, Barb, especially since, as Leviosa said, he is so obviously a criminal, he'd be the perfect person for a DE to approach to become a traitor and would thus be in a perfect position to give the bad guys the wrong info, as a service to Dumbledore.
Sherbie: Dung did not have a dramatic reawakening ala Severus Snape. He did not come to Dumbledore asking forgiveness, he did not vow to change his ways and henceforth alter his choices.
Actually, we don't know what Severus did. We don't know if there was some massive "reawakening" or if, as JKR put it, "Snape has given Dumbledore his story and Dumbledore believes it" (World Day interview). We also don't know the full circumstances surrounding Dumbledore "helping Dung out of tight spot", if it included him saving his life, nearly getting himself killed for him, etc.; we just don't know. There may be a very good reason that Dung is loyal to Dumbledore and those who know the story so fully believe he'll stay that way.
(By the way, Sherbie, I make the wallpapers and posters on my site....)
- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Librarian - Mar 22, 2004 7:39 pm (#56 of 359)
Actually, Sarah, I was speculating that Dung really could be a traitor, just one who couldn't manage to get the information right. The opposite (as you said, delivering mis-information as a double agent) would work, too.
Ciao. Barb
- - - - - - - - - -
Rosariana - Mar 22, 2004 8:01 pm (#57 of 359)
I did not suspect Dung as a traitor before reading this, but now I agree it is entirely possible.
Umbridge had to have known Mundungus had abandoned his post or else she would not have sent the Dementors that particular night. Sure, the Ministry could have other ways of knowing, but these are not described or even mentioned. Therefore it is possible that Dung was in contact with Umbridge.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Mar 22, 2004 8:07 pm (#58 of 359)
Let it snow!
I know you were, Barb. I was expanding on your previous thought....
- - - - - - - - - -
Essidji - Mar 23, 2004 2:24 am (#59 of 359)
Treason in Book 6 and/or 7? Look... REASON IS 6/7TH OF TREASON!!! ;-)
It's not from me, though...
- - - - - - - - - -
Blast - Apr 2, 2004 8:03 am (#60 of 359)
I think I'm back!
In PoA where Hagrid, Fudge and the Teachers are in the Three Broomsticks Fudge says that Dumbledore had several usfull spies. We know that Snape was spying for him, but who were the others? Do we have more than one D.E. who gave him information?
- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - Apr 2, 2004 8:47 am (#61 of 359)
Canon Seeker
I can't answer if there is another DE spy, but I'd bet anything that Mundungus is a spy! We've already seen him spying in drag in the Hogs Head!
I do wonder about Avery. He was one of the DE tortured in the cemetery in GoF the night of Voldemort's return. Voldemort mentioned Dumbledore, and Avery begged for forgiveness. Avery was also the one who gave Voldemort the incorrect information about removing the prophecy, and was tortured for it. Might be something there.
- - - - - - - - - -
mike miller - Apr 25, 2004 6:11 am (#62 of 359)
aka The Barmy Old Codger
I agree that Mundungus is the most obvious potential spy. His leaving Harry at the beginning of OotP and his general nepharious (Sp?) nature and activities. What would be the point of having Dung consciously betray DD and the Order? To show that DD is not all knowing?
Those central to the Order we know very well and I can't see anyone of the "Inner Circle" of the Order betraying their cause. There are a few characters on the periphery that we do not know that well; i.e., Kingsley, that could be possible. I'm just not sure without knowing more about them.
I think the real possibility for betrayal is from the other side. It could start with some of the students at Hogwarts as part of the Houses uniting. As has been discussed on other threads, a couple of Slytherins join the DA. Any thoughts on who within Voldemort's ranks could "jump ship"?
- - - - - - - - - -
MTW - May 21, 2004 5:45 am (#63 of 359)
Haven't been a close follower of this thread, but in the Petunia Thread NYCNomad mention the squeak at the foot of the stairs . I brought up the strange behavior of escort party in OP that supports the theory of some kind of protection for Harry underneath the the first tread of the stairs. If this theory is correct, no wizard can go up stairs with out Harry's permission, then I think we already know who the traitor will be in the next book. Tonks . Whether it of her own free will or not will be the only question.
- - - - - - - - - -
Mare - May 21, 2004 6:05 am (#64 of 359)
I'm going to take a different road here and stun everybody with my most amazing theory:
There will be no more traitors in the books, we have seen them all!
Tatatadaa!
PS MTW, I'm not understanding the details of your theory, why should Tonks be the traitor, she is invited up isn't she?
- - - - - - - - - -
Miréimé - May 21, 2004 6:12 am (#65 of 359)
Tomoé's only twin sister ^_~
It's like vampire. Invite one once in your house and he can come back whenever he wants. Same with Tonks, Harry let her go in the staircase so she can climb the stairs whenever she wants while other wizard are only allowed on the first floor of 4 privet Drive. Until Harry give them permision, that is. And all of this happens because there's something hidden under the first step.
I love it MTW. ^_^
- - - - - - - - - -
mike miller - May 21, 2004 6:42 am (#66 of 359)
aka The Barmy Old Codger
That would only play out if the act of treason were to happen at #4 PD. Harry has other protections at that location. If an act of treason is going to occur, there are many more likely locations other than #4 PD (say #12 GP).
I agree with you Mare' - betrayal was an element of VWI and the previous generation of wizards. I don't thing JKR will reuse that plot device.
- - - - - - - - - -
Mare - May 21, 2004 6:43 am (#67 of 359)
Hmm interesting. I don't think it means that Tonks is going to be a traitor, but I do like the steps theory. I'm going to store that one near the put-outer theory.
(For all of you who don't know that one: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Moody using Dumbledore's put-outer on 12 GP before Harry arrives there ties in nicely with the essay
Edit: Well thank you Mike, it is nice to meet people who agree with me.
Edit2: One tiny thing: since Harry has been living the largest part of his life under the stairs, why would any potentialy evil wizard needed to be stopped from going up the stairs...?
- - - - - - - - - -
MTW - May 21, 2004 7:38 pm (#68 of 359)
Mare
The reason I think Tonks is the one is because of the mirror. She offers to help pack, but once in his room she goes straight to the mirror to look at her hair. Only help once she saw Harry picking up his stuff to put in his trunk. It seemed a little self-centered for her. Compared with her actions in the rest of the book.
on Edit 2
The cubboard being part of the stairs would be covered by the protection. But I don't think it was orginally under the stairs, that would mean DD want Harry to live under the stairs. I think theres a clue in earlier books. The loose floorboards in Harry current room. I wonder if the room had been Harry's room untill Pet and Vernon decided they wanted the protection from Wizards too. Thus moving it to the foot of the stairs to protection of everybody. Harry got moved to the cubboard in a belief that Harry had to be near the protection.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - May 22, 2004 1:43 am (#69 of 359)
Let it snow!
I always figured her going to the mirror fit perfectly with her character. I mean, she's named Nymphadora. Nymphs were known for being rather vain and they liked attention. Tonks is always changing her appearance, trying out new lengths, colors, and styles of hair, etc. (vanity), but the colors she chooses are also usually vibrant colors (unless she's undercover) such as the violent shade of violet that she wore when she arrived at 4 Privet Drive or the bright bubble-gum pink that adorned her head at the end of the book (drawing attention). Like I said, her name said it all so the mirror thing didn't surprise me a bit.
Also, Harry didn't really invite her up the stairs, she invited herself and Harry simply didn't stop her from following him up the stairs. How does that fit into the theory?
- - - - - - - - - -
MTW - May 22, 2004 5:30 pm (#70 of 359)
Tonks made a backhanded offer to help. This way Harry couldn't refuse without being rude. Why didn't Lupin simply climb the stair and open the door. It seemed that Lupin was doing something simple the hard way, unless he could'nt climb the stair until Harry gives approval.
- - - - - - - - - -
sewfuninme - May 23, 2004 5:42 pm (#71 of 359)
Didn't Fred and George go up the stairs to get Harry's trunk at the beginning of GoF?
- - - - - - - - - -
MTW - May 23, 2004 7:46 pm (#72 of 359)
They also went down the stairs in CS. That where Harry warn them of the step squeaks. Both times they Harry's approval/ knowledge. It also possible you only need the approval once ( vampire rule, once invited it can come anytime it wants). The rules of the charm are unknown. If it a one time approval is need . Then Tonks now can come upstairs without Harry's knowledge. But if the item is a simple sneaking behind Harry's back charm/ talsman, then it will go off if she tries later on.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - May 24, 2004 1:22 am (#73 of 359)
Let it snow!
I still don't see why Tonks would be the one to stab Harry in the back somehow... Is it because she's the character we've known for the least amount of time?
- - - - - - - - - -
MTW - May 24, 2004 6:16 am (#74 of 359)
SE
If the protection charm falls under the vampire rule, as previous stated. Then only three wizards ( Tonks , Fred and George) can go upstairs. In my first post I stated that whether Tonks treason will be voluntary is yet to be seen. ie Imperious curse (sp?). Fred and George admission is known to fewest amount of people Harry, Ron, Arthur, and the Dursley . Tonks admission upstairs is known to every member of the escort. All it takes is one of it member to be captured and question by LV for this to be known.
The protection spells that DD has placed on Privet Drive means it receives least attention. Figg and Dung where there to keep a eye on Harry when he leaves the House. But in the middle of the night, it probables has the no lookout. If LV knew that someone could walk into the House and up the stairs , He will use that person. There might be other protections that are not know to LV in the House. But one thing about LV , He is know to send others into hairy situations with partial info.
- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - May 24, 2004 6:25 am (#75 of 359)
Canon Seeker
This is an interesting theory. I guess I don't know what "rules" vampires follow in the Potter universe, since Rowling hasn't explained that yet.
I would be truly surprised for Tonks to be a traitor. We know that she's undergone a lot of character testing in order to be admitted as an Auror. I understand that's not foolproof, but Tonks appears extremely bright and loyal to Dumbledore. After all, she joined the Order before there was any evidence besides the word of Dumbledore and Harry. Also, she's a half-blood, and I see none of the pure-blood mania that initially attracted Regulus Black. She put her life on the line to help rescue Harry in OoP, and she was the one who suffered the most serious injuries (well, aside from Sirius falling through the archway) by fighting Death Eaters.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - May 24, 2004 4:07 pm (#76 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
I'm not yet very persuaded by the vampire/invitation theory yet, but it is creative.
- - - - - - - - - -
Tomoé - May 27, 2004 7:37 pm (#77 of 359)
Back in business
Albert Hall - June 26, 2003
JKR -> So Lupin's a wonderful teacher and a very nice man but he has a failing and his failing is that he does like to be liked and that's where he slips up because he has been disliked so often that he's always so pleased to have friends so he cuts them an awful lot of slack.
Does that mean ... Lupin will let Peter do something bad .. possibly something that will harm the Order or Harry? After all he did keep secret that Sirius was an animagus ... even if he thought he was the traitor ...
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - May 28, 2004 9:22 am (#78 of 359)
Lupin was ready to kill Peter after the truth was told.
I don't think he would let Peter get away with anything now.
- - - - - - - - - -
Tomoé - May 28, 2004 9:30 am (#79 of 359)
Back in business
But now that Sirius is dead ...
- - - - - - - - - -
mike miller - May 28, 2004 9:47 am (#80 of 359)
aka The Barmy Old Codger
Peter is no longer a friend. There will be no slack given. Remus will not allow Peter to harm and of his new friends (HRH, et. al.) if there is anything he can do about.
- - - - - - - - - -
Tomoé - May 28, 2004 10:28 am (#81 of 359)
Back in business
It's not likely based on how the things when in books 3 to 5, but circumstances could change. It will depend on what happen in books 6 and 7.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - May 28, 2004 4:13 pm (#82 of 359)
Let it snow!
Maybe it's not Peter, maybe it's a newer friend... Someone in the Order?
- - - - - - - - - -
mike miller - May 29, 2004 5:06 am (#83 of 359)
aka The Barmy Old Codger
What about turning this idea around; will a know DE turn traitor to Voldemort? We know of the Life Debt owed Harry by Peter. A big surprise could be an unknown, or only hinted at, DE coming out and turning to DD for help. Any thoughts?
- - - - - - - - - -
Tomoé - May 31, 2004 9:26 pm (#84 of 359)
Back in business
Catherine Allen had suggest Avery in post #61, he mislead Voldemort on the prophecy thing (did he do it on purpose or was he mistaken). He was in Snape gang back in Hogwarts.
- - - - - - - - - -
Liz - May 31, 2004 9:36 pm (#85 of 359)
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I think in the final battle Peter will switch over to good because he is in Harry's debt.
Beth
- - - - - - - - - -
Dumbledore - Jun 1, 2004 2:19 pm (#86 of 359)
(Albus Percival Wulfric Brian)
In any event, I think that however (and whenver) Peter pays back his life debt to Harry, it will play a major role in the outcome of events.
- - - - - - - - - -
Liz - Jun 1, 2004 2:36 pm (#87 of 359)
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I'm with you on that one Dumbledore.
Also I think I read this somewhere, Peter has a silver hand and Lupin is a warewolf. I wonder how that will play out?
Beth
- - - - - - - - - -
Dumbledore - Jun 1, 2004 2:37 pm (#88 of 359)
(Albus Percival Wulfric Brian)
I've heard that before too. It always got me to thinking...
- - - - - - - - - -
PIJ - Jun 2, 2004 3:26 am (#89 of 359)
With Sirius gone, can Kreacher now embelish some of his comments to the Malfoys of Lestrades??
The fidelius charm locks the secret of Grimauld Place, but Kreacher has the details of the order. If I have read OoP right then the only prevention of Kreacher telling the Malfoys all over the Christmas break was Sirius command, with Sirius gone does this command now resind?
Come to think of it re-reading the passage in Dumbledores office at the end of OoP I get the horrid feeling that Kreacher may be dead at Dumbledores hand, which ends my theory of Kreacher being a traitor to the order.
- - - - - - - - - -
Padfoot - Jun 2, 2004 2:20 pm (#90 of 359)
I get the horrid feeling that Kreacher may be dead at Dumbledores hand
Where did you get that idea from? I don't ever remember getting that idea. In fact, DD seems to cut the house elves some slack. At least he treats them well and says Sirius should not have treated Kreacher so bad.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Jun 2, 2004 3:28 pm (#91 of 359)
Let it snow!
Doesn't he say that, though, because he also said that Kreacher was dangerous to them and that's why they should've been nice to him, so as not to give him a reason to stab them in the back?
- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - Jun 2, 2004 3:51 pm (#92 of 359)
Canon Seeker
Dumbledore, if you'll excuse the trite phrase, is kindness itself, unless violence by someone else warrants harsh treatment.
Dumbledore even pays Dobby. I don't think he is an instrument of death toward anyone, much less an elderly, venemous house elf.
- - - - - - - - - -
PIJ - Jun 2, 2004 11:39 pm (#93 of 359)
It was just a feeling I received from reading the end of OoP. I haven't the reference to hand but it is when DD is telling HP where Kreacher had been during the Christmas holidays and how he told me eventually.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Jun 15, 2004 4:30 pm (#94 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
I think Voldemort and Co. already know most of list of those in the Order of the Phoenix and vice versa. Kreacher could potentially betray locations or a few secret identities -- such as Snape's.
By the way, to mention Snape, let me hasten to add that I don't think Snape will be a traitor from the OoP side (but I could be surprised). I would not be surprised, though, if Snape is portrayed in a bad light to once again make it seem like he is or will be a traitor. Indeed, he might instead end up being the object of betrayal and perhaps even a sacrificial figure.
- - - - - - - - - -
Dumbledore - Jun 29, 2004 3:02 pm (#95 of 359)
(Albus Percival Wulfric Brian)
That theory's very interesting. Perhaps there is an information leak or some other sort of betrayal in the Order of the Phoenix, and all eyes point to Snape because he is the most suspicious. That accusation could allow for the true betrayor to go undetected until it's too late.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Jun 29, 2004 4:44 pm (#96 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
. . . or, in the dramatically well-timed sense, almost too late. Perhaps too late for some sacrificial goat but not too late to save the ultimate day.
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Jun 30, 2004 11:20 am (#97 of 359)
A sacrificial goat raised by Aberforth, who gives up a beazor to save Harry.
- - - - - - - - - -
Chris. - Jun 30, 2004 11:27 am (#98 of 359)
HBP: 16th July 2005: the most anticipated day in history
Hmmm... haymoni, as mad as it may sound I think your theory could be a discovery about Aberforth's role in the Order.
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Jun 30, 2004 11:54 am (#99 of 359)
Yes - also with all the shady characters coming into the Hogs Head, it may be necessary for Aberforth to keep a few goats around to save patrons that may have been slipped a poison or potion.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Jul 2, 2004 6:15 am (#100 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
I wonder know whether this Book 6 HBP will be a traitor figure, even if it refers to prior treason. The whole "Tom not Voldemort is the HBP" theory, if true, would lend itself to that, as we might see treachery of old revealed. I wonder whether DD had the close sort of relation to Tom in his youth that he later has with Harry? Could that explain a basis for some of DD's errors in method for dealing with Harry in Book 5 (OoP)? All very interesting stuff.
(Ah! I have inadvertently made the 100th post in my own thread. Why are we westerners so obsessed with digits that end in 0's or 00's? Does that occur in the east as well?)
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Pixie led
who knows whether he hesitated before going or not...? I think he must have been anxious about it to some extent because he told Figg where he was going, he was also very repentent afterwards, and not just because he was being hit by a bag full of cat food. Yes, Dung is a theif, always has been and always will be, but haven't you ever heard of honour amongst theives? In almost all childrens books of the fantasy genre- which is what this is- the thieves are the ones whose loyalty, once won, is unwavering.
- - - - - - - - - -
Sherbie Lemon - Mar 22, 2004 12:30 pm (#52 of 359)
"If he does become a traitor, I don't think it will be intentional." Very possible, Virgogoddess. As I said earlier, I think Dung was bailed out by DD, DD in turn asked Dung to keep him informed about the crooks and what they hear. That worked for awhile, but Dung likes money... a lot. So eventually he is approached by Umbridge, or a DE, or some other sinister character who is working with Umbridge, and offered a nice sum of money for any information he can provide about Harry or the Order. The approacher may have been very casual in his/her offer, making it seem less like a betrayal and more like a "good business opportunity." Because I do not think Dung is the brightest bulb in the box, and because I think he is driven by money, not loyalty, I am inclined to believe that he would do just about anything for a buck.
So the position I am going to take today is that Dung will likely betray the Order intentionally for money. The part about Dung being "very loyal to Dumbledore is coming from Sirius, not the Headmaster, and though I love Snuffles, I don't neccessarily believe everything he says. Besides, when did DD help Dung? It could have been years ago and a lot can change within that length of time. Plus, as I've said many times, just because he's loyal doesn't mean DD trusts him. To me, that is a big difference.
I like this little theory because I think it's fun and has some evidence to support it. All in all, I find I like discussing theories that I don't completely believe better than those I am adament about. This way I'm not dissapointed if someone puctures it with holes.
- - - - - - - - - -
Leviosa - Mar 22, 2004 12:46 pm (#53 of 359)
I don't see Dung becoming a traitor. There is a lot of evidence that he would sell the Order out, like Sherbie Lemon already showed. But that's exactly the reason why I think Dung won't be a traitor. It's just so obvious. We are immediately suspicious of him. I think this is a red herring.
If there is really another traitor (after Wormtail) in the Order, it would make a huge plot twist. I just can't see JK going the most obvious way (she never does and this is why we all like the series so much). She makes us very suspicious of Dung from the first minute on (he wanted to curse Arthur, he left Harry, he isn't reliable, he likes money way too much, etc.). I think she does this on purpose to lead us in the wrong direction. If someone becomes a traitor, it will be someone we never suspected.
- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Librarian - Mar 22, 2004 2:30 pm (#54 of 359)
One possibility that works well if the character involved is Dung is the device of the bumbling traitor. He reports to the DEs, but gets it wrong, so unintentionally giving the bad guys bad information. We do see that Dung is not always on top of his game, so to speak, and he tends to hit the bottle.
I do think he's too funny a character to turn out this way, but if anyone can make it work, JKR can.
Ciao. Barb
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Jun 3, 2004 9:16 pm (#55 of 359)
Let it snow!
Ah, finally got back around to this thread. A very interesting possiblility, Barb, especially since, as Leviosa said, he is so obviously a criminal, he'd be the perfect person for a DE to approach to become a traitor and would thus be in a perfect position to give the bad guys the wrong info, as a service to Dumbledore.
Sherbie: Dung did not have a dramatic reawakening ala Severus Snape. He did not come to Dumbledore asking forgiveness, he did not vow to change his ways and henceforth alter his choices.
Actually, we don't know what Severus did. We don't know if there was some massive "reawakening" or if, as JKR put it, "Snape has given Dumbledore his story and Dumbledore believes it" (World Day interview). We also don't know the full circumstances surrounding Dumbledore "helping Dung out of tight spot", if it included him saving his life, nearly getting himself killed for him, etc.; we just don't know. There may be a very good reason that Dung is loyal to Dumbledore and those who know the story so fully believe he'll stay that way.
(By the way, Sherbie, I make the wallpapers and posters on my site....)
- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Librarian - Mar 22, 2004 7:39 pm (#56 of 359)
Actually, Sarah, I was speculating that Dung really could be a traitor, just one who couldn't manage to get the information right. The opposite (as you said, delivering mis-information as a double agent) would work, too.
Ciao. Barb
- - - - - - - - - -
Rosariana - Mar 22, 2004 8:01 pm (#57 of 359)
I did not suspect Dung as a traitor before reading this, but now I agree it is entirely possible.
Umbridge had to have known Mundungus had abandoned his post or else she would not have sent the Dementors that particular night. Sure, the Ministry could have other ways of knowing, but these are not described or even mentioned. Therefore it is possible that Dung was in contact with Umbridge.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Mar 22, 2004 8:07 pm (#58 of 359)
Let it snow!
I know you were, Barb. I was expanding on your previous thought....
- - - - - - - - - -
Essidji - Mar 23, 2004 2:24 am (#59 of 359)
Treason in Book 6 and/or 7? Look... REASON IS 6/7TH OF TREASON!!! ;-)
It's not from me, though...
- - - - - - - - - -
Blast - Apr 2, 2004 8:03 am (#60 of 359)
I think I'm back!
In PoA where Hagrid, Fudge and the Teachers are in the Three Broomsticks Fudge says that Dumbledore had several usfull spies. We know that Snape was spying for him, but who were the others? Do we have more than one D.E. who gave him information?
- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - Apr 2, 2004 8:47 am (#61 of 359)
Canon Seeker
I can't answer if there is another DE spy, but I'd bet anything that Mundungus is a spy! We've already seen him spying in drag in the Hogs Head!
I do wonder about Avery. He was one of the DE tortured in the cemetery in GoF the night of Voldemort's return. Voldemort mentioned Dumbledore, and Avery begged for forgiveness. Avery was also the one who gave Voldemort the incorrect information about removing the prophecy, and was tortured for it. Might be something there.
- - - - - - - - - -
mike miller - Apr 25, 2004 6:11 am (#62 of 359)
aka The Barmy Old Codger
I agree that Mundungus is the most obvious potential spy. His leaving Harry at the beginning of OotP and his general nepharious (Sp?) nature and activities. What would be the point of having Dung consciously betray DD and the Order? To show that DD is not all knowing?
Those central to the Order we know very well and I can't see anyone of the "Inner Circle" of the Order betraying their cause. There are a few characters on the periphery that we do not know that well; i.e., Kingsley, that could be possible. I'm just not sure without knowing more about them.
I think the real possibility for betrayal is from the other side. It could start with some of the students at Hogwarts as part of the Houses uniting. As has been discussed on other threads, a couple of Slytherins join the DA. Any thoughts on who within Voldemort's ranks could "jump ship"?
- - - - - - - - - -
MTW - May 21, 2004 5:45 am (#63 of 359)
Haven't been a close follower of this thread, but in the Petunia Thread NYCNomad mention the squeak at the foot of the stairs . I brought up the strange behavior of escort party in OP that supports the theory of some kind of protection for Harry underneath the the first tread of the stairs. If this theory is correct, no wizard can go up stairs with out Harry's permission, then I think we already know who the traitor will be in the next book. Tonks . Whether it of her own free will or not will be the only question.
- - - - - - - - - -
Mare - May 21, 2004 6:05 am (#64 of 359)
I'm going to take a different road here and stun everybody with my most amazing theory:
There will be no more traitors in the books, we have seen them all!
Tatatadaa!
PS MTW, I'm not understanding the details of your theory, why should Tonks be the traitor, she is invited up isn't she?
- - - - - - - - - -
Miréimé - May 21, 2004 6:12 am (#65 of 359)
Tomoé's only twin sister ^_~
It's like vampire. Invite one once in your house and he can come back whenever he wants. Same with Tonks, Harry let her go in the staircase so she can climb the stairs whenever she wants while other wizard are only allowed on the first floor of 4 privet Drive. Until Harry give them permision, that is. And all of this happens because there's something hidden under the first step.
I love it MTW. ^_^
- - - - - - - - - -
mike miller - May 21, 2004 6:42 am (#66 of 359)
aka The Barmy Old Codger
That would only play out if the act of treason were to happen at #4 PD. Harry has other protections at that location. If an act of treason is going to occur, there are many more likely locations other than #4 PD (say #12 GP).
I agree with you Mare' - betrayal was an element of VWI and the previous generation of wizards. I don't thing JKR will reuse that plot device.
- - - - - - - - - -
Mare - May 21, 2004 6:43 am (#67 of 359)
Hmm interesting. I don't think it means that Tonks is going to be a traitor, but I do like the steps theory. I'm going to store that one near the put-outer theory.
(For all of you who don't know that one: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Moody using Dumbledore's put-outer on 12 GP before Harry arrives there ties in nicely with the essay
Edit: Well thank you Mike, it is nice to meet people who agree with me.
Edit2: One tiny thing: since Harry has been living the largest part of his life under the stairs, why would any potentialy evil wizard needed to be stopped from going up the stairs...?
- - - - - - - - - -
MTW - May 21, 2004 7:38 pm (#68 of 359)
Mare
The reason I think Tonks is the one is because of the mirror. She offers to help pack, but once in his room she goes straight to the mirror to look at her hair. Only help once she saw Harry picking up his stuff to put in his trunk. It seemed a little self-centered for her. Compared with her actions in the rest of the book.
on Edit 2
The cubboard being part of the stairs would be covered by the protection. But I don't think it was orginally under the stairs, that would mean DD want Harry to live under the stairs. I think theres a clue in earlier books. The loose floorboards in Harry current room. I wonder if the room had been Harry's room untill Pet and Vernon decided they wanted the protection from Wizards too. Thus moving it to the foot of the stairs to protection of everybody. Harry got moved to the cubboard in a belief that Harry had to be near the protection.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - May 22, 2004 1:43 am (#69 of 359)
Let it snow!
I always figured her going to the mirror fit perfectly with her character. I mean, she's named Nymphadora. Nymphs were known for being rather vain and they liked attention. Tonks is always changing her appearance, trying out new lengths, colors, and styles of hair, etc. (vanity), but the colors she chooses are also usually vibrant colors (unless she's undercover) such as the violent shade of violet that she wore when she arrived at 4 Privet Drive or the bright bubble-gum pink that adorned her head at the end of the book (drawing attention). Like I said, her name said it all so the mirror thing didn't surprise me a bit.
Also, Harry didn't really invite her up the stairs, she invited herself and Harry simply didn't stop her from following him up the stairs. How does that fit into the theory?
- - - - - - - - - -
MTW - May 22, 2004 5:30 pm (#70 of 359)
Tonks made a backhanded offer to help. This way Harry couldn't refuse without being rude. Why didn't Lupin simply climb the stair and open the door. It seemed that Lupin was doing something simple the hard way, unless he could'nt climb the stair until Harry gives approval.
- - - - - - - - - -
sewfuninme - May 23, 2004 5:42 pm (#71 of 359)
Didn't Fred and George go up the stairs to get Harry's trunk at the beginning of GoF?
- - - - - - - - - -
MTW - May 23, 2004 7:46 pm (#72 of 359)
They also went down the stairs in CS. That where Harry warn them of the step squeaks. Both times they Harry's approval/ knowledge. It also possible you only need the approval once ( vampire rule, once invited it can come anytime it wants). The rules of the charm are unknown. If it a one time approval is need . Then Tonks now can come upstairs without Harry's knowledge. But if the item is a simple sneaking behind Harry's back charm/ talsman, then it will go off if she tries later on.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - May 24, 2004 1:22 am (#73 of 359)
Let it snow!
I still don't see why Tonks would be the one to stab Harry in the back somehow... Is it because she's the character we've known for the least amount of time?
- - - - - - - - - -
MTW - May 24, 2004 6:16 am (#74 of 359)
SE
If the protection charm falls under the vampire rule, as previous stated. Then only three wizards ( Tonks , Fred and George) can go upstairs. In my first post I stated that whether Tonks treason will be voluntary is yet to be seen. ie Imperious curse (sp?). Fred and George admission is known to fewest amount of people Harry, Ron, Arthur, and the Dursley . Tonks admission upstairs is known to every member of the escort. All it takes is one of it member to be captured and question by LV for this to be known.
The protection spells that DD has placed on Privet Drive means it receives least attention. Figg and Dung where there to keep a eye on Harry when he leaves the House. But in the middle of the night, it probables has the no lookout. If LV knew that someone could walk into the House and up the stairs , He will use that person. There might be other protections that are not know to LV in the House. But one thing about LV , He is know to send others into hairy situations with partial info.
- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - May 24, 2004 6:25 am (#75 of 359)
Canon Seeker
This is an interesting theory. I guess I don't know what "rules" vampires follow in the Potter universe, since Rowling hasn't explained that yet.
I would be truly surprised for Tonks to be a traitor. We know that she's undergone a lot of character testing in order to be admitted as an Auror. I understand that's not foolproof, but Tonks appears extremely bright and loyal to Dumbledore. After all, she joined the Order before there was any evidence besides the word of Dumbledore and Harry. Also, she's a half-blood, and I see none of the pure-blood mania that initially attracted Regulus Black. She put her life on the line to help rescue Harry in OoP, and she was the one who suffered the most serious injuries (well, aside from Sirius falling through the archway) by fighting Death Eaters.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - May 24, 2004 4:07 pm (#76 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
I'm not yet very persuaded by the vampire/invitation theory yet, but it is creative.
- - - - - - - - - -
Tomoé - May 27, 2004 7:37 pm (#77 of 359)
Back in business
Albert Hall - June 26, 2003
JKR -> So Lupin's a wonderful teacher and a very nice man but he has a failing and his failing is that he does like to be liked and that's where he slips up because he has been disliked so often that he's always so pleased to have friends so he cuts them an awful lot of slack.
Does that mean ... Lupin will let Peter do something bad .. possibly something that will harm the Order or Harry? After all he did keep secret that Sirius was an animagus ... even if he thought he was the traitor ...
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - May 28, 2004 9:22 am (#78 of 359)
Lupin was ready to kill Peter after the truth was told.
I don't think he would let Peter get away with anything now.
- - - - - - - - - -
Tomoé - May 28, 2004 9:30 am (#79 of 359)
Back in business
But now that Sirius is dead ...
- - - - - - - - - -
mike miller - May 28, 2004 9:47 am (#80 of 359)
aka The Barmy Old Codger
Peter is no longer a friend. There will be no slack given. Remus will not allow Peter to harm and of his new friends (HRH, et. al.) if there is anything he can do about.
- - - - - - - - - -
Tomoé - May 28, 2004 10:28 am (#81 of 359)
Back in business
It's not likely based on how the things when in books 3 to 5, but circumstances could change. It will depend on what happen in books 6 and 7.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - May 28, 2004 4:13 pm (#82 of 359)
Let it snow!
Maybe it's not Peter, maybe it's a newer friend... Someone in the Order?
- - - - - - - - - -
mike miller - May 29, 2004 5:06 am (#83 of 359)
aka The Barmy Old Codger
What about turning this idea around; will a know DE turn traitor to Voldemort? We know of the Life Debt owed Harry by Peter. A big surprise could be an unknown, or only hinted at, DE coming out and turning to DD for help. Any thoughts?
- - - - - - - - - -
Tomoé - May 31, 2004 9:26 pm (#84 of 359)
Back in business
Catherine Allen had suggest Avery in post #61, he mislead Voldemort on the prophecy thing (did he do it on purpose or was he mistaken). He was in Snape gang back in Hogwarts.
- - - - - - - - - -
Liz - May 31, 2004 9:36 pm (#85 of 359)
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I think in the final battle Peter will switch over to good because he is in Harry's debt.
Beth
- - - - - - - - - -
Dumbledore - Jun 1, 2004 2:19 pm (#86 of 359)
(Albus Percival Wulfric Brian)
In any event, I think that however (and whenver) Peter pays back his life debt to Harry, it will play a major role in the outcome of events.
- - - - - - - - - -
Liz - Jun 1, 2004 2:36 pm (#87 of 359)
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I'm with you on that one Dumbledore.
Also I think I read this somewhere, Peter has a silver hand and Lupin is a warewolf. I wonder how that will play out?
Beth
- - - - - - - - - -
Dumbledore - Jun 1, 2004 2:37 pm (#88 of 359)
(Albus Percival Wulfric Brian)
I've heard that before too. It always got me to thinking...
- - - - - - - - - -
PIJ - Jun 2, 2004 3:26 am (#89 of 359)
With Sirius gone, can Kreacher now embelish some of his comments to the Malfoys of Lestrades??
The fidelius charm locks the secret of Grimauld Place, but Kreacher has the details of the order. If I have read OoP right then the only prevention of Kreacher telling the Malfoys all over the Christmas break was Sirius command, with Sirius gone does this command now resind?
Come to think of it re-reading the passage in Dumbledores office at the end of OoP I get the horrid feeling that Kreacher may be dead at Dumbledores hand, which ends my theory of Kreacher being a traitor to the order.
- - - - - - - - - -
Padfoot - Jun 2, 2004 2:20 pm (#90 of 359)
I get the horrid feeling that Kreacher may be dead at Dumbledores hand
Where did you get that idea from? I don't ever remember getting that idea. In fact, DD seems to cut the house elves some slack. At least he treats them well and says Sirius should not have treated Kreacher so bad.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Jun 2, 2004 3:28 pm (#91 of 359)
Let it snow!
Doesn't he say that, though, because he also said that Kreacher was dangerous to them and that's why they should've been nice to him, so as not to give him a reason to stab them in the back?
- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - Jun 2, 2004 3:51 pm (#92 of 359)
Canon Seeker
Dumbledore, if you'll excuse the trite phrase, is kindness itself, unless violence by someone else warrants harsh treatment.
Dumbledore even pays Dobby. I don't think he is an instrument of death toward anyone, much less an elderly, venemous house elf.
- - - - - - - - - -
PIJ - Jun 2, 2004 11:39 pm (#93 of 359)
It was just a feeling I received from reading the end of OoP. I haven't the reference to hand but it is when DD is telling HP where Kreacher had been during the Christmas holidays and how he told me eventually.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Jun 15, 2004 4:30 pm (#94 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
I think Voldemort and Co. already know most of list of those in the Order of the Phoenix and vice versa. Kreacher could potentially betray locations or a few secret identities -- such as Snape's.
By the way, to mention Snape, let me hasten to add that I don't think Snape will be a traitor from the OoP side (but I could be surprised). I would not be surprised, though, if Snape is portrayed in a bad light to once again make it seem like he is or will be a traitor. Indeed, he might instead end up being the object of betrayal and perhaps even a sacrificial figure.
- - - - - - - - - -
Dumbledore - Jun 29, 2004 3:02 pm (#95 of 359)
(Albus Percival Wulfric Brian)
That theory's very interesting. Perhaps there is an information leak or some other sort of betrayal in the Order of the Phoenix, and all eyes point to Snape because he is the most suspicious. That accusation could allow for the true betrayor to go undetected until it's too late.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Jun 29, 2004 4:44 pm (#96 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
. . . or, in the dramatically well-timed sense, almost too late. Perhaps too late for some sacrificial goat but not too late to save the ultimate day.
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Jun 30, 2004 11:20 am (#97 of 359)
A sacrificial goat raised by Aberforth, who gives up a beazor to save Harry.
- - - - - - - - - -
Chris. - Jun 30, 2004 11:27 am (#98 of 359)
HBP: 16th July 2005: the most anticipated day in history
Hmmm... haymoni, as mad as it may sound I think your theory could be a discovery about Aberforth's role in the Order.
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Jun 30, 2004 11:54 am (#99 of 359)
Yes - also with all the shady characters coming into the Hogs Head, it may be necessary for Aberforth to keep a few goats around to save patrons that may have been slipped a poison or potion.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Jul 2, 2004 6:15 am (#100 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
I wonder know whether this Book 6 HBP will be a traitor figure, even if it refers to prior treason. The whole "Tom not Voldemort is the HBP" theory, if true, would lend itself to that, as we might see treachery of old revealed. I wonder whether DD had the close sort of relation to Tom in his youth that he later has with Harry? Could that explain a basis for some of DD's errors in method for dealing with Harry in Book 5 (OoP)? All very interesting stuff.
(Ah! I have inadvertently made the 100th post in my own thread. Why are we westerners so obsessed with digits that end in 0's or 00's? Does that occur in the east as well?)
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Elanor- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 51
Location : France
Treason in Book 6 and/or 7 (Post 101 to 150)
Elanor Sat May 21, 2011 9:04 am
Joss - Jul 8, 2004 1:14 pm (#101 of 359)
On the case of Neville: If you had to see your parents insane, and know that without the death eaters/ voldermort you'd have had a normal life, you'd run off with all the people who did that to you? If you look at the way Neville throws himself headfirst into D.A. and the fight at the ministry in OoP I don't think he's traitor material. Also, I think Rowling has a particular fondness for Neville, he's had it harder than Harry, not only does he have to see his parents at a shadow of their former selves he's also a bit of a drip. I don't think she'd do it to him.
- - - - - - - - - -
Leila 2X4B - Jul 8, 2004 1:21 pm (#102 of 359)
I'd be smegged off. I'd be mad as hell, man. If some git in a white coat designed me to croak just so that he could sell his new android with go-faster stripes.
If there is treason, perhaps it is not a sinister as a deliberate traitor. Maybe it is going to be similar to the Edgecomb affair. Someone is pressured into it. Or maybe it is sinister. A DE could possibly imperio a student, maybe their own, to spy for the DE's and Sir Voldy.
- - - - - - - - - -
accio firebolt - Jul 12, 2004 3:15 pm (#103 of 359)
Add me to the Mundungus could be a traitor camp - even though he hasn't done anything affirmatively terrible, the fact that he shirks his duty is negligent at the least and pretty harmful at the most.
But other traitors on the "good" side - maybe Ludo Bagman - he strikes me as a pretty weak-minded guy, and not very honest (gambling, trying to get Harry to cheat in the tri-wizard). Percy, if we can still count him as "good" - I think he could possibly go further over to the dark side and then have a change of heart and become a sort of sacrificial figure (which I think someone mentioned in the thread above).
On the "bad" side - I think Pettigrew will have to come through for Harry because he owes him. Draco possibly, since it would be a great twist, although I don't think JKR has laid any groundwork for this.
I don't think Snape will be a traitor to the good side, but I do think he's being set up as a martyr - he'll save Harry and then be killed.
- - - - - - - - - -
Chris. - Jul 13, 2004 2:30 pm (#104 of 359)
HBP: 16th July 2005: the most anticipated day in history
I've changed my mind! I don't want Dung to be the traitor!
I've took a liking to him. He's funny and a great person to read about.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Jul 13, 2004 6:38 pm (#105 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Too late, Prongs. Once you name a traitor, no take backs. You are stuck with Dung, and Dung is on your head.
(Just kidding of course, but I have to say that because someone thought I was being serious a few weeks ago.)
- - - - - - - - - -
Luke E.A. Lockhart - Jul 17, 2004 1:28 pm (#106 of 359)
I think that Mundungus may not be a "traitor" in the most treasonous sense of the word, but that he easily may back out out of cowardice. He's one of the few instances in JKR's world where someone is morally neutral, rather than "good", "evil", or "conflicted", in my opinion.
- - - - - - - - - -
The Wandless Wizard - Jul 24, 2004 12:11 am (#107 of 359)
When wands are outlawed, only outlaws will have wands.
Edited by Jul 24, 2004 12:16 am
Ok, I came up with this theory before I even knew this thread existed. After working it out, I looked for the best thread to post it in, and to my surprise, there was already a traitor thread going. So here is my thought on why there will be a traitor to the Order. Worse yet, the traitor will be either Harry, Ron Hermione or Neville. I don't believe for sure it will happen. It is just a possibility. I apologize in advance for how long this will be
Ok, first I have always believed that HRH+Neville share lots of similarities to the Marauders. Both have Potters But there is a core group of friends. Wormtail to me seemed just on the outside of that core group, like Neville is. I think Wormtail was closer than Neville, but Neville could be getting closer after the DoM. Anyway, Harry is obviously similar to James. NeVille is similar to Wormtail in that he is not as skilled magically or socially. Hermione and Lupin have a lot in common. They are both the moral compass of their group of friends (failing miserably in both cases) and both are book smart. Sirius and Ron both have a certain disregard for the rules. They are also the best friend of the Potter in the group. So the Marauders group tends to mirror the HRH+Neville group.
That is not enough to lead me to believe there is a traitor among them. However, the other day I started thinking about comparisons between the Marauders and the founders of Hogwarts. Lupin and Ravenclaw are both highly intelligent. Sirius has a certain disregard for the rules just like Slytherin. Harry is so much like his father that James has to share Harry's Gryffindor qualities. Finally Wormtail is just sort of there with no outstanding qualities (which is the type of wizard that gets sorted into Hufflepuff).
Seeing this, I applied the same analysis to HRH+Nevilee. It fits as well. The sorting hat considered Hermione for Ravenclaw. Neville shows Hufflepuff like qualities of perserverence and hard work. Harry is a true Gryffindor, pulling the sword out of his hat. Ron is a pure-blood with a disregard for the rules like Slytherin. And even more, with Ron, you have the jealousy he displayed of Harry in GoF. He wanted the spotlight which would show a thirst to prove oneself. That was the Slytherin quality in Harry the sorting hat mentions when deciding where to put him. Slytherin and Gryffindor are best friends like Ron and Hary, and also like James and Sirius.
So there are three groups of four friends that have definite similarities. All were very tight groups (aside from Neville, who again I believe will become a stronger firend in Book 6). Now, two of the groups split because of an act of betrayal. Wormtail told Voldemort the secret, breaking the Fidelius charm. Slytherin built the Chamber of Secrets which was very detrimental to the product of the founder's friendship, Hogwarts. To keep the comparison, one of HRH+Neville needs to break the friendship through an act of betrayal.
My vote is Ron based on process of elimination. Since a different character type was the betrayer in the other two groups, it cannot be used as a guide. I don't see Neville as the betrayer because his parents. I don't see Hermione because she is muggle-born and Voldemort would want to kill her. And the book is about Harry, so I don't see him. Plus Voldemort killed his parents. Ron on the other hand has already shown the ability to abandon Harry in GoF. I believe he was part of the people making fun of Harry for entering the Tri-wizard tournement. That is a mini-betrayal of sorts.
To soften the blow for Ron fans, it is my theory that he will have a good reason (at least in his mind) for the betrayal. I think the later books will show that Slytherin and Wormtail both had misguided reasons for what they did. Then again, the betrayal doesn't have to be in favor of Voldemort. Maybe a new group will arise to combat Voldemort (led by the HBP?) and Ron, Hermione or Neville will betray the Order in favor of this new group. I also believe whoever the betrayer is will do the right thing in the end along with Wormtail.
So that is my theory. As I said before, I do not believe it will definitely happen. I never believe anything will definitely happen, I prefer theories on what could happen. What do you all think? Please, shoot holes in it because I do not like the thought of Ron betrayong the group.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Jul 24, 2004 5:23 am (#108 of 359)
I agree that Ron will be a traitor
- - - - - - - - - -
T Brightwater - Jul 26, 2004 8:31 am (#109 of 359)
I don't think Ron will be a traitor, at least not deliberately; he might accidentally let information slip or put Harry in a dangerous position. Having HRH be an exact parallel to the Marauders seems a little too predictible to me.
Has anyone considered Parvati Patil? The main thing that makes me suspicious of her is that she doesn't like Hagrid; JKR often seems to use Hagrid as a kind of touchstone to demonstrate the worth of other characters. (I find it interesting that we don't ever really see Snape and Hagrid together, which may be a way for JKR to preserve Snape's ambiguity.) Also, Parvati and Lavender both seem to like the superior feeling of knowing things other people don't.
(To quote the late R.A.Lafferty, "Theories have been built on slighter bases. They haven't stood up very well, though.")
- - - - - - - - - -
The Wandless Wizard - Jul 26, 2004 9:32 am (#110 of 359)
When wands are outlawed, only outlaws will have wands.
Edited by Jul 26, 2004 9:34 am
I like the idea of Hagrid as a guage, but I don't think it completely works. Wasn't Crouch Jr. friendly with Hagrid? I know he was pretending to be Moody and trying to get along with everyone, but he was also openly contemptuous of Snape. Besides Parvati does not dislike Hagrid, at least not that we can see. She just does not like his classes. Even Hermione is probably in agreement there although she keeps quiet so as not to upset Harry. Finally, I do not think Parvati being a trator would serve the plot at all. She is not really friends with the trio. She went to the ball with Harry, but had a miserable time. She is not privy to any of the gangs secrets. I wouldn't really consider it a betrayal if she went to the other side.
As for Ron being obvious, I disagree. Since he is so close to Harry, I think he would be the least obvious. And my theory is not just based on the trios similarity to the Marauders, but also the founders. That is 3 groups of friends that echo each other. I am not saying it will definitely happen. I just thought it was an interesting possibility. And the groundwork is definitely there if JKR decides to take that route.
- - - - - - - - - -
T Brightwater - Jul 26, 2004 11:18 am (#111 of 359)
I don't remember seeing Crouch/Moody and Hagrid together. Hagrid threatens "takin' a leaf out of Professor Moody's book" to Draco Malfoy at one point, and Crouch/Moody takes advantage of the earth Hagrid dug up for his niffler class, but - correct me if I'm wrong - I don't think you actually hear either give an opinion about the other.
All of the people who like Hagrid are aware of his shortcomings as a teacher and a person, but Parvati's remark "He can still be gamekeeper, can't he?" especially given the description of her face or voice (can't remember exactly, and I've loaned the book out) sounds like there's at least a little dislike there. I'll admit it's pretty tenuous. She likes Firenze, so I don't think she has the "part-human" prejudice working against her.
As for Ron, we've seen him angry with both of his best friends, but he's come around both times. I think that scene at the end of PoA where he holds out his new owl for Crookshanks to sniff is a good indicator of his character - he's capable of admitting he was wrong and restoring good relations. To make an analogy to other figures of betrayal, I could maybe see him being Simon Peter, but not Judas.
Harry, Ron, and Hermione have never really had an equal fourth person in their group. They have other friends, especially Neville and Ginny, but they aren't quite like either the Founders or the Marauders. Perhaps they'll acquire a fourth member and thus reverse the pattern of the Founders?
- - - - - - - - - -
Weeny Owl - Jul 26, 2004 11:40 am (#112 of 359)
I don't think Ron will be a traitor, at least not deliberately; he might accidentally let information slip or put Harry in a dangerous position. Having HRH be an exact parallel to the Marauders seems a little too predictible to me.
I couldn't agree more.
The Marauders have such different backgrounds than our trio. Harry and Lupin are half-bloods, Ron, James, and Sirius are pure-bloods, Hermione is a Muggle-born, and we don't know about Pettigrew.
The Marauders did things together that our trio haven't done, at least not yet - no werewolves to cavort with, they aren't Animagi, they haven't made a map.
No one really hangs out with them, although we see Ginny and Neville with them from time to time. When they left for the Ministry in OotP, there were six students - not four.
There are more differences than similarities, and after the Department of Mysteries battle, I can't see any of the six betraying one another deliberately.
I can see pretty much anyone inadvertently letting a key piece of information slip to the wrong person; I can see a significant character being put under the Imperius Curse; and I can see any of them discussing something without realizing they're being overheard.
- - - - - - - - - -
Round Pink Spider - Jul 26, 2004 11:49 am (#113 of 359)
Crazed Writer
I don't think Ron would turn traitor deliberately, but he would be an ideal person on whom to put an Imperious Curse (I know, the movie isn't canon, but spiders forcing Ron to tap-dance, like Moody forced the spider in GoF?). He's right near Harry, and he's one of the people Harry trusts most.
- - - - - - - - - -
The Wandless Wizard - Jul 26, 2004 1:09 pm (#114 of 359)
When wands are outlawed, only outlaws will have wands.
Edited by Jul 26, 2004 1:12 pm
Ok, this will be my last shot at defending my theory unless someone else takes up the fight. I believe that we will either see someone close to harry be a traitor or there won't be a traitor. It is too close to the end to have a mystery (who betrayed Harry?) that ends with the culprit being a minor character. Whatever happens will have a big impact. Plus, JKR has said that things will not be nice for Harry in the coming books. Here are two quotes JKR said in the chat on the chat thread:
"I think I'd most like to spend a day with Harry. I'd take him out for a meal and apologize for everything I've put him through. " and "If I, personally, were Harry Potter I think I would go and hide somewhere, but that's because I know what's coming!"
So what would be so bad that JKR would want to run and hide. Well, maybe she is going to kill Harry and that of course would make anyone hide. But maybe it is one of those things worse than death DD talks about. If having your best friend betray you isn't one of those things, it is close.
Weeny Owl, regarding you comment that the comparison does not completely fit. Well, neither does the comparison between James and Harry. Harry has never been arrogant or cruel to others, he has never been good at everything he does (in school), he is not normally really popular (there are times, but he has also been the least popular student), and he is not an animagus. But these differences and others has not stopped JKR from using the comparisons. I think there are enough similarities between the founders, Marauders and trio+Neville to look to them for clues. Neville's status as being on the fringe of the trio is a weakness of my theory. I'll give you that. That relationship still can change though, and I think he is still close enough for a basis of comparison.
I don't think Ron will betray Harry directly to Voldemort. I am thinking he will betray Harry to someone working for Voldemort. Ron will know the person is not exactly on harry's side, but not that he is working for Voldemort. Ron will think he has a good reason and will eventually realize his error and come back to Harry (as T Brightwater points out he has done before).
Now on T brightwater's Parvati theory (sorry this is so long). Crouch Jr and Hagrid were friendly enough that Crouch Jr could convince Hagrid to take Harry to see the Dragons. Plus I believe there was a scene where he was at Hagrid's hut, but I don't have my book on me. Finally, your quote from Parvati shows she is ambivalent toward Hagrid. She doesn't care what he does as long as he isn't teaching. Malfoy, who truly hates Hagrid, would want him fired from every job and possibly killed as well.
- - - - - - - - - -
T Brightwater - Jul 26, 2004 1:33 pm (#115 of 359)
"Crouch Jr and Hagrid were friendly enough that Crouch Jr could convince Hagrid to take Harry to see the Dragons."
I don't think he would take much convincing. Crouch Jr may have taken credit for it while boasting to Harry, but I don't doubt that all he would have to do is give Hagrid the slightest hint, which Hagrid probably wouldn't even remember. Crouch certainly wouldn't have suggested showing the dragons to Madame Maxime! Anyway, I don't think that's enough evidence for Crouch and Hagrid to have been friends.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Jul 26, 2004 4:57 pm (#116 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Besides, at that point, didn't Hagrid believe Crouch Jr. to be the somewhat revered and somewhat scary Mad Eye Moody?
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Jul 28, 2004 4:29 pm (#117 of 359)
I agree that Ron will not betray Harry to Voldemort. I am thinking that he will do something to put Harry in a dangerous position. Neville might be a bit weak but his stance on Voldie is alway consistent. If the two ever made a traitor, I believe the main reason will be jealousy.
- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Jul 28, 2004 7:07 pm (#118 of 359)
I just finished reading this entire thread (whew!) and there are certainly some interesting theories. One thing kept flitting through my head whenever Sherbie talked about the Dung theory. The reason given for Dung as traitor always comes back to one thing: money.
What other character is continually bemoaning the lack of money--in every single book? Think about it ... are you there yet? Ron. Am I suggesting that Ron would betray Harry for the proverbial 30 pieces of silver? Not intentionally, no.
I do, however, think Ron is a very vulnerable character on a couple of different fronts. He feels kind of lost among multiple Weasley brothers, all of whom (even "Gred & Forge") are standouts in their own ways. Consider what Ron saw when he looked into the Mirror of Erised: Wasn't he Quidditch Captain and Head Boy? Ron longs to distinguish himself on his own terms, yet he continually finds himself overshadowed by Harry. He knows it isn't Harry's fault he is thrust into the limelight, but it takes a mighty strong character to stand aside and allow one's best friend to always get the glory.
There are several places in the books where Ron alludes to the fact that everything he owns is a hand-me-down or junk (or trash--I can't remember the specific comments). I think Ron's desire for money and a few minutes in the spotlight could leave him vulnerable to some subtle manipulation by a very smooth enemy. I do not think Ron would willingly or openly betray Harry, but I do think he is vulnerable.
ON THE OTHER HAND ... his participation in the battle at the MoM might have taught him that all the attention Harry gets isn't worth the price he must repeatedly pay. I hope this is so, because I don't think either Ron or Harry could sustain a betrayal by Ron. I think the emotional damage both of them would suffer could push them beyond hope of recovery--I certainly think it would push Harry to a point of reckless abandon; and the guilt Ron would feel might do the same. Ron is the closest person Harry has ever had to a brother. He and Hermione are certainly the two dearest people in the world to Harry.
Okay, now I'm REALLY going to go out on a limb ... Is anyone else bothered by the statement Harry sees Dumbledore make in the Pensieve in GoF ... "[Severus Snape] is now no more a Death Eater than I am." When Harry turned to look at Moody, who was also in the Pensieve ... "He was wearing a look of deep skepticism behind Dumbledore's back." IS there more to DD than meets the eye? I know ... NO! Smack! Slap! Whomp! for even thinking it. I apologize.
I love DD, but sometimes he bugs me. I think Harry has shown that he can be trusted with "sensitive" info. After all, he keeps the secret about Neville's parents. I think DD might help things a lot if he and Snape would just talk to Harry WHY he feels Snape can be trusted ... because Snape obviously knows Harry doesn't trust him. The only reason I can think of is that Snape witnessed the deaths of James and Lily ... and DD doesn't want Harry questioning him about what happened, why he didn't intervene, etc.
As DD says to Harry, if he'd been completely open with Harry about his fears in the first place, Sirius might still be alive. Sadly, that is true. Big D blew it big time here.
Just my 2 knuts worth ...
Solitaire
- - - - - - - - - -
Leila 2X4B - Jul 28, 2004 7:09 pm (#119 of 359)
I'd be smegged off. I'd be mad as hell, man. If some git in a white coat designed me to croak just so that he could sell his new android with go-faster stripes.
I think it because Harry is a normal human teen and probably couldn't handle more info Psychologicaly. It has nothing to do with trust, but love and concern.
- - - - - - - - - -
Luke E.A. Lockhart - Jul 28, 2004 7:24 pm (#120 of 359)
I don't buy the "Ron will betray Harry" thing. Yes, Ron wants money, but he's not so desperate for it that he would betray his friend - who is the only person who has stood by him his entire life at school. The only way I could see Ron being a traitor would be if Hermione is a traitor, as his relationship with Hermione seems deeper than his relationship with Harry (and I'm not neccesarily talking romatically here, it's just that Ron and Hermione hang out a lot). And I definately don't see Hermione as a traitor given that JKR models her on herself. No, I think the trio will stay good and loyal for the whole story.
If one of the main characters is a traitor, I would think it would be more likely to be one of the adult protaganists. Lupin seems unlikely, and Mad-Eye has already sort of been a traitor. Snape is a possibility, but I'm still thinking (and hoping) that he's a good guy. Perhaps - well, maybe the adults aren't such great guesses.
Among the students, possibilities would be Luna (out of, well, not being aware of the world), but I doubt it. Despite her instability, she's quite paranoid, and I doubt she'd be easily fooled. And I definately can't see her as evil.
What about Neville? I doubt it. Neville is such an underdog, and he's already accidentially betrayed the good guys in PoA. I don't see him as evil, and he's now too smart to be bamboozled.
How about Ginny? I could possibly see her betraying the heroes, but I really don't have enough supporting evidence.
So, my guesses are:
A. There is no traitor.
B. It's someone very unexpected.
- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Jul 28, 2004 8:03 pm (#121 of 359)
Frankly, I hope there is no traitor ... unless it is a Slytherin/DE defecting from THEIR side to fight against V.
Life denied me the parent experience, so maybe that is why I have such a strong sense of "stewardship" toward my students. I really love many of them care deeply about their well-being.
Having said that--and having admitted on another thread to immersing myself completely in what I read--I must confess that I worry about the Hogwarts kids (especially the Gryffindors) as though they were my own students, too. If one of them were to betray Harry or each other, I would feel terrible ... just as I do when I discover one of my own students has cheated or stolen or something similar. I feel like I have failed them in some way.
Truthfully, I find it hard to imagine anyone who fought with Harry in the MoM battle--kids or Order members--as a traitor. Perhaps I can't see it because I don't want it to happen ... but I hope I'm right.
Solitaire
- - - - - - - - - -
Luke E.A. Lockhart - Jul 28, 2004 8:24 pm (#122 of 359)
I think that in many ways, the Ministry battle symbolized the squaring off of sides. Those who fought alongside Harry are, in my opinion, completely loyal; they are the true heroes of the story. They are the main characters; if HP was a TV show, they would be the regular stars. I personally think that Harry, Ron, Hermione, Neville, Ginny, and Luna are safe from treason.
One more idea I had, though: what if Dumbledore is the traitor. It's unlikely, and I really don't think this because of the "glint of triumph". My main reason is that he's such a sympathetic character (apparently), on the level of James and Lily. Yet JKR had an apparently (probably mock) offended response when it was suggested that Lily was evil. No such thing has been said about DD.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Jul 28, 2004 8:43 pm (#123 of 359)
Let it snow!
I always figured Ron's "bemoaning the lack of money" was a key to how all the Weasley kids looked at their situation and helped explain why they each went the way they did. Bill took a job that had "treasure bonuses" (OotP), Fred and George became entrepreneurs. Percy took a slightly different route and picked a job that offers a lot of advancement, provided you have the right connections (as if often the way in bureaucracies), so he is just as ambitious as his brothers and kisses up and works hard to get promoted. Charlie seems to be the only real exception in that he picked a job working with dragons which may or may not pay very well. Ron is just like the rest of his brothers but is more vocal about his wish to have more than what he grew up with. I somehow think that, because he is the one most vocal about it, he will be the one to somehow make a decision giving up something material for something he wants more, in a sort of "be careful what you wish for" sense.... I don't see him as a traitor at all. Ron seems to be the personification of loyalty, so I can't see him turning on Harry.
Sirius pointed out that Dung was very loyal to Dumbledore so I don't think he'd turn traitor either.
- - - - - - - - - -
The Wandless Wizard - Jul 29, 2004 1:58 pm (#124 of 359)
When wands are outlawed, only outlaws will have wands.
Ron seems to be the personification of loyalty
How do you account for him turning his back on Harry in GoF? It wasn't even for a really good reason. Ron had decided to shut Harry out before Harry even gave any explanation as to how his name got in the goblet. I know he eventually came back around and they were better friends for it. Still his loyalty has waivered before.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Jul 29, 2004 3:07 pm (#125 of 359)
Let it snow!
I don't think his loyalty waivered at all. I've already expressed my view of the fight in the "Ron" thread (post 774), so I won't repeat those points here. JKR made a comment in her A&E Biography interview: "He's always there when you need him. That's Ron Weasley." I think that sums it up quite nicely.
- - - - - - - - - -
The Wandless Wizard - Jul 29, 2004 4:12 pm (#126 of 359)
When wands are outlawed, only outlaws will have wands.
Sorry, I have not read the Ron thread yet. I have only been here a month or so. I am trying to read a couple new threads a day, but lately the new posts in threads I have read is enough to keep me busy. Plus, I have definitely shied away from some of the longer threads. Still I am curious how you view this as not a waivering of loyalty. Normally I think you have pretty good insight into the HP world and I agree with a lot of your posts. So I am off to read up about Ron. I'll be reading all the posts first It may be awhile before I can respond.
- - - - - - - - - -
Archangel - Aug 9, 2004 4:55 am (#127 of 359)
Every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end. -- Semisonic
I think it'll be Ron. I know it'd probably break a lot of hearts (Harry's included) to find out that your bestfriend could do that to you but it would make the series more grounded and cyclical (the right word escapes me at this moment). I mean, Harry's parents were betrayed by someone who they thought was their friend, and in these stories, things have a tendency to repeat themselves. Harry being betrayed by his friend would come as a shock but it would fit nicely with the plot.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Aug 9, 2004 4:34 pm (#128 of 359)
I agree. Ron must die
- - - - - - - - - -
MickeyCee3948 - Aug 11, 2004 8:55 pm (#129 of 359)
Avatar courtesy of Gwen
NEVER!!!! Ron is the type of friend we all want and strive for. In GoF he was upset because of the perception that Harry had entered and not told him.
No Way can I see Ron betraying Harry. It's not in his make up or the make up of any of his family. Yeah he wishes he had more money, Ginny does to. Remember her gripes to TR in CoS.
Fred and George have their business going well and with fewer mouths to feed Molly and Arthur may find the going a little easier. They are down from 9 to 4 mouths in the house. Every parent and most children can relate with the same feelings but the majority do not turn on their friends.
Mikie
- - - - - - - - - -
Archangel - Aug 11, 2004 9:27 pm (#130 of 359)
Every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end. -- Semisonic
Well one'll never know what could turn someone against another, right? Although if Ron does betray Harry, I don't think it'll be because of money or because Harry gets all the attention and he does not. Winning the Quidditch Cup for Gryffindor made sure that he's no longer just Harry's mate to the majority of students. OR if he does indeed betray Harry, it won't be on his own accord. He might be under the Imperius curse or Voldemort fed some bogus idea in his mind like he did with Harry.
Either way, making Ron the traitor would have maximum impact on Harry -- if not create the maximum damage to him. Doing so wouldn't be beneath someone like Voldemort. Cheers!
- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Aug 12, 2004 12:15 am (#131 of 359)
I agree, Archangel. If Ron does betray Harry, it will be either unconsciously or against his will. I will be covering Ron. TH, I'm watching you! **wand out and ready**
- - - - - - - - - -
MickeyCee3948 - Aug 12, 2004 7:41 am (#132 of 359)
Avatar courtesy of Gwen
Archangel and Solitaire - When you put it that way I guess it could happen. Ron and Hermione are also so worried about LV possessing or controlling Harry's thoughts that they more or less leave themselves open to that same control
Mikie
- - - - - - - - - -
Kasse - Aug 12, 2004 10:58 am (#133 of 359)
Total Hatred you broke my heart with your statement. I am watching you with Solitaire *takes wand out ready to defend Ron*
Ok remember that JKR said friendship is a big foundation of her stories. The trio together can overcome anything, yes they have their arguments, and petty insecurities but their friendship is stronger than all of this.
Ron will never betray Harry, at least not by his own free will!
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Aug 12, 2004 5:24 pm (#134 of 359)
Let it snow!
Total Hatred, tread carefully....
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Aug 12, 2004 8:04 pm (#135 of 359)
Let it snow!
I don't see Ron betraying Harry. Ron more closely parallels James or Sirius than he does Peter. James was the betrayed and Sirius was nothing but loyal to James. Besides, there were four friends in the original betrayal, so you'd have to include a fourth one to make a real parallel, in a literal sense, and I just don't see it. I don't really put much faith in generational parallels.
However, I could see Ron doing something out of loyalty that Harry percieved as a betrayal. As Hermione demonstrated by going to McGonagall about the Firebolt, being a loyal friend isn't always standing by while you know you're friend is doing something that might get them hurt, it's also stepping in to prevent them from hurting themselves or others. I keep thinking of the way Ron and Hermione kept urging Harry to go to Dumbledore or McGonagall about his scar, his dreams, and about Umbridge. I could see one of them finally going over Harry's head and telling Dumbledore something that Harry might be hiding from him again. Harry might percieve this action as a betrayal, at least for a time, but it would've been done out of loyalty to a friend. I just don't see JKR severing the Trio. Distancing them, yes, but not cutting bonds the way a betrayal would.
- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Aug 12, 2004 10:53 pm (#136 of 359)
I agree with S.E. Jones. Even though Ron has had some problems with envy in the past (so has Harry; he has envied Ron's family life), in Book 5 he got quite a lot of glory with the Quidditch cup. He also survived the Ministry battle and got a taste of what Harry has faced all these years. I really do not see Ron betraying Harry or anyone else he loves.
I can see the scenario S.E. offers ... and its opposite: Ron or Hermione doing something in an effort to help and having it backfire. Those are really the only way I can see a betrayal from either of them. They are too much a part of each other at this point--that "cord of three strands."
Solitaire
- - - - - - - - - -
Archangel - Aug 12, 2004 11:41 pm (#137 of 359)
Every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end. -- Semisonic
You make fair points Solitaire and S.E. The scenarios that you pointed out are the most likely to happen and Harry might indeed feel betrayed because of those actions. However, I still can't shake off that feeling that the events in Book 6 (or maybe a specific event in the book) will test their bond and Ron will be found wanting. Gut feel I guess...
- - - - - - - - - -
Quibbler Editor In Chief - Aug 13, 2004 4:25 pm (#138 of 359)
Although I cannot see Ron betraying Harry intentionally, mostly because I hope that it will not happen, he does seem to be a very vulnerable character. If he was offered power, fame, or money, I could see him accepting it if he did not realize how it would hurt Harry, although he would feel horrible about it later on. Ron has shown jealousy of Harry, and we cannot forget that the Death Eaters are very powerful wizards that would probably be able to trick a young wizard with so much to prove like Ron. Going into Hogwarts he had to try to live up to the standards set by all of his 5 amazing brothers, but now he must also try to live up to the standards set by his friends and even his younger sister. Harry has now stood up to Voldemort four times and is a great Quidditch seeker, Hermione has excelled in the classroom, and Ginny is also a very sucessful Quidditch player now.
- - - - - - - - - -
Archangel - Aug 14, 2004 12:03 am (#139 of 359)
Every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end. -- Semisonic
Edited by Aug 14, 2004 12:08 am
I thought of something while I was reading the Ship threads which I feel might be used to create disharmony among the 3 and it's something that Iago did to Othello to make him lose his mind.
In this case, Ron will be Othello. He is the man of the moment having just won the Quidditch Cup for Gryffindor (and presumably the House Cup, although there was no mention of that in OoP). Supposing that he gets together with Hermione in Book 6 (please note I'm not sailing any ship but let's just say that this happens for argument's sake), is still a prefect come 6th year, and is made the Gryffindor Quidditch captain based on his heroics, then we could safely say that he's pretty much on a roll right now. Now I'm not saying that Harry will be Iago and be jealous of Ron and try to get what he has right now, I think he'll be happy for pal and support him 100%. My guess is that the "Iago" of the story would be Voldemort (or Draco? After all, what could be a sweeter payback than breaking up the HRH gang?) and he'll mess with Ron's mind by showing him Harry and Hermione discussing this and that -- making it appear that she's being unfaithful and all that. I'm sure he'll sneak in whispers that Harry is a much better Quidditch player since he can win a game all by himself and that he is national player material. Of course, by then Ron will probably be too distraught and too confused that'll he'll start to believe these lies and thus, unwittingly cause harm to Harry and the Order.
Sounds far-fetched I know, but JKR has introduced some Shakespearean themes in her books before and I feel that Othello is quite prime to make an appearance in the series somehow.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Aug 15, 2004 2:33 am (#140 of 359)
What heroics. Saving a single goal is not considered a heroic endeavor. If he is really trying hard enough, I believe that he can perform better. He is bragging that he has years of practice but look what happened, he performs poorly. Ron's most fatal flaw is that his head inflates easily. A little accomplishment and he thinks he is already the greatest. I believe that Ron is more like Wormtail. He is always at the shadows of his friends. He is trying hard to be like them but fails miserably. He is willing to do everything to be stronger even it cost something precious to him. Ron is never like Sirius. There is some circumstancial parallelism but the personality is different.
- - - - - - - - - -
Leila 2X4B - Aug 15, 2004 9:46 pm (#141 of 359)
I'd be smegged off. I'd be mad as hell, man. If some git in a white coat designed me to croak just so that he could sell his new android with go-faster stripes.
Archangel, what would that make Harry, Cassio? I still am not sold on the trio betraying each other.
- - - - - - - - - -
Archangel - Aug 15, 2004 9:58 pm (#142 of 359)
Every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end. -- Semisonic
He could be Beauty. Who knows what Harry'll look like in the 6th book? LOL It's OK if you're not sold, this is just fun speculation anyway.
- - - - - - - - - -
Leila 2X4B - Aug 15, 2004 10:00 pm (#143 of 359)
I'd be smegged off. I'd be mad as hell, man. If some git in a white coat designed me to croak just so that he could sell his new android with go-faster stripes.
True Archangel, it is not as if we have book 6 to read.... Fun speculation is all that we have to grasp on to for now.
Actually, if you want to make a case for Othello/HP crossovers, the best would be Iago for Barty Crouch Jr/Moody. He had everyone fooled and messed with you without you being any the wiser.
Leila
- - - - - - - - - -
Archangel - Aug 15, 2004 10:03 pm (#144 of 359)
Every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end. -- Semisonic
Yeah and the wait can be frustrating sometimes!
- - - - - - - - - -
remiden - Aug 16, 2004 6:44 pm (#145 of 359)
I am going to predict a shocker! Wait for it .......ready? .......There will be no betrayel.
- - - - - - - - - -
Quibbler Editor In Chief - Aug 17, 2004 2:27 pm (#146 of 359)
I agree somewhat with you remiden. I cannot see any high profile characters betraying Harry and Voldemort. I think that they are all too loyal for that, but you never know with JKR. She really tricked most of us when Peter Pittegrew was the bad guy instead of Sirius, after we all thought that it was the other way around.
I believe the people that are too loyal to betray are:
All of the Weasleys (except Percy), Dumbledore, Lupin, Hermione, McGonagall, and Hagrid.
P.S. Did JKR ever say anything about there being any suprising betrayals, or are we just guessing that there will be some?
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Aug 20, 2004 8:47 pm (#147 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
It is just a surmise based upon classic Western (not cowboy) epochal, mythical and/or fictional literature.
- - - - - - - - - -
Lord Montemort - Aug 25, 2004 9:03 pm (#148 of 359)
If it follows the Arthurian legend then Ron (Lancelot) could betray Harry in some way. Possibly to protect Hermione (Gwenivere (sp)).
Although I don't it's too likely.
Ludo could definately turn traitor. He's in debt up to his eyes so the motivation is there.
Neville: another possibility. A "third party" could bring up away to cure his parents if he does something (that he thinks isn't a big deal),i.e leave this door open on X date type of thing.
Dung: A tough one, I see him playing both sides against the middle more then anything. He's on his side primarily, but would side with DD simply because DD is less likely to dispose of him when the dust clears.
Percy: Maybe, but he plays by the rules too much. He's ambitious yes, but that doesn't mean he'd betray his principles, he was in Gryffindor after all. Aside from F&G, the rest will want to reconcile, especially Molly. F&G will eventually, but they will draw it out and make Percy the but of their jokes for years to come.
Ultimately I don't think there will be any betrayal. After losing Sirius, Harry, I think will guarded towards everyone. So maybe it will be his own distrust that betrays him.
Huh, guess I contradicted myself in that last statement.
- - - - - - - - - -
Loopy Lupin - Aug 27, 2004 8:18 am (#149 of 359)
Dung: A tough one, I see him playing both sides against the middle more then anything. He's on his side primarily, but would side with DD simply because DD is less likely to dispose of him when the dust clears. -- hogshead
I tend to think Dung is the least likely candidate for betrayal. I think this primarily because, as a crook, you would be quick to jump to the conclusion that he might betray anyone as suits his needs. That would be too obvious. Pluse we don't know the thing that DD helped him out with previously. It could be something so serious that even a crook would have to remain loyal.
I've said somewhere else, possibily in this thread, that Ron's intermittent jealousy stays in the back of my mind. The ground work has been laid for this character flaw. I hope not though. A betrayal by Ron would make re-reading the first books sad.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Aug 27, 2004 1:17 pm (#150 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Well, there's outright treason (like Brutus and Cassius, Judas, Benedict Arnold, Peter Pettigrew, etc.) and then there's "temporary insanity" or even inadvertence. In the first case, the actor joins a scheme to knowingly betray someone or something precious while in the latter case something -- like a secret, etc. -- slips in the heat of it all. Both can do damage but the former is outright evil whereas the latter is more human and forgivable. I can see Ron, Neville, and a few others, blurting something out that they shouldn't. I can't see either of them actually becoming a traitor, i.e., switching sides, etc.
And Dung and Percy are both a little too obvious. There would be little dramatic surprise if either of them turned out to be a "secret agent" for Voldemort.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
On the case of Neville: If you had to see your parents insane, and know that without the death eaters/ voldermort you'd have had a normal life, you'd run off with all the people who did that to you? If you look at the way Neville throws himself headfirst into D.A. and the fight at the ministry in OoP I don't think he's traitor material. Also, I think Rowling has a particular fondness for Neville, he's had it harder than Harry, not only does he have to see his parents at a shadow of their former selves he's also a bit of a drip. I don't think she'd do it to him.
- - - - - - - - - -
Leila 2X4B - Jul 8, 2004 1:21 pm (#102 of 359)
I'd be smegged off. I'd be mad as hell, man. If some git in a white coat designed me to croak just so that he could sell his new android with go-faster stripes.
If there is treason, perhaps it is not a sinister as a deliberate traitor. Maybe it is going to be similar to the Edgecomb affair. Someone is pressured into it. Or maybe it is sinister. A DE could possibly imperio a student, maybe their own, to spy for the DE's and Sir Voldy.
- - - - - - - - - -
accio firebolt - Jul 12, 2004 3:15 pm (#103 of 359)
Add me to the Mundungus could be a traitor camp - even though he hasn't done anything affirmatively terrible, the fact that he shirks his duty is negligent at the least and pretty harmful at the most.
But other traitors on the "good" side - maybe Ludo Bagman - he strikes me as a pretty weak-minded guy, and not very honest (gambling, trying to get Harry to cheat in the tri-wizard). Percy, if we can still count him as "good" - I think he could possibly go further over to the dark side and then have a change of heart and become a sort of sacrificial figure (which I think someone mentioned in the thread above).
On the "bad" side - I think Pettigrew will have to come through for Harry because he owes him. Draco possibly, since it would be a great twist, although I don't think JKR has laid any groundwork for this.
I don't think Snape will be a traitor to the good side, but I do think he's being set up as a martyr - he'll save Harry and then be killed.
- - - - - - - - - -
Chris. - Jul 13, 2004 2:30 pm (#104 of 359)
HBP: 16th July 2005: the most anticipated day in history
I've changed my mind! I don't want Dung to be the traitor!
I've took a liking to him. He's funny and a great person to read about.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Jul 13, 2004 6:38 pm (#105 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Too late, Prongs. Once you name a traitor, no take backs. You are stuck with Dung, and Dung is on your head.
(Just kidding of course, but I have to say that because someone thought I was being serious a few weeks ago.)
- - - - - - - - - -
Luke E.A. Lockhart - Jul 17, 2004 1:28 pm (#106 of 359)
I think that Mundungus may not be a "traitor" in the most treasonous sense of the word, but that he easily may back out out of cowardice. He's one of the few instances in JKR's world where someone is morally neutral, rather than "good", "evil", or "conflicted", in my opinion.
- - - - - - - - - -
The Wandless Wizard - Jul 24, 2004 12:11 am (#107 of 359)
When wands are outlawed, only outlaws will have wands.
Edited by Jul 24, 2004 12:16 am
Ok, I came up with this theory before I even knew this thread existed. After working it out, I looked for the best thread to post it in, and to my surprise, there was already a traitor thread going. So here is my thought on why there will be a traitor to the Order. Worse yet, the traitor will be either Harry, Ron Hermione or Neville. I don't believe for sure it will happen. It is just a possibility. I apologize in advance for how long this will be
Ok, first I have always believed that HRH+Neville share lots of similarities to the Marauders. Both have Potters But there is a core group of friends. Wormtail to me seemed just on the outside of that core group, like Neville is. I think Wormtail was closer than Neville, but Neville could be getting closer after the DoM. Anyway, Harry is obviously similar to James. NeVille is similar to Wormtail in that he is not as skilled magically or socially. Hermione and Lupin have a lot in common. They are both the moral compass of their group of friends (failing miserably in both cases) and both are book smart. Sirius and Ron both have a certain disregard for the rules. They are also the best friend of the Potter in the group. So the Marauders group tends to mirror the HRH+Neville group.
That is not enough to lead me to believe there is a traitor among them. However, the other day I started thinking about comparisons between the Marauders and the founders of Hogwarts. Lupin and Ravenclaw are both highly intelligent. Sirius has a certain disregard for the rules just like Slytherin. Harry is so much like his father that James has to share Harry's Gryffindor qualities. Finally Wormtail is just sort of there with no outstanding qualities (which is the type of wizard that gets sorted into Hufflepuff).
Seeing this, I applied the same analysis to HRH+Nevilee. It fits as well. The sorting hat considered Hermione for Ravenclaw. Neville shows Hufflepuff like qualities of perserverence and hard work. Harry is a true Gryffindor, pulling the sword out of his hat. Ron is a pure-blood with a disregard for the rules like Slytherin. And even more, with Ron, you have the jealousy he displayed of Harry in GoF. He wanted the spotlight which would show a thirst to prove oneself. That was the Slytherin quality in Harry the sorting hat mentions when deciding where to put him. Slytherin and Gryffindor are best friends like Ron and Hary, and also like James and Sirius.
So there are three groups of four friends that have definite similarities. All were very tight groups (aside from Neville, who again I believe will become a stronger firend in Book 6). Now, two of the groups split because of an act of betrayal. Wormtail told Voldemort the secret, breaking the Fidelius charm. Slytherin built the Chamber of Secrets which was very detrimental to the product of the founder's friendship, Hogwarts. To keep the comparison, one of HRH+Neville needs to break the friendship through an act of betrayal.
My vote is Ron based on process of elimination. Since a different character type was the betrayer in the other two groups, it cannot be used as a guide. I don't see Neville as the betrayer because his parents. I don't see Hermione because she is muggle-born and Voldemort would want to kill her. And the book is about Harry, so I don't see him. Plus Voldemort killed his parents. Ron on the other hand has already shown the ability to abandon Harry in GoF. I believe he was part of the people making fun of Harry for entering the Tri-wizard tournement. That is a mini-betrayal of sorts.
To soften the blow for Ron fans, it is my theory that he will have a good reason (at least in his mind) for the betrayal. I think the later books will show that Slytherin and Wormtail both had misguided reasons for what they did. Then again, the betrayal doesn't have to be in favor of Voldemort. Maybe a new group will arise to combat Voldemort (led by the HBP?) and Ron, Hermione or Neville will betray the Order in favor of this new group. I also believe whoever the betrayer is will do the right thing in the end along with Wormtail.
So that is my theory. As I said before, I do not believe it will definitely happen. I never believe anything will definitely happen, I prefer theories on what could happen. What do you all think? Please, shoot holes in it because I do not like the thought of Ron betrayong the group.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Jul 24, 2004 5:23 am (#108 of 359)
I agree that Ron will be a traitor
- - - - - - - - - -
T Brightwater - Jul 26, 2004 8:31 am (#109 of 359)
I don't think Ron will be a traitor, at least not deliberately; he might accidentally let information slip or put Harry in a dangerous position. Having HRH be an exact parallel to the Marauders seems a little too predictible to me.
Has anyone considered Parvati Patil? The main thing that makes me suspicious of her is that she doesn't like Hagrid; JKR often seems to use Hagrid as a kind of touchstone to demonstrate the worth of other characters. (I find it interesting that we don't ever really see Snape and Hagrid together, which may be a way for JKR to preserve Snape's ambiguity.) Also, Parvati and Lavender both seem to like the superior feeling of knowing things other people don't.
(To quote the late R.A.Lafferty, "Theories have been built on slighter bases. They haven't stood up very well, though.")
- - - - - - - - - -
The Wandless Wizard - Jul 26, 2004 9:32 am (#110 of 359)
When wands are outlawed, only outlaws will have wands.
Edited by Jul 26, 2004 9:34 am
I like the idea of Hagrid as a guage, but I don't think it completely works. Wasn't Crouch Jr. friendly with Hagrid? I know he was pretending to be Moody and trying to get along with everyone, but he was also openly contemptuous of Snape. Besides Parvati does not dislike Hagrid, at least not that we can see. She just does not like his classes. Even Hermione is probably in agreement there although she keeps quiet so as not to upset Harry. Finally, I do not think Parvati being a trator would serve the plot at all. She is not really friends with the trio. She went to the ball with Harry, but had a miserable time. She is not privy to any of the gangs secrets. I wouldn't really consider it a betrayal if she went to the other side.
As for Ron being obvious, I disagree. Since he is so close to Harry, I think he would be the least obvious. And my theory is not just based on the trios similarity to the Marauders, but also the founders. That is 3 groups of friends that echo each other. I am not saying it will definitely happen. I just thought it was an interesting possibility. And the groundwork is definitely there if JKR decides to take that route.
- - - - - - - - - -
T Brightwater - Jul 26, 2004 11:18 am (#111 of 359)
I don't remember seeing Crouch/Moody and Hagrid together. Hagrid threatens "takin' a leaf out of Professor Moody's book" to Draco Malfoy at one point, and Crouch/Moody takes advantage of the earth Hagrid dug up for his niffler class, but - correct me if I'm wrong - I don't think you actually hear either give an opinion about the other.
All of the people who like Hagrid are aware of his shortcomings as a teacher and a person, but Parvati's remark "He can still be gamekeeper, can't he?" especially given the description of her face or voice (can't remember exactly, and I've loaned the book out) sounds like there's at least a little dislike there. I'll admit it's pretty tenuous. She likes Firenze, so I don't think she has the "part-human" prejudice working against her.
As for Ron, we've seen him angry with both of his best friends, but he's come around both times. I think that scene at the end of PoA where he holds out his new owl for Crookshanks to sniff is a good indicator of his character - he's capable of admitting he was wrong and restoring good relations. To make an analogy to other figures of betrayal, I could maybe see him being Simon Peter, but not Judas.
Harry, Ron, and Hermione have never really had an equal fourth person in their group. They have other friends, especially Neville and Ginny, but they aren't quite like either the Founders or the Marauders. Perhaps they'll acquire a fourth member and thus reverse the pattern of the Founders?
- - - - - - - - - -
Weeny Owl - Jul 26, 2004 11:40 am (#112 of 359)
I don't think Ron will be a traitor, at least not deliberately; he might accidentally let information slip or put Harry in a dangerous position. Having HRH be an exact parallel to the Marauders seems a little too predictible to me.
I couldn't agree more.
The Marauders have such different backgrounds than our trio. Harry and Lupin are half-bloods, Ron, James, and Sirius are pure-bloods, Hermione is a Muggle-born, and we don't know about Pettigrew.
The Marauders did things together that our trio haven't done, at least not yet - no werewolves to cavort with, they aren't Animagi, they haven't made a map.
No one really hangs out with them, although we see Ginny and Neville with them from time to time. When they left for the Ministry in OotP, there were six students - not four.
There are more differences than similarities, and after the Department of Mysteries battle, I can't see any of the six betraying one another deliberately.
I can see pretty much anyone inadvertently letting a key piece of information slip to the wrong person; I can see a significant character being put under the Imperius Curse; and I can see any of them discussing something without realizing they're being overheard.
- - - - - - - - - -
Round Pink Spider - Jul 26, 2004 11:49 am (#113 of 359)
Crazed Writer
I don't think Ron would turn traitor deliberately, but he would be an ideal person on whom to put an Imperious Curse (I know, the movie isn't canon, but spiders forcing Ron to tap-dance, like Moody forced the spider in GoF?). He's right near Harry, and he's one of the people Harry trusts most.
- - - - - - - - - -
The Wandless Wizard - Jul 26, 2004 1:09 pm (#114 of 359)
When wands are outlawed, only outlaws will have wands.
Edited by Jul 26, 2004 1:12 pm
Ok, this will be my last shot at defending my theory unless someone else takes up the fight. I believe that we will either see someone close to harry be a traitor or there won't be a traitor. It is too close to the end to have a mystery (who betrayed Harry?) that ends with the culprit being a minor character. Whatever happens will have a big impact. Plus, JKR has said that things will not be nice for Harry in the coming books. Here are two quotes JKR said in the chat on the chat thread:
"I think I'd most like to spend a day with Harry. I'd take him out for a meal and apologize for everything I've put him through. " and "If I, personally, were Harry Potter I think I would go and hide somewhere, but that's because I know what's coming!"
So what would be so bad that JKR would want to run and hide. Well, maybe she is going to kill Harry and that of course would make anyone hide. But maybe it is one of those things worse than death DD talks about. If having your best friend betray you isn't one of those things, it is close.
Weeny Owl, regarding you comment that the comparison does not completely fit. Well, neither does the comparison between James and Harry. Harry has never been arrogant or cruel to others, he has never been good at everything he does (in school), he is not normally really popular (there are times, but he has also been the least popular student), and he is not an animagus. But these differences and others has not stopped JKR from using the comparisons. I think there are enough similarities between the founders, Marauders and trio+Neville to look to them for clues. Neville's status as being on the fringe of the trio is a weakness of my theory. I'll give you that. That relationship still can change though, and I think he is still close enough for a basis of comparison.
I don't think Ron will betray Harry directly to Voldemort. I am thinking he will betray Harry to someone working for Voldemort. Ron will know the person is not exactly on harry's side, but not that he is working for Voldemort. Ron will think he has a good reason and will eventually realize his error and come back to Harry (as T Brightwater points out he has done before).
Now on T brightwater's Parvati theory (sorry this is so long). Crouch Jr and Hagrid were friendly enough that Crouch Jr could convince Hagrid to take Harry to see the Dragons. Plus I believe there was a scene where he was at Hagrid's hut, but I don't have my book on me. Finally, your quote from Parvati shows she is ambivalent toward Hagrid. She doesn't care what he does as long as he isn't teaching. Malfoy, who truly hates Hagrid, would want him fired from every job and possibly killed as well.
- - - - - - - - - -
T Brightwater - Jul 26, 2004 1:33 pm (#115 of 359)
"Crouch Jr and Hagrid were friendly enough that Crouch Jr could convince Hagrid to take Harry to see the Dragons."
I don't think he would take much convincing. Crouch Jr may have taken credit for it while boasting to Harry, but I don't doubt that all he would have to do is give Hagrid the slightest hint, which Hagrid probably wouldn't even remember. Crouch certainly wouldn't have suggested showing the dragons to Madame Maxime! Anyway, I don't think that's enough evidence for Crouch and Hagrid to have been friends.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Jul 26, 2004 4:57 pm (#116 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Besides, at that point, didn't Hagrid believe Crouch Jr. to be the somewhat revered and somewhat scary Mad Eye Moody?
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Jul 28, 2004 4:29 pm (#117 of 359)
I agree that Ron will not betray Harry to Voldemort. I am thinking that he will do something to put Harry in a dangerous position. Neville might be a bit weak but his stance on Voldie is alway consistent. If the two ever made a traitor, I believe the main reason will be jealousy.
- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Jul 28, 2004 7:07 pm (#118 of 359)
I just finished reading this entire thread (whew!) and there are certainly some interesting theories. One thing kept flitting through my head whenever Sherbie talked about the Dung theory. The reason given for Dung as traitor always comes back to one thing: money.
What other character is continually bemoaning the lack of money--in every single book? Think about it ... are you there yet? Ron. Am I suggesting that Ron would betray Harry for the proverbial 30 pieces of silver? Not intentionally, no.
I do, however, think Ron is a very vulnerable character on a couple of different fronts. He feels kind of lost among multiple Weasley brothers, all of whom (even "Gred & Forge") are standouts in their own ways. Consider what Ron saw when he looked into the Mirror of Erised: Wasn't he Quidditch Captain and Head Boy? Ron longs to distinguish himself on his own terms, yet he continually finds himself overshadowed by Harry. He knows it isn't Harry's fault he is thrust into the limelight, but it takes a mighty strong character to stand aside and allow one's best friend to always get the glory.
There are several places in the books where Ron alludes to the fact that everything he owns is a hand-me-down or junk (or trash--I can't remember the specific comments). I think Ron's desire for money and a few minutes in the spotlight could leave him vulnerable to some subtle manipulation by a very smooth enemy. I do not think Ron would willingly or openly betray Harry, but I do think he is vulnerable.
ON THE OTHER HAND ... his participation in the battle at the MoM might have taught him that all the attention Harry gets isn't worth the price he must repeatedly pay. I hope this is so, because I don't think either Ron or Harry could sustain a betrayal by Ron. I think the emotional damage both of them would suffer could push them beyond hope of recovery--I certainly think it would push Harry to a point of reckless abandon; and the guilt Ron would feel might do the same. Ron is the closest person Harry has ever had to a brother. He and Hermione are certainly the two dearest people in the world to Harry.
Okay, now I'm REALLY going to go out on a limb ... Is anyone else bothered by the statement Harry sees Dumbledore make in the Pensieve in GoF ... "[Severus Snape] is now no more a Death Eater than I am." When Harry turned to look at Moody, who was also in the Pensieve ... "He was wearing a look of deep skepticism behind Dumbledore's back." IS there more to DD than meets the eye? I know ... NO! Smack! Slap! Whomp! for even thinking it. I apologize.
I love DD, but sometimes he bugs me. I think Harry has shown that he can be trusted with "sensitive" info. After all, he keeps the secret about Neville's parents. I think DD might help things a lot if he and Snape would just talk to Harry WHY he feels Snape can be trusted ... because Snape obviously knows Harry doesn't trust him. The only reason I can think of is that Snape witnessed the deaths of James and Lily ... and DD doesn't want Harry questioning him about what happened, why he didn't intervene, etc.
As DD says to Harry, if he'd been completely open with Harry about his fears in the first place, Sirius might still be alive. Sadly, that is true. Big D blew it big time here.
Just my 2 knuts worth ...
Solitaire
- - - - - - - - - -
Leila 2X4B - Jul 28, 2004 7:09 pm (#119 of 359)
I'd be smegged off. I'd be mad as hell, man. If some git in a white coat designed me to croak just so that he could sell his new android with go-faster stripes.
I think it because Harry is a normal human teen and probably couldn't handle more info Psychologicaly. It has nothing to do with trust, but love and concern.
- - - - - - - - - -
Luke E.A. Lockhart - Jul 28, 2004 7:24 pm (#120 of 359)
I don't buy the "Ron will betray Harry" thing. Yes, Ron wants money, but he's not so desperate for it that he would betray his friend - who is the only person who has stood by him his entire life at school. The only way I could see Ron being a traitor would be if Hermione is a traitor, as his relationship with Hermione seems deeper than his relationship with Harry (and I'm not neccesarily talking romatically here, it's just that Ron and Hermione hang out a lot). And I definately don't see Hermione as a traitor given that JKR models her on herself. No, I think the trio will stay good and loyal for the whole story.
If one of the main characters is a traitor, I would think it would be more likely to be one of the adult protaganists. Lupin seems unlikely, and Mad-Eye has already sort of been a traitor. Snape is a possibility, but I'm still thinking (and hoping) that he's a good guy. Perhaps - well, maybe the adults aren't such great guesses.
Among the students, possibilities would be Luna (out of, well, not being aware of the world), but I doubt it. Despite her instability, she's quite paranoid, and I doubt she'd be easily fooled. And I definately can't see her as evil.
What about Neville? I doubt it. Neville is such an underdog, and he's already accidentially betrayed the good guys in PoA. I don't see him as evil, and he's now too smart to be bamboozled.
How about Ginny? I could possibly see her betraying the heroes, but I really don't have enough supporting evidence.
So, my guesses are:
A. There is no traitor.
B. It's someone very unexpected.
- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Jul 28, 2004 8:03 pm (#121 of 359)
Frankly, I hope there is no traitor ... unless it is a Slytherin/DE defecting from THEIR side to fight against V.
Life denied me the parent experience, so maybe that is why I have such a strong sense of "stewardship" toward my students. I really love many of them care deeply about their well-being.
Having said that--and having admitted on another thread to immersing myself completely in what I read--I must confess that I worry about the Hogwarts kids (especially the Gryffindors) as though they were my own students, too. If one of them were to betray Harry or each other, I would feel terrible ... just as I do when I discover one of my own students has cheated or stolen or something similar. I feel like I have failed them in some way.
Truthfully, I find it hard to imagine anyone who fought with Harry in the MoM battle--kids or Order members--as a traitor. Perhaps I can't see it because I don't want it to happen ... but I hope I'm right.
Solitaire
- - - - - - - - - -
Luke E.A. Lockhart - Jul 28, 2004 8:24 pm (#122 of 359)
I think that in many ways, the Ministry battle symbolized the squaring off of sides. Those who fought alongside Harry are, in my opinion, completely loyal; they are the true heroes of the story. They are the main characters; if HP was a TV show, they would be the regular stars. I personally think that Harry, Ron, Hermione, Neville, Ginny, and Luna are safe from treason.
One more idea I had, though: what if Dumbledore is the traitor. It's unlikely, and I really don't think this because of the "glint of triumph". My main reason is that he's such a sympathetic character (apparently), on the level of James and Lily. Yet JKR had an apparently (probably mock) offended response when it was suggested that Lily was evil. No such thing has been said about DD.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Jul 28, 2004 8:43 pm (#123 of 359)
Let it snow!
I always figured Ron's "bemoaning the lack of money" was a key to how all the Weasley kids looked at their situation and helped explain why they each went the way they did. Bill took a job that had "treasure bonuses" (OotP), Fred and George became entrepreneurs. Percy took a slightly different route and picked a job that offers a lot of advancement, provided you have the right connections (as if often the way in bureaucracies), so he is just as ambitious as his brothers and kisses up and works hard to get promoted. Charlie seems to be the only real exception in that he picked a job working with dragons which may or may not pay very well. Ron is just like the rest of his brothers but is more vocal about his wish to have more than what he grew up with. I somehow think that, because he is the one most vocal about it, he will be the one to somehow make a decision giving up something material for something he wants more, in a sort of "be careful what you wish for" sense.... I don't see him as a traitor at all. Ron seems to be the personification of loyalty, so I can't see him turning on Harry.
Sirius pointed out that Dung was very loyal to Dumbledore so I don't think he'd turn traitor either.
- - - - - - - - - -
The Wandless Wizard - Jul 29, 2004 1:58 pm (#124 of 359)
When wands are outlawed, only outlaws will have wands.
Ron seems to be the personification of loyalty
How do you account for him turning his back on Harry in GoF? It wasn't even for a really good reason. Ron had decided to shut Harry out before Harry even gave any explanation as to how his name got in the goblet. I know he eventually came back around and they were better friends for it. Still his loyalty has waivered before.
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Jul 29, 2004 3:07 pm (#125 of 359)
Let it snow!
I don't think his loyalty waivered at all. I've already expressed my view of the fight in the "Ron" thread (post 774), so I won't repeat those points here. JKR made a comment in her A&E Biography interview: "He's always there when you need him. That's Ron Weasley." I think that sums it up quite nicely.
- - - - - - - - - -
The Wandless Wizard - Jul 29, 2004 4:12 pm (#126 of 359)
When wands are outlawed, only outlaws will have wands.
Sorry, I have not read the Ron thread yet. I have only been here a month or so. I am trying to read a couple new threads a day, but lately the new posts in threads I have read is enough to keep me busy. Plus, I have definitely shied away from some of the longer threads. Still I am curious how you view this as not a waivering of loyalty. Normally I think you have pretty good insight into the HP world and I agree with a lot of your posts. So I am off to read up about Ron. I'll be reading all the posts first It may be awhile before I can respond.
- - - - - - - - - -
Archangel - Aug 9, 2004 4:55 am (#127 of 359)
Every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end. -- Semisonic
I think it'll be Ron. I know it'd probably break a lot of hearts (Harry's included) to find out that your bestfriend could do that to you but it would make the series more grounded and cyclical (the right word escapes me at this moment). I mean, Harry's parents were betrayed by someone who they thought was their friend, and in these stories, things have a tendency to repeat themselves. Harry being betrayed by his friend would come as a shock but it would fit nicely with the plot.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Aug 9, 2004 4:34 pm (#128 of 359)
I agree. Ron must die
- - - - - - - - - -
MickeyCee3948 - Aug 11, 2004 8:55 pm (#129 of 359)
Avatar courtesy of Gwen
NEVER!!!! Ron is the type of friend we all want and strive for. In GoF he was upset because of the perception that Harry had entered and not told him.
No Way can I see Ron betraying Harry. It's not in his make up or the make up of any of his family. Yeah he wishes he had more money, Ginny does to. Remember her gripes to TR in CoS.
Fred and George have their business going well and with fewer mouths to feed Molly and Arthur may find the going a little easier. They are down from 9 to 4 mouths in the house. Every parent and most children can relate with the same feelings but the majority do not turn on their friends.
Mikie
- - - - - - - - - -
Archangel - Aug 11, 2004 9:27 pm (#130 of 359)
Every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end. -- Semisonic
Well one'll never know what could turn someone against another, right? Although if Ron does betray Harry, I don't think it'll be because of money or because Harry gets all the attention and he does not. Winning the Quidditch Cup for Gryffindor made sure that he's no longer just Harry's mate to the majority of students. OR if he does indeed betray Harry, it won't be on his own accord. He might be under the Imperius curse or Voldemort fed some bogus idea in his mind like he did with Harry.
Either way, making Ron the traitor would have maximum impact on Harry -- if not create the maximum damage to him. Doing so wouldn't be beneath someone like Voldemort. Cheers!
- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Aug 12, 2004 12:15 am (#131 of 359)
I agree, Archangel. If Ron does betray Harry, it will be either unconsciously or against his will. I will be covering Ron. TH, I'm watching you! **wand out and ready**
- - - - - - - - - -
MickeyCee3948 - Aug 12, 2004 7:41 am (#132 of 359)
Avatar courtesy of Gwen
Archangel and Solitaire - When you put it that way I guess it could happen. Ron and Hermione are also so worried about LV possessing or controlling Harry's thoughts that they more or less leave themselves open to that same control
Mikie
- - - - - - - - - -
Kasse - Aug 12, 2004 10:58 am (#133 of 359)
Total Hatred you broke my heart with your statement. I am watching you with Solitaire *takes wand out ready to defend Ron*
Ok remember that JKR said friendship is a big foundation of her stories. The trio together can overcome anything, yes they have their arguments, and petty insecurities but their friendship is stronger than all of this.
Ron will never betray Harry, at least not by his own free will!
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Aug 12, 2004 5:24 pm (#134 of 359)
Let it snow!
Total Hatred, tread carefully....
- - - - - - - - - -
S.E. Jones - Aug 12, 2004 8:04 pm (#135 of 359)
Let it snow!
I don't see Ron betraying Harry. Ron more closely parallels James or Sirius than he does Peter. James was the betrayed and Sirius was nothing but loyal to James. Besides, there were four friends in the original betrayal, so you'd have to include a fourth one to make a real parallel, in a literal sense, and I just don't see it. I don't really put much faith in generational parallels.
However, I could see Ron doing something out of loyalty that Harry percieved as a betrayal. As Hermione demonstrated by going to McGonagall about the Firebolt, being a loyal friend isn't always standing by while you know you're friend is doing something that might get them hurt, it's also stepping in to prevent them from hurting themselves or others. I keep thinking of the way Ron and Hermione kept urging Harry to go to Dumbledore or McGonagall about his scar, his dreams, and about Umbridge. I could see one of them finally going over Harry's head and telling Dumbledore something that Harry might be hiding from him again. Harry might percieve this action as a betrayal, at least for a time, but it would've been done out of loyalty to a friend. I just don't see JKR severing the Trio. Distancing them, yes, but not cutting bonds the way a betrayal would.
- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - Aug 12, 2004 10:53 pm (#136 of 359)
I agree with S.E. Jones. Even though Ron has had some problems with envy in the past (so has Harry; he has envied Ron's family life), in Book 5 he got quite a lot of glory with the Quidditch cup. He also survived the Ministry battle and got a taste of what Harry has faced all these years. I really do not see Ron betraying Harry or anyone else he loves.
I can see the scenario S.E. offers ... and its opposite: Ron or Hermione doing something in an effort to help and having it backfire. Those are really the only way I can see a betrayal from either of them. They are too much a part of each other at this point--that "cord of three strands."
Solitaire
- - - - - - - - - -
Archangel - Aug 12, 2004 11:41 pm (#137 of 359)
Every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end. -- Semisonic
You make fair points Solitaire and S.E. The scenarios that you pointed out are the most likely to happen and Harry might indeed feel betrayed because of those actions. However, I still can't shake off that feeling that the events in Book 6 (or maybe a specific event in the book) will test their bond and Ron will be found wanting. Gut feel I guess...
- - - - - - - - - -
Quibbler Editor In Chief - Aug 13, 2004 4:25 pm (#138 of 359)
Although I cannot see Ron betraying Harry intentionally, mostly because I hope that it will not happen, he does seem to be a very vulnerable character. If he was offered power, fame, or money, I could see him accepting it if he did not realize how it would hurt Harry, although he would feel horrible about it later on. Ron has shown jealousy of Harry, and we cannot forget that the Death Eaters are very powerful wizards that would probably be able to trick a young wizard with so much to prove like Ron. Going into Hogwarts he had to try to live up to the standards set by all of his 5 amazing brothers, but now he must also try to live up to the standards set by his friends and even his younger sister. Harry has now stood up to Voldemort four times and is a great Quidditch seeker, Hermione has excelled in the classroom, and Ginny is also a very sucessful Quidditch player now.
- - - - - - - - - -
Archangel - Aug 14, 2004 12:03 am (#139 of 359)
Every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end. -- Semisonic
Edited by Aug 14, 2004 12:08 am
I thought of something while I was reading the Ship threads which I feel might be used to create disharmony among the 3 and it's something that Iago did to Othello to make him lose his mind.
In this case, Ron will be Othello. He is the man of the moment having just won the Quidditch Cup for Gryffindor (and presumably the House Cup, although there was no mention of that in OoP). Supposing that he gets together with Hermione in Book 6 (please note I'm not sailing any ship but let's just say that this happens for argument's sake), is still a prefect come 6th year, and is made the Gryffindor Quidditch captain based on his heroics, then we could safely say that he's pretty much on a roll right now. Now I'm not saying that Harry will be Iago and be jealous of Ron and try to get what he has right now, I think he'll be happy for pal and support him 100%. My guess is that the "Iago" of the story would be Voldemort (or Draco? After all, what could be a sweeter payback than breaking up the HRH gang?) and he'll mess with Ron's mind by showing him Harry and Hermione discussing this and that -- making it appear that she's being unfaithful and all that. I'm sure he'll sneak in whispers that Harry is a much better Quidditch player since he can win a game all by himself and that he is national player material. Of course, by then Ron will probably be too distraught and too confused that'll he'll start to believe these lies and thus, unwittingly cause harm to Harry and the Order.
Sounds far-fetched I know, but JKR has introduced some Shakespearean themes in her books before and I feel that Othello is quite prime to make an appearance in the series somehow.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Aug 15, 2004 2:33 am (#140 of 359)
What heroics. Saving a single goal is not considered a heroic endeavor. If he is really trying hard enough, I believe that he can perform better. He is bragging that he has years of practice but look what happened, he performs poorly. Ron's most fatal flaw is that his head inflates easily. A little accomplishment and he thinks he is already the greatest. I believe that Ron is more like Wormtail. He is always at the shadows of his friends. He is trying hard to be like them but fails miserably. He is willing to do everything to be stronger even it cost something precious to him. Ron is never like Sirius. There is some circumstancial parallelism but the personality is different.
- - - - - - - - - -
Leila 2X4B - Aug 15, 2004 9:46 pm (#141 of 359)
I'd be smegged off. I'd be mad as hell, man. If some git in a white coat designed me to croak just so that he could sell his new android with go-faster stripes.
Archangel, what would that make Harry, Cassio? I still am not sold on the trio betraying each other.
- - - - - - - - - -
Archangel - Aug 15, 2004 9:58 pm (#142 of 359)
Every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end. -- Semisonic
He could be Beauty. Who knows what Harry'll look like in the 6th book? LOL It's OK if you're not sold, this is just fun speculation anyway.
- - - - - - - - - -
Leila 2X4B - Aug 15, 2004 10:00 pm (#143 of 359)
I'd be smegged off. I'd be mad as hell, man. If some git in a white coat designed me to croak just so that he could sell his new android with go-faster stripes.
True Archangel, it is not as if we have book 6 to read.... Fun speculation is all that we have to grasp on to for now.
Actually, if you want to make a case for Othello/HP crossovers, the best would be Iago for Barty Crouch Jr/Moody. He had everyone fooled and messed with you without you being any the wiser.
Leila
- - - - - - - - - -
Archangel - Aug 15, 2004 10:03 pm (#144 of 359)
Every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end. -- Semisonic
Yeah and the wait can be frustrating sometimes!
- - - - - - - - - -
remiden - Aug 16, 2004 6:44 pm (#145 of 359)
I am going to predict a shocker! Wait for it .......ready? .......There will be no betrayel.
- - - - - - - - - -
Quibbler Editor In Chief - Aug 17, 2004 2:27 pm (#146 of 359)
I agree somewhat with you remiden. I cannot see any high profile characters betraying Harry and Voldemort. I think that they are all too loyal for that, but you never know with JKR. She really tricked most of us when Peter Pittegrew was the bad guy instead of Sirius, after we all thought that it was the other way around.
I believe the people that are too loyal to betray are:
All of the Weasleys (except Percy), Dumbledore, Lupin, Hermione, McGonagall, and Hagrid.
P.S. Did JKR ever say anything about there being any suprising betrayals, or are we just guessing that there will be some?
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Aug 20, 2004 8:47 pm (#147 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
It is just a surmise based upon classic Western (not cowboy) epochal, mythical and/or fictional literature.
- - - - - - - - - -
Lord Montemort - Aug 25, 2004 9:03 pm (#148 of 359)
If it follows the Arthurian legend then Ron (Lancelot) could betray Harry in some way. Possibly to protect Hermione (Gwenivere (sp)).
Although I don't it's too likely.
Ludo could definately turn traitor. He's in debt up to his eyes so the motivation is there.
Neville: another possibility. A "third party" could bring up away to cure his parents if he does something (that he thinks isn't a big deal),i.e leave this door open on X date type of thing.
Dung: A tough one, I see him playing both sides against the middle more then anything. He's on his side primarily, but would side with DD simply because DD is less likely to dispose of him when the dust clears.
Percy: Maybe, but he plays by the rules too much. He's ambitious yes, but that doesn't mean he'd betray his principles, he was in Gryffindor after all. Aside from F&G, the rest will want to reconcile, especially Molly. F&G will eventually, but they will draw it out and make Percy the but of their jokes for years to come.
Ultimately I don't think there will be any betrayal. After losing Sirius, Harry, I think will guarded towards everyone. So maybe it will be his own distrust that betrays him.
Huh, guess I contradicted myself in that last statement.
- - - - - - - - - -
Loopy Lupin - Aug 27, 2004 8:18 am (#149 of 359)
Dung: A tough one, I see him playing both sides against the middle more then anything. He's on his side primarily, but would side with DD simply because DD is less likely to dispose of him when the dust clears. -- hogshead
I tend to think Dung is the least likely candidate for betrayal. I think this primarily because, as a crook, you would be quick to jump to the conclusion that he might betray anyone as suits his needs. That would be too obvious. Pluse we don't know the thing that DD helped him out with previously. It could be something so serious that even a crook would have to remain loyal.
I've said somewhere else, possibily in this thread, that Ron's intermittent jealousy stays in the back of my mind. The ground work has been laid for this character flaw. I hope not though. A betrayal by Ron would make re-reading the first books sad.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Aug 27, 2004 1:17 pm (#150 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Well, there's outright treason (like Brutus and Cassius, Judas, Benedict Arnold, Peter Pettigrew, etc.) and then there's "temporary insanity" or even inadvertence. In the first case, the actor joins a scheme to knowingly betray someone or something precious while in the latter case something -- like a secret, etc. -- slips in the heat of it all. Both can do damage but the former is outright evil whereas the latter is more human and forgivable. I can see Ron, Neville, and a few others, blurting something out that they shouldn't. I can't see either of them actually becoming a traitor, i.e., switching sides, etc.
And Dung and Percy are both a little too obvious. There would be little dramatic surprise if either of them turned out to be a "secret agent" for Voldemort.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Elanor- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 51
Location : France
Treason in Book 6 and/or 7 (Post 151 to 200)
Elanor Sat May 21, 2011 9:05 am
TomProffitt - Aug 28, 2004 5:19 am (#151 of 359)
Bullheaded empiricist
The classic Western Literature betrayal took place in Voldemort War I. It will not occur in VWII because the true nature of Voldemort and the Death Eaters has been exposed fifteen years ago.
Yes, people we have counted on as friends and family may fail us(e.g. Percy), but none will turn their coats as Pettigrew did. Some, such as Fudge, Umbridge, and Skeeter, have been against as through ignorance, ambition, and avarice, but a more dangerous opponent than us now opposes them.
Now that war is in the open those that have hindered us will join with us; even if it is the discomfort of aligning with Lindberg, Stalin, and Chiang Kai-shek.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hermy-own - Aug 29, 2004 5:29 am (#152 of 359)
S.P.R.W. Vice President = Ponine
Excellent post, Tom! Very...poetic.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Aug 29, 2004 3:27 pm (#153 of 359)
Remember that jelousy is the reason why Pettigrew betrayed the Potters. He is jealous of their capabilities. If Ron will only expand his emotion range which currently as large as teaspoon, the chances of him betraying will lessen. Why do R/HR shipper will not accept the possiblity that Ron will betray them. Just because he is their friend. In Arthurian legend, Lancelot betrayed Arthur and Lancelot was Arthur's most trusted Knight. I think Lancelot betrayed Arthur because he is in love with Arthur's wife. I believe her name was similar to Ginny's real name and I not sure of the spelling
- - - - - - - - - -
Jessalynn Quirky - Sep 2, 2004 3:31 pm (#154 of 359)
Interesting....maybe Ginny represents Guinuvere? (think I mispelled that) Maybe JKR was doing a bit of foreshadowing at the end of book 5 when talk goes on about Ginny going with someone?
I better go re-read book 5.....
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 3, 2004 4:21 pm (#155 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Ron would not have a thing for his own sister though, so he can't be Lancelot to Harry/Ginny. Not in a JKR book.
But, it is good that you are analyzing the treason angle along the lines of the baser emotions -- jealously, envy, covetousness, fear, embarrassment, insecurity and its conjoined twin arrogance, etc. These are the things that push the fragile or fractured psyche down the path of treason and betrayal.
- - - - - - - - - -
HPHouse - Sep 3, 2004 10:24 pm (#156 of 359)
I really do not think Ron is one to betray Harry, I just do not see the connection between himself and Lancelot of the Arthurian Legends. I think Ron is interested in Hermaoine not Ginny. Now someone I think could turn out to be a traitor would be Peter Pettigrew betraying Voldemort in the end because of what Harry does for him at the end of Prisoner of Azkaban. He will probably sacrifice himself to save Harry or something like that.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Sep 4, 2004 3:02 am (#157 of 359)
Ron= Lancelot Hermione= Guinevere Harry=Arthur. Get the point
- - - - - - - - - -
Neville Longbottom - Sep 4, 2004 3:24 am (#158 of 359)
I am sure Ron would never betray Harry. After all, JKR said he is one of her favourite characters. He is losely based on one of JKR's best friends. He sacrificed himself for Harry during the chess game. He risked his life again to help him in book 2,3 and 5. He destroyed Percy's letter when Percy told him to sever ties with Harry. Okay, he was jealous in GoF, but that's what makes him more well rounded as a character, not a traitor in waiting. I also can't see any similarity between Hermione and Guinevere. And anyway, if even there were, Lancelot never sold King Arthur to his enemies, he "just" fell in love with Arthur's wife. But they were still on the same side of the war. (And in the end, it was Lancelot who got Guinevere *g*)
- - - - - - - - - -
TwinklingBlueEyes - Sep 4, 2004 3:47 am (#159 of 359)
"Character is doing the right thing when nobody is looking"
Besides, this is not King Authur's story. :-)
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Sep 4, 2004 3:48 am (#160 of 359)
I got the point. But if I made comparison like this Arthur= Ron Guinevere= Mione Lancelot= Lancelot Lady Morgana= Ginny. Do you think it will make a diference?
- - - - - - - - - -
Chris. - Sep 4, 2004 4:56 am (#161 of 359)
HBP: 16th July 2005: the most anticipated day in history
I don't think JKR wold do anything like that. There's simliarities between Harry and King Arthur, but I see no others with Ron, Ginny or Hermione.
I don't think it will be Ron who, if any, will betray them. He's been to good a friend, and after Percy's disloyalty, I doubt he will betray his family and friends.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 7, 2004 2:54 pm (#162 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Ron= Lancelot Hermione= Guinevere Harry=Arthur. Get the point
No.
I mean, I get the part about the Lancelot/ Guinevere/ Arthur theme and legend, etc. I just think it has no application to the trio of Ron/ Hermione/ Harry. So far, Harry has more in common with Wart than Arthur. While Harry might be a little Arthurian (what Western literary "hero" can avoid it to some extent, with notable exceptions like Dog Day Afternoon, Bonnie & Clyde, Reservoir Dogs, etc. that really prove the rule), Ron has almost nothing (other than loyalty) in common with Lancelot and Hermione is certainly not Guinevere.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Sep 7, 2004 2:57 pm (#163 of 359)
You forgot the fact that he harbors a secret jelousy to Harry. Added the fact of his emotional range as small as a teaspoon, he is vulnerable to the possibility of betrayal. If Ron matures emotionally in the next book, he reduces his tendecy to betray Harry. That emotional immaturity is Ron's greatest weakness and coupled by the facts that the his head inflates easily and he is a bit dense at most times. It only takes a small catalyst to make him betray his friends.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 7, 2004 3:13 pm (#164 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
No, I didn't forget anything. It is just friendly disagreement.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Sep 7, 2004 3:25 pm (#165 of 359)
I know. I just refreshing your memory
- - - - - - - - - -
Weeny Owl - Sep 9, 2004 10:15 am (#166 of 359)
I doubt if JKR will use the same scenario as she did with the Marauders because she's much too clever not to come up with something completely fresh.
There were four Marauders. Harry, Hermione, and Ron are a trio. In order to make it four, only one person would be needed, but which person? Ginny, Neville, Luna? That would exclude two of them, of course.
The comparisons with the Arthurian legends have no basis in canon, and while it's possible JKR has used parts of pretty much any legends, she isn't going to use them completely. She may add bits and pieces here and there, such as a comparison between Excalibur and Godric Gryffindor's sword. There are just too many points she needs to cover to finish the series to make it feasible that a romantic triangle will be included. She has to tell the story of Voldemort's birth, the Marauders' backstory, give us a new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher, get rid of Fudge, deal with the Death Eaters in Azkaban, and get all of the students through two more years of school.
I really don't care who ends up with whom from a romantic perspective because the romances are just tiny parts of the series that show teens being teens, just as discussions about sports and fashion are. Whether or not a specific character ends up with another character has little to do with the whole series, and while I have my preferences, it just doesn't matter when thinking of the seriousness of a second wizarding war.
I really don't understand how anyone could hate Ron or think that he would deliberately and with malice aforethought betray Harry or anyone else he cared about. Harry, Hermione, and Ron have all done things that have made the others angry, but throughout the entire series, they've argued and made up, and that shows that their friendship is strong enough not to be torn asunder.
I just cannot see Ron, Hermione, Ginny, Neville, or Luna betraying anyone. If a bad guy were to use the Imperius Curse, any of them could do something to harm Harry, but it would not be a betrayal since it would not be something done of their own free will but something that was done to them.
I do think there is a wolf among the sheep, though, but I think it will be an adult member of the Order. I keep thinking about the battle at the Department of Mysteries and wondering who was supposed to be on duty that night. Arthur was on duty when he was attacked by Nagini, and Sturgis Podmore was on duty when he was discovered and sent to Azkaban. What Order member was supposed to be on duty and where was he/she the night of the battle? Inquiring owls want to know!
- - - - - - - - - -
The One - Sep 9, 2004 10:40 am (#167 of 359)
Open minded sceptic
You forgot the fact that he harbors a secret jealousy to Harry. Added the fact of his emotional range as small as a teaspoon, he is vulnerable to the possibility of betrayal.
I have also considered the possibility that Ron might betray the trio, but I have decided against it.
Mostly because that even if his insecurity and jealousy is a weak point, Ron is a good guy and a good friend. Even if he may do stupid things in a moment of anger, he will never knowingly do anything evil.
Even during the GoF fight he never did anything against Harry, he just did not support him. (Except for the initial accusation of betrayal.)
I do believe that his jealousy is still an issue, and I do expect it to create problems in the 6th book, but by book 7 I believe hat the issues will be resolved. I find it extremely unlikely that Ron will turn evil or betray Harry.
That simply is not Ron, despite his teenager issues.
- - - - - - - - - -
TomProffitt - Sep 9, 2004 2:46 pm (#168 of 359)
Bullheaded empiricist
"That simply is not Ron, despite his teenager issues." --- The One
I am in full agreement. Of all the well developed characters I don't believe any of them have it in them to betray Harry and the Order, with two exceptions.
I believe that Snape is amoral enough to do it, but I cannot see any reward being significant enough for him to want the Dark Lord to achieve victory.
I may be jumping at nothing, but I believe there may be a few subtle hints about Ginny in the books. What we know of her character makes me believe that she would not willingly betray Harry. I do, however, wonder if Riddle's Diary left open some back door that Lord Voldemort or the Death Eaters could use against her. It's only a suspicion at this point, I really don't think it will happen.
As I posted earlier (#151), I don't think Jo's going to do the treason thing again.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 11, 2004 5:44 pm (#169 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
There may not be an event of treason -- that is all in JKR's hands. However, this thread mainly assesses who it could be and why. I think treason is still possible, but it will not be by Ron, nor Hermi, nor Neville, nor Ginny, nor Loopy. Any of these could let something harmful to Harry inadvertently slip -- either out of anger (Ron) or being too smart for her own good (Hermione) or being to quick to "take the bait" (Neville) or being too much in love with Harry (Ginny) or just being loveably daffy (Luna), but none would intentionally help Voldemort or hurt Harry.
Treason, if it comes, could come from one of Harry's other two roomies. I think Dean is the least likely of the two in this regard. So that still leaves Seamus as a candidate (sorry, but he is), since he has unresolved issues hanging over from OoP.
One of the other DE members could be a traitor, but that is less likely given the ending to OoP. (We did, however, see a little treason at the end of OoP by the DE member who squealed and forced Dumbledore's "disappearance" (and where did he go, after all), didn't we, but that was relatively minor -- not a betrayal into the hands of Voldemort but based on an over-eager loyalty to superficial school rules and self-important authorities).
So, who has the most complex relationship with Harry AND Voldemort? Snape, of course, but betrayal by Snape would be too obvious on one level and too contrary to Dumbledore's insights on another. So, who else? Other than Snape. Think, think, think.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hermy-own - Sep 11, 2004 6:09 pm (#170 of 359)
S.P.R.W. Vice President = Ponine
"I think treason is still possible, but it will not be by Ron, nor Hermi, nor Neville, nor Ginny, nor Loopy."
-- Hogs Head (emphasis mine)
I take it that by "Loopy" you mean Luna? Initially I thought you were referring to Lupin - we have a member called "Loopy Lupin" on the forum and this connection threw me off. *chides Loopy for choosing obscure name*
In addition, I believe Luna is referred to as "Looney" rather than "Loopy" in the books. Of course, I could be wrong.
Hermy.
- - - - - - - - - -
Jessalynn Quirky - Sep 11, 2004 7:20 pm (#171 of 359)
Your right, Hermy, Luna is referred to as "Loony" and on here "Loopy" is Lupin. :-)
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 12, 2004 6:25 am (#172 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
I guess our member's nomme de plum threw me off. Yes, I'm talking about Luna.
- - - - - - - - - -
Weeny Owl - Sep 12, 2004 8:53 pm (#173 of 359)
I've noticed a lot of discussion about the kids who may or may not betray Harry, but what about the adults? There are teachers, Ministry employees, fellow students' parents, and Order members. I see an adult being more capable of actual betrayal than one of the kids.
- - - - - - - - - -
Quibbler Editor In Chief - Sep 13, 2004 1:38 pm (#174 of 359)
I think that it is easier to think about the kids because we probably know more about them, even the not so major characters because they are at school with Harry for most of the book. We don't get quite as good an idea of the personalities of the adults who we only see once in a while. I definitely don't expect Lupin, Hagrid, McGonagall, or Mad Eye to betray because of what we know about them already. I also think that it would be too easy for Snape to be the traitor, and he would have done something to Harry by now, therefore I don't expect him to betray Dumbledore or Harry. Other characters such as Dung, Tonks, and more minor characters that we know less about seem harder to be sure that we can trust. My problem with predicting which adults are traitors is that it is hard to think that Dumbledore would have made a bad decision about who he trusts and keeps around him. Ideas anyone?
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 13, 2004 4:17 pm (#175 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
. . . hard to think that Dumbledore would have made a bad decision about who he trusts and keeps around him . . .
I know what you mean, but sometimes the person harboring the traitor or would be traitor is actually very smart. They see what is happening or what could happen, and so hold the traitor or would-be traitor close-in, like a confidant, letting them see only what is safe for the "good guys" and sometimes letting them see just enough to give an incomplete or incorrect picture to the "bad guys." By similar techniques, the Allies in WWII used Hitler's own spy network in England (along with other sleight of hand) to confirm Hitler's presumption that the amphibious invasion would be in Calais and not Normandy.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Sep 13, 2004 4:29 pm (#176 of 359)
I agree that is a brilliant maneuver. Dumbledore best traits is his ability to improvise. He is master manipulator, not that I am saying that he is evil. He takes advantage of the situation and make measures to use that situation to his advantage
- - - - - - - - - -
Weeny Owl - Sep 14, 2004 9:55 am (#177 of 359)
that it is hard to think that Dumbledore would have made a bad decision about who he trusts and keeps around him. Ideas anyone?
Yes, but don't forget about Quirrell, Lockhart, and Barty Crouch, Jr. For someone who is supposed to be so much on the ball, he didn't do too well with those three.
Also, as I said with the kids, while I don't see them deliberately betraying Harry or the Order, as far as we know, Harry is the only one who can fight off the Imperius Curse. In OotP, Podmore and Bode were under the Imperius Curse, so it happening with another adult seems like something that almost has to happen again. It's been mentioned by Hagrid and Sirius that no one knew who could be trusted because Voldemort could blackmail, threaten, or Imperio people. Look what Lucius Malfoy did to get the Board of Governors to suspend Dumbledore in CoS.
- - - - - - - - - -
Quibbler Editor In Chief - Sep 14, 2004 1:39 pm (#178 of 359)
Good point with Lockhart and Quirrel. With Moody I think that it is a little different since Dumbledore did not appoint Barty Crouch Jr., but Alastor Moody, who he was right to trust. After that though, Dumbledore did make the mistake of believeing that Professor Moody really was Alastor Moody. Just thinking, since we know that Tonks has been portrayed as somewhat careless and unorganized, do you think that she could be in the category of someone who would accidentally help the Death Eaters without knowing what she was doing? I think that the same could be said about Mundungus Fletcher.
- - - - - - - - - -
Weeny Owl - Sep 14, 2004 2:02 pm (#179 of 359)
I'll take Mundungus first. I flat-out don't trust him, and I think he is a blackmail victim waiting to happen. I'm not sure how much damage he could do to the Order, but after the dementor debacle and him selling controlled substances to the twins, I could see him doing pretty much anything and justifying it to himself. I'm not sure he would knowingly betray Dumbledore, but he could easily become involved in more cauldron schemes and either not do something he should (such as guarding Harry) or let something slip, not realizing how damaging it could be (such as Sirius not ordering Kreacher to keep his mouth shut about anything and everything going on at Grimmauld Place).
As for Tonks, I do believe she is loyal to Dumbledore and the Order. In part, I feel that way because her father is a Muggle-born, so she would know he would be a target of Voldemort and the Death Eaters. As for her accidentally giving away something, I don't think she would let some critical bit of information slip, but I do think she could do something that might harm the Order by dropping something or tripping at a time when Order members are trying to sneak up on a group of Death Eaters.
- - - - - - - - - -
LooneyLuna - Sep 15, 2004 2:17 pm (#180 of 359)
I'm thinking that Harry could be mislead to think that someone close to him is a traitor. Voldemort puts some doubts into Harry's head about his friends or he starts dreaming about being betrayed. That could be even more damaging than a real traitor.
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Sep 15, 2004 3:39 pm (#181 of 359)
Harry is really going to have to learn Occlumency.
Hopefully he will stick it out.
- - - - - - - - - -
timrew - Sep 15, 2004 4:24 pm (#182 of 359)
Middle-aged Harry Potter fan
LooneyLuna: Voldemort puts some doubts into Harry's head about his friends.......
I agree, Luna. Voldie could put some doubt into Harry's head about, say, Ron; and, because they have rowed before, Harry could think that Ron is a traitor.
Let's face it. There are a few people Harry has rowed with before - Seamus, Hermione, even Neville.
The thought could be planted in Harry's mind that they were traitors; or they could even be placed under the Imperius Curse, and made to do traitorous acts against their own wills.
Harry needs to learn Occlumency, Legilimency, and how to throw the Imperius Curse off others (rather than just himself) right away!
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Sep 15, 2004 4:39 pm (#183 of 359)
"Harry could think that Ron is a traitor. Let's face it. There are a few people Harry has rowed with before - Seamus, Hermione, even Neville."
I don't think that Harry would be so stupid as to think that any of them would side with Voldemort, and if he learned anything from the prophecy, it was that Voldemort's enemies are his friends.
Of course, he might suspect them of being under Imperius, which will make him root out the wizard responsible for the Imperius...
But to think that they would willingly turn against him, when he has a much bigger fish to fry? Unlikely.
- - - - - - - - - -
The One - Sep 15, 2004 4:49 pm (#184 of 359)
Open minded sceptic
LooneyLuna 9/15/04 2:17pm
Excelent point. It may very well be the fear of treason more than treason itself that causes problems.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 15, 2004 7:19 pm (#185 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Nothing to fear but fear itself? Not treason but the fear of treason: Hmmm. I'll think about that. Very clever.
(I can't wait for Book 6 but I guess we all will.)
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Sep 17, 2004 11:40 pm (#186 of 359)
Do you think Harry will as gullible as he was before? The answer is no. The death of Sirius had opened his eyes to the truth. Use your head, not your heart.
I can't understand what Sirius mean when he says that the ones that can considered as blood traitors are the Weasleys. Does this refers to Weasley's friendship to Muggles or something deeeper. Is this related to the incident where Athur Weasley used an Imperius Curse
- - - - - - - - - -
Weeny Owl - Sep 18, 2004 6:28 am (#187 of 359)
A blood traitor is a pure-blood who doesn't buy into the typical Death Eater blood prejudices, but is willing to accept anyone, pure-blood, half-blood, or Muggle-born.
When did Arthur Weasley ever use an Imperius Curse?
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Sep 18, 2004 3:27 pm (#188 of 359)
It was not written in the books but Barty Crouch said it when he was teaching them the effects of the Unforgivable Curses. It was implied and it was in page 212 Chapter 14: Unforgivable Curses, Goblet of Fire.
- - - - - - - - - -
The One - Sep 18, 2004 3:54 pm (#189 of 359)
Open minded sceptic
I suppose you are refering to this?
"Er," said Ron tentatively, "my dad told me about one.. . . Is it called the Imperius Curse, or something?"
"Ah, yes," said Moody appreciatively. "Your father would know that one. Gave the Ministry a lot of trouble at one time, the Imperius Curse."
I do not believe that this means that Arthur ever used the curse. It is stated elsewhere that the ministry had great trouble after the last war to decide who had joined Voldemort of their free will, and who had been under an Imperius Curse.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 19, 2004 6:06 am (#190 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
But Arthur might have had the curse used on him.
- - - - - - - - - -
Jessalynn Quirky - Sep 20, 2004 3:30 pm (#191 of 359)
Hmmm....*explodes* I need to read book 6 right now! So many questions to be answered!
- - - - - - - - - -
KTO - Sep 20, 2004 4:15 pm (#192 of 359)
This is a great thread. I do not believe that Ron will betray Harry. Ron is Sam to Harry's Frodo. Also JKR has indicated that Ron is based on one of her best friends and Ron has always come through in the end. Like I said on another thread, Harry knows that he cannot be successful without his friend, Ron needs to learn this and I believe he will.
Can see Dung as a traitor, selling the twins illegal materials, like a drug dealer, one of the greatest destructive forces in our world. I also like the idea of Tonks being a traitor, it resonates with me, I do not know why.
The biggest act of treason is everyones refusal to tell us when HBP is being released, not knowing is driving me MAD!!
- - - - - - - - - -
remiden - Sep 23, 2004 7:35 am (#193 of 359)
The point that someone made about Dumbledore choosing Lockhart as an example of Dumbledoore making a mistake, I disagree with. One, Lockhart never did anything bad to any of the students, until Harry and Ron forced him to go into the chamber. (which forcing someone to go somewhere against their will when they could die is just as bad or possibly worse than shooting off memory charms. Why didn't Harry and Ron go get someone useful anyway?) And second, when Harry tells Dumbledore what happened to Lockhart, Dumbledore replies something to the effect of "Stabbed with your own sword." showing that he knew that Lockhart was using memory charms on other people and not doing hte deeds himself. I do not remember Dumbledore's exact quote though.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hermy-own - Sep 23, 2004 7:50 am (#194 of 359)
S.P.R.W. Vice President = Ponine
"Dumbledore replies something to the effect of "Stabbed with your own sword." showing that he knew that Lockhart was using memory charms on other people and not doing hte deeds himself."
This part continues to confuse me, Remiden. Why would DD employ someone he knows is a fraud?
It is certainly not something I would expect DD, in all his wisdom, to do. Perhaps it was, indeed, a mistake.
Please do hold your hippogriffs; I'm not suggesting that DD will make another mistake or turn traitor in book 6/7.
- - - - - - - - - -
LooneyLuna - Sep 23, 2004 10:52 am (#195 of 359)
I honestly think that there was no one else who applied for the job, and Dumbledore was forced to hire Lockhart, knowing he was a fraud.
I do NOT think Ron would betray Harry willingly, but since Ron had trouble throwing off the Imperious Curse (GOF), he could be put under the curse and forced to hurt or betray Harry. I think Ron would fight the curse off eventually, before he could do too much damage.
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Sep 23, 2004 11:25 am (#196 of 359)
Yeah, that's what Hagrid said. "He was the on'y man for the job."
So where was Lupin? Where was Moody?
- - - - - - - - - -
Jessalynn Quirky - Sep 25, 2004 4:47 pm (#197 of 359)
They probably weren't available at the time. No idea why, I'm just making up an excuse for them.
- - - - - - - - - -
Half Blood Princess - Sep 26, 2004 7:00 pm (#198 of 359)
I think that Dung will betray the Order. I have not felt completely comfortable with him in the Order, and when we were first introduced to him, I didn't like him. He's too...odd. He does illegal things, and I think of him as a spy.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hermy-own - Sep 27, 2004 1:54 am (#199 of 359)
S.P.R.W. Vice President = Ponine
Once again, Dumbledore's trust in Order members becomes an issue. We have asked the same questions before, about Snape in particular.
Half Blood Princess, I do not believe you are the only reader who feels uneasy about 'Dung. I do, too, but think it would be too easy, too predictable, for 'Dung to be traitor. His shortcomings are very apparent but I would not be surprised if this is just another one of Rowling's red-herrings.
Hermy.
- - - - - - - - - -
Neville Longbottom - Sep 28, 2004 12:51 pm (#200 of 359)
I agree with Hermy-own. I dislike Dung so far, as both, a person and a character, but I think he will be loyal to Dumbledore and rather serve as a red-herring. I doubt he will be a traitor, because it's too obvious. :-)
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Bullheaded empiricist
The classic Western Literature betrayal took place in Voldemort War I. It will not occur in VWII because the true nature of Voldemort and the Death Eaters has been exposed fifteen years ago.
Yes, people we have counted on as friends and family may fail us(e.g. Percy), but none will turn their coats as Pettigrew did. Some, such as Fudge, Umbridge, and Skeeter, have been against as through ignorance, ambition, and avarice, but a more dangerous opponent than us now opposes them.
Now that war is in the open those that have hindered us will join with us; even if it is the discomfort of aligning with Lindberg, Stalin, and Chiang Kai-shek.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hermy-own - Aug 29, 2004 5:29 am (#152 of 359)
S.P.R.W. Vice President = Ponine
Excellent post, Tom! Very...poetic.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Aug 29, 2004 3:27 pm (#153 of 359)
Remember that jelousy is the reason why Pettigrew betrayed the Potters. He is jealous of their capabilities. If Ron will only expand his emotion range which currently as large as teaspoon, the chances of him betraying will lessen. Why do R/HR shipper will not accept the possiblity that Ron will betray them. Just because he is their friend. In Arthurian legend, Lancelot betrayed Arthur and Lancelot was Arthur's most trusted Knight. I think Lancelot betrayed Arthur because he is in love with Arthur's wife. I believe her name was similar to Ginny's real name and I not sure of the spelling
- - - - - - - - - -
Jessalynn Quirky - Sep 2, 2004 3:31 pm (#154 of 359)
Interesting....maybe Ginny represents Guinuvere? (think I mispelled that) Maybe JKR was doing a bit of foreshadowing at the end of book 5 when talk goes on about Ginny going with someone?
I better go re-read book 5.....
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 3, 2004 4:21 pm (#155 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Ron would not have a thing for his own sister though, so he can't be Lancelot to Harry/Ginny. Not in a JKR book.
But, it is good that you are analyzing the treason angle along the lines of the baser emotions -- jealously, envy, covetousness, fear, embarrassment, insecurity and its conjoined twin arrogance, etc. These are the things that push the fragile or fractured psyche down the path of treason and betrayal.
- - - - - - - - - -
HPHouse - Sep 3, 2004 10:24 pm (#156 of 359)
I really do not think Ron is one to betray Harry, I just do not see the connection between himself and Lancelot of the Arthurian Legends. I think Ron is interested in Hermaoine not Ginny. Now someone I think could turn out to be a traitor would be Peter Pettigrew betraying Voldemort in the end because of what Harry does for him at the end of Prisoner of Azkaban. He will probably sacrifice himself to save Harry or something like that.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Sep 4, 2004 3:02 am (#157 of 359)
Ron= Lancelot Hermione= Guinevere Harry=Arthur. Get the point
- - - - - - - - - -
Neville Longbottom - Sep 4, 2004 3:24 am (#158 of 359)
I am sure Ron would never betray Harry. After all, JKR said he is one of her favourite characters. He is losely based on one of JKR's best friends. He sacrificed himself for Harry during the chess game. He risked his life again to help him in book 2,3 and 5. He destroyed Percy's letter when Percy told him to sever ties with Harry. Okay, he was jealous in GoF, but that's what makes him more well rounded as a character, not a traitor in waiting. I also can't see any similarity between Hermione and Guinevere. And anyway, if even there were, Lancelot never sold King Arthur to his enemies, he "just" fell in love with Arthur's wife. But they were still on the same side of the war. (And in the end, it was Lancelot who got Guinevere *g*)
- - - - - - - - - -
TwinklingBlueEyes - Sep 4, 2004 3:47 am (#159 of 359)
"Character is doing the right thing when nobody is looking"
Besides, this is not King Authur's story. :-)
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Sep 4, 2004 3:48 am (#160 of 359)
I got the point. But if I made comparison like this Arthur= Ron Guinevere= Mione Lancelot= Lancelot Lady Morgana= Ginny. Do you think it will make a diference?
- - - - - - - - - -
Chris. - Sep 4, 2004 4:56 am (#161 of 359)
HBP: 16th July 2005: the most anticipated day in history
I don't think JKR wold do anything like that. There's simliarities between Harry and King Arthur, but I see no others with Ron, Ginny or Hermione.
I don't think it will be Ron who, if any, will betray them. He's been to good a friend, and after Percy's disloyalty, I doubt he will betray his family and friends.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 7, 2004 2:54 pm (#162 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Ron= Lancelot Hermione= Guinevere Harry=Arthur. Get the point
No.
I mean, I get the part about the Lancelot/ Guinevere/ Arthur theme and legend, etc. I just think it has no application to the trio of Ron/ Hermione/ Harry. So far, Harry has more in common with Wart than Arthur. While Harry might be a little Arthurian (what Western literary "hero" can avoid it to some extent, with notable exceptions like Dog Day Afternoon, Bonnie & Clyde, Reservoir Dogs, etc. that really prove the rule), Ron has almost nothing (other than loyalty) in common with Lancelot and Hermione is certainly not Guinevere.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Sep 7, 2004 2:57 pm (#163 of 359)
You forgot the fact that he harbors a secret jelousy to Harry. Added the fact of his emotional range as small as a teaspoon, he is vulnerable to the possibility of betrayal. If Ron matures emotionally in the next book, he reduces his tendecy to betray Harry. That emotional immaturity is Ron's greatest weakness and coupled by the facts that the his head inflates easily and he is a bit dense at most times. It only takes a small catalyst to make him betray his friends.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 7, 2004 3:13 pm (#164 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
No, I didn't forget anything. It is just friendly disagreement.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Sep 7, 2004 3:25 pm (#165 of 359)
I know. I just refreshing your memory
- - - - - - - - - -
Weeny Owl - Sep 9, 2004 10:15 am (#166 of 359)
I doubt if JKR will use the same scenario as she did with the Marauders because she's much too clever not to come up with something completely fresh.
There were four Marauders. Harry, Hermione, and Ron are a trio. In order to make it four, only one person would be needed, but which person? Ginny, Neville, Luna? That would exclude two of them, of course.
The comparisons with the Arthurian legends have no basis in canon, and while it's possible JKR has used parts of pretty much any legends, she isn't going to use them completely. She may add bits and pieces here and there, such as a comparison between Excalibur and Godric Gryffindor's sword. There are just too many points she needs to cover to finish the series to make it feasible that a romantic triangle will be included. She has to tell the story of Voldemort's birth, the Marauders' backstory, give us a new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher, get rid of Fudge, deal with the Death Eaters in Azkaban, and get all of the students through two more years of school.
I really don't care who ends up with whom from a romantic perspective because the romances are just tiny parts of the series that show teens being teens, just as discussions about sports and fashion are. Whether or not a specific character ends up with another character has little to do with the whole series, and while I have my preferences, it just doesn't matter when thinking of the seriousness of a second wizarding war.
I really don't understand how anyone could hate Ron or think that he would deliberately and with malice aforethought betray Harry or anyone else he cared about. Harry, Hermione, and Ron have all done things that have made the others angry, but throughout the entire series, they've argued and made up, and that shows that their friendship is strong enough not to be torn asunder.
I just cannot see Ron, Hermione, Ginny, Neville, or Luna betraying anyone. If a bad guy were to use the Imperius Curse, any of them could do something to harm Harry, but it would not be a betrayal since it would not be something done of their own free will but something that was done to them.
I do think there is a wolf among the sheep, though, but I think it will be an adult member of the Order. I keep thinking about the battle at the Department of Mysteries and wondering who was supposed to be on duty that night. Arthur was on duty when he was attacked by Nagini, and Sturgis Podmore was on duty when he was discovered and sent to Azkaban. What Order member was supposed to be on duty and where was he/she the night of the battle? Inquiring owls want to know!
- - - - - - - - - -
The One - Sep 9, 2004 10:40 am (#167 of 359)
Open minded sceptic
You forgot the fact that he harbors a secret jealousy to Harry. Added the fact of his emotional range as small as a teaspoon, he is vulnerable to the possibility of betrayal.
I have also considered the possibility that Ron might betray the trio, but I have decided against it.
Mostly because that even if his insecurity and jealousy is a weak point, Ron is a good guy and a good friend. Even if he may do stupid things in a moment of anger, he will never knowingly do anything evil.
Even during the GoF fight he never did anything against Harry, he just did not support him. (Except for the initial accusation of betrayal.)
I do believe that his jealousy is still an issue, and I do expect it to create problems in the 6th book, but by book 7 I believe hat the issues will be resolved. I find it extremely unlikely that Ron will turn evil or betray Harry.
That simply is not Ron, despite his teenager issues.
- - - - - - - - - -
TomProffitt - Sep 9, 2004 2:46 pm (#168 of 359)
Bullheaded empiricist
"That simply is not Ron, despite his teenager issues." --- The One
I am in full agreement. Of all the well developed characters I don't believe any of them have it in them to betray Harry and the Order, with two exceptions.
I believe that Snape is amoral enough to do it, but I cannot see any reward being significant enough for him to want the Dark Lord to achieve victory.
I may be jumping at nothing, but I believe there may be a few subtle hints about Ginny in the books. What we know of her character makes me believe that she would not willingly betray Harry. I do, however, wonder if Riddle's Diary left open some back door that Lord Voldemort or the Death Eaters could use against her. It's only a suspicion at this point, I really don't think it will happen.
As I posted earlier (#151), I don't think Jo's going to do the treason thing again.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 11, 2004 5:44 pm (#169 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
There may not be an event of treason -- that is all in JKR's hands. However, this thread mainly assesses who it could be and why. I think treason is still possible, but it will not be by Ron, nor Hermi, nor Neville, nor Ginny, nor Loopy. Any of these could let something harmful to Harry inadvertently slip -- either out of anger (Ron) or being too smart for her own good (Hermione) or being to quick to "take the bait" (Neville) or being too much in love with Harry (Ginny) or just being loveably daffy (Luna), but none would intentionally help Voldemort or hurt Harry.
Treason, if it comes, could come from one of Harry's other two roomies. I think Dean is the least likely of the two in this regard. So that still leaves Seamus as a candidate (sorry, but he is), since he has unresolved issues hanging over from OoP.
One of the other DE members could be a traitor, but that is less likely given the ending to OoP. (We did, however, see a little treason at the end of OoP by the DE member who squealed and forced Dumbledore's "disappearance" (and where did he go, after all), didn't we, but that was relatively minor -- not a betrayal into the hands of Voldemort but based on an over-eager loyalty to superficial school rules and self-important authorities).
So, who has the most complex relationship with Harry AND Voldemort? Snape, of course, but betrayal by Snape would be too obvious on one level and too contrary to Dumbledore's insights on another. So, who else? Other than Snape. Think, think, think.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hermy-own - Sep 11, 2004 6:09 pm (#170 of 359)
S.P.R.W. Vice President = Ponine
"I think treason is still possible, but it will not be by Ron, nor Hermi, nor Neville, nor Ginny, nor Loopy."
-- Hogs Head (emphasis mine)
I take it that by "Loopy" you mean Luna? Initially I thought you were referring to Lupin - we have a member called "Loopy Lupin" on the forum and this connection threw me off. *chides Loopy for choosing obscure name*
In addition, I believe Luna is referred to as "Looney" rather than "Loopy" in the books. Of course, I could be wrong.
Hermy.
- - - - - - - - - -
Jessalynn Quirky - Sep 11, 2004 7:20 pm (#171 of 359)
Your right, Hermy, Luna is referred to as "Loony" and on here "Loopy" is Lupin. :-)
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 12, 2004 6:25 am (#172 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
I guess our member's nomme de plum threw me off. Yes, I'm talking about Luna.
- - - - - - - - - -
Weeny Owl - Sep 12, 2004 8:53 pm (#173 of 359)
I've noticed a lot of discussion about the kids who may or may not betray Harry, but what about the adults? There are teachers, Ministry employees, fellow students' parents, and Order members. I see an adult being more capable of actual betrayal than one of the kids.
- - - - - - - - - -
Quibbler Editor In Chief - Sep 13, 2004 1:38 pm (#174 of 359)
I think that it is easier to think about the kids because we probably know more about them, even the not so major characters because they are at school with Harry for most of the book. We don't get quite as good an idea of the personalities of the adults who we only see once in a while. I definitely don't expect Lupin, Hagrid, McGonagall, or Mad Eye to betray because of what we know about them already. I also think that it would be too easy for Snape to be the traitor, and he would have done something to Harry by now, therefore I don't expect him to betray Dumbledore or Harry. Other characters such as Dung, Tonks, and more minor characters that we know less about seem harder to be sure that we can trust. My problem with predicting which adults are traitors is that it is hard to think that Dumbledore would have made a bad decision about who he trusts and keeps around him. Ideas anyone?
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 13, 2004 4:17 pm (#175 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
. . . hard to think that Dumbledore would have made a bad decision about who he trusts and keeps around him . . .
I know what you mean, but sometimes the person harboring the traitor or would be traitor is actually very smart. They see what is happening or what could happen, and so hold the traitor or would-be traitor close-in, like a confidant, letting them see only what is safe for the "good guys" and sometimes letting them see just enough to give an incomplete or incorrect picture to the "bad guys." By similar techniques, the Allies in WWII used Hitler's own spy network in England (along with other sleight of hand) to confirm Hitler's presumption that the amphibious invasion would be in Calais and not Normandy.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Sep 13, 2004 4:29 pm (#176 of 359)
I agree that is a brilliant maneuver. Dumbledore best traits is his ability to improvise. He is master manipulator, not that I am saying that he is evil. He takes advantage of the situation and make measures to use that situation to his advantage
- - - - - - - - - -
Weeny Owl - Sep 14, 2004 9:55 am (#177 of 359)
that it is hard to think that Dumbledore would have made a bad decision about who he trusts and keeps around him. Ideas anyone?
Yes, but don't forget about Quirrell, Lockhart, and Barty Crouch, Jr. For someone who is supposed to be so much on the ball, he didn't do too well with those three.
Also, as I said with the kids, while I don't see them deliberately betraying Harry or the Order, as far as we know, Harry is the only one who can fight off the Imperius Curse. In OotP, Podmore and Bode were under the Imperius Curse, so it happening with another adult seems like something that almost has to happen again. It's been mentioned by Hagrid and Sirius that no one knew who could be trusted because Voldemort could blackmail, threaten, or Imperio people. Look what Lucius Malfoy did to get the Board of Governors to suspend Dumbledore in CoS.
- - - - - - - - - -
Quibbler Editor In Chief - Sep 14, 2004 1:39 pm (#178 of 359)
Good point with Lockhart and Quirrel. With Moody I think that it is a little different since Dumbledore did not appoint Barty Crouch Jr., but Alastor Moody, who he was right to trust. After that though, Dumbledore did make the mistake of believeing that Professor Moody really was Alastor Moody. Just thinking, since we know that Tonks has been portrayed as somewhat careless and unorganized, do you think that she could be in the category of someone who would accidentally help the Death Eaters without knowing what she was doing? I think that the same could be said about Mundungus Fletcher.
- - - - - - - - - -
Weeny Owl - Sep 14, 2004 2:02 pm (#179 of 359)
I'll take Mundungus first. I flat-out don't trust him, and I think he is a blackmail victim waiting to happen. I'm not sure how much damage he could do to the Order, but after the dementor debacle and him selling controlled substances to the twins, I could see him doing pretty much anything and justifying it to himself. I'm not sure he would knowingly betray Dumbledore, but he could easily become involved in more cauldron schemes and either not do something he should (such as guarding Harry) or let something slip, not realizing how damaging it could be (such as Sirius not ordering Kreacher to keep his mouth shut about anything and everything going on at Grimmauld Place).
As for Tonks, I do believe she is loyal to Dumbledore and the Order. In part, I feel that way because her father is a Muggle-born, so she would know he would be a target of Voldemort and the Death Eaters. As for her accidentally giving away something, I don't think she would let some critical bit of information slip, but I do think she could do something that might harm the Order by dropping something or tripping at a time when Order members are trying to sneak up on a group of Death Eaters.
- - - - - - - - - -
LooneyLuna - Sep 15, 2004 2:17 pm (#180 of 359)
I'm thinking that Harry could be mislead to think that someone close to him is a traitor. Voldemort puts some doubts into Harry's head about his friends or he starts dreaming about being betrayed. That could be even more damaging than a real traitor.
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Sep 15, 2004 3:39 pm (#181 of 359)
Harry is really going to have to learn Occlumency.
Hopefully he will stick it out.
- - - - - - - - - -
timrew - Sep 15, 2004 4:24 pm (#182 of 359)
Middle-aged Harry Potter fan
LooneyLuna: Voldemort puts some doubts into Harry's head about his friends.......
I agree, Luna. Voldie could put some doubt into Harry's head about, say, Ron; and, because they have rowed before, Harry could think that Ron is a traitor.
Let's face it. There are a few people Harry has rowed with before - Seamus, Hermione, even Neville.
The thought could be planted in Harry's mind that they were traitors; or they could even be placed under the Imperius Curse, and made to do traitorous acts against their own wills.
Harry needs to learn Occlumency, Legilimency, and how to throw the Imperius Curse off others (rather than just himself) right away!
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Sep 15, 2004 4:39 pm (#183 of 359)
"Harry could think that Ron is a traitor. Let's face it. There are a few people Harry has rowed with before - Seamus, Hermione, even Neville."
I don't think that Harry would be so stupid as to think that any of them would side with Voldemort, and if he learned anything from the prophecy, it was that Voldemort's enemies are his friends.
Of course, he might suspect them of being under Imperius, which will make him root out the wizard responsible for the Imperius...
But to think that they would willingly turn against him, when he has a much bigger fish to fry? Unlikely.
- - - - - - - - - -
The One - Sep 15, 2004 4:49 pm (#184 of 359)
Open minded sceptic
LooneyLuna 9/15/04 2:17pm
Excelent point. It may very well be the fear of treason more than treason itself that causes problems.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 15, 2004 7:19 pm (#185 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Nothing to fear but fear itself? Not treason but the fear of treason: Hmmm. I'll think about that. Very clever.
(I can't wait for Book 6 but I guess we all will.)
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Sep 17, 2004 11:40 pm (#186 of 359)
Do you think Harry will as gullible as he was before? The answer is no. The death of Sirius had opened his eyes to the truth. Use your head, not your heart.
I can't understand what Sirius mean when he says that the ones that can considered as blood traitors are the Weasleys. Does this refers to Weasley's friendship to Muggles or something deeeper. Is this related to the incident where Athur Weasley used an Imperius Curse
- - - - - - - - - -
Weeny Owl - Sep 18, 2004 6:28 am (#187 of 359)
A blood traitor is a pure-blood who doesn't buy into the typical Death Eater blood prejudices, but is willing to accept anyone, pure-blood, half-blood, or Muggle-born.
When did Arthur Weasley ever use an Imperius Curse?
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Sep 18, 2004 3:27 pm (#188 of 359)
It was not written in the books but Barty Crouch said it when he was teaching them the effects of the Unforgivable Curses. It was implied and it was in page 212 Chapter 14: Unforgivable Curses, Goblet of Fire.
- - - - - - - - - -
The One - Sep 18, 2004 3:54 pm (#189 of 359)
Open minded sceptic
I suppose you are refering to this?
"Er," said Ron tentatively, "my dad told me about one.. . . Is it called the Imperius Curse, or something?"
"Ah, yes," said Moody appreciatively. "Your father would know that one. Gave the Ministry a lot of trouble at one time, the Imperius Curse."
I do not believe that this means that Arthur ever used the curse. It is stated elsewhere that the ministry had great trouble after the last war to decide who had joined Voldemort of their free will, and who had been under an Imperius Curse.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 19, 2004 6:06 am (#190 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
But Arthur might have had the curse used on him.
- - - - - - - - - -
Jessalynn Quirky - Sep 20, 2004 3:30 pm (#191 of 359)
Hmmm....*explodes* I need to read book 6 right now! So many questions to be answered!
- - - - - - - - - -
KTO - Sep 20, 2004 4:15 pm (#192 of 359)
This is a great thread. I do not believe that Ron will betray Harry. Ron is Sam to Harry's Frodo. Also JKR has indicated that Ron is based on one of her best friends and Ron has always come through in the end. Like I said on another thread, Harry knows that he cannot be successful without his friend, Ron needs to learn this and I believe he will.
Can see Dung as a traitor, selling the twins illegal materials, like a drug dealer, one of the greatest destructive forces in our world. I also like the idea of Tonks being a traitor, it resonates with me, I do not know why.
The biggest act of treason is everyones refusal to tell us when HBP is being released, not knowing is driving me MAD!!
- - - - - - - - - -
remiden - Sep 23, 2004 7:35 am (#193 of 359)
The point that someone made about Dumbledore choosing Lockhart as an example of Dumbledoore making a mistake, I disagree with. One, Lockhart never did anything bad to any of the students, until Harry and Ron forced him to go into the chamber. (which forcing someone to go somewhere against their will when they could die is just as bad or possibly worse than shooting off memory charms. Why didn't Harry and Ron go get someone useful anyway?) And second, when Harry tells Dumbledore what happened to Lockhart, Dumbledore replies something to the effect of "Stabbed with your own sword." showing that he knew that Lockhart was using memory charms on other people and not doing hte deeds himself. I do not remember Dumbledore's exact quote though.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hermy-own - Sep 23, 2004 7:50 am (#194 of 359)
S.P.R.W. Vice President = Ponine
"Dumbledore replies something to the effect of "Stabbed with your own sword." showing that he knew that Lockhart was using memory charms on other people and not doing hte deeds himself."
This part continues to confuse me, Remiden. Why would DD employ someone he knows is a fraud?
It is certainly not something I would expect DD, in all his wisdom, to do. Perhaps it was, indeed, a mistake.
Please do hold your hippogriffs; I'm not suggesting that DD will make another mistake or turn traitor in book 6/7.
- - - - - - - - - -
LooneyLuna - Sep 23, 2004 10:52 am (#195 of 359)
I honestly think that there was no one else who applied for the job, and Dumbledore was forced to hire Lockhart, knowing he was a fraud.
I do NOT think Ron would betray Harry willingly, but since Ron had trouble throwing off the Imperious Curse (GOF), he could be put under the curse and forced to hurt or betray Harry. I think Ron would fight the curse off eventually, before he could do too much damage.
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Sep 23, 2004 11:25 am (#196 of 359)
Yeah, that's what Hagrid said. "He was the on'y man for the job."
So where was Lupin? Where was Moody?
- - - - - - - - - -
Jessalynn Quirky - Sep 25, 2004 4:47 pm (#197 of 359)
They probably weren't available at the time. No idea why, I'm just making up an excuse for them.
- - - - - - - - - -
Half Blood Princess - Sep 26, 2004 7:00 pm (#198 of 359)
I think that Dung will betray the Order. I have not felt completely comfortable with him in the Order, and when we were first introduced to him, I didn't like him. He's too...odd. He does illegal things, and I think of him as a spy.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hermy-own - Sep 27, 2004 1:54 am (#199 of 359)
S.P.R.W. Vice President = Ponine
Once again, Dumbledore's trust in Order members becomes an issue. We have asked the same questions before, about Snape in particular.
Half Blood Princess, I do not believe you are the only reader who feels uneasy about 'Dung. I do, too, but think it would be too easy, too predictable, for 'Dung to be traitor. His shortcomings are very apparent but I would not be surprised if this is just another one of Rowling's red-herrings.
Hermy.
- - - - - - - - - -
Neville Longbottom - Sep 28, 2004 12:51 pm (#200 of 359)
I agree with Hermy-own. I dislike Dung so far, as both, a person and a character, but I think he will be loyal to Dumbledore and rather serve as a red-herring. I doubt he will be a traitor, because it's too obvious. :-)
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Elanor- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 51
Location : France
Treason in Book 6 and/or 7 (Post 201 to 250)
Elanor Sat May 21, 2011 9:06 am
Catherine - Sep 28, 2004 3:05 pm (#201 of 359)
Canon Seeker
Oh, I think Dung is a great character. I must be weird, because I don't dislike him at all. He's written to be quite comic, and he makes me laugh. He appears in drag, for goodness' sake.
I don't think Dung is the most potent potion ever, in terms of intelligence, but I don't think he would knowingly betray Dumbledore.
It also seems too obvious that the "crook" would be the one to turn betrayer.
- - - - - - - - - -
Loopy Lupin - Sep 28, 2004 3:17 pm (#202 of 359)
His shortcomings are very apparent but I would not be surprised if this is just another one of Rowling's red-herrings.-- Hermy-own
I would like to know how, precisely, Dung is supposed to be a red-herring. Of what? Dung is shiftless, a drunk, and a crook. JKR has not made this a secret. She's also told us, through Sirius, that he is extremely loyal to DD and, even if he blew it in Chapter 1, he was clearly shown to be spying for DD later in the book. By contrast, in PS/SS Snape was portrayed to be everything short of Voldemort himself, but, in the end, it turned out that he was trying to save Harry's life. That was the first incarnation of JKR's famous red-herrings and misdirections. I don't see how Dung being a crook means that he is a red-herring when JKR has told outright that Dung is, well, a crook.
- - - - - - - - - -
timrew - Sep 28, 2004 3:20 pm (#203 of 359)
Middle-aged Harry Potter fan
Hmmmm....Dung dresses in drag, Snape's boggart was dressed in drag, and the wizard at the Quidditch World Cup (Archie?) was dressed in drag.
Do they all like the air to get to their privates.....? Is this why they wear robes? I think we should be told!
This could be the start of a new thread!
- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - Sep 28, 2004 3:37 pm (#204 of 359)
Canon Seeker
Tim--SPEW!
Your comments definitely made me think I wasn't a weirdo for liking Dung's character. To connect him with Archie from GoF and his need for good air circulation....well, that makes it seem even more unlikely that Dung is a betrayer.
Thanks for the connection, and thanks for the laugh, as always. Cheers!
- - - - - - - - - -
Jessalynn Quirky - Sep 28, 2004 4:17 pm (#205 of 359)
Catherine, you're definitely not a weirdo. I don't dislike Dung either. I was just too afraid to admit. *blushes shyly*
Tim--do the jokes ever stop?! :-D
- - - - - - - - - -
Hermy-own - Sep 28, 2004 4:50 pm (#206 of 359)
S.P.R.W. Vice President = Ponine
Loopy,
Firstly, anyone claiming that Dung is not a crook is wasting their time, I agree.
Second, many have lined him up to be the one who switches sides - the traitor. Why might one hold this belief? Simply because Dung is, as you say, shiftless, a drunk, and a crook. The likes of Molly Weasley and Hermione Granger have expressed their concerns regarding this and what it might mean for The Order.
Now to my point. Is it not possible that JKR is using Dung's decription to lure us into a false sense of suspicion?
Let's assume there will be a mole in The Order but it will not be Mundungus Fletcher. Any funny business at 12 Grimmauld Place would cause people to ask questions, and I think more than a few of those questions would be directed towards 'Dung. The only problem is, he will not be the traitor. See how Rowling would have had us, and, indeed, Dumbledore et al, fooled?
Does this constitute a red-herring? I don't know. I'm afraid you shattered my idealised conception of a red-herring, and have left me in a dark sea of confusion. **Ok, maybe I overdid the metaphor**
Perhaps this post explains things better; I tend not to make myself clear writing short posts. But do feel free to pick holes in anything I have said this time; that is, in anything that deserves 'picking'.
Hermy.
- - - - - - - - - -
Jessalynn Quirky - Sep 28, 2004 5:18 pm (#207 of 359)
That would set us up for a nice little suspenseful plot for book 6 or 7. Good job, Hermy!
- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - Sep 28, 2004 5:22 pm (#208 of 359)
Canon Seeker
Hermy-Own,
You are so clever in your last post that I am still trying to make heads or tails of it.
As you so correctly pointed out, Molly doesn't like Dung, and has shown us his shortcomings many times.
When did Hermione do this?
I still think, literarily speaking, that Dung doesn't work for a Red Herring. He already smells fishy enough as it is!
- - - - - - - - - -
sere35 - Sep 28, 2004 9:00 pm (#209 of 359)
I like Dung to. He is one of my top 5 favourite characters.
Harry, Voldermort, Dumbledore, Dung, Dobby in no particular order.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hermy-own - Sep 29, 2004 3:30 am (#210 of 359)
S.P.R.W. Vice President = Ponine
"When did Hermione do this?"
Good question, Catherine.
Unfortuntely I do not have my books with me (can you believe I forgot to pack them before coming to college?!) so I am not able to give you anything 'canon'.
For the moment, the best I can come up with is the time the Weasley twins were discussing business with 'Dung at the grim-old-place. I seem to remember Hermione frowning, or something to that effect. I'm also tempted to add that she reprimanded Fred and George for their dealings.
Again, I must say that this is just from memory. I'll take a look at OotP as soon as I can get my hands on a copy. Does anyone else remember Hermione saying anything about 'Dung?
Hermy.
- - - - - - - - - -
Amilia Smith - Sep 30, 2004 10:25 am (#211 of 359)
While I too seem to remember Hermione not approving of Dung, I have just spent the past hour thumbing through OotP and can't come up with anything. The closest I found was when they were cleaning out Grimauld Place, and Dung shows up with a load of stolen cauldrons.
"Mundungus!" said Hermione. "What's he brought all those cauldrons for?"
But this sounds more curious than disapproving to me. Molly goes on to yell at him, but Hermione doesn't say anything else.
I think the scene you are thinking of, Hermy-own, is the party to celebrate Ron and Hermione being made prefects. Harry finds Fred and George huddled in a corner dickering with Dung over the price of the Venomous Tentacula seeds Dung has acquired for them. However, Hermione doesn't pay them any mind. She is busy talking to Lupin about elf rights.
Sorry not to be of more help, but that was the best I could find.
Mills.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hermy-own - Sep 30, 2004 11:12 am (#212 of 359)
S.P.R.W. Vice President = Ponine
Thank-you Mills! You have been a big help.
I guess I must have just imagined Hermione disapproving of 'Dung.
Hermy.
- - - - - - - - - -
Jessalynn Quirky - Sep 30, 2004 3:08 pm (#213 of 359)
I got that impression too for some reason......
- - - - - - - - - -
legolas - Sep 30, 2004 3:11 pm (#214 of 359)
She is a rules orientated girl so its hardly suprising that you came to the impression that she was disapproving.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Oct 8, 2004 8:07 pm (#215 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
You know, I wished I had included ". . . & Betrayal . . ." in the caption of this thread when I first created it. Hearing one of the "swift boat veterans" last week in a confrontational interview with an opposing commentator made me recall that "treason" is fairly technical while "betrayal" is more general.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Nov 3, 2004 7:04 am (#216 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
If "Felix Felicis" turns out to be a character rather than a charm, he sounds to good to be trusted -- "How Happy is the Happy One," indeed. Such a character might be the Lockhart of Book 6. However, I reserve the right to be more charitable later.
P.S., in case you UK members think you sense a grouchy tone in all of the US posters today, it isn't necessarily because of unhappiness with election results (we're apparently in diffent camps on that aspect) -- it's because we all sat up until 2 or 3 in the morning watching the blooming thing unfold. There just isn't enough coffee. So, be kind to us today. We have a headache.
- - - - - - - - - -
Czarina II - Nov 3, 2004 9:47 am (#217 of 359)
Hogs Head -- It isn't just the US posters! ;-) (I stayed up till 2am and I unfortunately don't drink coffee.)
I think Felix Felicis might be a Cheering Charm of sorts, which we could all use about now.
- - - - - - - - - -
LooneyLuna - Nov 3, 2004 6:58 pm (#218 of 359)
Felix Felicis - could it be a lucky charm? And no one better lay a finger on me lucky charms! hee hee
toddles off for a butterbeer.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Nov 3, 2004 8:36 pm (#219 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Czarina II -- which part of the Great Canadian Prairie are you from? (I'm hoping for visions of beautiful mountains, lakes fed by thawing glaciers, fish the size of small cars, etc.)
- - - - - - - - - -
Czarina II - Nov 4, 2004 10:07 am (#220 of 359)
Hogs Head -- that scene you describe is about seven hours drive from my hometown. I'm from the flatlands north of North Dakota.
I suppose Felix Felicis could also be something to do with congratulations. (French: "felicitations" = "congratulations")
If Felix Felicis is a person, they would have to be ancient, since I don't even think the wizarding world would have such a name. It also sounds like a password or a plant. I have to agree that if this Felix is a person (an ancient person), perhaps that person had to do with a betrayal of Godric Gryffindor.
(staggers off with a bottle of butterbeer)
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Nov 11, 2004 8:07 am (#221 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
On another thread, someone inquired about whether there might be a link between U.K.'s Guy Fawkes and our beloved phoenix, Fawkes, wondering if our Fawkes might not a traitor in the same mold.
Most replies rebuffed this immediately, as I would, too. (Although with the PS/SS appearance of the historic Nicholas Flamel, it did fleetingly cross my mind that Guy Fawkes might, in JKR's fictional wizard world, have been a wrongly accused wizard who saved himself by transfiguring into a phoenix -- that's probably too wild and incongruent with history, no?)
However, can anyone provide more than the basic, popular information on "Guy Fawkes" and his status as a "traitor"? Thanks.
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Nov 11, 2004 10:32 am (#222 of 359)
I'm not sure if this link provides more than the basic, popular information about Guy Fawkes, but I do believe that it is appropriate to name a phoenix after him, given that Guy was caught in a store room with barrels full of gunpowder...
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Nov 11, 2004 3:22 pm (#223 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Per this site, supplied above by Paulus Maximus, I assume Guy Fawkes was among those who were:
"`hanged, drawn, and quartered', a brutal practice which authorities hoped would instill terror in other potential traitors"
If so, my fleeting theory that JKR might portray Guy Fawkes as able to escape death by transformation into a phoenix, hence becoming our Fawkes, seems all the more unlikely. What was I thinking?
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Nov 11, 2004 5:39 pm (#224 of 359)
It takes a lot to kill a wizard, though. A car crash couldn't kill Lily and James, various mediaeval wizards could endure burning at the stake... if Guy Fawkes were a wizard, he might survive hanging, drawing, and quartering...
Of course, he would have to be a wizard of Lord Voldemort's caliber to use such magic... I'd rather not contemplate that...
Then again, Lord Voldemort's wand does contain one of Fawkes' feathers...
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Nov 12, 2004 7:36 am (#225 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Wizard or not, if you are actually drawn and quartered, you're pretty much toast. I don't want to get into the specifics of that particular method of execution here, but I'm sure it can be found in a good reference. That doesn't preclude a clever wizard from creating the illusion of being drawn and quartered, I suppose.
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Nov 12, 2004 1:49 pm (#226 of 359)
If Voldemort could protect himself from a backfired Auada Kedaura, I'm sure that wizards could manage to stay alive even if hanged, drawn, and quartered.
- - - - - - - - - -
Annika - Nov 12, 2004 1:50 pm (#227 of 359)
They may be able to stay alive if hanged, drawn or quartered, but at what price?
Annika
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Nov 12, 2004 1:53 pm (#228 of 359)
No price too great, if they think that death is the ultimate evil (as Voldemort does).
- - - - - - - - - -
Annika - Nov 12, 2004 1:56 pm (#229 of 359)
So the price then would be to become the ultimate evil in order to avoid the "next great adventure."
Annika
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Nov 13, 2004 2:06 am (#230 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
All that being said, I can't see a viable theory whereby the historic Guy Fawkes is now our phoenix, Fawkes, in transformed state.
Nor do I see much link between the two at all other than name similarity. But I am open to ideas. It is a curious similarity, in any event.
If a pet in the U.S. were named "Arnold," it would not necessarily draw attention, but one named "Benedict" would draw occasional wisecracks. I'm sure a pet named "Judas" would draw comment, as well. Does the name "Fawkes" evoke the same connections in the U.K. as "Benedict" or "Judas" might, or is it more like "Arnold"?
- - - - - - - - - -
TomProffitt - Nov 21, 2004 10:15 am (#231 of 359)
Bullheaded empiricist
I don't know much about British culture, but isn't Guy Fawkes associated with Bonfire Night and fireworks and such? I assumed Fawkes got got his name because he was like a living firecracker, not because he had any association with the true Historical figure.
- - - - - - - - - -
azi - Nov 22, 2004 5:49 am (#232 of 359)
Photo borrowed from Ardent Photography
I assumed the same as you, Tom. In my opinion, Fawkes got his name because of Bonfire Night and the fires that are lit because of the fact he bursts into flame and regrows from the ashes. Guy Fawkes just happened to be the one who tried to blow the king up. Yeah, people burn a guy (not a real one) on the fire every year, but I always thought of the fire connection and Fawkes rebirth. rather than any association with the 'real' Fawkes.
Hmmm, not sure if that made sense, I think I've lost my use of English somewhat...
- - - - - - - - - -
TomProffitt - Nov 22, 2004 7:44 am (#233 of 359)
Bullheaded empiricist
Um, what exactly is Bonfire Night? I take it that it's not like the 4th of July in the States where we (leaving aside the actual origin of the day, thinking more of what we do) celebrate with a parade, a little flag waving, and fireworks?
- - - - - - - - - -
Dr Filibuster - Nov 22, 2004 1:21 pm (#234 of 359)
Sue, from Northwich, England.
No parades or flag waving.
We set fireworks off whilst standing next to bonfires. Not everyones idea of fun, but I love it.
It's cold in Novemeber so hot food is served, such as burgers, hot dogs, soup, jacket (baked) potatoes, hot pot (stew). Traditional treats include treacle toffee, and parkin (cake made with treacle, ginger and oats).
Not everywhere has a Guy burning on the stake these days, but that's what we're supposed to do.
We don't go round contemplating the meaning of Parliament, terrorist attacks or Catholics. Having said that, kids' tv programmes may well explain the history around this time of year and we learn the story at primary school.
It's occurred to me that Americans may just say "fire" instead of bonfire. Is that why Steve has a definition on the Lexicon? A bonfire is only an outdoor fire.
I agree that Fawkes the phoenix was nothing more than a pun by Rowling. She's fond of alliteration in names as well.
- - - - - - - - - -
azi - Nov 23, 2004 7:16 am (#235 of 359)
Photo borrowed from Ardent Photography
Mmm treacle toffee. Yep, I love bonfire night too. 'Remember, remember the 5th of November, gunpowder treason and plot.' That's what I learned at first school. I just love building the bonfire and then watching it burn personally.
I just realised that Hagrids quite fond of treacle toffee, and Harry's fond of treacle tart. Any connection to Fawkes, the traditonal bonfire toffee etc.? Probably not, it's just interesting.
- - - - - - - - - -
Amilia Smith - Nov 23, 2004 6:24 pm (#236 of 359)
I was over in Quick Quotes looking for something else, when I ran across this quote from the online chat of 16 October 2000. As it applies to the discussion here at the moment, I thought I'd share. The question and answer are as follows:
What is Bonfire Night?
Good question! We celebrate November 5th in Britain every year. There was a plot to blow up the Houses of Parliament. The ringleader of the plot was called Guy Fawkes (spot any Harry Potter connection?!), and we burn him in effigy and set off fireworks to celebrate not losing our government.
So maybe there is more to this Fawkes connection than we are thinking . . .
Mills.
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Nov 28, 2004 4:12 am (#237 of 359)
The only Fawkes connection that I can think of is the association with flammables...
- - - - - - - - - -
timrew - Dec 28, 2004 5:21 pm (#238 of 359)
Middle-aged Harry Potter fan
Guy (or Guido) Fawkes was a Roman Catholic, who, with a few pals, decided to blow up the Houses Of Parliament, and get rid of a house full of politicians (and the King) at the same time.
So why we celebrate his capture and death to this day is total anathema to me!
- - - - - - - - - -
TomProffitt - Dec 30, 2004 6:52 am (#239 of 359)
Bullheaded empiricist
Tim, I don't know how y'all do it across the pond, but here in the states the gov'ment decides what the holidays are.
- - - - - - - - - -
timrew - Dec 30, 2004 5:02 pm (#240 of 359)
Middle-aged Harry Potter fan
Yes, Tom. I suppose it was a house full of politicians who decided to celebrate Guy Fawkes' capture and death. After all, he was trying to get rid of them!
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Dec 31, 2004 3:20 pm (#241 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Timrew -- I always love your posts and those of Loopy Lupin. I've missed you both.
I guess I assumed the U.S. had originated most of the anti-heros, like Jesse James, Billy the Kid, Tom Dooley (more famous in a folk songs than real history), and, via the magical sixties, Bonnie & Clyde. I should have known that the longer European history and mythology would countenance nothing new under the sun from the Colonials, so I'm not surprised that the Guy Fawkes bonfires meant to villanize a traitor might have come to popularize him instead. And I suppose Robin Hood was a prototype of them all -- although good Sir Robin had the good sense not to have his legend sullied at the end by being captured and hung.
Back to a possible Fawkes / Guy Fawkes connection to a possible treason scenario. I've been shot at (if not shot down) on this before but I've always wondered whether Fawkes was an amimagus counterpart of someone stuck in the animal side. This theory has played with the supposition that some injury or the like was incurred on the human / wizard side, preventing a safe return to human form. I guess it might also be because the person was "wanted" by the authorities on the human / wizard side. But that would be a little too redundant of Sirius & his dog counterpart, no? At any rate, the theory, if viable at all, probably works against any notion that Fawkes is related to any Book 6 or Book 7 treason scenario or that there is a Guy Fawkes connection. Which takes one back to a simpler default theory -- that any Fawkes / Guy Fawkes thing is virtually coincidental, and perhaps suggested only from the similarity of names and flames to fireworks, etc.
I've even wondered if Fawkes was Albus Dumbledore's (or even Nicolas Flamel's) animagus counterpart, but that thought has also received considerable flak. I'll save that for another day. But to close it out with a seemingly off the wall question -- is there any support in JKR interviews, texts, etc. for the notion that a person's animal side animagus counterpart and his or her patronus need be the same creature?
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Jan 15, 2005 3:40 pm (#242 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Okay, no one like my animagi theories. Just remember they were mine when we get surprises in July (or in HP Book 7).
Although some of it joking in light of Snape's birthday announcement, much talk on the JKR website thread about Snape, JKR's remarks about keeping an eye on him, etc. I think Snape too obvious to be a traitor. I think he's the decoy for some other traitor (assuming there will be one) who will be surprising.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Jan 15, 2005 4:17 pm (#243 of 359)
Let me quess,is it Ron. He seems the most insecure among them. He might need a power boost
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Jan 16, 2005 3:30 pm (#244 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
For the reasons you cite, I imagine Ron could be easily duped into spilling some beans or might, in some moment of angst or insecurity, say or do something damaging he might later want to retract. I suspect Ron would, however, be among the first to "repent." So my guess is the Ron is not really so much traitor as he might be a mark or a target, i.e., an easy prey for a trick.
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Jan 16, 2005 10:18 pm (#245 of 359)
That's what I, at least, thought about Quirrel...
- - - - - - - - - -
Joanne R. Reid - Jan 17, 2005 11:21 am (#246 of 359)
If you repeat an iteration, which by its definition is repeated, it's a reiteration. If so, then what's the repetition of a reiteration called? Boring!
Anyhoo, my money's still on Percy.
Ron's the quintessential side-kick. He's utterly loyal, loves Harry better than any of his brothers and would willingly sacrifice himself for Harry. As for the jealousy/envy motive, that's already been handled. That is, Ron has faced his moment of jealousy. He's discovered that Harry is as loyal to him as he is to Harry. Ron will never, ever become a git like his brother, Percy. End of story.
None of the other regulars would betray Harry, either. They've all had their opportunities to study the boy in all sorts of difficulties. He has never done anything to any of them, has saved them from harm and has always acted in their best interests in so far as he is able.
However, as I have stated elsewhere, Percy is a very different story. He's ambitious. He detests his upbringing. He dislikes his father, perhaps even hates him at this point. He's inordinately proud of his accomplishments and certain of his personal righteousness. That is, he's a perfect target for the pure-blood DEs.
I opine that Lucius Malfoy will endear himself to Percy, perhaps even protecting him from the inevitable shake up at the MoM. Percy will slowly, but surely fall into the clutches of the DEs. At first, he'll provide information, as did Rookwood. In his arrogance, Percy will rationalize his actions, eg. the ends justifying the means.
As for DD, he's not perfect. He's too trusting. But, he's still the only one Voldemort ever feared.
OK, time to get off my soapbox.
Thanks,
- - - - - - - - - -
MickeyCee3948 - Jan 17, 2005 12:31 pm (#247 of 359)
Avatar courtesy of Gwen
I agree Joanne R. Reid that Percy is the most likely to be a traitor in HBP but I can't see how Lucius is going to save himself AGAIN. Yes the first time he said he was under a spell. But TWICE. You can only use a line so often and it then it will tend to lose its ring.
Mikie
- - - - - - - - - -
Joanne R. Reid - Jan 17, 2005 2:51 pm (#248 of 359)
Good point, Mickie. I was thinking that Lucius had already laid a firm foundation for his future both inside and outside the MoM. That is, he's been dishing out the dough pretty regularly. He's used every bit of his family connections, money and influence to get what he wants. And, as we remember, there are many people both inside and outside the MoM who feel strongly about the purity of bloodlines.
So, regardless of his capture, and perhaps because of it, I get the feeling that old Lucius still has a lot of power and influence.
Thanks
- - - - - - - - - -
TGF - Jan 17, 2005 10:48 pm (#249 of 359)
Anti-Voldemort Insurgent
It should be noted that in book 4, Ron was described as being especially vulnerable to the Imperius curse. I know that most people have a hard time with it to begin with, but Ron had side effects from the curse even after Moody-Crouch took it off of him.
So maybe he'll become one of the Imperius Curse's victims at some point. I don't think he'd really betray Harry of his own accord (I used to) though... not unless something very drastic happens to him in the next two books.
- - - - - - - - - -
MickeyCee3948 - Jan 17, 2005 10:51 pm (#250 of 359)
Avatar courtesy of Gwen
TGF-I believe that those around Ron would notice even a little change in his behavior which could indicate the imperius curse. I agree that something drastic will happen to Ron. I believe it will happen at the end of HBP and that Ron will be killed.
Mikie
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Canon Seeker
Oh, I think Dung is a great character. I must be weird, because I don't dislike him at all. He's written to be quite comic, and he makes me laugh. He appears in drag, for goodness' sake.
I don't think Dung is the most potent potion ever, in terms of intelligence, but I don't think he would knowingly betray Dumbledore.
It also seems too obvious that the "crook" would be the one to turn betrayer.
- - - - - - - - - -
Loopy Lupin - Sep 28, 2004 3:17 pm (#202 of 359)
His shortcomings are very apparent but I would not be surprised if this is just another one of Rowling's red-herrings.-- Hermy-own
I would like to know how, precisely, Dung is supposed to be a red-herring. Of what? Dung is shiftless, a drunk, and a crook. JKR has not made this a secret. She's also told us, through Sirius, that he is extremely loyal to DD and, even if he blew it in Chapter 1, he was clearly shown to be spying for DD later in the book. By contrast, in PS/SS Snape was portrayed to be everything short of Voldemort himself, but, in the end, it turned out that he was trying to save Harry's life. That was the first incarnation of JKR's famous red-herrings and misdirections. I don't see how Dung being a crook means that he is a red-herring when JKR has told outright that Dung is, well, a crook.
- - - - - - - - - -
timrew - Sep 28, 2004 3:20 pm (#203 of 359)
Middle-aged Harry Potter fan
Hmmmm....Dung dresses in drag, Snape's boggart was dressed in drag, and the wizard at the Quidditch World Cup (Archie?) was dressed in drag.
Do they all like the air to get to their privates.....? Is this why they wear robes? I think we should be told!
This could be the start of a new thread!
- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - Sep 28, 2004 3:37 pm (#204 of 359)
Canon Seeker
Tim--SPEW!
Your comments definitely made me think I wasn't a weirdo for liking Dung's character. To connect him with Archie from GoF and his need for good air circulation....well, that makes it seem even more unlikely that Dung is a betrayer.
Thanks for the connection, and thanks for the laugh, as always. Cheers!
- - - - - - - - - -
Jessalynn Quirky - Sep 28, 2004 4:17 pm (#205 of 359)
Catherine, you're definitely not a weirdo. I don't dislike Dung either. I was just too afraid to admit. *blushes shyly*
Tim--do the jokes ever stop?! :-D
- - - - - - - - - -
Hermy-own - Sep 28, 2004 4:50 pm (#206 of 359)
S.P.R.W. Vice President = Ponine
Loopy,
Firstly, anyone claiming that Dung is not a crook is wasting their time, I agree.
Second, many have lined him up to be the one who switches sides - the traitor. Why might one hold this belief? Simply because Dung is, as you say, shiftless, a drunk, and a crook. The likes of Molly Weasley and Hermione Granger have expressed their concerns regarding this and what it might mean for The Order.
Now to my point. Is it not possible that JKR is using Dung's decription to lure us into a false sense of suspicion?
Let's assume there will be a mole in The Order but it will not be Mundungus Fletcher. Any funny business at 12 Grimmauld Place would cause people to ask questions, and I think more than a few of those questions would be directed towards 'Dung. The only problem is, he will not be the traitor. See how Rowling would have had us, and, indeed, Dumbledore et al, fooled?
Does this constitute a red-herring? I don't know. I'm afraid you shattered my idealised conception of a red-herring, and have left me in a dark sea of confusion. **Ok, maybe I overdid the metaphor**
Perhaps this post explains things better; I tend not to make myself clear writing short posts. But do feel free to pick holes in anything I have said this time; that is, in anything that deserves 'picking'.
Hermy.
- - - - - - - - - -
Jessalynn Quirky - Sep 28, 2004 5:18 pm (#207 of 359)
That would set us up for a nice little suspenseful plot for book 6 or 7. Good job, Hermy!
- - - - - - - - - -
Catherine - Sep 28, 2004 5:22 pm (#208 of 359)
Canon Seeker
Hermy-Own,
You are so clever in your last post that I am still trying to make heads or tails of it.
As you so correctly pointed out, Molly doesn't like Dung, and has shown us his shortcomings many times.
When did Hermione do this?
I still think, literarily speaking, that Dung doesn't work for a Red Herring. He already smells fishy enough as it is!
- - - - - - - - - -
sere35 - Sep 28, 2004 9:00 pm (#209 of 359)
I like Dung to. He is one of my top 5 favourite characters.
Harry, Voldermort, Dumbledore, Dung, Dobby in no particular order.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hermy-own - Sep 29, 2004 3:30 am (#210 of 359)
S.P.R.W. Vice President = Ponine
"When did Hermione do this?"
Good question, Catherine.
Unfortuntely I do not have my books with me (can you believe I forgot to pack them before coming to college?!) so I am not able to give you anything 'canon'.
For the moment, the best I can come up with is the time the Weasley twins were discussing business with 'Dung at the grim-old-place. I seem to remember Hermione frowning, or something to that effect. I'm also tempted to add that she reprimanded Fred and George for their dealings.
Again, I must say that this is just from memory. I'll take a look at OotP as soon as I can get my hands on a copy. Does anyone else remember Hermione saying anything about 'Dung?
Hermy.
- - - - - - - - - -
Amilia Smith - Sep 30, 2004 10:25 am (#211 of 359)
While I too seem to remember Hermione not approving of Dung, I have just spent the past hour thumbing through OotP and can't come up with anything. The closest I found was when they were cleaning out Grimauld Place, and Dung shows up with a load of stolen cauldrons.
"Mundungus!" said Hermione. "What's he brought all those cauldrons for?"
But this sounds more curious than disapproving to me. Molly goes on to yell at him, but Hermione doesn't say anything else.
I think the scene you are thinking of, Hermy-own, is the party to celebrate Ron and Hermione being made prefects. Harry finds Fred and George huddled in a corner dickering with Dung over the price of the Venomous Tentacula seeds Dung has acquired for them. However, Hermione doesn't pay them any mind. She is busy talking to Lupin about elf rights.
Sorry not to be of more help, but that was the best I could find.
Mills.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hermy-own - Sep 30, 2004 11:12 am (#212 of 359)
S.P.R.W. Vice President = Ponine
Thank-you Mills! You have been a big help.
I guess I must have just imagined Hermione disapproving of 'Dung.
Hermy.
- - - - - - - - - -
Jessalynn Quirky - Sep 30, 2004 3:08 pm (#213 of 359)
I got that impression too for some reason......
- - - - - - - - - -
legolas - Sep 30, 2004 3:11 pm (#214 of 359)
She is a rules orientated girl so its hardly suprising that you came to the impression that she was disapproving.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Oct 8, 2004 8:07 pm (#215 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
You know, I wished I had included ". . . & Betrayal . . ." in the caption of this thread when I first created it. Hearing one of the "swift boat veterans" last week in a confrontational interview with an opposing commentator made me recall that "treason" is fairly technical while "betrayal" is more general.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Nov 3, 2004 7:04 am (#216 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
If "Felix Felicis" turns out to be a character rather than a charm, he sounds to good to be trusted -- "How Happy is the Happy One," indeed. Such a character might be the Lockhart of Book 6. However, I reserve the right to be more charitable later.
P.S., in case you UK members think you sense a grouchy tone in all of the US posters today, it isn't necessarily because of unhappiness with election results (we're apparently in diffent camps on that aspect) -- it's because we all sat up until 2 or 3 in the morning watching the blooming thing unfold. There just isn't enough coffee. So, be kind to us today. We have a headache.
- - - - - - - - - -
Czarina II - Nov 3, 2004 9:47 am (#217 of 359)
Hogs Head -- It isn't just the US posters! ;-) (I stayed up till 2am and I unfortunately don't drink coffee.)
I think Felix Felicis might be a Cheering Charm of sorts, which we could all use about now.
- - - - - - - - - -
LooneyLuna - Nov 3, 2004 6:58 pm (#218 of 359)
Felix Felicis - could it be a lucky charm? And no one better lay a finger on me lucky charms! hee hee
toddles off for a butterbeer.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Nov 3, 2004 8:36 pm (#219 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Czarina II -- which part of the Great Canadian Prairie are you from? (I'm hoping for visions of beautiful mountains, lakes fed by thawing glaciers, fish the size of small cars, etc.)
- - - - - - - - - -
Czarina II - Nov 4, 2004 10:07 am (#220 of 359)
Hogs Head -- that scene you describe is about seven hours drive from my hometown. I'm from the flatlands north of North Dakota.
I suppose Felix Felicis could also be something to do with congratulations. (French: "felicitations" = "congratulations")
If Felix Felicis is a person, they would have to be ancient, since I don't even think the wizarding world would have such a name. It also sounds like a password or a plant. I have to agree that if this Felix is a person (an ancient person), perhaps that person had to do with a betrayal of Godric Gryffindor.
(staggers off with a bottle of butterbeer)
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Nov 11, 2004 8:07 am (#221 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
On another thread, someone inquired about whether there might be a link between U.K.'s Guy Fawkes and our beloved phoenix, Fawkes, wondering if our Fawkes might not a traitor in the same mold.
Most replies rebuffed this immediately, as I would, too. (Although with the PS/SS appearance of the historic Nicholas Flamel, it did fleetingly cross my mind that Guy Fawkes might, in JKR's fictional wizard world, have been a wrongly accused wizard who saved himself by transfiguring into a phoenix -- that's probably too wild and incongruent with history, no?)
However, can anyone provide more than the basic, popular information on "Guy Fawkes" and his status as a "traitor"? Thanks.
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Nov 11, 2004 10:32 am (#222 of 359)
I'm not sure if this link provides more than the basic, popular information about Guy Fawkes, but I do believe that it is appropriate to name a phoenix after him, given that Guy was caught in a store room with barrels full of gunpowder...
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Nov 11, 2004 3:22 pm (#223 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Per this site, supplied above by Paulus Maximus, I assume Guy Fawkes was among those who were:
"`hanged, drawn, and quartered', a brutal practice which authorities hoped would instill terror in other potential traitors"
If so, my fleeting theory that JKR might portray Guy Fawkes as able to escape death by transformation into a phoenix, hence becoming our Fawkes, seems all the more unlikely. What was I thinking?
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Nov 11, 2004 5:39 pm (#224 of 359)
It takes a lot to kill a wizard, though. A car crash couldn't kill Lily and James, various mediaeval wizards could endure burning at the stake... if Guy Fawkes were a wizard, he might survive hanging, drawing, and quartering...
Of course, he would have to be a wizard of Lord Voldemort's caliber to use such magic... I'd rather not contemplate that...
Then again, Lord Voldemort's wand does contain one of Fawkes' feathers...
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Nov 12, 2004 7:36 am (#225 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Wizard or not, if you are actually drawn and quartered, you're pretty much toast. I don't want to get into the specifics of that particular method of execution here, but I'm sure it can be found in a good reference. That doesn't preclude a clever wizard from creating the illusion of being drawn and quartered, I suppose.
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Nov 12, 2004 1:49 pm (#226 of 359)
If Voldemort could protect himself from a backfired Auada Kedaura, I'm sure that wizards could manage to stay alive even if hanged, drawn, and quartered.
- - - - - - - - - -
Annika - Nov 12, 2004 1:50 pm (#227 of 359)
They may be able to stay alive if hanged, drawn or quartered, but at what price?
Annika
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Nov 12, 2004 1:53 pm (#228 of 359)
No price too great, if they think that death is the ultimate evil (as Voldemort does).
- - - - - - - - - -
Annika - Nov 12, 2004 1:56 pm (#229 of 359)
So the price then would be to become the ultimate evil in order to avoid the "next great adventure."
Annika
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Nov 13, 2004 2:06 am (#230 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
All that being said, I can't see a viable theory whereby the historic Guy Fawkes is now our phoenix, Fawkes, in transformed state.
Nor do I see much link between the two at all other than name similarity. But I am open to ideas. It is a curious similarity, in any event.
If a pet in the U.S. were named "Arnold," it would not necessarily draw attention, but one named "Benedict" would draw occasional wisecracks. I'm sure a pet named "Judas" would draw comment, as well. Does the name "Fawkes" evoke the same connections in the U.K. as "Benedict" or "Judas" might, or is it more like "Arnold"?
- - - - - - - - - -
TomProffitt - Nov 21, 2004 10:15 am (#231 of 359)
Bullheaded empiricist
I don't know much about British culture, but isn't Guy Fawkes associated with Bonfire Night and fireworks and such? I assumed Fawkes got got his name because he was like a living firecracker, not because he had any association with the true Historical figure.
- - - - - - - - - -
azi - Nov 22, 2004 5:49 am (#232 of 359)
Photo borrowed from Ardent Photography
I assumed the same as you, Tom. In my opinion, Fawkes got his name because of Bonfire Night and the fires that are lit because of the fact he bursts into flame and regrows from the ashes. Guy Fawkes just happened to be the one who tried to blow the king up. Yeah, people burn a guy (not a real one) on the fire every year, but I always thought of the fire connection and Fawkes rebirth. rather than any association with the 'real' Fawkes.
Hmmm, not sure if that made sense, I think I've lost my use of English somewhat...
- - - - - - - - - -
TomProffitt - Nov 22, 2004 7:44 am (#233 of 359)
Bullheaded empiricist
Um, what exactly is Bonfire Night? I take it that it's not like the 4th of July in the States where we (leaving aside the actual origin of the day, thinking more of what we do) celebrate with a parade, a little flag waving, and fireworks?
- - - - - - - - - -
Dr Filibuster - Nov 22, 2004 1:21 pm (#234 of 359)
Sue, from Northwich, England.
No parades or flag waving.
We set fireworks off whilst standing next to bonfires. Not everyones idea of fun, but I love it.
It's cold in Novemeber so hot food is served, such as burgers, hot dogs, soup, jacket (baked) potatoes, hot pot (stew). Traditional treats include treacle toffee, and parkin (cake made with treacle, ginger and oats).
Not everywhere has a Guy burning on the stake these days, but that's what we're supposed to do.
We don't go round contemplating the meaning of Parliament, terrorist attacks or Catholics. Having said that, kids' tv programmes may well explain the history around this time of year and we learn the story at primary school.
It's occurred to me that Americans may just say "fire" instead of bonfire. Is that why Steve has a definition on the Lexicon? A bonfire is only an outdoor fire.
I agree that Fawkes the phoenix was nothing more than a pun by Rowling. She's fond of alliteration in names as well.
- - - - - - - - - -
azi - Nov 23, 2004 7:16 am (#235 of 359)
Photo borrowed from Ardent Photography
Mmm treacle toffee. Yep, I love bonfire night too. 'Remember, remember the 5th of November, gunpowder treason and plot.' That's what I learned at first school. I just love building the bonfire and then watching it burn personally.
I just realised that Hagrids quite fond of treacle toffee, and Harry's fond of treacle tart. Any connection to Fawkes, the traditonal bonfire toffee etc.? Probably not, it's just interesting.
- - - - - - - - - -
Amilia Smith - Nov 23, 2004 6:24 pm (#236 of 359)
I was over in Quick Quotes looking for something else, when I ran across this quote from the online chat of 16 October 2000. As it applies to the discussion here at the moment, I thought I'd share. The question and answer are as follows:
What is Bonfire Night?
Good question! We celebrate November 5th in Britain every year. There was a plot to blow up the Houses of Parliament. The ringleader of the plot was called Guy Fawkes (spot any Harry Potter connection?!), and we burn him in effigy and set off fireworks to celebrate not losing our government.
So maybe there is more to this Fawkes connection than we are thinking . . .
Mills.
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Nov 28, 2004 4:12 am (#237 of 359)
The only Fawkes connection that I can think of is the association with flammables...
- - - - - - - - - -
timrew - Dec 28, 2004 5:21 pm (#238 of 359)
Middle-aged Harry Potter fan
Guy (or Guido) Fawkes was a Roman Catholic, who, with a few pals, decided to blow up the Houses Of Parliament, and get rid of a house full of politicians (and the King) at the same time.
So why we celebrate his capture and death to this day is total anathema to me!
- - - - - - - - - -
TomProffitt - Dec 30, 2004 6:52 am (#239 of 359)
Bullheaded empiricist
Tim, I don't know how y'all do it across the pond, but here in the states the gov'ment decides what the holidays are.
- - - - - - - - - -
timrew - Dec 30, 2004 5:02 pm (#240 of 359)
Middle-aged Harry Potter fan
Yes, Tom. I suppose it was a house full of politicians who decided to celebrate Guy Fawkes' capture and death. After all, he was trying to get rid of them!
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Dec 31, 2004 3:20 pm (#241 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Timrew -- I always love your posts and those of Loopy Lupin. I've missed you both.
I guess I assumed the U.S. had originated most of the anti-heros, like Jesse James, Billy the Kid, Tom Dooley (more famous in a folk songs than real history), and, via the magical sixties, Bonnie & Clyde. I should have known that the longer European history and mythology would countenance nothing new under the sun from the Colonials, so I'm not surprised that the Guy Fawkes bonfires meant to villanize a traitor might have come to popularize him instead. And I suppose Robin Hood was a prototype of them all -- although good Sir Robin had the good sense not to have his legend sullied at the end by being captured and hung.
Back to a possible Fawkes / Guy Fawkes connection to a possible treason scenario. I've been shot at (if not shot down) on this before but I've always wondered whether Fawkes was an amimagus counterpart of someone stuck in the animal side. This theory has played with the supposition that some injury or the like was incurred on the human / wizard side, preventing a safe return to human form. I guess it might also be because the person was "wanted" by the authorities on the human / wizard side. But that would be a little too redundant of Sirius & his dog counterpart, no? At any rate, the theory, if viable at all, probably works against any notion that Fawkes is related to any Book 6 or Book 7 treason scenario or that there is a Guy Fawkes connection. Which takes one back to a simpler default theory -- that any Fawkes / Guy Fawkes thing is virtually coincidental, and perhaps suggested only from the similarity of names and flames to fireworks, etc.
I've even wondered if Fawkes was Albus Dumbledore's (or even Nicolas Flamel's) animagus counterpart, but that thought has also received considerable flak. I'll save that for another day. But to close it out with a seemingly off the wall question -- is there any support in JKR interviews, texts, etc. for the notion that a person's animal side animagus counterpart and his or her patronus need be the same creature?
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Jan 15, 2005 3:40 pm (#242 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Okay, no one like my animagi theories. Just remember they were mine when we get surprises in July (or in HP Book 7).
Although some of it joking in light of Snape's birthday announcement, much talk on the JKR website thread about Snape, JKR's remarks about keeping an eye on him, etc. I think Snape too obvious to be a traitor. I think he's the decoy for some other traitor (assuming there will be one) who will be surprising.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred - Jan 15, 2005 4:17 pm (#243 of 359)
Let me quess,is it Ron. He seems the most insecure among them. He might need a power boost
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Jan 16, 2005 3:30 pm (#244 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
For the reasons you cite, I imagine Ron could be easily duped into spilling some beans or might, in some moment of angst or insecurity, say or do something damaging he might later want to retract. I suspect Ron would, however, be among the first to "repent." So my guess is the Ron is not really so much traitor as he might be a mark or a target, i.e., an easy prey for a trick.
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Jan 16, 2005 10:18 pm (#245 of 359)
That's what I, at least, thought about Quirrel...
- - - - - - - - - -
Joanne R. Reid - Jan 17, 2005 11:21 am (#246 of 359)
If you repeat an iteration, which by its definition is repeated, it's a reiteration. If so, then what's the repetition of a reiteration called? Boring!
Anyhoo, my money's still on Percy.
Ron's the quintessential side-kick. He's utterly loyal, loves Harry better than any of his brothers and would willingly sacrifice himself for Harry. As for the jealousy/envy motive, that's already been handled. That is, Ron has faced his moment of jealousy. He's discovered that Harry is as loyal to him as he is to Harry. Ron will never, ever become a git like his brother, Percy. End of story.
None of the other regulars would betray Harry, either. They've all had their opportunities to study the boy in all sorts of difficulties. He has never done anything to any of them, has saved them from harm and has always acted in their best interests in so far as he is able.
However, as I have stated elsewhere, Percy is a very different story. He's ambitious. He detests his upbringing. He dislikes his father, perhaps even hates him at this point. He's inordinately proud of his accomplishments and certain of his personal righteousness. That is, he's a perfect target for the pure-blood DEs.
I opine that Lucius Malfoy will endear himself to Percy, perhaps even protecting him from the inevitable shake up at the MoM. Percy will slowly, but surely fall into the clutches of the DEs. At first, he'll provide information, as did Rookwood. In his arrogance, Percy will rationalize his actions, eg. the ends justifying the means.
As for DD, he's not perfect. He's too trusting. But, he's still the only one Voldemort ever feared.
OK, time to get off my soapbox.
Thanks,
- - - - - - - - - -
MickeyCee3948 - Jan 17, 2005 12:31 pm (#247 of 359)
Avatar courtesy of Gwen
I agree Joanne R. Reid that Percy is the most likely to be a traitor in HBP but I can't see how Lucius is going to save himself AGAIN. Yes the first time he said he was under a spell. But TWICE. You can only use a line so often and it then it will tend to lose its ring.
Mikie
- - - - - - - - - -
Joanne R. Reid - Jan 17, 2005 2:51 pm (#248 of 359)
Good point, Mickie. I was thinking that Lucius had already laid a firm foundation for his future both inside and outside the MoM. That is, he's been dishing out the dough pretty regularly. He's used every bit of his family connections, money and influence to get what he wants. And, as we remember, there are many people both inside and outside the MoM who feel strongly about the purity of bloodlines.
So, regardless of his capture, and perhaps because of it, I get the feeling that old Lucius still has a lot of power and influence.
Thanks
- - - - - - - - - -
TGF - Jan 17, 2005 10:48 pm (#249 of 359)
Anti-Voldemort Insurgent
It should be noted that in book 4, Ron was described as being especially vulnerable to the Imperius curse. I know that most people have a hard time with it to begin with, but Ron had side effects from the curse even after Moody-Crouch took it off of him.
So maybe he'll become one of the Imperius Curse's victims at some point. I don't think he'd really betray Harry of his own accord (I used to) though... not unless something very drastic happens to him in the next two books.
- - - - - - - - - -
MickeyCee3948 - Jan 17, 2005 10:51 pm (#250 of 359)
Avatar courtesy of Gwen
TGF-I believe that those around Ron would notice even a little change in his behavior which could indicate the imperius curse. I agree that something drastic will happen to Ron. I believe it will happen at the end of HBP and that Ron will be killed.
Mikie
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Elanor- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 51
Location : France
Treason in Book 6 and/or 7 (Post 251 to 300)
Elanor Sat May 21, 2011 9:07 am
TGF - Jan 17, 2005 11:24 pm (#251 of 359)
Anti-Voldemort Insurgent
I agree that Ron will likely die, but not as early as book 6. If Ron dies, then he'll die towards the end of book 7, during the climatic final battle with the forces of Voldemort. After all, no death in the series would be quite as devestating as that of Ron's (unless she were to go ahead and kill Hermione, but let's not think about that). Would you feel sad that Lupin just died if you just saw Ron go down, for instance? I think it would make sense to have a death of that kind of magnitude towards the close of the books.
As for Imperius... I don't know, we haven't seen many people under Imperius. Ron is apparently defenseless against the Imperius curse, so would his being under it be so conspicuous? And even if he does act weird, would Harry and Hermione both instantly say: "Ron's a little odd lately... he must be under the control of Dark Wizards"?
That aside, he doesn't necessarily have to be under Imperius for a long time. A Death Eater could just seize him at a critical moment for whatever purpose.
It'd be cool if Ron, under Imperio, were forced to fight Harry. I would love to see those two fight.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Feb 6, 2005 1:10 pm (#252 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Interesting thought -- on another thread (I forget which), someone supposed that Amelia Bones may be the new Minister of Magic in Book 6 and that the treason in Book 6 might be a sequence in which she is betrayed. Not my theory, but one that is interesting.
- - - - - - - - - -
Good Evans - May 15, 2005 10:53 am (#253 of 359)
Practically perfect in every way
Loyalty and Bravery - will the Death Eaters be betrayed?
I was listening to OOtP and the part where Phineas Nigellus delivers Dumbledores message to Harry at 12 Grimauld Place, (incidentally I assume everyone reads this as grimm old place??? - good one Jo). He says that Gryffendors are supposed to be brave and that his old house Slytherin are also brave but will always save themselves. This got me thinking about Draco, is this foreshadowing that given the choice, betraying Voldemort, his father or the death eaters in general is preferable to his own incarceration or death if it comes to it? We saw Karakarof spill the beans in the penseive, and we realise why the death eaters do not know the identity of all of their number. The one thing Voldemort does not have is loyalty, his followers will save themselves before him. He rules through fear, if the fear were greater in the heat of the moment or if a sly person felt that it would do him good (Draco has colluded with Umbridge for his own purposes and in book one and two he spilled the beans on Harry (and others) being out of bed in order to get them in to trouble). Do we have a pattern of Draco that JKR has been building up in order to lead to a great betaryal in order to save his own skin?
- - - - - - - - - -
Miriam Huber - May 15, 2005 8:29 am (#254 of 359)
I once again agree with you, Good Evans (though not especially on Draco).
In GoF we learned already that there were not so many DEs who really wanted Voldemort back. And look how he treated them in the graveyard!
I think they came mostly out of fear back to him, not out of loyalty. The only thing that seemed to keep them together apart from fear of Voldemort is hatred for "that muggle-loving fool" Dumbledore: their racism and their feeling of being superior. So they saved their skin when they wriggled out of being sent to Askaban after Voldemort´s downfall, and they saved their skin again by returning to him -- because all knew the other choice would mean death.
This is really different to the kind of loyalty Harry and many others have shown Dumbledore and his "side". And perhaps this might be decisive in the end.
I am thinking especially of Avery (and I am not the only one on the forum), who has at least twice been horribly punished by Voldemort -- after having twice "betrayed" him (in a smaller way). What if he decided to flee to Dumbledore? What if he will become another spy -- or is already one? Why did he give wrong information to Voldemort about the prophecy? Somewhere in the series (I think in PoA when Fudge et al. talk in the Three Broomstick shortly before christmas) it says that Dumbledore "had a number of useful spies"; not only one (Snape, presumably). Who or where are the others?
- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - May 15, 2005 10:53 am (#255 of 359)
We already know that Voldemort does not treat his followers much better than he does those who oppose him. He may occasionally reward, but I suggest his rewards are capricious--and may be withdrawn--and his punishments are more permanent. I suppose his followers are more loyal to themselves than they are to their fellow DEs ... and perhaps even to their families. I believe most would save their own skins before sacrificing themselves for anyone else. Those who do jeopardize their own lives to save someone else may unconsciously be taking a step away from everything a DE is. I think there may be DEs who would willingly leave Voldemort, if they felt there was a chance of surviving the defection.
Solitaire
- - - - - - - - - -
Ydnam96 - May 16, 2005 8:21 am (#256 of 359)
Yes, Yes. I agree.
It makes me think of the people in Hitler's army...or even just in the German populatin. There were a quite a number of Priests who were sent to prison camps because they took up stances against Hitler (along with tons of other people this is just the first thing I thought of). Hitler ruled through fear and propaganda, just like VM. I would be terrified of turning on him. Probably to the point of going into hiding, perhaps like Karakof?
- - - - - - - - - -
Miriam Huber - May 16, 2005 9:56 am (#257 of 359)
In don´t know, Ydnam. Unfortunately, I think, the attachment to nazism in Germany was more than just fear for many. Look at the end of the war: Hundred thousands died in the last weeks, there was bombing and hunger and death everywhere, it was obvious that the war was lost, but very, very many Germans believed Hitler until the end. Of course there were desertations and stuff, but relatively few -- even after Hitler had "heroically died defending Berlin" (I think that was the announcement on one of the first days of May after Hitler´s suicide on the 30th of april).
Don´t misunderstand me: First, I am talking about my own people, not accusing anyone else, second, I am NOT saying I would have been braver or anything. It´s just the facts.
The situation in HP seems to be a bit different: There are, of course, people who are real Voldemort-fanatics: Bella, for one thing. But GoF suggest, IMO, that they are relatively few. I hope, of course, that this will prove to be a great weakness of Voldemort, this lack of true loyalty.
- - - - - - - - - -
Good Evans - May 16, 2005 12:19 pm (#258 of 359)
Practically perfect in every way
Miriam -that is how I feel - that this is a great weakenss of Voldemort - no true Loyalty. If faced with it I do believe that he will be betrayed in order to save the neck of the slytherin concerned. Slippery Lucius is not Voldemort loyal - he likes the reign of terror but his first and foremost thought is himself and his family. He plays the game so well. But I dont think that Voldemort truly trust him either. Who does Voldemort truly trust and could this be a very real weakness? I still think our young slippery snake Draco could be the one, but then there are so many within the ranks that are waiting to prove their devotion... or lack of it!
- - - - - - - - - -
Joanne R. Reid - May 17, 2005 7:21 am (#259 of 359)
Hi,
Although I like the parallel between the Nazi hierarchy and the DEs, it's obvious that we could push that analogy too far. Yet, I am tempted to suggest that the DEs are akin to the Goebbels, Himmlers, Goerings and other fanatics of the Nazi regime. They were loyal not because they feared Hitler, but because they admired and agreed with him. We might even say they worshipped him as a messiah, leading them and their nation into a new and golden era.
Their fanaticism, propaganda and training inculcated their youth in the spirit, goals and techniques of National Socialism. Ultimately this led to the Hitler Jungen (Youth), and some of the most dedicated and battle-worthy divisions of the Waffen SS.
I suggest that Draco has lived his entire life listening to his father's pro-Voldemort propaganda, experiencing the power of DE fanaticism, especially at school, and is thoroughly inculcated in the belief of the superiority of the Pure-Blood. Like the Hitler Youth, Draco and his ilk will be more dedicated, tougher and more powerful than their parents. They will arise from the defeat of their parents, prepared to sacrifice anyone and anything to achieve their ultimate victory.
Thus, we will have the continuation of the battle between Good and Evil. We wil have more books about the WW, Harry Potter and all of our friends that survive the battles that are about to be revealed to us.
Accio! Half-Blood Prince!
Thanks,
- - - - - - - - - -
Miss Malaprop - Jun 16, 2005 5:06 pm (#260 of 359)
Edited by Jun 16, 2005 5:11 pm
My guess is Gregory and Mr Goyle. Although I think it would be more significant if any treason occurred within the Order than within the DE's (after all, Dumbledore has Snape...what could the Goyles do for him?), I just can't ignore this essay on the Lexicon. At the end, the author basically draws attention to the fact that Goyle Sr was absent from the DoM battle (and Goyle Jr was not mentioned as being part of the Inquisitorial Squad).
Now, almost everywhere else in the books we find Crabbe and Goyle together, laughing trollishly, cracking their knuckles, flanking Draco. Both Goyles missing from important scenes involving the Malfoys and the Crabbes, seems too significant a coincidence to ignore.
- - - - - - - - - -
Professor V - Jun 16, 2005 6:52 pm (#261 of 359)
Along those lines, isn't Goyle also missing from Draco's side during much of the third movie.
- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Jun 17, 2005 12:20 pm (#262 of 359)
*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
Professor - Supposedly the actor who plays him has exams and had to miss some scenes. That was the explanation I heard.
- - - - - - - - - -
Professor V - Jun 17, 2005 1:34 pm (#263 of 359)
I'd heard that as well, but each time I see the movie, I remember JKR saying something about there being some good foreshadowing in the third movie. When I combine the absence of Goyle in the movie along with all of the speculation about uniting the houses - Goyle comes to mind.
- - - - - - - - - -
Jessalynn Quirky - Jun 17, 2005 5:20 pm (#264 of 359)
Maybe Goyle's absense is significant, and the actor needing to take his exams a happy coincidence.
- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Jun 17, 2005 6:05 pm (#265 of 359)
*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
Actually, it's not whether or not he is absent in the movie, but whether or not he is absent in the book that counts.
- - - - - - - - - -
Ms Amanda - Jun 17, 2005 7:03 pm (#266 of 359)
And it helps that Peter Pettigrew as Scabbers didn't like Goyle, right? Remember the bite?
- - - - - - - - - -
frogface - Jun 18, 2005 3:44 am (#267 of 359)
I always got the feeling (don't ask me why) that Crabbe was slightly suprior to Goyle. I think it maybe because Crabbe was chosen by Draco to be his second when they planned the duel with Harry and Ron in their first year. Also I'm sure Ron refers to Goyle as being the stupidest in the year or something along those lines at one point. Could this be significant to the Goyle's absence towards the end of the book?
By the way Choices is right, the films aren't concerened canon, so the fact that Nott (it was Nott wasn't it?) took a bigger role in POA movie doesn't count.
- - - - - - - - - -
Miss Malaprop - Jun 19, 2005 6:52 am (#268 of 359)
Edited by Jun 19, 2005 6:55 am
The other Slytherin boy in the film isn't named as Nott - he is just listed as "Slytherin Boy" on imdb.
Crabbe, I think, is chosen to be Draco's duelling second because he is bigger than Goyle (PoA pg 63). Draco stands on Goyle's shoulders when imitating Dementors which would also indicate Goyle is shorter.
When you search the books for references to C&G, there are few stand-out moments for either of them. But, like frogface, I think Crabbe seems to be slightly closer to Malfoy. In CoS, in the Slytherin common room, Draco chooses to show the newspaper article about Arthur's work enquiry to Crabbe first. He mentions his friend Crabbe, rather than Goyle, in Rita's article (GoF 381) and after Harry names the Death Eaters in The Quibbler, Malfoy whispers something to Crabbe (OotP 514).
Crabbe Senior also seems slightly more noticeable to Voldemort in the graveyard: "We have Crabbe...you will do better this time, will you not, Crabbe?...And you, Goyle?" (but personally I think this is too minor a quote to use as evidence for Goyle's loyalties).
My idea of the Goyles as turncoats persists mainly because they were missing from the Inquisitorial Squad and the DoM battle. So...
- Where were the Goyles that day?
- What were they doing?
- Why weren’t they missed? Or were they?
If they are on the good side, mightn't they have just blown their chances of spying for DD? (assuming they are not as thick as they seem).
The evidence is so scant, I still can't completely convince myself...but as C&G are almost always together, why would JKR leave out both father and son from the action that day?
- - - - - - - - - -
Good Evans - Jun 19, 2005 6:59 am (#269 of 359)
Practically perfect in every way
I was almost persuaded by this argument until I listened again to the end of OOTP - where the three nemesis were together and menaced harry both in the entance hall at Hogwarts and then on the train - where all three were together and hit by many hexes by the DA. I am not sure that JKR just didnt need them at those other quoted moments, and crabbe and Goyle SNRs both having reprimanded by Voldemort I wonder if he only sends one liability and not two on a mission now?
Nice theory though and I will watch with interest, I have long hoped one of the henchmen would turn to the good side, whether it is C or G - well lets wait and see, I will be floored if it is malfoy.
- - - - - - - - - -
Professor V - Jun 19, 2005 4:46 pm (#270 of 359)
I know that the movies aren't canon, it wasn't my intention for my comment about the movie to be taken that way. The only reason I mentioned the movie was to tie in the idea that JKR felt that there was something in the third movie that foreshadowed future story lines.
- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Jun 19, 2005 5:34 pm (#271 of 359)
Librarian
I think that it is possible that the Goyle's have turned against Voldemort. However, there was also another missing character in OOTP. The Goyle's could be doing something nefarious with Peter.
- - - - - - - - - -
Professor V - Jun 19, 2005 8:08 pm (#272 of 359)
Really quick, I just reread my last post and it came off a bit not so nice - sorry.
- - - - - - - - - -
Miss Malaprop - Jun 21, 2005 4:30 am (#273 of 359)
Steve, which missing character do you mean? Was it Travers missing from the DoM battle?
If someone really had to be left out of the battle for, say, logistical reasons (I can't really think of any other reason they might not have been there) - why not Jugson, who was only introduced in this chapter?
- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Jun 21, 2005 5:37 am (#274 of 359)
Librarian
Peter was missing throughout OOTP.
- - - - - - - - - -
Kip Carter - Aug 2, 2005 11:32 am (#275 of 359)
co-Host with Steve on the Lexicon Forum, but he has the final say as the Owner!
This thread was closed down during the sixteen day period surrounding the release of Book Six. It is now opened for posts.
- - - - - - - - - -
Aqualu Nifey - Aug 2, 2005 11:42 am (#276 of 359)
"So this is how liberty dies, with thunderous applause." - Padme Amidala-Skywalker
Umm... Treason in Book VI, I would just like to say SNAPE!
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Aug 2, 2005 1:17 pm (#277 of 359)
Umm... Treason in Book VI, I would just like to say SNAPE!
Quite so.
And I would hazard a guess that we haven't seen the last of his treachery...
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Aug 3, 2005 2:59 pm (#278 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Okay, so what about Book 7 now. Who will switch sides? Who will spy for one side against the other? You naysayers recall that you also said there would be none of that in Book 6. It is almost a must in Book 7.
Will Snape be redeemed, either by being proven a triple agent or by "repenting"?
Who else does Voldemort now have in the OoP camp? Surely the correct answer is not "no one." If it is, Voldemort will do his best to remedy that.
Who else (other than Snape perhaps) does the OoP have in the Voldemort camp?
Even if Snape is a very, very clever OoP plant in the Voldemort camp (reminscent of the brilliant schemes British intelligence masterminded to conceal the true locus of the D-Day invasion), to whom in the OoP could Snape report, since Dumbledore is either dead (as some argue) or at least hiding out very well (as others argue) -- in either case quite out of touch with other OoPs?
(DEAR EDITORS: Perhaps we can now re-title this thread to refer only to Book 7, dropping the "6 and/or" part?
- - - - - - - - - -
Saralinda Again - Aug 3, 2005 5:45 pm (#279 of 359)
My Patronus is a Crumple-Horn Snorkack
My guess is that Snape is still on the side of the good, and he's reporting to Aberforth.
(But then, I thought that Harry and Luna made a really cool 'ship, too, so you can see how right my guesses run!)
- - - - - - - - - -
Madam Pince - Aug 5, 2005 5:06 am (#280 of 359)
The eyes are the windows to the soul...
Saralinda, although I was sure Harry and Ginny would end up together, I secretly thought Harry and Luna would be fun, too! I like her character so much. I'm glad he at least took her out on a date!
I'm guessing Snape is definitely on the "good" side, but I don't think he's going to be reporting to anyone. He's just been positioned, much like a chess piece, to be near the "king" so he can maneuver him around and help take him out in the final battle. (Oooo, I should post that on the chess thread -- Nathan would love it! Actually he's probably already thought of it...)
Are we going to find out more about Mundungus Fletcher? He was arrested in HBP, but is he really a traitor or was he in the same boat as poor Stan Shunpike?
- - - - - - - - - -
Saralinda Again - Aug 5, 2005 9:06 am (#281 of 359)
My Patronus is a Crumple-Horn Snorkack
For some reason I keep thinking of Aberforth as the Order's secret weapon -- someone so under-the-radar that most people, even Order members, don't actively consider him part of the equation. I think that's one of his greatest strengths we'll see in Seven.
I'm kind of hoping he'll be sort of "Albus Lite," a fair wizard with a well of wisdom, or at least pertinent observations, with which he can empower Harry to kick LV's bum. At the very least, I'm hoping that Albus confided in him extensively, so we can get some answers.
- - - - - - - - - -
Neville Longbottom - Aug 5, 2005 11:02 pm (#282 of 359)
Mundungus was arrested because he impersonated an Inferi. I think that was an incident unrelated to Voldemort, other than that he used the general hysteria for his aims. But if he really stole the locket out of 12 GP, than I suppose Harry will talk with him again, to ask him to whom it was sold.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred01 - Aug 22, 2005 11:05 pm (#283 of 359)
I think Snape is neither good or bad. He only answers to himself. It might be possible that Dumbledore faked his own death. In fact, he is almost asking to die. The fact that he paralyzed Harry before that signifies that he has planned this. Maybe Snape and him had an secret agreement. He knows that if Harry will suffer another loss, Harry will get more serious
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 3, 2005 12:19 pm (#284 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Could there be another mole to be found out in Book 7? One possible purpose (among several) in the "Albus is alive and Snape is still a good guy" theory for Snape now posing as Albus's killer is that Voldy may now have to activate (and expose) other hidden resources (moles and traitors) otherwise presumed to be in the OoF camp. Who could that be?
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Oct 2, 2005 12:45 pm (#285 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Okay, no takers to my #284 inquiry? Assume arguendo for the moment that Albus is alive and that Snape is good and acting now as a spy in Voldy's camp, who is Voldy most likely to try to recruit from within the OoP as his eyes and ears there? Don't we still have one of the "inner Voldy circle" from the graveyard scene at the end of GoF still to be accounted for?
It couldn't be one of the Weasleys, could it? (And, no, I would never suggest that to be Molly Weasley.) If, arguendo, Voldy's mole is one of the Weasleys, which one? (Isn't Percy too easy?)
And if not one of the Weasleys, who else? Who else would give us a huge shock at the end of Book 7 if it turned out they were Voldy's mole all along?
- - - - - - - - - -
Honour - Oct 2, 2005 2:44 pm (#286 of 359)
Just for arguments sake... How about Minerva? She seems to be continually out of the loop in HBP, do you think someone may have got to her at St Mungo's? Now that would be a shocker!
(diving for cover under my purple and gold umbrella awaiting the dung bomb shower...)
Just had another thought, what about Rufus? He struck me as 'smarmy' in HBP... and on the occassions he crossed paths with Harry he seemed almost fudge-like ... yet menacing ... I know he has been described as looking lion-like (I have paraphrased), a thought had crossed my mind a while back ... (as usual - no canon, just a feeling)what if he was a werewolf? ... and another thought why did he get rid of Shaklebolt? If he mis-trusted him, where did this come from? I thought Shaklebolt (and DD) covered his bases very well? to me it seemed like Rufus got rid of Shaklebolt to elinminate a strong rival..
There you go Hogs Head lets see where that lot lands ...
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Oct 2, 2005 3:26 pm (#287 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
It will likely land you and I in the deep end with those who are devoted fans of those you and I referenced but . . . someone has got to be a secret bad guy! There's no other way a Western (as opposed to Eastern, as in not a Cowboy movie) plot can develop from here.
- - - - - - - - - -
Honour - Oct 2, 2005 4:45 pm (#288 of 359)
Heee Heee Heee ....Never mind Hogs Head come share my umbrella, its big enough for two ...
- - - - - - - - - -
far from prefect - Oct 4, 2005 2:30 pm (#289 of 359)
A mole in the Order... hmm... I agree with HH that it is unlikely to be one of the Weasleys. Interesting idea about McGonagall, but I don't like it! Couldn't you see Mundungus selling information? Or would the other Order members be a little more circumspect around him now? Scrimgeour is not a member of the Order -- just of the Ministry. There are fewer members to speculate about, though...
(
ffp
- - - - - - - - - -
Esther Rose - Oct 4, 2005 2:46 pm (#290 of 359)
Diggle would be my guess. Flattery is always the best disguise.
- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Oct 4, 2005 6:16 pm (#291 of 359)
Librarian
I think that the time of major treason is past.
I also spent a fair amount of time a couple of months preHBP looking to hints that perhaps McGonnagall was a traitor. Not much that I could see. I looked not believing that she was a traitor but because she could do so much damage if she was.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Oct 4, 2005 6:50 pm (#292 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Major treason always strikes in literature when you think it is gone.
Since I'm inclined to follow the "good Snape" theory for now, he wasn't it in my assessment.
In Book 1, Quirrel might have qualified as a traitor if he'd been more in the inner circle. No cigar. However, he was Voldy's inside man.
No real traitor in Book 2, except for possessed Ginny, whom we will forgive since she is kissy face with Harry. (However, Voldy might hear of that and make another run at her for many reasons. She might be vulnerable to attack, but I think no for overtly switching sides or betraying secrets.) I guess out of kindness to Ginny, we'll say that the Diary Tom was Voldy's inside man, with the help of Lucius.
In Book 3, Wormtail didn't qualify as a traitor -- at least not since the death of Lily & James. He was Voldy's surprise inside man -- and a surprise to Voldy, too, no doubt.
In Book 4, Fake Moody was Voldy's inside man, and sort of a fake traitor. Real Moody wasn't a traitor, but rather stuffed in a trunk. Fake Moody didn't really switch sides, but I guess you could call him a mole. Not "major treason," though. Still, at the end of Book 4, we have a mysterious DE that remains unaccounted for.
In Book 5, Umbridge was a negative catalyst and a sneak, but not an agent of Voldy. So far as we know, no major agents of Voldy in the inner circle. Well there was the fellow from the ministry who got ivy'd to death, but he, too, was possessed.
In Book 6, we're supposed to think Snape, but I'm a "good Snape" adherent, so I'd have to say Voldy's inside man was Draco.
All that in combination just isn't sufficiently shocking treason to satisfy the criteria of fiction in Western culture. Probably not in Japanese literature, from what I've seen translated -- they know and love their bad guys, too. The "Dark Lord," if he's half he's cracked up to be, would have done a better job at infiltrating the good guys. And if Snape is indeed "bad Snape," surely Voldy has another card up his sleeve among the OoPs. So, any way you slice it, there's a slimy traitor or mole still to go.
And, while I do rule out Molly, I do not yet rule out Arthur. (If Molly went over to the bad guys, it would only be because she'd just gone whacko.)
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Oct 7, 2005 9:04 am (#293 of 359)
Given how ambitious Percy is, can we rule out the possibility that he might side with the equally ambitious Dark Lord?
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Oct 7, 2005 9:53 am (#294 of 359)
I have thought about that before, Paulus, but Percy loves rules and order.
I think being a follower of Voldy may be a bit too spontaneous for him.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Oct 7, 2005 5:58 pm (#295 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Can't rule Percy out, but would he be a surprise? I think it must be someone that would make us gasp or at least say, "Oh, why didn't I see that coming?"
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Oct 17, 2005 8:35 am (#296 of 359)
Suppose the Ministry made some concessions to Vold...
...never mind... too disturbing...
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Oct 17, 2005 3:17 pm (#297 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Concessions . . . like Chamberlain to Hitler?
- - - - - - - - - -
rambkowalczyk - Oct 18, 2005 5:45 am (#298 of 359)
In the first chap of book 6 there is a mention of appeasement.
Fudge says "The Brockdale Bridge --he did it, Prime Minister, he threatened a mass Muggle killing unless I stood aside for him and---"
- - - - - - - - - -
ex-FAHgeek - Oct 18, 2005 9:43 am (#299 of 359)
Except that Fudge actually refused to cave into blackmail.
It seems he had one partially redeeming feature as Minister after all.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Nov 27, 2005 1:42 pm (#300 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
One might think there is a "traitor in the OoP yet to be revealed" even if he/she is a firm "DD is dead and Snape is bad" adherent. Yet for those adopting or toying with the "Dumbledore is still alive" theory and its companion "Snape is really good and now a plant in the Voldemort camp" theory there is a problem greater than sorting through the ample (albeit inconclusive) clues spotted by many. More importantly from a plot line standpoint -- why?
What in the plot is advanced if Dumbledore is thought to be dead but is really alive or if Snape is now embedded in the Voldemort camp but really working for the Good Guys?
Of course, it could be merely old standbys (not necessarily bad simply because they've been used in other works of fiction) like -- to make Harry depend on himself and become active on his own; or to make Voldemort let his guard down against some crucial moment or thing or to cause Voldemort to become overconfident and overplay his hand (again).
All these are good, but I keep fixating on my pet Treason in Book 6 and/or 7 thread. Could it be that the rationale behind a "DD is dead ruse" (assuming arguendo that is what it is) or a "Snape embed ruse" is to flush out a very well hidden but deeply embedded Death Eater mole in the Good Guy camp?
But the puzzlement of figuring out candidates for such an mole has befuddled me lately -- moreso since the end of Book 6.
For reasons not wholely satisfying to me, I keep answering my question, "Who is the least likely to be a traitor but who has capacity to know what is going on and to do great harm at just the wrong moment?" with Arthur Weasley. Tell me I'm batty. Please.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Anti-Voldemort Insurgent
I agree that Ron will likely die, but not as early as book 6. If Ron dies, then he'll die towards the end of book 7, during the climatic final battle with the forces of Voldemort. After all, no death in the series would be quite as devestating as that of Ron's (unless she were to go ahead and kill Hermione, but let's not think about that). Would you feel sad that Lupin just died if you just saw Ron go down, for instance? I think it would make sense to have a death of that kind of magnitude towards the close of the books.
As for Imperius... I don't know, we haven't seen many people under Imperius. Ron is apparently defenseless against the Imperius curse, so would his being under it be so conspicuous? And even if he does act weird, would Harry and Hermione both instantly say: "Ron's a little odd lately... he must be under the control of Dark Wizards"?
That aside, he doesn't necessarily have to be under Imperius for a long time. A Death Eater could just seize him at a critical moment for whatever purpose.
It'd be cool if Ron, under Imperio, were forced to fight Harry. I would love to see those two fight.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Feb 6, 2005 1:10 pm (#252 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Interesting thought -- on another thread (I forget which), someone supposed that Amelia Bones may be the new Minister of Magic in Book 6 and that the treason in Book 6 might be a sequence in which she is betrayed. Not my theory, but one that is interesting.
- - - - - - - - - -
Good Evans - May 15, 2005 10:53 am (#253 of 359)
Practically perfect in every way
Loyalty and Bravery - will the Death Eaters be betrayed?
I was listening to OOtP and the part where Phineas Nigellus delivers Dumbledores message to Harry at 12 Grimauld Place, (incidentally I assume everyone reads this as grimm old place??? - good one Jo). He says that Gryffendors are supposed to be brave and that his old house Slytherin are also brave but will always save themselves. This got me thinking about Draco, is this foreshadowing that given the choice, betraying Voldemort, his father or the death eaters in general is preferable to his own incarceration or death if it comes to it? We saw Karakarof spill the beans in the penseive, and we realise why the death eaters do not know the identity of all of their number. The one thing Voldemort does not have is loyalty, his followers will save themselves before him. He rules through fear, if the fear were greater in the heat of the moment or if a sly person felt that it would do him good (Draco has colluded with Umbridge for his own purposes and in book one and two he spilled the beans on Harry (and others) being out of bed in order to get them in to trouble). Do we have a pattern of Draco that JKR has been building up in order to lead to a great betaryal in order to save his own skin?
- - - - - - - - - -
Miriam Huber - May 15, 2005 8:29 am (#254 of 359)
I once again agree with you, Good Evans (though not especially on Draco).
In GoF we learned already that there were not so many DEs who really wanted Voldemort back. And look how he treated them in the graveyard!
I think they came mostly out of fear back to him, not out of loyalty. The only thing that seemed to keep them together apart from fear of Voldemort is hatred for "that muggle-loving fool" Dumbledore: their racism and their feeling of being superior. So they saved their skin when they wriggled out of being sent to Askaban after Voldemort´s downfall, and they saved their skin again by returning to him -- because all knew the other choice would mean death.
This is really different to the kind of loyalty Harry and many others have shown Dumbledore and his "side". And perhaps this might be decisive in the end.
I am thinking especially of Avery (and I am not the only one on the forum), who has at least twice been horribly punished by Voldemort -- after having twice "betrayed" him (in a smaller way). What if he decided to flee to Dumbledore? What if he will become another spy -- or is already one? Why did he give wrong information to Voldemort about the prophecy? Somewhere in the series (I think in PoA when Fudge et al. talk in the Three Broomstick shortly before christmas) it says that Dumbledore "had a number of useful spies"; not only one (Snape, presumably). Who or where are the others?
- - - - - - - - - -
Solitaire - May 15, 2005 10:53 am (#255 of 359)
We already know that Voldemort does not treat his followers much better than he does those who oppose him. He may occasionally reward, but I suggest his rewards are capricious--and may be withdrawn--and his punishments are more permanent. I suppose his followers are more loyal to themselves than they are to their fellow DEs ... and perhaps even to their families. I believe most would save their own skins before sacrificing themselves for anyone else. Those who do jeopardize their own lives to save someone else may unconsciously be taking a step away from everything a DE is. I think there may be DEs who would willingly leave Voldemort, if they felt there was a chance of surviving the defection.
Solitaire
- - - - - - - - - -
Ydnam96 - May 16, 2005 8:21 am (#256 of 359)
Yes, Yes. I agree.
It makes me think of the people in Hitler's army...or even just in the German populatin. There were a quite a number of Priests who were sent to prison camps because they took up stances against Hitler (along with tons of other people this is just the first thing I thought of). Hitler ruled through fear and propaganda, just like VM. I would be terrified of turning on him. Probably to the point of going into hiding, perhaps like Karakof?
- - - - - - - - - -
Miriam Huber - May 16, 2005 9:56 am (#257 of 359)
In don´t know, Ydnam. Unfortunately, I think, the attachment to nazism in Germany was more than just fear for many. Look at the end of the war: Hundred thousands died in the last weeks, there was bombing and hunger and death everywhere, it was obvious that the war was lost, but very, very many Germans believed Hitler until the end. Of course there were desertations and stuff, but relatively few -- even after Hitler had "heroically died defending Berlin" (I think that was the announcement on one of the first days of May after Hitler´s suicide on the 30th of april).
Don´t misunderstand me: First, I am talking about my own people, not accusing anyone else, second, I am NOT saying I would have been braver or anything. It´s just the facts.
The situation in HP seems to be a bit different: There are, of course, people who are real Voldemort-fanatics: Bella, for one thing. But GoF suggest, IMO, that they are relatively few. I hope, of course, that this will prove to be a great weakness of Voldemort, this lack of true loyalty.
- - - - - - - - - -
Good Evans - May 16, 2005 12:19 pm (#258 of 359)
Practically perfect in every way
Miriam -that is how I feel - that this is a great weakenss of Voldemort - no true Loyalty. If faced with it I do believe that he will be betrayed in order to save the neck of the slytherin concerned. Slippery Lucius is not Voldemort loyal - he likes the reign of terror but his first and foremost thought is himself and his family. He plays the game so well. But I dont think that Voldemort truly trust him either. Who does Voldemort truly trust and could this be a very real weakness? I still think our young slippery snake Draco could be the one, but then there are so many within the ranks that are waiting to prove their devotion... or lack of it!
- - - - - - - - - -
Joanne R. Reid - May 17, 2005 7:21 am (#259 of 359)
Hi,
Although I like the parallel between the Nazi hierarchy and the DEs, it's obvious that we could push that analogy too far. Yet, I am tempted to suggest that the DEs are akin to the Goebbels, Himmlers, Goerings and other fanatics of the Nazi regime. They were loyal not because they feared Hitler, but because they admired and agreed with him. We might even say they worshipped him as a messiah, leading them and their nation into a new and golden era.
Their fanaticism, propaganda and training inculcated their youth in the spirit, goals and techniques of National Socialism. Ultimately this led to the Hitler Jungen (Youth), and some of the most dedicated and battle-worthy divisions of the Waffen SS.
I suggest that Draco has lived his entire life listening to his father's pro-Voldemort propaganda, experiencing the power of DE fanaticism, especially at school, and is thoroughly inculcated in the belief of the superiority of the Pure-Blood. Like the Hitler Youth, Draco and his ilk will be more dedicated, tougher and more powerful than their parents. They will arise from the defeat of their parents, prepared to sacrifice anyone and anything to achieve their ultimate victory.
Thus, we will have the continuation of the battle between Good and Evil. We wil have more books about the WW, Harry Potter and all of our friends that survive the battles that are about to be revealed to us.
Accio! Half-Blood Prince!
Thanks,
- - - - - - - - - -
Miss Malaprop - Jun 16, 2005 5:06 pm (#260 of 359)
Edited by Jun 16, 2005 5:11 pm
My guess is Gregory and Mr Goyle. Although I think it would be more significant if any treason occurred within the Order than within the DE's (after all, Dumbledore has Snape...what could the Goyles do for him?), I just can't ignore this essay on the Lexicon. At the end, the author basically draws attention to the fact that Goyle Sr was absent from the DoM battle (and Goyle Jr was not mentioned as being part of the Inquisitorial Squad).
Now, almost everywhere else in the books we find Crabbe and Goyle together, laughing trollishly, cracking their knuckles, flanking Draco. Both Goyles missing from important scenes involving the Malfoys and the Crabbes, seems too significant a coincidence to ignore.
- - - - - - - - - -
Professor V - Jun 16, 2005 6:52 pm (#261 of 359)
Along those lines, isn't Goyle also missing from Draco's side during much of the third movie.
- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Jun 17, 2005 12:20 pm (#262 of 359)
*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
Professor - Supposedly the actor who plays him has exams and had to miss some scenes. That was the explanation I heard.
- - - - - - - - - -
Professor V - Jun 17, 2005 1:34 pm (#263 of 359)
I'd heard that as well, but each time I see the movie, I remember JKR saying something about there being some good foreshadowing in the third movie. When I combine the absence of Goyle in the movie along with all of the speculation about uniting the houses - Goyle comes to mind.
- - - - - - - - - -
Jessalynn Quirky - Jun 17, 2005 5:20 pm (#264 of 359)
Maybe Goyle's absense is significant, and the actor needing to take his exams a happy coincidence.
- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Jun 17, 2005 6:05 pm (#265 of 359)
*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
Actually, it's not whether or not he is absent in the movie, but whether or not he is absent in the book that counts.
- - - - - - - - - -
Ms Amanda - Jun 17, 2005 7:03 pm (#266 of 359)
And it helps that Peter Pettigrew as Scabbers didn't like Goyle, right? Remember the bite?
- - - - - - - - - -
frogface - Jun 18, 2005 3:44 am (#267 of 359)
I always got the feeling (don't ask me why) that Crabbe was slightly suprior to Goyle. I think it maybe because Crabbe was chosen by Draco to be his second when they planned the duel with Harry and Ron in their first year. Also I'm sure Ron refers to Goyle as being the stupidest in the year or something along those lines at one point. Could this be significant to the Goyle's absence towards the end of the book?
By the way Choices is right, the films aren't concerened canon, so the fact that Nott (it was Nott wasn't it?) took a bigger role in POA movie doesn't count.
- - - - - - - - - -
Miss Malaprop - Jun 19, 2005 6:52 am (#268 of 359)
Edited by Jun 19, 2005 6:55 am
The other Slytherin boy in the film isn't named as Nott - he is just listed as "Slytherin Boy" on imdb.
Crabbe, I think, is chosen to be Draco's duelling second because he is bigger than Goyle (PoA pg 63). Draco stands on Goyle's shoulders when imitating Dementors which would also indicate Goyle is shorter.
When you search the books for references to C&G, there are few stand-out moments for either of them. But, like frogface, I think Crabbe seems to be slightly closer to Malfoy. In CoS, in the Slytherin common room, Draco chooses to show the newspaper article about Arthur's work enquiry to Crabbe first. He mentions his friend Crabbe, rather than Goyle, in Rita's article (GoF 381) and after Harry names the Death Eaters in The Quibbler, Malfoy whispers something to Crabbe (OotP 514).
Crabbe Senior also seems slightly more noticeable to Voldemort in the graveyard: "We have Crabbe...you will do better this time, will you not, Crabbe?...And you, Goyle?" (but personally I think this is too minor a quote to use as evidence for Goyle's loyalties).
My idea of the Goyles as turncoats persists mainly because they were missing from the Inquisitorial Squad and the DoM battle. So...
- Where were the Goyles that day?
- What were they doing?
- Why weren’t they missed? Or were they?
If they are on the good side, mightn't they have just blown their chances of spying for DD? (assuming they are not as thick as they seem).
The evidence is so scant, I still can't completely convince myself...but as C&G are almost always together, why would JKR leave out both father and son from the action that day?
- - - - - - - - - -
Good Evans - Jun 19, 2005 6:59 am (#269 of 359)
Practically perfect in every way
I was almost persuaded by this argument until I listened again to the end of OOTP - where the three nemesis were together and menaced harry both in the entance hall at Hogwarts and then on the train - where all three were together and hit by many hexes by the DA. I am not sure that JKR just didnt need them at those other quoted moments, and crabbe and Goyle SNRs both having reprimanded by Voldemort I wonder if he only sends one liability and not two on a mission now?
Nice theory though and I will watch with interest, I have long hoped one of the henchmen would turn to the good side, whether it is C or G - well lets wait and see, I will be floored if it is malfoy.
- - - - - - - - - -
Professor V - Jun 19, 2005 4:46 pm (#270 of 359)
I know that the movies aren't canon, it wasn't my intention for my comment about the movie to be taken that way. The only reason I mentioned the movie was to tie in the idea that JKR felt that there was something in the third movie that foreshadowed future story lines.
- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Jun 19, 2005 5:34 pm (#271 of 359)
Librarian
I think that it is possible that the Goyle's have turned against Voldemort. However, there was also another missing character in OOTP. The Goyle's could be doing something nefarious with Peter.
- - - - - - - - - -
Professor V - Jun 19, 2005 8:08 pm (#272 of 359)
Really quick, I just reread my last post and it came off a bit not so nice - sorry.
- - - - - - - - - -
Miss Malaprop - Jun 21, 2005 4:30 am (#273 of 359)
Steve, which missing character do you mean? Was it Travers missing from the DoM battle?
If someone really had to be left out of the battle for, say, logistical reasons (I can't really think of any other reason they might not have been there) - why not Jugson, who was only introduced in this chapter?
- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Jun 21, 2005 5:37 am (#274 of 359)
Librarian
Peter was missing throughout OOTP.
- - - - - - - - - -
Kip Carter - Aug 2, 2005 11:32 am (#275 of 359)
co-Host with Steve on the Lexicon Forum, but he has the final say as the Owner!
This thread was closed down during the sixteen day period surrounding the release of Book Six. It is now opened for posts.
- - - - - - - - - -
Aqualu Nifey - Aug 2, 2005 11:42 am (#276 of 359)
"So this is how liberty dies, with thunderous applause." - Padme Amidala-Skywalker
Umm... Treason in Book VI, I would just like to say SNAPE!
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Aug 2, 2005 1:17 pm (#277 of 359)
Umm... Treason in Book VI, I would just like to say SNAPE!
Quite so.
And I would hazard a guess that we haven't seen the last of his treachery...
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Aug 3, 2005 2:59 pm (#278 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Okay, so what about Book 7 now. Who will switch sides? Who will spy for one side against the other? You naysayers recall that you also said there would be none of that in Book 6. It is almost a must in Book 7.
Will Snape be redeemed, either by being proven a triple agent or by "repenting"?
Who else does Voldemort now have in the OoP camp? Surely the correct answer is not "no one." If it is, Voldemort will do his best to remedy that.
Who else (other than Snape perhaps) does the OoP have in the Voldemort camp?
Even if Snape is a very, very clever OoP plant in the Voldemort camp (reminscent of the brilliant schemes British intelligence masterminded to conceal the true locus of the D-Day invasion), to whom in the OoP could Snape report, since Dumbledore is either dead (as some argue) or at least hiding out very well (as others argue) -- in either case quite out of touch with other OoPs?
(DEAR EDITORS: Perhaps we can now re-title this thread to refer only to Book 7, dropping the "6 and/or" part?
- - - - - - - - - -
Saralinda Again - Aug 3, 2005 5:45 pm (#279 of 359)
My Patronus is a Crumple-Horn Snorkack
My guess is that Snape is still on the side of the good, and he's reporting to Aberforth.
(But then, I thought that Harry and Luna made a really cool 'ship, too, so you can see how right my guesses run!)
- - - - - - - - - -
Madam Pince - Aug 5, 2005 5:06 am (#280 of 359)
The eyes are the windows to the soul...
Saralinda, although I was sure Harry and Ginny would end up together, I secretly thought Harry and Luna would be fun, too! I like her character so much. I'm glad he at least took her out on a date!
I'm guessing Snape is definitely on the "good" side, but I don't think he's going to be reporting to anyone. He's just been positioned, much like a chess piece, to be near the "king" so he can maneuver him around and help take him out in the final battle. (Oooo, I should post that on the chess thread -- Nathan would love it! Actually he's probably already thought of it...)
Are we going to find out more about Mundungus Fletcher? He was arrested in HBP, but is he really a traitor or was he in the same boat as poor Stan Shunpike?
- - - - - - - - - -
Saralinda Again - Aug 5, 2005 9:06 am (#281 of 359)
My Patronus is a Crumple-Horn Snorkack
For some reason I keep thinking of Aberforth as the Order's secret weapon -- someone so under-the-radar that most people, even Order members, don't actively consider him part of the equation. I think that's one of his greatest strengths we'll see in Seven.
I'm kind of hoping he'll be sort of "Albus Lite," a fair wizard with a well of wisdom, or at least pertinent observations, with which he can empower Harry to kick LV's bum. At the very least, I'm hoping that Albus confided in him extensively, so we can get some answers.
- - - - - - - - - -
Neville Longbottom - Aug 5, 2005 11:02 pm (#282 of 359)
Mundungus was arrested because he impersonated an Inferi. I think that was an incident unrelated to Voldemort, other than that he used the general hysteria for his aims. But if he really stole the locket out of 12 GP, than I suppose Harry will talk with him again, to ask him to whom it was sold.
- - - - - - - - - -
total hatred01 - Aug 22, 2005 11:05 pm (#283 of 359)
I think Snape is neither good or bad. He only answers to himself. It might be possible that Dumbledore faked his own death. In fact, he is almost asking to die. The fact that he paralyzed Harry before that signifies that he has planned this. Maybe Snape and him had an secret agreement. He knows that if Harry will suffer another loss, Harry will get more serious
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Sep 3, 2005 12:19 pm (#284 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Could there be another mole to be found out in Book 7? One possible purpose (among several) in the "Albus is alive and Snape is still a good guy" theory for Snape now posing as Albus's killer is that Voldy may now have to activate (and expose) other hidden resources (moles and traitors) otherwise presumed to be in the OoF camp. Who could that be?
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Oct 2, 2005 12:45 pm (#285 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Okay, no takers to my #284 inquiry? Assume arguendo for the moment that Albus is alive and that Snape is good and acting now as a spy in Voldy's camp, who is Voldy most likely to try to recruit from within the OoP as his eyes and ears there? Don't we still have one of the "inner Voldy circle" from the graveyard scene at the end of GoF still to be accounted for?
It couldn't be one of the Weasleys, could it? (And, no, I would never suggest that to be Molly Weasley.) If, arguendo, Voldy's mole is one of the Weasleys, which one? (Isn't Percy too easy?)
And if not one of the Weasleys, who else? Who else would give us a huge shock at the end of Book 7 if it turned out they were Voldy's mole all along?
- - - - - - - - - -
Honour - Oct 2, 2005 2:44 pm (#286 of 359)
Just for arguments sake... How about Minerva? She seems to be continually out of the loop in HBP, do you think someone may have got to her at St Mungo's? Now that would be a shocker!
(diving for cover under my purple and gold umbrella awaiting the dung bomb shower
...) Just had another thought, what about Rufus? He struck me as 'smarmy' in HBP... and on the occassions he crossed paths with Harry he seemed almost fudge-like ... yet menacing ... I know he has been described as looking lion-like (I have paraphrased), a thought had crossed my mind a while back ... (as usual - no canon, just a feeling)what if he was a werewolf? ... and another thought why did he get rid of Shaklebolt? If he mis-trusted him, where did this come from? I thought Shaklebolt (and DD) covered his bases very well? to me it seemed like Rufus got rid of Shaklebolt to elinminate a strong rival..
There you go Hogs Head lets see where that lot lands ...
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Oct 2, 2005 3:26 pm (#287 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
It will likely land you and I in the deep end with those who are devoted fans of those you and I referenced but . . . someone has got to be a secret bad guy! There's no other way a Western (as opposed to Eastern, as in not a Cowboy movie) plot can develop from here.
- - - - - - - - - -
Honour - Oct 2, 2005 4:45 pm (#288 of 359)
Heee Heee Heee ....Never mind Hogs Head come share my umbrella, its big enough for two ...
- - - - - - - - - -
far from prefect - Oct 4, 2005 2:30 pm (#289 of 359)
A mole in the Order... hmm... I agree with HH that it is unlikely to be one of the Weasleys. Interesting idea about McGonagall, but I don't like it! Couldn't you see Mundungus selling information? Or would the other Order members be a little more circumspect around him now? Scrimgeour is not a member of the Order -- just of the Ministry. There are fewer members to speculate about, though...
( ffp
- - - - - - - - - -
Esther Rose - Oct 4, 2005 2:46 pm (#290 of 359)
Diggle would be my guess. Flattery is always the best disguise.
- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Oct 4, 2005 6:16 pm (#291 of 359)
Librarian
I think that the time of major treason is past.
I also spent a fair amount of time a couple of months preHBP looking to hints that perhaps McGonnagall was a traitor. Not much that I could see. I looked not believing that she was a traitor but because she could do so much damage if she was.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Oct 4, 2005 6:50 pm (#292 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Major treason always strikes in literature when you think it is gone.
Since I'm inclined to follow the "good Snape" theory for now, he wasn't it in my assessment.
In Book 1, Quirrel might have qualified as a traitor if he'd been more in the inner circle. No cigar. However, he was Voldy's inside man.
No real traitor in Book 2, except for possessed Ginny, whom we will forgive since she is kissy face with Harry. (However, Voldy might hear of that and make another run at her for many reasons. She might be vulnerable to attack, but I think no for overtly switching sides or betraying secrets.) I guess out of kindness to Ginny, we'll say that the Diary Tom was Voldy's inside man, with the help of Lucius.
In Book 3, Wormtail didn't qualify as a traitor -- at least not since the death of Lily & James. He was Voldy's surprise inside man -- and a surprise to Voldy, too, no doubt.
In Book 4, Fake Moody was Voldy's inside man, and sort of a fake traitor. Real Moody wasn't a traitor, but rather stuffed in a trunk. Fake Moody didn't really switch sides, but I guess you could call him a mole. Not "major treason," though. Still, at the end of Book 4, we have a mysterious DE that remains unaccounted for.
In Book 5, Umbridge was a negative catalyst and a sneak, but not an agent of Voldy. So far as we know, no major agents of Voldy in the inner circle. Well there was the fellow from the ministry who got ivy'd to death, but he, too, was possessed.
In Book 6, we're supposed to think Snape, but I'm a "good Snape" adherent, so I'd have to say Voldy's inside man was Draco.
All that in combination just isn't sufficiently shocking treason to satisfy the criteria of fiction in Western culture. Probably not in Japanese literature, from what I've seen translated -- they know and love their bad guys, too. The "Dark Lord," if he's half he's cracked up to be, would have done a better job at infiltrating the good guys. And if Snape is indeed "bad Snape," surely Voldy has another card up his sleeve among the OoPs. So, any way you slice it, there's a slimy traitor or mole still to go.
And, while I do rule out Molly, I do not yet rule out Arthur. (If Molly went over to the bad guys, it would only be because she'd just gone whacko.)
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Oct 7, 2005 9:04 am (#293 of 359)
Given how ambitious Percy is, can we rule out the possibility that he might side with the equally ambitious Dark Lord?
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Oct 7, 2005 9:53 am (#294 of 359)
I have thought about that before, Paulus, but Percy loves rules and order.
I think being a follower of Voldy may be a bit too spontaneous for him.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Oct 7, 2005 5:58 pm (#295 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Can't rule Percy out, but would he be a surprise? I think it must be someone that would make us gasp or at least say, "Oh, why didn't I see that coming?"
- - - - - - - - - -
Paulus Maximus - Oct 17, 2005 8:35 am (#296 of 359)
Suppose the Ministry made some concessions to Vold...
...never mind... too disturbing...
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Oct 17, 2005 3:17 pm (#297 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Concessions . . . like Chamberlain to Hitler?
- - - - - - - - - -
rambkowalczyk - Oct 18, 2005 5:45 am (#298 of 359)
In the first chap of book 6 there is a mention of appeasement.
Fudge says "The Brockdale Bridge --he did it, Prime Minister, he threatened a mass Muggle killing unless I stood aside for him and---"
- - - - - - - - - -
ex-FAHgeek - Oct 18, 2005 9:43 am (#299 of 359)
Except that Fudge actually refused to cave into blackmail.
It seems he had one partially redeeming feature as Minister after all.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Nov 27, 2005 1:42 pm (#300 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
One might think there is a "traitor in the OoP yet to be revealed" even if he/she is a firm "DD is dead and Snape is bad" adherent. Yet for those adopting or toying with the "Dumbledore is still alive" theory and its companion "Snape is really good and now a plant in the Voldemort camp" theory there is a problem greater than sorting through the ample (albeit inconclusive) clues spotted by many. More importantly from a plot line standpoint -- why?
What in the plot is advanced if Dumbledore is thought to be dead but is really alive or if Snape is now embedded in the Voldemort camp but really working for the Good Guys?
Of course, it could be merely old standbys (not necessarily bad simply because they've been used in other works of fiction) like -- to make Harry depend on himself and become active on his own; or to make Voldemort let his guard down against some crucial moment or thing or to cause Voldemort to become overconfident and overplay his hand (again).
All these are good, but I keep fixating on my pet Treason in Book 6 and/or 7 thread. Could it be that the rationale behind a "DD is dead ruse" (assuming arguendo that is what it is) or a "Snape embed ruse" is to flush out a very well hidden but deeply embedded Death Eater mole in the Good Guy camp?
But the puzzlement of figuring out candidates for such an mole has befuddled me lately -- moreso since the end of Book 6.
For reasons not wholely satisfying to me, I keep answering my question, "Who is the least likely to be a traitor but who has capacity to know what is going on and to do great harm at just the wrong moment?" with Arthur Weasley. Tell me I'm batty. Please.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Elanor- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 51
Location : France
Treason in Book 6 and/or 7 (Post 301 to 359)
Elanor Sat May 21, 2011 9:08 am
hawick girl - Nov 27, 2005 7:27 pm (#301 of 359)
In OotP, he is attacked in the MoM and Harry 'sees' it and gets help to him. Why would Voldie attack one of his own?
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Nov 28, 2005 7:58 pm (#302 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
I'm hanging my hopes on that. I don't wait Arthur to be a traitor. I just can't spot anyone else who would give such a bang.
- - - - - - - - - -
Bocefus - Dec 14, 2005 5:11 pm (#303 of 359)
In regards to characteristic change I keep giving thought to Tonks' behavior the night Dumbledoor brought Harry to the Burrow. Could it be that we might have yet another Polly Juice-olic on our hands? It is well known the Headmaster is an accomplished Legillimans among everything else. Why then, did Tonks avoid looking Albus in the eyes when he entered the kitchen? Then the next part of this puzzle arrives. Dumbledoor told Harry, in Tom Riddle's cave, that magic always leaves a mark. In other words, a way to trace it down. After Tonks apparates from the burrow Dumbledoor quickly does the same, at the exact spot Tonks departed! Seems feasible that he could follow that sort of magical path as well. While Harry has undergone so much more loss and heartbreak his potronus has never changed shape. Why then would Tonk's potronus do so? Once again I question if it really is Tonks at all we are seeing, or an infiltrator into the Order.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Dec 15, 2005 9:11 pm (#304 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Wasn't the Tonks thing fully explained by her relationship with Remus? I don't see much unsolved mystery about Tonks. While I would not be surprised to find a Polly-Juice-olic running lose, I somehow doubt it is Tonks.
- - - - - - - - - -
TomProffitt - Dec 16, 2005 7:21 pm (#305 of 359)
Bullheaded empiricist
Hogs Head, the traitor to give the biggest bang for the buck would be Hagrid.
Arthur Weasley can not be excluded from consideration by the attack in OoP, because Nagini attacked on a "busted play" not on an intent to find and destroy Order Members.
Personally, I don't believe that there is a character in the books (that we have significant information about) for us to argue as a traitor to the Order (excepting Severus, of course). If one turns up in book 7 the character will need a lot of development for the plot to be effective.
I think that Harry has too much to do in book 7 (find and destroy four Horcruxes) for there to be a lot of time to devote to anything else aside from resolving the Severus Snape issue. I don't see how a "good" Snape killing DD on orders could smoke out a spy.
So, in my opinion, if there are any treasons, it will be rats bailing out of Voldemort's boat. But, Voldemort is looking very strong indeed going into book 7, who would bail out on him now?
- - - - - - - - - -
Ydnam96 - Dec 29, 2005 12:28 pm (#306 of 359)
Tom, I think a good reason to run fast from VM would be fear; as Regulus did. Or a good case of concious.
I'm not a fan of the betrayal of Harry or the Order in book seven. I don't think it will happen like that. I think if there is any betrayal it will be Peter, after all he is in debt to Harry...
- - - - - - - - - -
me and my shadow 813 - Dec 30, 2005 4:25 pm (#307 of 359)
Image Courtesy of Burgundyeyes at fanpop.com icons -- [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I don't know if this qualifies as treason, but I'm convinced Lockhart will come out of his fog and join with Vold. Otherwise, why would we have seen him again in OoP and told his memory is coming back?
- - - - - - - - - -
K Michaelis - Jan 12, 2006 2:13 pm (#308 of 359)
I don't know if this qualifies as treason, but I'm convinced Lockhart will come out of his fog and join with Vold. Otherwise, why would we have seen him again in OoP and told his memory is coming back?
I thought Lockhart's presence was mainly a way to get them into the locked ward to see Neville and have the trio privvy to the fate of Neville's parents.
- - - - - - - - - -
me and my shadow 813 - Jan 13, 2006 12:10 am (#309 of 359)
Image Courtesy of Burgundyeyes at fanpop.com icons -- [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
But I found it strange that JKR went out of her way to tell us -via the nurse- that Lockhart is getting his memory back.
- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Pomfrey - Sep 2, 2006 9:13 am (#310 of 359)
While rereading OoP I made a couple of observations that may be a forewarning .In the chapter The Advance Guard, Moody said "Are you quite sure it's him,Lupin?"he growled. "It'd be a nice lookout if we bring back some Death Eater impersonating him.We ought to ask him something only the real Potter would know.Unless someone brought any Veratiserum?"
Now this may just be the paranoid Moody but in HBP Dumbledore basically does the same thing when he told Harry his favorite jam.
Then,later in the same chapter, Harry starts to ask about Voldemort and Moody interrups him. "Shut up!" "We're not discussing anything here,it's too risky," said Moody.
Why would it be too risky? They are in a muggle household where Harry has protection.Only the Advance Guard are present.Does Moody not trust someone in the guard or is it possible that a DE could get into the house? I am unsure about the protections there.
Tonks also told Harry"Metamorphmagi are really rare,they're born,not made.Most wizards need to use a wand or potions to change their appearance.... We know about polyjuice potion,but I didn't realize a wand could be used.
We have Snape who is spying for Dumbledore.We know that Rookwood was a spy for Voldemort.I think there may be more wiithin the Ministry or possibly even the Order.Fudge was asked to step aside by Voldemort then was ousted from the Ministry.Madame Bones was murdered(I think by someone within the ministry) and Scrimgeour is put in office.Who in the Ministry is working for Voldemort?
- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Sep 2, 2006 10:40 am (#311 of 359)
*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
We know Waldon McNair, the executioner for the MOM, is also a DE.
As for using a wand - I think that must be for some more complicated forms of transfiguration, other than animagi or metamorphmagi.
- - - - - - - - - -
wynnleaf - Sep 2, 2006 5:43 pm (#312 of 359)
There were even more references to people not being who they seem in HBP. Remember the pamphlet from the MOM that talked about having a password so that you would know that your close family and associates were really who they seemed? And Arthur and Molly had passwords. And of course, DD mentioned it.
There's a great deal of mention about the possibilities of someone impersonating another person for that to have not been used.
Well, it was, a little. There were Crabb and Goyle polyjuiced into girls. But most of the "warnings" were for people close to you to be not who they seem.
I wonder if we'll find out in book 7 that someone was being impersonated?
I've been thinking a lot about the traitor question for Book 7. Every book has had its traitor. Kreacher wasn't very satisfying because he just wasn't a big surprise -- we already knew he was probably doing something nasty.
In HBP, Snape and Draco are both the "traitors." However, we already knew Draco was likely to go that way, and Snape may not be a real traitor. Still, even if Snape isn't a true traitor, the shock value really came through -- and that's what I think JKR is often going for in these turn-about traitor plots.
So who is the traitor in Book 7? With JKR already saying "no new characters," it means that we've probably got to have one of the supposed good guys be a traitor.
Who?
- - - - - - - - - -
Chemyst - Sep 2, 2006 7:59 pm (#313 of 359)
"Organizing is what you do before you do something, so that when you do it, it is not all mixed up." A.A. Milne
Then, later in the same chapter, Harry starts to ask about Voldemort and Moody interrupts him. "Shut up!" "We're not discussing anything here, it's too risky," said Moody.
Why would it be too risky? They are in a muggle household where Harry has protection. Only the Advance Guard are present. Does Moody not trust someone in the guard or is it possible that a DE could get into the house? – Madame Pomfrey
When I read that, I thought of Emmeline Vance. She was part of the Advance Guard, but in Spinner's End HBP, Snape is talking to Bellatrix and takes credit for passing information that led to her murder.
That has always struck me as odd, but... if she had been passing information about the Order to Voldemort, then Snape would be very clever indeed if he were able to trick Voldemort into the murder of his own spy by convincing LV that Emmeline had been a double agent who was ratting him out. Just a thought, but it neatly explains both (1)Moody's suspicions and (2)how Snape could claim credit, tell the truth, and maintain DD's trust all at the same time.
- - - - - - - - - -
Honour - Sep 3, 2006 3:01 am (#314 of 359)
...there was some mention of metamorph medals too ...
- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Pomfrey - Sep 3, 2006 6:56 am (#315 of 359)
Chemyst,I thought of Emmeline Vance also. Snape said that his passing information on The Order led to the recent capture and murder of Emmeline Vance.According to the muggle Prime Minister her muder happened around the corner,in "the Prime Minister's backyard." The word that stuck out was CAPTURE.We know that Shacklebolt was in the area,perhaps he had other orders besides watching over the Muggle prime Minister.
- - - - - - - - - -
wynnleaf - Sep 4, 2006 10:08 am (#316 of 359)
I think the traitor of Book 7 has to be a character that has truly already been introduced to us. Not just a name from past books, but a real character. Besides in order for the impact to be strong, this has to be a character we know in some way.
But there's another thing. If the traitor is a character from one of more of the past books (and with no new characters, it has to be), then JKR will have written in things about that character so that in a re-read, we'll be able to have those "ah-hah!" moments where we see the suspicious behavior. Just as we could read back over the parts with past traitors and see little things where the evidence of the treachery was there, we've got to be able to do this for whoever is the last traitor.
Also, because JKR has made so much out of the other supposed "surprises" of Book 7 -- Snape's loyalty, the facts of DD's death, who is RAB, etc. -- I don't think the revelations there will have nearly so much impact as a revelation that she has not been hinting at. A traitor. She never really hints that there's going to be a traitor. There just is one. And except for the case of Kreacher, each instance was a very satisfying surprise. (Kreacher was too obvious, in my opinion.)
So I'm expecting a traitor to turn up who will shock us, but whose suspicious behavior in past books will become clear once we know this person's true motivations and intentions. However, in attempting to guess this side of Book 7, who the traitor could be, I think we have to be able to look back on mentions of that character and see some sort of information that can not just raise suspicion, but that in a re-read can show us the character actually acting treacherously, even though we don't see it now.
I'm not a fan of Percy-traitor, but if he turned out to be the traitor, we could look back over his scenes in the books and find various larger and even tiny places where he seems to be acting very suspiciously. Lupin is another possibility, as I've covered in the Lupin thread.
I'm sure there are other possibilities, but I think they have to be characters with some sort of suspicious events in the books already. But not suspicous enough to really concern the reader up to this point.
- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Pomfrey - Sep 4, 2006 11:47 am (#317 of 359)
Lupin,to me, would be a great shock.Percy no,I would almost expect him of it.I had once tried to pick up hints on McGonnagal.I couldn't find any,not only that,it would break my heart if she turned out to be a traitor.
- - - - - - - - - -
Soul Search - Sep 4, 2006 3:06 pm (#318 of 359)
wynnleaf,
I like your idea of "traitor" from past books, with appropriate backstory hints, once the traitor is identified. I don't have any good ideas yet, but thought to explore the concept a bit.
I think your idea also implies the traitor has always been one; that is, it isn't that someone will turn during book seven.
It will either be a "oh no, not HIM," or a "oh him, of course."
Even in thinking back, with someone in mind, I can't come up with any "hints" that support anyone for the "not HIM" category.
Just about any Ministry employee could fit the "oh him, of course" category.
I think it is the "not HIM" category that would be most interesting, though. Can we rule out students? Hogwarts' staff? All the Weasleys, even Percy? The Dursleys?
Who are we left with? My process of elimination doesn't seem to be working very well.
- - - - - - - - - -
legolas returns - Sep 6, 2006 2:17 pm (#319 of 359)
Have we not - been there, done that and bought the traitor t-shirt already at least thrice (Wormtail,Madeye/Couch and Snape). It would be over useage of a plot device. With all the stuff that she has to finish off I dont think she is going to have enough room to introduce another traitor and there motivation.
- - - - - - - - - -
Chemyst - Sep 6, 2006 8:56 pm (#320 of 359)
"Organizing is what you do before you do something, so that when you do it, it is not all mixed up." A.A. Milne
We've had hints that Peter is a wild card, his loyalty could go either way and the only surprising direction would be for him to think about someone other than himself.
Rather than one big betrayal, we may get a series of small ones. Two guesses:
Borgin may get totally fed up and do a tiny betrayal of Malfoy which turns out to be a big help for Harry.
Lavender has been written as a fairly air-headed girl; so we could be surprised if she turned out to have some depth– maybe something like thwarting Trelawny from blabbing secrets or preventing the betrayal of the centaurs.
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Sep 7, 2006 6:16 am (#321 of 359)
Lavender = Bertha Jorkins in my book.
I think Snape & Peter are going to have the twists - and Aberforth - not as a traitor, but as someone who knows more than what he lets on.
- - - - - - - - - -
journeymom - Sep 7, 2006 9:08 am (#322 of 359)
Chemyst, your comment about 'a series of small' betrayals reminded me of something I've been contemplating. Since JKR's story has been all about the choices for better or worse that everybody makes, I can see Book 7 being about the final, last choices that every minor and major character make that effect the outcome of the Final Battle. Snape and Pettigrew's choices will have a stronger effect (affect? I'm never sure.) while I can see Lavender, Theodore Nott, Blaize Zabini or Percy Weasley having smaller but important choices to make.
So while the story will still ultimately be about Harry Potter and his solo confrontation with Lord Voldemort, the whole book will be full of situations where many, many characters will be confronted with a choice to do the right thing, in mundane ways or more epic ways.
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Sep 7, 2006 9:34 am (#323 of 359)
Draco is really the only character that we've seen faced with a major choice.
Marietta I guess had a choice.
Anyone else?
- - - - - - - - - -
Pamzter - Sep 7, 2006 4:39 pm (#324 of 359)
I've always suspected Seamus. Not for any particular reason but it just doesn't seem we've seen much past the surface of him and he was so anti-Harry for a while. Then there's also his name: "Shame Us". Didn't think of that until just now - a bit too easy?
- - - - - - - - - -
kingdolohov - Sep 7, 2006 8:08 pm (#325 of 359)
I have been a bit suspicious of Romilda Vane. Perhaps she is merely a typical teenage girl who is obsessed with Harry because of his fame. But it's possible that there's more to it. I believe JKR has said there are DE parents of non-Slytherins; maybe Romilda was ordered to try to get close to Harry.
Of course she may have been in HBP to show the change in attitude toward Harry, which is more probable, but there's no harm in throwing her name out there.
Pamtzer, I've thought the same of Seamus from time to time. He would seem to be the most likely roommate of Harry's to be a traitor.
- - - - - - - - - -
Nathan Zimmermann - Sep 7, 2006 8:33 pm (#326 of 359)
If someone is likely to commit a treasonous act in book seven I would aseert that it would be either Romilda Vane, Dean Thomas, or Cormac McLaggen.
First, at the party celebrating Gryffinor's win of the Quidditch Cup. When it was revealed that Ginny and Harry were seeing each Romilda wanted to throw something and Dean broke the glass he was holding. In either case their jealousy might drive them to a treasonous act.
Second, Cormac might be displeased that he was passedover and was excluded from the Quidditch team when Ginny replaced Harry as Seeker, and Dean returned as a Chaser in the aftermath of the use of Sectumsempra.
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Sep 8, 2006 6:51 am (#327 of 359)
I just don't see kids showing up as major traitors, unless it is the children of the known DEs.
That's why I'm so perplexed about Pansy. There really is no evidence that she is tied in to the DEs, other than her grooming Draco like a monkey.
- - - - - - - - - -
painting sheila - Sep 8, 2006 10:57 am (#328 of 359)
Doing one of the things I love best . . .
I think Lucius Malfoy is going to be a traitor. Not from good to bad, but a traitor to the Dark Lord himself.
I think Lucius wants to be the next omnipotent evil person and has been laying the ground work take the Dark Lord down. I don't think he will succeed, but I thik he willweaken the Dark Lord's forces.
This will put Cissy and Bella on uneven ground. Cissy is more powerful than we think and may leave Lucius to protect her son. Bella will be enraged that Cissy will not betray Lucius even though she leaves him and there will be a confrontation there of some sort - Cissy amy even volunteer to help take down the DL some how to even the evil done by her husband and Bella.
So I guess I am saying Cissy may be a traitor also. Can't trust a Malfoy!
- - - - - - - - - -
xray - Sep 14, 2006 2:09 pm (#329 of 359)
Hermione will work in Fred & George's Joke Shop after Hogwarts
Another thing I thought about regarding Rufus Scrimgeour...
Have you noticed that he's only mentioned in OotP once when he was asking "funny questions" ?
We learn about previous Order members in OotP but we never see anything about Scrimgeour. Evidently he wasn't respected enough to be a member of the Order of the Phoenix.
- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Sep 14, 2006 4:35 pm (#330 of 359)
*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
Maybe he just didn't want to be a member or maybe he didn't even know about it. He was head of the Aurors, but evidently not close to Dumbledore and could be unaware that the Order exists. Shacklebolt seems to keep it secret that he is a member, as does Arthur Weasley.
- - - - - - - - - -
Finn BV - Sep 14, 2006 7:13 pm (#331 of 359)
Me kayaking, Niagara River, August 2006. I have been likened to Reepicheep in this photo.
Seamus was also a little bit of a traitor in OoP when he didn't join the DA.
Not to mention Harry and Ron's row in GoF.
- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Sep 14, 2006 7:30 pm (#332 of 359)
Librarian
Seamus wasn't a traitor. He was feuding with Harry. As far as I remember it was more Harry's fault than Seamus'.
- - - - - - - - - -
nthdavid - Sep 15, 2006 1:01 am (#333 of 359)
If there is a DE traitor, my money is on Bella. She seemed quite upset when Harry told her LV was a half-blood.
If there is a ootp traitor, I'm thinking McGonagall. In book 1 she seemed to be sitting shiva all day instead of celebrating when the news that LV was done in... And she was at Hogwarts when Tom Riddle was there, she would have been a year ahead according to the time line. Maybe she had a thing for him.
- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Sep 15, 2006 6:06 am (#334 of 359)
Librarian
nthdavid, a while back I figured that the one who could do the most damage as a traitor was McGonagall. Whenever I reread the books I am looking for slips by her. I have come across a couple little things but nothing that would make me consider her a traitor. I think that I have posted my random findings in her thread. Maybe in one of the read along threads.
- - - - - - - - - -
Honour - Sep 15, 2006 7:03 am (#335 of 359)
Hey there Steve, even I had a wee walk along those lines as well awhile back, I helped in starting an uproar amongst the Minerva fans on her thread, now, we're picking on Remus!
- - - - - - - - - -
Thom Matheson - Sep 15, 2006 7:35 am (#336 of 359)
After the stunners in OoP, My doubts went away that Minerva would turn.
- - - - - - - - - -
Anna L. Black - Sep 15, 2006 11:16 am (#337 of 359)
Well, she did try to figure out where Harry and Dumbledore went on the night he (DD) died...
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Sep 15, 2006 11:20 am (#338 of 359)
I assumed she thought it was important to her new role - should she go where the old Headmaster went? Is there something she should know in order to do her job correctly?
- - - - - - - - - -
wynnleaf - Sep 15, 2006 11:56 am (#339 of 359)
Hey there Steve, even I had a wee walk along those lines as well awhile back, I helped in starting an uproar amongst the Minerva fans on her thread, now, we're picking on Remus!
There are a lot of characters that can be candidates for traitor. Remus is very well liked by readers, including me (believe it or not). The unfortunate thing for Remus is that he's in the most advantageous position to be the literarily perfect traitor. If he turned out to be a traitor (possibly a weak, frustrated, can't-make-up-his-mind traitor), he'd be in just the right position to create a really excellent balance in the story -- this is totally aside from plot, where we can also find a number of questionable things about Remus. The excellent balance comes particularly if Snape is not a traitor.
1. Snape the spy, supposed a traitor, is loyal. Lupin, a spy, supposed loyal, but really a traitor.
2. Snape is hated by Harry, but is really loyal. Lupin is trusted, but is really a traitor.
3. Both are the same age and from the same Hogwarts era. Both of their stories are rooted in the same era and are intertwined.
4. The Slytherin, supposedly synonymous with bad is loyal. The Gryffindor, supposedly synonymous with good, is a traitor.
5. Snape is mean and nasty, but really loyal. Lupin is nice and pleasant, but a traitor.
6. Snape is willing to have everyone hate him (AKing DD) in order to do what's right. Lupin is unwilling for any to dislike him, so he does what is easy and ultimately betrays the Order.
Other perfect literary reasons for Lupin as traitor include:
1. His story runs back to the beginning of Harry's story -- to Harry's parent's story.
2. He has a huge 12 year gap in his story for which we have no information.
3. She has already given him motive in his identification with the other persecuted werewolves.
4. She has already had him spend an entire book essentially betraying the trust of DD, although she makes sure the readers forgive him at the end.
5. It would be a huge surprise for the readers and something no one would expect.
6. He is a major character, so such a revelation would be a major event in the plot, as opposed to learning that a very minor character was a traitor.
7. A major good guy, instead being a traitor, would not only be a surprise twist for Book 7, but as the final book of the series, it would throw a surprise twist that would affect how we view all of the books, from the first revelation of Harry's parents deaths, right through to the end.
See what I mean by his being so perfect?
The biggest thing against it is that JKR has made us like him so much. She would have a lot of work to do to get her readers to make that kind of leap, or turnaround, in their feelings about Lupin. But you know, writers have to be ruthless.
On the other hand, if she did that, it probably wouldn't be to make us hate Lupin. She'd probably simply make us feel very, very bad for him, that his weaknesses would cause him to fall.
We might not like it from this perspective (prior to Book 7), but if done right, it could be very good literature.
- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Sep 15, 2006 12:08 pm (#340 of 359)
Librarian
Not to be picky but simply by saying "5. It would be a huge surprise for the readers and something no one would expect." you make it not a surprise. You've officially ruined the plot to book 7.
- - - - - - - - - -
Holly T. - Sep 15, 2006 12:09 pm (#341 of 359)
What I keep thinking in this whole "Lupin is a bad guy" theory is that JKR has said she likes Lupin.
Then I think, she might be only saying that to confuse us.
Which is why we love these books!
- - - - - - - - - -
legolas returns - Sep 15, 2006 12:11 pm (#342 of 359)
She has previously said that Lupin was one of her favourite characters. I cant imagine one of her favourite characters turning out bad. Having many weaknesses but still being lovable is how I would clasify Lupin-now and in book 7.
- - - - - - - - - -
wynnleaf - Sep 15, 2006 12:18 pm (#343 of 359)
Not to be picky but simply by saying "5. It would be a huge surprise for the readers and something no one would expect." you make it not a surprise. You've officially ruined the plot to book 7.
Come now Steve, are you saying that this one theory in the face of literally hundreds of theories, and the primary focus of most fans on horcruxes and who will die, is somehow going to ruin the surprise of Book 7?
Frankly there is only an extraordinarily tiny contingent of people, in the broad field of HP readers, who even know this theory exists.
Sure a lot of people get on the Lexicon Forum and many read these parts of it. But there are lots and lots of theories here. Are the few that turn out to be close to true ruining the plot?
If one is concerned about having the plot ruined for them by reading a really good theory on a fan site, one can always simply choose not to read the theories.
But for most of the literally millions of readers, such a plot twist would come completely out of the blue.
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Sep 15, 2006 12:26 pm (#344 of 359)
Nope - I refuse to believe it.
I'd rather be wrong than believe Remus or Neville or Minerva to be a traitor.
- - - - - - - - - -
legolas returns - Sep 15, 2006 12:28 pm (#345 of 359)
The only traitor I want is a bad guy turning to the good side.
- - - - - - - - - -
Soul Search - Sep 15, 2006 2:35 pm (#346 of 359)
wynnleaf, as usual, very good literary analysis. I don't like the idea that Lupin is really a bad guy, but I have to agree that it would create a good balance in the books. And a dramatic twist for book seven.
We did go around with the "Lupin is bad" theory a while back on the Lupin topic. I thought we put the idea to bed then.
- - - - - - - - - -
Thom Matheson - Sep 15, 2006 2:52 pm (#347 of 359)
Has anyone ever hit the nail on the head with a proper theory? I have yet to read something here and have it show up in the books. I laugh out loud every time I run into a part that I thought in my soul to be right on the money and watch it just blow up in my face.
Remember when we all swore up and down that Figg would be the next DADA teacher? Then turns out to be a Squib.
I don't think that there is much to be concerned about Steve.
- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Sep 15, 2006 3:27 pm (#348 of 359)
Librarian
I guess I', just a worrier.
- - - - - - - - - -
Chemyst - Sep 23, 2006 7:18 pm (#349 of 359)
"Organizing is what you do before you do something, so that when you do it, it is not all mixed up." A.A. Milne
Has anyone ever hit the nail on the head with a proper theory? I have yet to read something here and have it show up in the books. ~ Thom
Right after HBP came out I suggested and Kip started a thread for posting about any predictions that actually came to pass. Most of the predictions that happened were either fairly small or they were worded fairly broadly. (Such as 'Ron's life will be at risk' but no mention specifically of drinking bad mead.) But there were a few impressive nail-hitters. And a lot of people thought DD would die, of course.
- - - - - - - - - -
Thom Matheson - Sep 23, 2006 10:56 pm (#350 of 359)
Thanks Chemyst, I absolutely loved the link. I forgot about all the shippers in the group. Don't spend a lot of time there myself, but I know that it is a popular thread.
- - - - - - - - - -
Die Zimtzicke - Sep 24, 2006 4:14 pm (#351 of 359)
Been thinking...my opinions:
Percy: No. Too cliche, and he hasn't got the guts or the nerves for it.
McGonagall: No. No opportunity and not enough motive. I expect the portraits in the castle keep an eye on her when she is in despair.
Luna: No. She's one of the few characters who has never done anything cruel or been anything less than helpful to Harry. And she doesn't care what anyone thinks of her.
Neville: Definitely not. Totally loyal and still suffering from what was done to his parents.
Dobby or Kreacher: Major possibilites here. Kreacher if he can, if Harry words something in a vague way, and gives Kreacher the chance. Dobby if someone confuses him and he does it unintentionally. He would never do it on purpose, but I think someone cunning could trick him.
Ginny: I wish. I can't stand her at all and I think her real name would be great foreshadowing, but even I don't believe she'd do it intentionally. Maybe she could get headstrong and blurt out something she shouldn't, but not turn traitor of her own free will, no. If Voldemort could exert any residual control over her, then I'd buy it.
Dung: No, for the simple reason he's been dropped from the OotP film, and I think if he were important, Jo would give them a hint to keep him in.
Bella: Can't see her betraying Voldemort even if he is a half-blood. She's too psycho and fanatical, and in too deep.
Hagrid: Could be. He's good at putting his foot in his mouth. I don't think he's do it deliberately either, but he could screw up something that becomes an advantage to the other side.
Fred and George: Could also be conned, or screw up by being headstrong. Again, not deliberately, but could cause trouble. The darkness powder proves it.
Tonks: I'd hate to think so but I can't rule her out. The Remus/Tonks stuff was very poorly done in my opinion, and I was rooting for it prior to HBP, so you know it was bad. She's kind of a wild card.
Other students: If anyone, it'd be Zacharias. He must be steamed at the whole sextet at this point. I'd say Marietta, who must be quite resentful about her continued disfigurement, but she is now out of school. Unless she turns up while the trio is horcrux hunting, I think she's out of the picture.
Peter: Can't figure him out. He could go either way, or just die a miserable death, unwanted by either side.
Draco: I think he can be redeemed. I wish he would be. He finally got a lot more complex in HBP.
- - - - - - - - - -
aggieamy - Sep 24, 2006 6:36 pm (#352 of 359)
Good list Die! I might not do your list justice when I try to add to it but I shall. I've got a few people to add to it ...
Ron: No way. That would ruin the story and I don't think JRK would consider it.
Hermoine: See Ron.
Flitwick: We don't know enough about him but I doubt it. No motive.
Charlie: I'd like to think not but he's a possibility.
Bill: Maybe but since being bit I doubt it.
Arthur: Nah, he's too loyal.
Molly: No oppurtunity and no motive. She wouldn't do anything to harm any of her children.
Remus: He's a possibility. I won't go into detail here. See the Remus thread for more.
Mad-Eye: He's too obsessed to turn as a traitor.
Anyone care to add to this list. Maybe we can get a complete list of supposed traitors going.
- - - - - - - - - -
juliebug - Sep 25, 2006 5:38 am (#353 of 359)
I thought the possibilty of a Gryffindor traitor could be interesting. If that were to happen, my first suspicion would be Cormac McLaggen. I can't really see anyone in Harry's year, or the Creavy brothers. Cormac is the only other Gryffindor I can think of.
- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Sep 25, 2006 6:12 am (#354 of 359)
Librarian
It seems that we have already had a Gryffindor traitor. Peter.
- - - - - - - - - -
juliebug - Sep 25, 2006 7:07 am (#355 of 359)
I was thinking only about Harry's generation this time around, but I should have clarified that. And you are right, we have seen a Gryffindor traitor in the past.
- - - - - - - - - -
Laura W - Sep 26, 2006 2:26 am (#356 of 359)
legolas returns - "The only traitor I want is a bad guy turning to the good side."
cough**Snape**cough
And speaking of our favourite Potions Master, it seems to me that Snape is already a traitor to the side he proports to be on one way or the other: something which will probably continue through Book Seven.
If he is pretending to be with Voldemort and is actually spying for Dumbledore, he is a traitor to V (Severus, the good traitor (?) ). If he is pretending to have gone over to Dumbledore and is really still with - ie - spying for - Voldemort, he is a traitor to DD (Severus, the bad traitor (?)).
Either way, the act of pretending to be on one side while actually working for the other is the same -- whichever side one is actually loyal to. Either way, Snape has been, is and will continue to be in a very precarious and dangerous position.
"Not to be picky but simply by saying "5. It would be a huge surprise for the readers and something no one would expect." you make it not a surprise. You've officially ruined the plot to book 7." (Steve Newton)
I honestly don't know if you were serious or kidding when you wrote this, Steve, but if you really were serious, I strongly advise you not to read the Remus Lupin thread (or parts of the Sirius Black and Severus Snape thread). I am saying this to be helpful. Honestly. This theory was discussed in huge detail there. If you think hearing all the ins and outs of the Lupin-is-a-traitor theory (NOT MINE!!, by the way!) will spoil Book Seven for you, I am warning you off that thread. I would genuinely hate to have anything spoil Book Seven for any of us.
Now, on with the discussion ...
Laura
- - - - - - - - - -
Chemyst - Sep 27, 2006 9:10 pm (#357 of 359)
"Organizing is what you do before you do something, so that when you do it, it is not all mixed up." A.A. Milne
Steve was joking. I smiled.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogwarts Class of 85 - Oct 6, 2006 8:17 am (#358 of 359)
"Molly: No oppurtunity and no motive. She wouldn't do anything to harm any of her children. "
Whilst I agree that Molly is unlikely to become a traitor, Aggieamy, I disagree with your reasoning. She has the opportunity as a member of the Order. As for motive, we saw with the boogart that her weakness is something happening to her loved ones. Imagine if Lord Voldemort or a DE had some (or all) children and offer her the choice of providing some information or seeing her children killed one by one. It would take a very strong person to make that choice. I don't think that she would intentionally become a traitor, but she does have a weakness that could be exploited by the evil.
- - - - - - - - - -
wynnleaf - Oct 6, 2006 8:34 am (#359 of 359)
At this point, JKR has not revealed any opportunity for Molly to pass that information on to LV or DE's. In other words, we have not been shown any link between Molly and the bad side.
Similarly, with any other possible traitor, the person is more likely to become the traitor (more likely from a literary perspective), if JKR has already laid the groundwork for the treachory: motive, opportunity, ability, etc. Yes, some characters are Order members and so they have the opportunity to spy on the Order. But we also have to consider whether we, the readers, have been shown that they have an opportunity to pass that information on to the bad side.
The fact that we can think up ways a character can do it is not the same as if JKR had already actually shown us that character's link to the Dark side. Yes, JKR could use a character who she has not yet shown us their motive, opportunity, etc. But it is far better writing if she uses a character for which she has already given the reader a lot of information that prepares the way, yet does it in such a way that the reader does not notice or doesn't regard such information as important.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
In OotP, he is attacked in the MoM and Harry 'sees' it and gets help to him. Why would Voldie attack one of his own?
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Nov 28, 2005 7:58 pm (#302 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
I'm hanging my hopes on that. I don't wait Arthur to be a traitor. I just can't spot anyone else who would give such a bang.
- - - - - - - - - -
Bocefus - Dec 14, 2005 5:11 pm (#303 of 359)
In regards to characteristic change I keep giving thought to Tonks' behavior the night Dumbledoor brought Harry to the Burrow. Could it be that we might have yet another Polly Juice-olic on our hands? It is well known the Headmaster is an accomplished Legillimans among everything else. Why then, did Tonks avoid looking Albus in the eyes when he entered the kitchen? Then the next part of this puzzle arrives. Dumbledoor told Harry, in Tom Riddle's cave, that magic always leaves a mark. In other words, a way to trace it down. After Tonks apparates from the burrow Dumbledoor quickly does the same, at the exact spot Tonks departed! Seems feasible that he could follow that sort of magical path as well. While Harry has undergone so much more loss and heartbreak his potronus has never changed shape. Why then would Tonk's potronus do so? Once again I question if it really is Tonks at all we are seeing, or an infiltrator into the Order.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogs Head - Dec 15, 2005 9:11 pm (#304 of 359)
Premium Pork But Not Premium HP Member Anymore - Wah!
Wasn't the Tonks thing fully explained by her relationship with Remus? I don't see much unsolved mystery about Tonks. While I would not be surprised to find a Polly-Juice-olic running lose, I somehow doubt it is Tonks.
- - - - - - - - - -
TomProffitt - Dec 16, 2005 7:21 pm (#305 of 359)
Bullheaded empiricist
Hogs Head, the traitor to give the biggest bang for the buck would be Hagrid.
Arthur Weasley can not be excluded from consideration by the attack in OoP, because Nagini attacked on a "busted play" not on an intent to find and destroy Order Members.
Personally, I don't believe that there is a character in the books (that we have significant information about) for us to argue as a traitor to the Order (excepting Severus, of course). If one turns up in book 7 the character will need a lot of development for the plot to be effective.
I think that Harry has too much to do in book 7 (find and destroy four Horcruxes) for there to be a lot of time to devote to anything else aside from resolving the Severus Snape issue. I don't see how a "good" Snape killing DD on orders could smoke out a spy.
So, in my opinion, if there are any treasons, it will be rats bailing out of Voldemort's boat. But, Voldemort is looking very strong indeed going into book 7, who would bail out on him now?
- - - - - - - - - -
Ydnam96 - Dec 29, 2005 12:28 pm (#306 of 359)
Tom, I think a good reason to run fast from VM would be fear; as Regulus did. Or a good case of concious.
I'm not a fan of the betrayal of Harry or the Order in book seven. I don't think it will happen like that. I think if there is any betrayal it will be Peter, after all he is in debt to Harry...
- - - - - - - - - -
me and my shadow 813 - Dec 30, 2005 4:25 pm (#307 of 359)
Image Courtesy of Burgundyeyes at fanpop.com icons -- [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I don't know if this qualifies as treason, but I'm convinced Lockhart will come out of his fog and join with Vold. Otherwise, why would we have seen him again in OoP and told his memory is coming back?
- - - - - - - - - -
K Michaelis - Jan 12, 2006 2:13 pm (#308 of 359)
I don't know if this qualifies as treason, but I'm convinced Lockhart will come out of his fog and join with Vold. Otherwise, why would we have seen him again in OoP and told his memory is coming back?
I thought Lockhart's presence was mainly a way to get them into the locked ward to see Neville and have the trio privvy to the fate of Neville's parents.
- - - - - - - - - -
me and my shadow 813 - Jan 13, 2006 12:10 am (#309 of 359)
Image Courtesy of Burgundyeyes at fanpop.com icons -- [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
But I found it strange that JKR went out of her way to tell us -via the nurse- that Lockhart is getting his memory back.
- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Pomfrey - Sep 2, 2006 9:13 am (#310 of 359)
While rereading OoP I made a couple of observations that may be a forewarning .In the chapter The Advance Guard, Moody said "Are you quite sure it's him,Lupin?"he growled. "It'd be a nice lookout if we bring back some Death Eater impersonating him.We ought to ask him something only the real Potter would know.Unless someone brought any Veratiserum?"
Now this may just be the paranoid Moody but in HBP Dumbledore basically does the same thing when he told Harry his favorite jam.
Then,later in the same chapter, Harry starts to ask about Voldemort and Moody interrups him. "Shut up!" "We're not discussing anything here,it's too risky," said Moody.
Why would it be too risky? They are in a muggle household where Harry has protection.Only the Advance Guard are present.Does Moody not trust someone in the guard or is it possible that a DE could get into the house? I am unsure about the protections there.
Tonks also told Harry"Metamorphmagi are really rare,they're born,not made.Most wizards need to use a wand or potions to change their appearance.... We know about polyjuice potion,but I didn't realize a wand could be used.
We have Snape who is spying for Dumbledore.We know that Rookwood was a spy for Voldemort.I think there may be more wiithin the Ministry or possibly even the Order.Fudge was asked to step aside by Voldemort then was ousted from the Ministry.Madame Bones was murdered(I think by someone within the ministry) and Scrimgeour is put in office.Who in the Ministry is working for Voldemort?
- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Sep 2, 2006 10:40 am (#311 of 359)
*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
We know Waldon McNair, the executioner for the MOM, is also a DE.
As for using a wand - I think that must be for some more complicated forms of transfiguration, other than animagi or metamorphmagi.
- - - - - - - - - -
wynnleaf - Sep 2, 2006 5:43 pm (#312 of 359)
There were even more references to people not being who they seem in HBP. Remember the pamphlet from the MOM that talked about having a password so that you would know that your close family and associates were really who they seemed? And Arthur and Molly had passwords. And of course, DD mentioned it.
There's a great deal of mention about the possibilities of someone impersonating another person for that to have not been used.
Well, it was, a little. There were Crabb and Goyle polyjuiced into girls. But most of the "warnings" were for people close to you to be not who they seem.
I wonder if we'll find out in book 7 that someone was being impersonated?
I've been thinking a lot about the traitor question for Book 7. Every book has had its traitor. Kreacher wasn't very satisfying because he just wasn't a big surprise -- we already knew he was probably doing something nasty.
In HBP, Snape and Draco are both the "traitors." However, we already knew Draco was likely to go that way, and Snape may not be a real traitor. Still, even if Snape isn't a true traitor, the shock value really came through -- and that's what I think JKR is often going for in these turn-about traitor plots.
So who is the traitor in Book 7? With JKR already saying "no new characters," it means that we've probably got to have one of the supposed good guys be a traitor.
Who?
- - - - - - - - - -
Chemyst - Sep 2, 2006 7:59 pm (#313 of 359)
"Organizing is what you do before you do something, so that when you do it, it is not all mixed up." A.A. Milne
Then, later in the same chapter, Harry starts to ask about Voldemort and Moody interrupts him. "Shut up!" "We're not discussing anything here, it's too risky," said Moody.
Why would it be too risky? They are in a muggle household where Harry has protection. Only the Advance Guard are present. Does Moody not trust someone in the guard or is it possible that a DE could get into the house? – Madame Pomfrey
When I read that, I thought of Emmeline Vance. She was part of the Advance Guard, but in Spinner's End HBP, Snape is talking to Bellatrix and takes credit for passing information that led to her murder.
That has always struck me as odd, but... if she had been passing information about the Order to Voldemort, then Snape would be very clever indeed if he were able to trick Voldemort into the murder of his own spy by convincing LV that Emmeline had been a double agent who was ratting him out. Just a thought, but it neatly explains both (1)Moody's suspicions and (2)how Snape could claim credit, tell the truth, and maintain DD's trust all at the same time.
- - - - - - - - - -
Honour - Sep 3, 2006 3:01 am (#314 of 359)
...there was some mention of metamorph medals too ...
- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Pomfrey - Sep 3, 2006 6:56 am (#315 of 359)
Chemyst,I thought of Emmeline Vance also. Snape said that his passing information on The Order led to the recent capture and murder of Emmeline Vance.According to the muggle Prime Minister her muder happened around the corner,in "the Prime Minister's backyard." The word that stuck out was CAPTURE.We know that Shacklebolt was in the area,perhaps he had other orders besides watching over the Muggle prime Minister.
- - - - - - - - - -
wynnleaf - Sep 4, 2006 10:08 am (#316 of 359)
I think the traitor of Book 7 has to be a character that has truly already been introduced to us. Not just a name from past books, but a real character. Besides in order for the impact to be strong, this has to be a character we know in some way.
But there's another thing. If the traitor is a character from one of more of the past books (and with no new characters, it has to be), then JKR will have written in things about that character so that in a re-read, we'll be able to have those "ah-hah!" moments where we see the suspicious behavior. Just as we could read back over the parts with past traitors and see little things where the evidence of the treachery was there, we've got to be able to do this for whoever is the last traitor.
Also, because JKR has made so much out of the other supposed "surprises" of Book 7 -- Snape's loyalty, the facts of DD's death, who is RAB, etc. -- I don't think the revelations there will have nearly so much impact as a revelation that she has not been hinting at. A traitor. She never really hints that there's going to be a traitor. There just is one. And except for the case of Kreacher, each instance was a very satisfying surprise. (Kreacher was too obvious, in my opinion.)
So I'm expecting a traitor to turn up who will shock us, but whose suspicious behavior in past books will become clear once we know this person's true motivations and intentions. However, in attempting to guess this side of Book 7, who the traitor could be, I think we have to be able to look back on mentions of that character and see some sort of information that can not just raise suspicion, but that in a re-read can show us the character actually acting treacherously, even though we don't see it now.
I'm not a fan of Percy-traitor, but if he turned out to be the traitor, we could look back over his scenes in the books and find various larger and even tiny places where he seems to be acting very suspiciously. Lupin is another possibility, as I've covered in the Lupin thread.
I'm sure there are other possibilities, but I think they have to be characters with some sort of suspicious events in the books already. But not suspicous enough to really concern the reader up to this point.
- - - - - - - - - -
Madame Pomfrey - Sep 4, 2006 11:47 am (#317 of 359)
Lupin,to me, would be a great shock.Percy no,I would almost expect him of it.I had once tried to pick up hints on McGonnagal.I couldn't find any,not only that,it would break my heart if she turned out to be a traitor.
- - - - - - - - - -
Soul Search - Sep 4, 2006 3:06 pm (#318 of 359)
wynnleaf,
I like your idea of "traitor" from past books, with appropriate backstory hints, once the traitor is identified. I don't have any good ideas yet, but thought to explore the concept a bit.
I think your idea also implies the traitor has always been one; that is, it isn't that someone will turn during book seven.
It will either be a "oh no, not HIM," or a "oh him, of course."
Even in thinking back, with someone in mind, I can't come up with any "hints" that support anyone for the "not HIM" category.
Just about any Ministry employee could fit the "oh him, of course" category.
I think it is the "not HIM" category that would be most interesting, though. Can we rule out students? Hogwarts' staff? All the Weasleys, even Percy? The Dursleys?
Who are we left with? My process of elimination doesn't seem to be working very well.
- - - - - - - - - -
legolas returns - Sep 6, 2006 2:17 pm (#319 of 359)
Have we not - been there, done that and bought the traitor t-shirt already at least thrice (Wormtail,Madeye/Couch and Snape). It would be over useage of a plot device. With all the stuff that she has to finish off I dont think she is going to have enough room to introduce another traitor and there motivation.
- - - - - - - - - -
Chemyst - Sep 6, 2006 8:56 pm (#320 of 359)
"Organizing is what you do before you do something, so that when you do it, it is not all mixed up." A.A. Milne
We've had hints that Peter is a wild card, his loyalty could go either way and the only surprising direction would be for him to think about someone other than himself.
Rather than one big betrayal, we may get a series of small ones. Two guesses:
Borgin may get totally fed up and do a tiny betrayal of Malfoy which turns out to be a big help for Harry.
Lavender has been written as a fairly air-headed girl; so we could be surprised if she turned out to have some depth– maybe something like thwarting Trelawny from blabbing secrets or preventing the betrayal of the centaurs.
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Sep 7, 2006 6:16 am (#321 of 359)
Lavender = Bertha Jorkins in my book.
I think Snape & Peter are going to have the twists - and Aberforth - not as a traitor, but as someone who knows more than what he lets on.
- - - - - - - - - -
journeymom - Sep 7, 2006 9:08 am (#322 of 359)
Chemyst, your comment about 'a series of small' betrayals reminded me of something I've been contemplating. Since JKR's story has been all about the choices for better or worse that everybody makes, I can see Book 7 being about the final, last choices that every minor and major character make that effect the outcome of the Final Battle. Snape and Pettigrew's choices will have a stronger effect (affect? I'm never sure.) while I can see Lavender, Theodore Nott, Blaize Zabini or Percy Weasley having smaller but important choices to make.
So while the story will still ultimately be about Harry Potter and his solo confrontation with Lord Voldemort, the whole book will be full of situations where many, many characters will be confronted with a choice to do the right thing, in mundane ways or more epic ways.
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Sep 7, 2006 9:34 am (#323 of 359)
Draco is really the only character that we've seen faced with a major choice.
Marietta I guess had a choice.
Anyone else?
- - - - - - - - - -
Pamzter - Sep 7, 2006 4:39 pm (#324 of 359)
I've always suspected Seamus. Not for any particular reason but it just doesn't seem we've seen much past the surface of him and he was so anti-Harry for a while. Then there's also his name: "Shame Us". Didn't think of that until just now - a bit too easy?
- - - - - - - - - -
kingdolohov - Sep 7, 2006 8:08 pm (#325 of 359)
I have been a bit suspicious of Romilda Vane. Perhaps she is merely a typical teenage girl who is obsessed with Harry because of his fame. But it's possible that there's more to it. I believe JKR has said there are DE parents of non-Slytherins; maybe Romilda was ordered to try to get close to Harry.
Of course she may have been in HBP to show the change in attitude toward Harry, which is more probable, but there's no harm in throwing her name out there.
Pamtzer, I've thought the same of Seamus from time to time. He would seem to be the most likely roommate of Harry's to be a traitor.
- - - - - - - - - -
Nathan Zimmermann - Sep 7, 2006 8:33 pm (#326 of 359)
If someone is likely to commit a treasonous act in book seven I would aseert that it would be either Romilda Vane, Dean Thomas, or Cormac McLaggen.
First, at the party celebrating Gryffinor's win of the Quidditch Cup. When it was revealed that Ginny and Harry were seeing each Romilda wanted to throw something and Dean broke the glass he was holding. In either case their jealousy might drive them to a treasonous act.
Second, Cormac might be displeased that he was passedover and was excluded from the Quidditch team when Ginny replaced Harry as Seeker, and Dean returned as a Chaser in the aftermath of the use of Sectumsempra.
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Sep 8, 2006 6:51 am (#327 of 359)
I just don't see kids showing up as major traitors, unless it is the children of the known DEs.
That's why I'm so perplexed about Pansy. There really is no evidence that she is tied in to the DEs, other than her grooming Draco like a monkey.
- - - - - - - - - -
painting sheila - Sep 8, 2006 10:57 am (#328 of 359)
Doing one of the things I love best . . .
I think Lucius Malfoy is going to be a traitor. Not from good to bad, but a traitor to the Dark Lord himself.
I think Lucius wants to be the next omnipotent evil person and has been laying the ground work take the Dark Lord down. I don't think he will succeed, but I thik he willweaken the Dark Lord's forces.
This will put Cissy and Bella on uneven ground. Cissy is more powerful than we think and may leave Lucius to protect her son. Bella will be enraged that Cissy will not betray Lucius even though she leaves him and there will be a confrontation there of some sort - Cissy amy even volunteer to help take down the DL some how to even the evil done by her husband and Bella.
So I guess I am saying Cissy may be a traitor also. Can't trust a Malfoy!
- - - - - - - - - -
xray - Sep 14, 2006 2:09 pm (#329 of 359)
Hermione will work in Fred & George's Joke Shop after Hogwarts
Another thing I thought about regarding Rufus Scrimgeour...
Have you noticed that he's only mentioned in OotP once when he was asking "funny questions" ?
We learn about previous Order members in OotP but we never see anything about Scrimgeour. Evidently he wasn't respected enough to be a member of the Order of the Phoenix.
- - - - - - - - - -
Choices - Sep 14, 2006 4:35 pm (#330 of 359)
*Completely Obsessed With Harry Potter*
Maybe he just didn't want to be a member or maybe he didn't even know about it. He was head of the Aurors, but evidently not close to Dumbledore and could be unaware that the Order exists. Shacklebolt seems to keep it secret that he is a member, as does Arthur Weasley.
- - - - - - - - - -
Finn BV - Sep 14, 2006 7:13 pm (#331 of 359)
Me kayaking, Niagara River, August 2006. I have been likened to Reepicheep in this photo.
Seamus was also a little bit of a traitor in OoP when he didn't join the DA.
Not to mention Harry and Ron's row in GoF.
- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Sep 14, 2006 7:30 pm (#332 of 359)
Librarian
Seamus wasn't a traitor. He was feuding with Harry. As far as I remember it was more Harry's fault than Seamus'.
- - - - - - - - - -
nthdavid - Sep 15, 2006 1:01 am (#333 of 359)
If there is a DE traitor, my money is on Bella. She seemed quite upset when Harry told her LV was a half-blood.
If there is a ootp traitor, I'm thinking McGonagall. In book 1 she seemed to be sitting shiva all day instead of celebrating when the news that LV was done in... And she was at Hogwarts when Tom Riddle was there, she would have been a year ahead according to the time line. Maybe she had a thing for him.
- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Sep 15, 2006 6:06 am (#334 of 359)
Librarian
nthdavid, a while back I figured that the one who could do the most damage as a traitor was McGonagall. Whenever I reread the books I am looking for slips by her. I have come across a couple little things but nothing that would make me consider her a traitor. I think that I have posted my random findings in her thread. Maybe in one of the read along threads.
- - - - - - - - - -
Honour - Sep 15, 2006 7:03 am (#335 of 359)
Hey there Steve, even I had a wee walk along those lines as well awhile back, I helped in starting an uproar amongst the Minerva fans on her thread, now, we're picking on Remus!
- - - - - - - - - -
Thom Matheson - Sep 15, 2006 7:35 am (#336 of 359)
After the stunners in OoP, My doubts went away that Minerva would turn.
- - - - - - - - - -
Anna L. Black - Sep 15, 2006 11:16 am (#337 of 359)
Well, she did try to figure out where Harry and Dumbledore went on the night he (DD) died...
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Sep 15, 2006 11:20 am (#338 of 359)
I assumed she thought it was important to her new role - should she go where the old Headmaster went? Is there something she should know in order to do her job correctly?
- - - - - - - - - -
wynnleaf - Sep 15, 2006 11:56 am (#339 of 359)
Hey there Steve, even I had a wee walk along those lines as well awhile back, I helped in starting an uproar amongst the Minerva fans on her thread, now, we're picking on Remus!
There are a lot of characters that can be candidates for traitor. Remus is very well liked by readers, including me (believe it or not). The unfortunate thing for Remus is that he's in the most advantageous position to be the literarily perfect traitor. If he turned out to be a traitor (possibly a weak, frustrated, can't-make-up-his-mind traitor), he'd be in just the right position to create a really excellent balance in the story -- this is totally aside from plot, where we can also find a number of questionable things about Remus. The excellent balance comes particularly if Snape is not a traitor.
1. Snape the spy, supposed a traitor, is loyal. Lupin, a spy, supposed loyal, but really a traitor.
2. Snape is hated by Harry, but is really loyal. Lupin is trusted, but is really a traitor.
3. Both are the same age and from the same Hogwarts era. Both of their stories are rooted in the same era and are intertwined.
4. The Slytherin, supposedly synonymous with bad is loyal. The Gryffindor, supposedly synonymous with good, is a traitor.
5. Snape is mean and nasty, but really loyal. Lupin is nice and pleasant, but a traitor.
6. Snape is willing to have everyone hate him (AKing DD) in order to do what's right. Lupin is unwilling for any to dislike him, so he does what is easy and ultimately betrays the Order.
Other perfect literary reasons for Lupin as traitor include:
1. His story runs back to the beginning of Harry's story -- to Harry's parent's story.
2. He has a huge 12 year gap in his story for which we have no information.
3. She has already given him motive in his identification with the other persecuted werewolves.
4. She has already had him spend an entire book essentially betraying the trust of DD, although she makes sure the readers forgive him at the end.
5. It would be a huge surprise for the readers and something no one would expect.
6. He is a major character, so such a revelation would be a major event in the plot, as opposed to learning that a very minor character was a traitor.
7. A major good guy, instead being a traitor, would not only be a surprise twist for Book 7, but as the final book of the series, it would throw a surprise twist that would affect how we view all of the books, from the first revelation of Harry's parents deaths, right through to the end.
See what I mean by his being so perfect?
The biggest thing against it is that JKR has made us like him so much. She would have a lot of work to do to get her readers to make that kind of leap, or turnaround, in their feelings about Lupin. But you know, writers have to be ruthless.
On the other hand, if she did that, it probably wouldn't be to make us hate Lupin. She'd probably simply make us feel very, very bad for him, that his weaknesses would cause him to fall.
We might not like it from this perspective (prior to Book 7), but if done right, it could be very good literature.
- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Sep 15, 2006 12:08 pm (#340 of 359)
Librarian
Not to be picky but simply by saying "5. It would be a huge surprise for the readers and something no one would expect." you make it not a surprise. You've officially ruined the plot to book 7.
- - - - - - - - - -
Holly T. - Sep 15, 2006 12:09 pm (#341 of 359)
What I keep thinking in this whole "Lupin is a bad guy" theory is that JKR has said she likes Lupin.
Then I think, she might be only saying that to confuse us.
Which is why we love these books!
- - - - - - - - - -
legolas returns - Sep 15, 2006 12:11 pm (#342 of 359)
She has previously said that Lupin was one of her favourite characters. I cant imagine one of her favourite characters turning out bad. Having many weaknesses but still being lovable is how I would clasify Lupin-now and in book 7.
- - - - - - - - - -
wynnleaf - Sep 15, 2006 12:18 pm (#343 of 359)
Not to be picky but simply by saying "5. It would be a huge surprise for the readers and something no one would expect." you make it not a surprise. You've officially ruined the plot to book 7.
Come now Steve, are you saying that this one theory in the face of literally hundreds of theories, and the primary focus of most fans on horcruxes and who will die, is somehow going to ruin the surprise of Book 7?
Frankly there is only an extraordinarily tiny contingent of people, in the broad field of HP readers, who even know this theory exists.
Sure a lot of people get on the Lexicon Forum and many read these parts of it. But there are lots and lots of theories here. Are the few that turn out to be close to true ruining the plot?
If one is concerned about having the plot ruined for them by reading a really good theory on a fan site, one can always simply choose not to read the theories.
But for most of the literally millions of readers, such a plot twist would come completely out of the blue.
- - - - - - - - - -
haymoni - Sep 15, 2006 12:26 pm (#344 of 359)
Nope - I refuse to believe it.
I'd rather be wrong than believe Remus or Neville or Minerva to be a traitor.
- - - - - - - - - -
legolas returns - Sep 15, 2006 12:28 pm (#345 of 359)
The only traitor I want is a bad guy turning to the good side.
- - - - - - - - - -
Soul Search - Sep 15, 2006 2:35 pm (#346 of 359)
wynnleaf, as usual, very good literary analysis. I don't like the idea that Lupin is really a bad guy, but I have to agree that it would create a good balance in the books. And a dramatic twist for book seven.
We did go around with the "Lupin is bad" theory a while back on the Lupin topic. I thought we put the idea to bed then.
- - - - - - - - - -
Thom Matheson - Sep 15, 2006 2:52 pm (#347 of 359)
Has anyone ever hit the nail on the head with a proper theory? I have yet to read something here and have it show up in the books. I laugh out loud every time I run into a part that I thought in my soul to be right on the money and watch it just blow up in my face.
Remember when we all swore up and down that Figg would be the next DADA teacher? Then turns out to be a Squib.
I don't think that there is much to be concerned about Steve.
- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Sep 15, 2006 3:27 pm (#348 of 359)
Librarian
I guess I', just a worrier.
- - - - - - - - - -
Chemyst - Sep 23, 2006 7:18 pm (#349 of 359)
"Organizing is what you do before you do something, so that when you do it, it is not all mixed up." A.A. Milne
Has anyone ever hit the nail on the head with a proper theory? I have yet to read something here and have it show up in the books. ~ Thom
Right after HBP came out I suggested and Kip started a thread for posting about any predictions that actually came to pass. Most of the predictions that happened were either fairly small or they were worded fairly broadly. (Such as 'Ron's life will be at risk' but no mention specifically of drinking bad mead.) But there were a few impressive nail-hitters. And a lot of people thought DD would die, of course.
- - - - - - - - - -
Thom Matheson - Sep 23, 2006 10:56 pm (#350 of 359)
Thanks Chemyst, I absolutely loved the link. I forgot about all the shippers in the group. Don't spend a lot of time there myself, but I know that it is a popular thread.
- - - - - - - - - -
Die Zimtzicke - Sep 24, 2006 4:14 pm (#351 of 359)
Been thinking...my opinions:
Percy: No. Too cliche, and he hasn't got the guts or the nerves for it.
McGonagall: No. No opportunity and not enough motive. I expect the portraits in the castle keep an eye on her when she is in despair.
Luna: No. She's one of the few characters who has never done anything cruel or been anything less than helpful to Harry. And she doesn't care what anyone thinks of her.
Neville: Definitely not. Totally loyal and still suffering from what was done to his parents.
Dobby or Kreacher: Major possibilites here. Kreacher if he can, if Harry words something in a vague way, and gives Kreacher the chance. Dobby if someone confuses him and he does it unintentionally. He would never do it on purpose, but I think someone cunning could trick him.
Ginny: I wish. I can't stand her at all and I think her real name would be great foreshadowing, but even I don't believe she'd do it intentionally. Maybe she could get headstrong and blurt out something she shouldn't, but not turn traitor of her own free will, no. If Voldemort could exert any residual control over her, then I'd buy it.
Dung: No, for the simple reason he's been dropped from the OotP film, and I think if he were important, Jo would give them a hint to keep him in.
Bella: Can't see her betraying Voldemort even if he is a half-blood. She's too psycho and fanatical, and in too deep.
Hagrid: Could be. He's good at putting his foot in his mouth. I don't think he's do it deliberately either, but he could screw up something that becomes an advantage to the other side.
Fred and George: Could also be conned, or screw up by being headstrong. Again, not deliberately, but could cause trouble. The darkness powder proves it.
Tonks: I'd hate to think so but I can't rule her out. The Remus/Tonks stuff was very poorly done in my opinion, and I was rooting for it prior to HBP, so you know it was bad. She's kind of a wild card.
Other students: If anyone, it'd be Zacharias. He must be steamed at the whole sextet at this point. I'd say Marietta, who must be quite resentful about her continued disfigurement, but she is now out of school. Unless she turns up while the trio is horcrux hunting, I think she's out of the picture.
Peter: Can't figure him out. He could go either way, or just die a miserable death, unwanted by either side.
Draco: I think he can be redeemed. I wish he would be. He finally got a lot more complex in HBP.
- - - - - - - - - -
aggieamy - Sep 24, 2006 6:36 pm (#352 of 359)
Good list Die! I might not do your list justice when I try to add to it but I shall. I've got a few people to add to it ...
Ron: No way. That would ruin the story and I don't think JRK would consider it.
Hermoine: See Ron.
Flitwick: We don't know enough about him but I doubt it. No motive.
Charlie: I'd like to think not but he's a possibility.
Bill: Maybe but since being bit I doubt it.
Arthur: Nah, he's too loyal.
Molly: No oppurtunity and no motive. She wouldn't do anything to harm any of her children.
Remus: He's a possibility. I won't go into detail here. See the Remus thread for more.
Mad-Eye: He's too obsessed to turn as a traitor.
Anyone care to add to this list. Maybe we can get a complete list of supposed traitors going.
- - - - - - - - - -
juliebug - Sep 25, 2006 5:38 am (#353 of 359)
I thought the possibilty of a Gryffindor traitor could be interesting. If that were to happen, my first suspicion would be Cormac McLaggen. I can't really see anyone in Harry's year, or the Creavy brothers. Cormac is the only other Gryffindor I can think of.
- - - - - - - - - -
Steve Newton - Sep 25, 2006 6:12 am (#354 of 359)
Librarian
It seems that we have already had a Gryffindor traitor. Peter.
- - - - - - - - - -
juliebug - Sep 25, 2006 7:07 am (#355 of 359)
I was thinking only about Harry's generation this time around, but I should have clarified that. And you are right, we have seen a Gryffindor traitor in the past.
- - - - - - - - - -
Laura W - Sep 26, 2006 2:26 am (#356 of 359)
legolas returns - "The only traitor I want is a bad guy turning to the good side."
cough**Snape**cough
And speaking of our favourite Potions Master, it seems to me that Snape is already a traitor to the side he proports to be on one way or the other: something which will probably continue through Book Seven.
If he is pretending to be with Voldemort and is actually spying for Dumbledore, he is a traitor to V (Severus, the good traitor (?) ). If he is pretending to have gone over to Dumbledore and is really still with - ie - spying for - Voldemort, he is a traitor to DD (Severus, the bad traitor (?)).
Either way, the act of pretending to be on one side while actually working for the other is the same -- whichever side one is actually loyal to. Either way, Snape has been, is and will continue to be in a very precarious and dangerous position.
"Not to be picky but simply by saying "5. It would be a huge surprise for the readers and something no one would expect." you make it not a surprise. You've officially ruined the plot to book 7." (Steve Newton)
I honestly don't know if you were serious or kidding when you wrote this, Steve, but if you really were serious, I strongly advise you not to read the Remus Lupin thread (or parts of the Sirius Black and Severus Snape thread). I am saying this to be helpful. Honestly. This theory was discussed in huge detail there. If you think hearing all the ins and outs of the Lupin-is-a-traitor theory (NOT MINE!!, by the way!) will spoil Book Seven for you, I am warning you off that thread. I would genuinely hate to have anything spoil Book Seven for any of us.
Now, on with the discussion ...
Laura
- - - - - - - - - -
Chemyst - Sep 27, 2006 9:10 pm (#357 of 359)
"Organizing is what you do before you do something, so that when you do it, it is not all mixed up." A.A. Milne
Steve was joking. I smiled.
- - - - - - - - - -
Hogwarts Class of 85 - Oct 6, 2006 8:17 am (#358 of 359)
"Molly: No oppurtunity and no motive. She wouldn't do anything to harm any of her children. "
Whilst I agree that Molly is unlikely to become a traitor, Aggieamy, I disagree with your reasoning. She has the opportunity as a member of the Order. As for motive, we saw with the boogart that her weakness is something happening to her loved ones. Imagine if Lord Voldemort or a DE had some (or all) children and offer her the choice of providing some information or seeing her children killed one by one. It would take a very strong person to make that choice. I don't think that she would intentionally become a traitor, but she does have a weakness that could be exploited by the evil.
- - - - - - - - - -
wynnleaf - Oct 6, 2006 8:34 am (#359 of 359)
At this point, JKR has not revealed any opportunity for Molly to pass that information on to LV or DE's. In other words, we have not been shown any link between Molly and the bad side.
Similarly, with any other possible traitor, the person is more likely to become the traitor (more likely from a literary perspective), if JKR has already laid the groundwork for the treachory: motive, opportunity, ability, etc. Yes, some characters are Order members and so they have the opportunity to spy on the Order. But we also have to consider whether we, the readers, have been shown that they have an opportunity to pass that information on to the bad side.
The fact that we can think up ways a character can do it is not the same as if JKR had already actually shown us that character's link to the Dark side. Yes, JKR could use a character who she has not yet shown us their motive, opportunity, etc. But it is far better writing if she uses a character for which she has already given the reader a lot of information that prepares the way, yet does it in such a way that the reader does not notice or doesn't regard such information as important.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Elanor- Hufflepuff Prefect
- Posts : 1440
Join date : 2011-02-19
Age : 51
Location : France
Similar topics» Life after HP: What other book or book series has been your favourite since HP has ended?
» Was anyone disappointed in Book 6?
» Predictions for Book Seven
» Anyone sad the final book is almost here?
» New UK book covers!!
» Was anyone disappointed in Book 6?
» Predictions for Book Seven
» Anyone sad the final book is almost here?
» New UK book covers!!
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum|
|
|