The Resurrection Stone - Deathly Hallow #2

Go down

The Resurrection Stone - Deathly Hallow #2

Post  Potteraholic on Sun Jul 17, 2011 1:10 pm

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. It was copied/saved by Lady Arabella and reformatted/reposted by Potteraholic. ~Potteraholic


Kip Carter - Jul 23, 2007 4:06 pm
Edited Aug 10, 2007 11:23 pm

This thread is to discuss The Resurrection Stone - Deathly Hallow #2. I narrowed a suggestion zelmia for a thread on The Deathly Hallows by creating a thread for each Deathly Hallow.
avatar
Potteraholic
Ravenclaw Prefect
Ravenclaw Prefect

Posts : 4241
Join date : 2011-02-18
Location : USA

Back to top Go down

The Resurrection Stone - Deathly Hallow #2 (posts #1 to #36)

Post  Potteraholic on Sun Jul 17, 2011 1:14 pm

TomProffitt - Jul 23, 2007 5:37 pm (#1 of 36)
Edited Jul 23, 2007 6:37 pm

To me the Resurrection Stone is a symbol of Compassion or Love. Harry did not choose to use the Resurrection Stone until after he chose to die for the Wizarding World. He did not use the Stone to help him live, but to help him die.




freshwater - Jul 23, 2007 6:13 pm (#2 of 36)

Excellent point, Tom. I also liked that it could not truly bring someone back from the dead as though they had never died. To bring someone back and keep them here on earth with you would be selfish. As always, our Harry chose the higher path.




Madame Pomfrey - Jul 23, 2007 10:09 pm (#3 of 36)

I am wondering why Tonks and Dumbledore were not there? Is it a kind of summons from Harry's heart that called out to only his parents, Lupin and Sirius? I think it must be because at Kings Cross Dumbledore said it was all in his head. "It's your party."




zelmia - Jul 23, 2007 10:53 pm (#4 of 36)
Edited Jul 23, 2007 11:56 pm

One thing I admire and appreciate about this element of DH is that JKR had told us very early on that "no spell can revive the Dead". And though she has tantalized us with many possibilities that there could be some sort of magical loophole (through portraits, and especially Sirius's mirror this time around), that never actually changed.

The only way to truly be in contact with the Dead is to become one of them. Through the Resurrection Stone, Harry finally understands this and accepts his destiny in the loving comfort of those who have gone on ahead.




Esther Rose - Jul 24, 2007 5:57 am (#5 of 36)
Edited Jul 24, 2007 7:05 am

Did anyone else notice Harry had as many "helpers" as there were destroyed Horcruxes. By the time Harry discovered his need to sacrifice himself only 4 Horcruxes were destroyed. The Diary - James, The Locket - Sirius, The Cup - Remus, The Diadem - Lily. There was room for only one more once Harry was AK’d, Harry - Dumbledore.

Those were the people Harry most wanted to see.

I was not surprised that Tonks, or Severus were not there to help Harry post-mortem. Uh, not enough destroyed Horcruxes to include them.

Oh wait, I forgot the ring was a Horcrux but maybe that didn't count because it was used as a connector. (Oh, Dear, I am complicating things aren't I.) Or the ring was represented by Dumbledore and the sickly baby was the Horcrux in Harry that had not completely died yet but was dying.




Jenniffler - Jul 24, 2007 6:22 am (#6 of 36)
Edited Jul 24, 2007 7:23 am

I want to point out: The ring - Severus Snape. He would not be invited on Harry final journey, but he revealed the way.

I love how the answer to get the ring and stone was inside the Snitch (Snape.)

I also think the second arrogant brother, Cadmus Peverell, mirrors Snape. Snape remembers Lily, separated from him by death. (Voldemort could have easily pushed her aside.) I think Snape too was driven mad by hopeless longing (Page 409, DH)

He also saved Dumbledore's life from the curse on the ring. If any Hallows could fall to him, this would be the one. But like so many other things, he was not meant to possess it.




NickyJean01 - Jul 24, 2007 6:55 am (#7 of 36)

I've been pondering the hallow because it seems rather odd that it's out there in the forest somewhere.. I mean shouldn't they at least try to get it and put it somewhere safe..

also they never really touched what this stone could do to a ghost that Hogwarts is so full of.. I mean they mention that the souls that are dead and the stone is used on aren't really ghosts but aren't really alive either.. which means they are actually in between ghost and alive..




Nathan Zimmermann - Jul 24, 2007 11:15 am (#8 of 36)

I tend to think that in order to speak with a person using the resurrection stone an individual is required to acknowledge the fact that a person has died and accept it. It to me seems to parallel the fact that Thestrals can only be seen by person who have witnessed a death and accepted it.

If so then it seems logical to me that Harry would not have seen Fred, Tonks, or Snape because, these deaths were ones that were totally unexpected to him.




Anna L. Black - Jul 26, 2007 11:17 pm (#9 of 36)

It sounds logical, but then - why did he see Lupin? Or did he always feel that Lupin would be joining his friends?..




Oruma - Jul 27, 2007 7:18 am (#10 of 36)
Edited Jul 27, 2007 8:20 am

NickyJean01,

I'd have thought the Stone is in a very safe location now: dropping the Resurrection Stone in the middle of the Forest (and very close to Aragog's descendents' home, too) should've been enough protection. The stone should be magically protected so that it cannot be Accio-ed, either. And most of all, who knows the Stone is in the forest? The Trio does, but they're not going to look for it.

Honestly, when I first read the description to the Resurrection Stone, I thought this is the stone that formed the Veiled Arch in the Department of Mysteries, what with its connection to the great beyond and all...although it'd be hard to "turn it thrice", I'd admit...




The Wandless Wizard - Jul 29, 2007 6:20 am (#11 of 36)
Edited Jul 29, 2007 7:21 am

I think the answer is obvious as to why Harry didn't call Snape with the Resurrection stone. Harry was calling parental figures who would make the journey easier. Snape was never a comforting presence in Harry's life. In your last moments on Earth, would you want to be heckled? Harry sought comfort. While he may have come to a grudging respect for what Snape did, I do not think he can ever like Snape.

As for Tonks, she was never really all that close to Harry. He didn't see Mad-eye either. I mean they were members of the Order. He liked and respected them, but they were not who he longed to see. Fred is a closer call as they were pretty good friends, but not all that close. Fred (and George) were always good for a laugh, but he was never really close to them.

His parents died for him. And they are who he saw in the mirror of Erised. He longed to see them. Longed for their comfort. That was the time he needed it most. Sirius and Lupin were the ones he confided in. Sirius was the closest thing to a parent he ever had. Lupin was a connection to his parents and Sirius after they were gone. Lupin also always encouraged Harry, and he needed encouragement. They were the ones he was closest too. Had Ron and Hermione died previously, they would have been there. But that is about it. Harry's closest family.

Dumbledore's absence is a bit puzzling, but Harry had doubts about him at this point. Harry had not yet learned the full story. Also, Dumbledore's spirit may have chosen to stay away lest he give away the secret that Harry would survive. And from a story standpoint, he is in the next scene anyway.

Edit: But why didn't Harry see Hedwig? I always thought he took Hedwig for granted.




Allison R - Jul 29, 2007 11:31 am (#12 of 36)

But why didn't Harry see Hedwig? I always thought he took Hedwig for granted.

TWW-- perhaps the stone can only reanimate people, not animals?




Paul Potter - Jul 29, 2007 12:11 pm (#13 of 36)

I would only work with people because they have souls. It may not have worked with LV




zelmia - Jul 29, 2007 1:45 pm (#14 of 36)

Hedwig didn't have a soul?




Paul Potter - Jul 29, 2007 2:44 pm (#15 of 36)

I meant to say (it would only work with people, because they have souls. It may not have worked with LV. )

Unless you think that Hedwig had a soul.




zelmia - Jul 29, 2007 3:35 pm (#16 of 36)
Edited Jul 29, 2007 4:36 pm

I understood what you meant, and yes, I do think Hedwig like everyone else had a soul. Just call me Hagrid.




TomProffitt - Jul 29, 2007 7:41 pm (#17 of 36)

Of course, it's not whether or not we think Hedwig had a soul, it's whether or not Jo thinks Hedwig had a soul.




shepherdess - Jul 31, 2007 4:17 pm (#18 of 36)

Or more like whether or not Jo thought Hedwig needed to be there.




tandaradei - Aug 17, 2007 12:51 pm (#19 of 36)

It seems to me that the Resurrection Stone is a more completed and powerful version of the Mirror Erised -- in much the same manner that commercial invisibility cloaks are inferior versions of Harry's Invisibility Cloak.

Unlike Erised, the phantoms called forth are more "real," or as real as they can get in the land of the living. Just like Erised, the stone may convey most what Harry at present wants to see. Harry basically looked to Dumbledore for wisdoms and answers to life-problems; when nearing death however, Harry looked in the stone rather IMO for closest family members and friends already dead. I think Harry was at that moment most interested, not in finding answers but comforts.

Harry dropped the stone in the lair of spiders in the Forbidden Forest, just before being AK-d by Voldemort. The spiders would have to know how to employ the stone, which I'd rather doubt; and they would certainly provide ample protection from anyone else using it. I'd think the problems of using the stone would be comparable to using the Mirror Erised: addiction to a non-possibility.




tandaradei - Aug 18, 2007 8:27 am (#20 of 36)

From the 7/30 chat:

Boggo: Would you choose the hallow that is the cloak, like you’re supposed to, and would you be tempted to use the others?

J.K. Rowling: My temptation would be Harry's, i.e., the Stone. But I believe, as does Harry ultimately, that the greatest wisdom is in accepting that we must all die, and moving on.

The Resurrection Stone had the greatest pull on the author, apparently; yet the least written about it.

Harry excepted, the other horcruxes were destroyed or made useless once the soul-bit was removed. There appears to be another exception: the Resurrection Stone. Though cracked, it yet performed for Harry.




zelmia - Aug 18, 2007 9:50 am (#21 of 36)
Edited Aug 18, 2007 10:50 am

I think the least is written about the Stone because the least explanation for its power is required. When used properly, it brings back the spirits of those who have gone before (waving to Elanor over at the Alchemy Thread) to comfort and guide the Master of Death - that is, he who has accepted that his own Death is imminent and who goes to it willingly.




Choices - Aug 18, 2007 2:14 pm (#22 of 36)

But in the hands of Voldemort, had he obtained the Resurrection Stone, he would have created an army of Inferi. Chilling thought.




NFla Barbara - Aug 18, 2007 2:54 pm (#23 of 36)

It is a chilling thought, but I don't think he would have done it using the Resurrection stone. For one thing, as DD points out, there is no one he would want to bring back -- he fears the dead. For another, he obviously has enough dark magic to "reanimate" poor Bathilda using Nagini. But most importantly, I think the Resurrection stone brings back a shadow of an actual person while they were alive, while Inferi are reanimated corpses.




TomProffitt - Aug 18, 2007 3:47 pm (#24 of 36)

But in the hands of Voldemort, had he obtained the Resurrection Stone, he would have created an army of Inferi. --- Choices

That was Grindelwald's intention, but it did not turn out that the Stone worked in that fashion.

I think the whole point of the single volume DH was that you must learn to accept the inevitability of death. None of the Hallows was a ticket, singly or collectively, to immortality. I find it amusing that the Hallow both Harry and Dumbledore thought the weakest and least important of the three is the one getting the most posts. Have our posters missed the importance of the book's lesson?




Xenophilius - Aug 18, 2007 4:09 pm (#25 of 36)

Tom - Have our posters missed the importance of the book's lesson?

I don't think so. Most of the posts are about clarifying the wand lore behind mastering the wand. If the posts were about what a great thing it would be to have then my answer would be different.




pedrobobo - Aug 18, 2007 4:12 pm (#26 of 36)
Edited Aug 18, 2007 5:14 pm

But in the hands of Voldemort, had he obtained the Resurrection Stone, he would have created an army of Inferi. ~ Choices

This is how Grindelwald intended to use the stone, but Dumbledore tells us that Voldemort would have acted differently.

"And Voldemort never knew about the Hallows?"

"I do not think so, because he did not recognize the Resurrection Stone he turned into a Horcrux. But even if he had known about them, Harry, I doubt he would have been interested in any except the first. he would not think that he needed the Cloak, and as for the stone, whom would he want to bring back from the dead? He fears the dead. He does not love." [DH chapter 35 "King's Cross"]




tandaradei - Aug 19, 2007 8:30 am (#27 of 36)
Edited Aug 19, 2007 9:31 am

Yes, the magic of the Resurrection Stone means you can appear to be with your lost loved ones in real time, even though the parties are in different dimensions or realms of experience. Kind of reminds me of posting online! The problem we get from this, as given in Beedle's Story, is that just talking is not enough: we are a herding species who also like to touch, feel, and experience the presence in our world of those we love.

Beedle's description of the Second Brother's request was specifically the power to recall others from death, as the Second Brother's snide attempt to humiliate Death and Death's purpose. Well, we can "recall" folks from looking at pictures of them; we don't necessarily have to have the physical presence of the actual person to recall them. I'm thinking, like in Faust's deals with the Devil, that here the Second Brother wasn't specific enough and thus received less than he had intended to ask.

Yes, even Xenophilius says these are just stories, but JKR plants all in her works to effect, and only those too sure of themselves won't explore all avenues JKR provides for enlightenment. Not only that, many myths can be interpreted into good sense.

It could well be that the Peverell brother who created this Resurrection Stone unfortunately had the same muddled intentions as the Second Brother in this story, for instance.




Choices - Aug 19, 2007 11:57 am (#28 of 36)

So sorry....I wrote Voldemort and meant Grindelwald.

"The Resurrection Stone---to him, through I pretended not to know it, it meant an army of Inferi! To me, I confess, it meant the return of my parents....."




Michael Franz - Aug 13, 2008 7:41 am (#29 of 36)

Do you think the Resurrection Stone genuinely brings back the dead? By which I mean, does it actually have the power to reach into the Great Beyond and retrieve a person's soul? I say not; wizards have no idea what lies beyond.

Dumbledore says "it is the unknown we fear when we look on death and darkness, nothing more." Of course, he doesn't fear the unknown; he wants to discover the Undiscovered Country. There is the Veiled Archway, but it can only send you into the Great Beyond; like a black hole, no information can emerge from it.

Of course, that raises the question of who built the Veil in the first place, and how. I'd say that something from Beyond actually contacted the wizard who built it and told him how. Could that have happened with the Stone? Possibly. But, if the Resurrection Stone can really bring back souls, why can't the Philosopher's Stone be used to recreate their bodies?




Mrs Brisbee - Aug 13, 2008 8:13 am (#30 of 36)

I think the Stone brings back the dead as they manifest themselves within the Stone's owner. For me, they are like living memories-- far more dynamic and in depth than a portrait could be, because they are tied to an actual soul of someone who was touched by the dead when they were still living. Note that the user of the Stone is the only one who can see their dead loved ones brought back by the Stone.




shepherdess - Aug 13, 2008 8:46 am (#31 of 36)

I'd say that something from Beyond actually contacted the wizard who built it and told him how. Could that have happened with the Stone?

But the stone wasn't created by a wizard; it was created by Death.

But, if the Resurrection Stone can really bring back souls, why can't the Philosopher's Stone be used to recreate their bodies?

I hadn't really connected the two stones in that way. Each of the Hallows is just a greater version of things that exist elsewhere in the Wizarding World. (Just call me "stater of the obvious". )




Mrs. Sirius - Aug 13, 2008 8:03 pm (#32 of 36)

But the stone wasn't created by a wizard; it was created by Death. shepherdess

On platform 9 3/4, doesn't Dumbledore say that it was one of the 3 brothers, who were powerful wizards, who probably created the stone? The legend and awe created the myth that death created these 3 powerful objects.




shepherdess - Aug 13, 2008 9:16 pm (#33 of 36)

Hmm...you may be right. It's been a while since I've read the book. I don't remember that.




Solitaire - Aug 16, 2008 7:36 pm (#34 of 36)
Edited Aug 16, 2008 8:37 pm

Then again, Dumbledore--as much as I love him--has been known to make mistakes now and then. Well, maybe they were errors in judgment. Still, he was not infallible ...




PeskyPixie - Sep 11, 2008 5:44 pm (#35 of 36)
Edited Sep 11, 2008 6:46 pm

I interpreted from the text that 'the three brothers' were exceptional wizards who created these exceptional items. Over time, a legend grew that Death had created these Hallows, perhaps because two of the three are so closely linked with Death. Anyhow, it's a pretty spooky story the second way.




Dryleaves - Sep 11, 2008 11:40 pm (#36 of 36)
Edited Sep 12, 2008 12:40 am

I interpreted from the text that 'the three brothers' were exceptional wizards who created these exceptional items. Over time, a legend grew that Death had created these Hallows(...) (PeskyPixie)

Well, that is what we, the Hermione’s of the world would say, of course, but the Lovegoods of the world would say that Death actually gave these items to the brothers and then the Hermione’s tried to rationalize the story so that it would fit the empirical facts of the world
avatar
Potteraholic
Ravenclaw Prefect
Ravenclaw Prefect

Posts : 4241
Join date : 2011-02-18
Location : USA

Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum