The Very Secret Diary

Go down

The Very Secret Diary Empty The Very Secret Diary

Post  Potteraholic on Mon Jul 18, 2011 7:56 am

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


zelmia - Sep 13, 2003 12:57 pm Reply
Edited by Kip Carter Jan 12, 2006 12:21 pm

I am fascinated with Tom Riddle's Diary. I have many questions about its use, creation, effects, etc. For example, does the diary have any connection whatsoever with the modern-day Voldemort?

If he "...left behind a diary preserving [his] 16-year-old self" well, that "self" later grew up to be Voldemort. So wouldn't Voldemort today have at least some inkling of the things people write about in that diary? Wouldn't even one or two become part of his current memories?

I guess I think this because of the movie Frequency. In that story, the main character communicated with his boyhood self (via HAM radio) and things that changed for his boyhood self immediately affected, and became part of his current (adult) memories. Why would the Diary be any different?
Potteraholic
Potteraholic
Ravenclaw Prefect
Ravenclaw Prefect

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

Back to top Go down

The Very Secret Diary Empty The Very Secret Diary (posts #1 to #50)

Post  Potteraholic on Mon Jul 18, 2011 7:59 am

Gabrielle D - Sep 14, 2003 7:48 am (#1 of 298)

I was thinking the same thing, but what important information could an eleven-year-old girl give. Remember, Tom Riddle said something along the lines of her boring him, and all he wanted to know was Harry Potter. Harry never gave that journal anything; he only got out info about the Camber of Secrets. If Voldy had a memory of this talking to Ginny and Harry, it would be insignificant, wouldn't it?




W J - Sep 14, 2003 7:34 pm (#2 of 298)

Tom Riddle in the diary had no communication with the real Tom Riddle/Voldemort after the diary was created. If the diary could be used to communicate with the later Voldemort, why would Lucius give it away to Ginny? Why wouldn't he have used it to find Voldemort and bring him back immediately after Voldemort disappeared? If there was communication, why wouldn't the Tom Riddle in the diary already know all about how Harry defeated Voldemort twice instead of having to ask Harry about it?

The diary just contained the ill will and determination of a very bad young man. There was no further connection to the real Tom Riddle/Voldemort after the diary was created.




Danny - Sep 15, 2003 10:09 pm (#3 of 298)
Edited Sep 15, 2003 11:10 pm

WJ - You're not thinking. If this diary was truly a 16-year-old replica of himself then yes what Zelmia said could be entirely true. How could Lucius communicate with a 16-year-old version of Voldemort and expect to know what he's doing years later? And also how would the 16-year-old version of Voldemort possibly know what happens between himself and Harry Potter years down the road? He can't see in the future. You're looking at it as if the 16-year-old version of Voldemort and Voldemort in the second book are different people. They are one and the same so yes I believe everything that happened in the Chamber of Secrets, Voldemort remembers as of the books. I don't mean to harp on you but I don't really like it that almost all the posts you make aren't stating your opinion but what you say is fact. This is after all just speculation. Unless you can directly prove something wrong using text from the books.




Mare - Sep 16, 2003 3:15 am (#4 of 298)

WJ - You're not thinking.

Now that's a thing that doesn't happen very often

And I have to agree with WJ, if Lucius could communicate with the real Voldemort, through the diary, than why don't we see Lucius rushing away in book two to find Voldemort? That would be logic. But we don't see that happen, instead it is not until book four that two other DE's, Crouch Jr. and Pettigrew, find and restore their Dark Lord.

And there in the graveyard is the first time that Lucius sees Voldemort again after his downfall. That's why he is apologizing for not looking for him in the past 13 years.

And Danny, when you will get to know WJ, you'll find out that she is a very nice person, who simply has a very direct way of speaking (or in this case writing) to people. I don't think there is anything wrong with that. She doesn't mean to attack people.

Well, most of the time she doesn't, that is.




mollis - Sep 16, 2003 8:00 am (#5 of 298)

I think that the real question here (which has likely been discussed before), is what would have happened if Ginny had died and 16 yr old Voldy had come to life (through the book)? Would we have had 2 Voldemort’s to deal with? How bad would that be? Not to mention that Harry probably would have died then too. A world with 2 Voldie’s and no Harry??? Creepy and scary!




zelmia - Sep 16, 2003 11:04 am (#6 of 298)
Edited Sep 16, 2003 12:09 pm

Let me try a different tack:

The 16-year-old Riddle would not actually be able give any insight into the Modern Voldemort. Why? Because that part of his life hasn't happened yet.

It would be like asking the people in the photograph of the original Order what happened the night the Potters were killed. Assuming that photographs can communicate in this way (a whole different thread), they wouldn't be able to tell you because - for them - it hasn't happened yet.

A photograph preserves a moment in time. The Diary preserves, in this case, literally the individual himself over an extended period in time - his 6th year at Hogwarts.

Other questions: Lucius Malfoy and Ginny Weasley couldn't possibly be the only ones to have handled the Diary over the course of the last 50 years. Riddle says he "left behind" a diary. Where? Did he himself get it back once he had become Lord Voldemort? If not, how did Lucius obtain it? Did Lucius (or one of the other later Death Eaters) discover it while he was at Hogwarts and not fully understand its uses until later in life? How does it work, anyway? I understand that it worked with Ginny because "she put too much of herself into the Diary. Into me..." But not everyone who writes in a Diary pours out their entire soul. Is possible that there were others who used the Diary but who simply didn't put enough of themselves into the pages for Riddle to "leave them at last?"

What would have happened if Riddle had succeeded? Would there have been 2 Voldemort’s walking around? Would Voldemort, the Younger, have allowed Voldemort the Mist to take over?




Caitlin McCoy - Sep 16, 2003 12:26 pm (#7 of 298)

Wow, that's a really good question, Zelmia, I hadn't even thought of that. I think that once Voldemort the Mist had found out what happened, Voldemort the Younger would've been toast. He's done too much (including stuff to himself to become immortal) to be usurped by a 16-year-old . Even if that 16-year-old is himself.




Danny - Sep 16, 2003 7:19 pm (#8 of 298)

That's the point I was trying to make. I just think you guys didn't read my post closely enough. Let's just say that someone 50 years from now could talk to the 2003 version of me. It definitely would not make sense for me to know my own whereabouts 50 years from now because I’m living in 2003. However... whatever was said to the 2003 version of me would become memories for the 2053 version of me.




mollis - Sep 17, 2003 5:52 am (#9 of 298)

I don't think that it would work like that Danny. Voldy preserved his 16 yr old self in the diary. Had that "self" actually gained its own form, through the death of Ginny, and been a live person, that new person (diary-Voldy) would have no connection to the real-Voldy. Diary-Voldy isn't going to grow up to be real-Voldy, we just have two separate and distinct Voldy’s. The real Voldemort would have had no idea that his diary-self had taken corporeal form and was now doing his own thing. Perhaps if diary-Voldy had achieved corporeal form and was free from the book, maybe at that point real-Voldy would have been able to sense him (through his Legilimency), but I don't see anyway that real-Voldy should have known what happened in the Chamber.

Of course, this is just my own reasoning behind it. Feel free to disagree. Smile




Caitlin McCoy - Sep 17, 2003 7:49 am (#10 of 298)

What you're talking about, Danny, is a time-traveling timeline, in which a person/character goes into the past to advise or speak with their past selves. Nine times out of ten the reason they do this is because of a slightly buried memory or to trigger off something else. In the case of Voldemort the Mist and Voldemort the Memory, Voldemort the Memory has no way to grow up in the exact same timeline as Voldemort the Mist. So one's memories cease to become shared after the point the diary ended - and that remains even if Voldemort the Memory became corporeal.




zelmia - Sep 17, 2003 10:56 am (#11 of 298)

So one's memories cease to become shared after the point the diary ended

But what about up until that point? When Harry meets Riddle in the Chamber he says, "Are you a ghost?" Riddle answers, "A memory. Preserved in a diary..."

Now, if Riddle himself is only a memory, how could the very events of the Chamber that he experiences not also be memories for Voldemort? Is it only because Riddle the Memory was... erased? Did any memory that Voldemort the Mist might have obtained through that interaction also dissolve?




Danny - Sep 17, 2003 9:21 pm (#12 of 298)

I believe that if Voldemort the mist had succeeded and became a real person thru Ginny then his none of what happened from then on would be a memory for the real Voldemort because they truly would become two separate people. But in the case of simply Voldemort the mist, he is the same person as the real Voldemort so I believe yes, all that happened would become memories for the real Voldemort.




mollis - Sep 18, 2003 6:41 am (#13 of 298)

But how would the real Voldemort obtain these memories created by diary-Voldemort? The real Voldy was still without a body, so no Legilimency to detect the presence of the diary-Voldy or to gain those memories. And I don't think that the memories of diary-Voldy would be able to have been preserved in any way prior to Harry's killing him. Sorry, but I just can't find a mechanism that would have allowed the transfer of diary-Voldy's memories into real-Voldy. Can anyone think of a way that could happen?




Carina - Sep 18, 2003 5:35 pm (#14 of 298)
Edited Sep 18, 2003 6:35 pm

When Tom created the diary 50 years ago, it contained 16 years worth of memories. Tom continued on to grow, change his name, wreck havoc on the wizarding world and get vaporized by a one-year-old baby.

Diary Tom has no recollection of anything that happened after he (it?) was created and all he knows of the present is what Ginny tells him.

Had he succeeded in sucking out her soul and becoming a permanent being, he would be starting at 16 years old with the memories he has been given and continue as a separate being to create new memories. Moldy Voldy on the other hand, would continue to be a 66-year-old body-less creature and have no connection to Diary Tom, other than those 16 years they shared.




W J - Sep 18, 2003 7:41 pm (#15 of 298)

That's what I think too, Carina and Mollis. There is no communication between Tom in the Diary and the present day Voldemort. There is nothing in the books to suggest there ever was any connection between them after the diary was created.




S.E. Jones - Sep 18, 2003 8:41 pm (#16 of 298)
Edited Sep 18, 2003 9:43 pm

I agree Carina, Mollis, and WJ. The Riddle in the diary could be seen more as a copy of himself more than the actual 16-year-old Riddle. It contains all his memories up till the point where he succeeded in putting this copy into the diary but wouldn't have any memories beyond that because, as of that point, it was an entirely separate entity. Has anyone ever seen the movie Multiplicity with Michael Keaton? He's a guy who goes to have a clone of himself made. The clone remembers everything right up to the point where he laid down on the operating table and was given anesthesia and so thinks he is the original, then he sees the something that marks him as the clone... I see the copy Riddle working much the same way. I also don't think that the real Voldy could learn anything from this copy precisely because he is a copy and not the real thing. In the movie Frequency, which Zelmia originally cited, the character actually spoke to himself in the past and thus the events became part of his memory. In Riddle's case, the self is a copy, a clone, if you will, and not himself in the past, thus the memories will not be incorporated into the modern Voldemort...




Danny - Sep 18, 2003 8:45 pm (#17 of 298)

Ahhh W J will you listen? "There is no communication between Tom and the Diary and the present day Voldemort" The way you word that you would almost make me believe that you think they are two different people. Unless he had succeeded and actually duplicated himself by getting enough out of Ginny, then they are the same person. Wouldn't you say that the diary is a form of time travel? Since you're able to essentially talk to the 16-year-old version of Voldemort? AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THE DIARY IS. It's simply a time portal back to the 16-year-old Voldemort. So yes, by talking to that person through the time portal that is the Diary, you change the course of the past. Now that's not that you could say kill the 16-year-old version of Voldemort and then not have him around in the future, no I believe the events that happen while talking to the diary are like a dream that Voldemort is having. I believe everything that happened between Ginny and Voldemort, and of course any interaction that might have happened before the diary fell into Ginny's hands, all became memories for Voldemort. And why wouldn't they? If they didn't become memories for Voldemort then who would they become memories for? And don't say that they'd just become memories of the 16-year-old Voldemort and not the present day Voldemort because they are the same person.




Danny - Sep 18, 2003 8:48 pm (#18 of 298)

S.E. Jones you're perfectly right! If he had succeeded and became a different person by getting enough of Ginny's soul to form his own, then yes it would be almost exactly like Multiplicity. But... he didn't succeed. Therefore, he didn't become a new person. He was still Voldemort.




shepherdess - Sep 18, 2003 10:07 pm (#19 of 298)

Danny,

You seem so convinced that you are right, that you're not allowing for any other possibilities. Now, I'm confused-I read the same books as you, but I never got the idea the diary was any type of time travel devise.

Could you please tell me specifically what you read that gave you that impression-because I don't see it. I guess different people just interpret the books differently. We really won't know who's right till the end.

(And could you lighten up on W.J. a little? If her posts bother you that much, just skip them and enjoy the rest of the forum.)




Carina - Sep 18, 2003 10:35 pm (#20 of 298)
Edited Sep 18, 2003 11:44 pm

Danny, don't YOU listen? I would NOT say that the Diary is a portal to the past and I WOULD say that Voldy and Diary Tom ARE two different people once Tom talks to Ginny. I WOULD say that the diary is a recording of past memories. You cannot really communicate with the participants in those memories any more than you could communicate with James Dean in "Rebel Without a Cause". I might be able to rig something up that would respond like he would, but I'm not really communicating with him.

Sorry if I'm being rude, but just because you think you're right doesn't mean everyone else has to.




Danny - Sep 18, 2003 10:48 pm (#21 of 298)

Okay first I’ll deal with Shepherdess. How can you say it's not a time travel device of sorts? You are in a sense going back in time because you are able to talk to a 16-year-old person who is in fact in the present time 50 years older. So yes you are IN A SENSE going back in time.

And Carina...the whole Diary is NOT a portal to the past thing I just dealed with. I just don't understand how you can say they're two different people! What are their names? Voldemort and...what is it?... Anyone? VOLDEMORT. They're both Voldemort. You are just in a sense being able to go back and talk to the 16-year-old version of him. That diary is like a severely restricted time machine that's exactly what it is. It's just that the only thing you can do with it is go back 50 years and talk to Voldemort. "You can not communicate with the participants in those memories any more than you could communicate with James Dean in "Rebel Without a Cause"." How can you say this? Ginny DID communicate with the 16-year-old Voldemort...That right there disproves what you just said.




Carina - Sep 18, 2003 10:53 pm (#22 of 298)

Ginny communicated with a magical device that was charmed to respond as Tom would respond. The diary could not tell any of its memories, but rather had to dump Harry in the middle of them where he could view, BUT NOT PARTICIPATE.

Communicating with the Diary is NOT communicating with 16-year-old Tom and therefore is NOT affecting present day Voldemort.

This is my opinion, you do not have to share it, nor do I have to share yours.




Denise P. - Sep 19, 2003 5:14 am (#23 of 298)

"There is no communication between Tom and the Diary and the present day Voldemort" The way you word that you would almost make me believe that you think they are two different people.

Well, color me in the camp who think that Tom in the Diary and present day Voldemort are not the same person. They were the same person until Tom was put in the diary and ceased to experience the same things that Tom out of the diary did. A person is defined and refined by the things they experience in life and how they deal with it. Tom in the Diary is stuck and stagnant. Tom out of the diary had to change and evolve to deal with things. If you were to get Tom in the diary and present day Voldemort together, they would be radically different people who share a name and physical make up but are in no way the same person.

The diary is not a time portal either. You are in no way going back in time to deal with Tom in the diary. The diary has allowed time to pass while Tom in the diary has remained dormant. If you really, really, really want to stretch the point, you can say you are dealing with a time stagnant Tom in the diary, whose ideas, thoughts etc are in the past...right where they were when he put his 16 yr old self into the diary to begin with. Any interaction done with Tom in the diary affects ONLY Tom in the diary, present day Voldemort doesn't gain any knowledge from it or is even aware of it. If the diary were a time portal, Harry would have been able to speak to Hagrid or Dumbledore in the memory rather than just stand by, unable to do more than observe.

Everyone on this forum is allowed to have different opinions but rather than attack the PERSON defending a certain viewpoint, go after the theory they are putting forth. If one can't do that, they may be better off either no engaging in a conversation or finding another place that does allow personal attacks. Danny, you have been asked to tone down a bit, please do so.




Danny - Sep 19, 2003 5:32 pm (#24 of 298)

"Danny, you have been asked to tone down a bit, please do so." Noted.

Okay I know this thread really isn't that important to the Harry Potter series however I can't help but defend my point of view, again. What I don't like is when people read a post, but don't fully understand what they are saying and then reply not really knowing exactly what the other person is saying. NoVeil4Me made a great example of this when they said this "If the diary were a time portal, Harry would have been able to speak to Hagrid or Dumbledore in the memory rather than just stand by, unable to do more than observe. "

I'm going to quote my own post which is saying the opposite of what you seem to think I believe.

"That diary is like a severely restricted time machine that's exactly what it is. It's just that the only thing you can do with it is go back 50 years and talk to Voldemort."

Let me ask you this, now I’m going to state again that I know this argument isn't that relevant however I still feel the need to defend myself. If you are able to talk to, and hold a conversation with, a 16-year-old person who is in fact in the present day much older than that using a certain device, how can you say that device is anything other than a certain type of time travel device? It's not like Ginny found a picture of the 16-year-old Voldemort, she actually could watch him walk around, and hold a conversation with him.

On another note, maybe you guys are right about the idea that whatever was said to the diary didn't become a memory to the old Voldemort. Maybe it's more that you could just look inside the 16-year-old Voldemort's mind with the diary. And that's definitely possible in my opinion but what I don't think is possible is that the diary actually created a different person. If you were somehow able to ask Ginny or Harry, who were you talking to? They'd answer well...a 16-year-old Voldemort. I don't see any evidence at all that the diary created a completely separate person. Was this diary a form of cloning? I think not. If Voldemort had succeeded in becoming real thru Ginny, then yes it would have cloned him, but see he wasn't successful. So then what was it? If the diary was simply a method of cloning then what would be the difference between Voldemort that came out of the diary and what he was trying to do? If he was already a separate person entirely then why was he even trying to get something out of Ginny? The answer is that he wasn't truly a separate person unless he got enough of Ginny to be come real. He was in fact only Voldemort the 16-year-old .




S.E. Jones - Sep 19, 2003 6:30 pm (#25 of 298)

"If you are able to talk to, and hold a conversation with, a 16-year-old person who is in fact in the present day much older than that using a certain device....If the diary was simply a method of cloning then what would be the difference between Voldemort that came out of the diary and what he was trying to do? If he was already a separate person entirely then why was he even trying to get something out of Ginny?"

Well, Danny, I still think the Riddle in the diary was a copy of the real Riddle's essence, soul, whatever. He was not "in fact in the present day" because of this. And, he still had all the same agendas as Riddle did when he was 16 because it (the copy) was a piece of Riddle. I know you don't think people are reading your posts and fully understanding your point of view, but perhaps you're not quite getting our point of view either. I agree that he was a 16-year-old Voldemort, just not the 16-year-old Voldemort....




W J - Sep 19, 2003 9:34 pm (#26 of 298)

The diary is like one of the school paintings. It contains a snapshot of the original person; it is a moment-in-time that remains stagnant, as NoVeil4Me said. Tom in the diary is like a portrait of Tom Riddle at age 16. The portrait can speak and mimic the real person it portrays, but it is still only a copy or animated memory of the original person. The portrait becomes a separate entity. There is no shared consciousness between the original person and the portrait. A person can ask his portrait questions and orally communicate with their portrait, but there is no telepathy between the portrait and the real person. So it is with Tom in the diary and the Tom Riddle that became Voldemort. The diary is charmed with dark magic that allows it to harm people, but other than that, it is just like one of the school portraits in nature.

This is my opinion, Danny, and it is apparently very similar to a lot of other person's opinions on this topic. I don't know what I did to you to make you attack me personally, but please get over it already.




Danny - Sep 19, 2003 11:30 pm (#27 of 298)

I was not attacking you. The first time I actually pointed out your name was about something you said that was entirely false. I won't quote it but you can go back and look and it's not like at any point I've been mad at anyone or attacking anyone.




Danny - Sep 19, 2003 11:35 pm (#28 of 298)

I'll make a longer post later because I'm way too tired right now but let me leave you with this...Are you trying to say that every time you paint a portrait of someone, or enchant a diary to preserve yourself you are creating a new person?




Carina - Sep 19, 2003 11:47 pm (#29 of 298)

I don't think anyone has said that.

These are magical devices that really have no thoughts or feelings other than what their creators have given them. But, while they may outwardly behave like their original subjects, they are not really linked to them. The diary is just a magical book that a 16-year-old boy recorded his 16-year-old thoughts in.




shepherdess - Sep 20, 2003 12:00 am (#30 of 298)
Edited Sep 20, 2003 1:07 am

Danny,

First, let's clear some things up:

"Okay first I'll deal with Shepherdess." -Excuse me?! I'm not a five-year-old child who needs to be dealt with, I'm an intelligent 48-year-old woman who deserves more respect than that.

"How can you say it's not a time travel device of sorts?" -I can say that because it's my opinion based on my interpretation of the book, just as you can state your opinion based on your interpretation.

"..I still feel the need to defend myself." -Why? No one is attacking you. We were only disagreeing with your theory. Why do you feel threatened by that?

Now that that's out of the way, let me say that out of respect to you, and in an effort to understand your point of view, I've gone back and reread that part of CoS. I'm guessing (and please correct me if I'm wrong, but you didn't answer my question above) that you're basing your opinion on the fact that Harry fell into the diary and landed in Dumbledore's office in the year Tom was 16. I can see how you might interpret that to mean time travel.

On the next page (243 AV) it says: "Harry was little more than a phantom; completely invisible to the people of 50 years ago." They couldn't see him. He tried to talk, but they couldn't hear him. To me that means Harry didn't fall into Hogwarts 50 years ago, but fell into the diary in the present and never left his dorm room, where the diary was, with him in it. That doesn't seem like time travel to me.

I don't think Harry was communicating with 16-year-old Tom Riddle or present-day Lord Voldemort, but with an object charmed with dark magic to suck the life out of him by "communicating".




Denise P. - Sep 20, 2003 5:56 am (#31 of 298)
Edited Sep 20, 2003 6:57 am

Okay folks....let's look at a cute 'lil bunny here.

Danny, WJ said nothing false, she gave her opinion and as did you. Agree to disagree and move along. This Forum is not set up for people to "make" others come to their viewpoint on things. Play nicely and remember Thumper's advice to Bambi.




zelmia - Sep 25, 2003 9:23 pm (#32 of 298)
Edited Sep 25, 2003 10:24 pm

I'm back. Now, there has been a lot of squabbling while I've been gone; and while I am happy to think that my questions about such a minor part of the saga could arouse such a passionate debate (Bravo), I would encourage everyone to remember that we are talking about a work of fiction. Besides, it's really very dull for everyone else to have to wade through all the sniping to get to the good stuff.

I have just read several comments that I found most interesting, especially from SE Jones. I had never considered the "clone" idea.

But a couple of things stand out for me in that whole part of the saga - and this is what made me question how the Diary works in the first place:

1. When Harry first writes in the Diary asking about the Chamber of Secrets, Tom writes back that it happened 50 years ago.

2. Riddle says to Harry (down in the Chamber) "Haven't I told you? Killing Mudbloods doesn't matter to me anymore. For many months now, my new target has been... you."

3. But most importantly of all, he also says: "Voldemort is my past, present and future." At this point, he begins speaking to Harry in the past tense: "It's a name I was already using at school..."

The rest of his story about the Chamber and creating the Diary is also told using the past tense: "Only Dumbledore, the Transfiguration teacher... etc."

Now, if 16-year-old Tom has no understanding of anything beyond the Diary - how could he know that Harry is writing to him from 50 years in his future? If Diary-Tom is stagnant, why does he refer to himself in the past tense?

For that matter, why create the Diary in the first place, if it's just to keep a stagnant 'copy' of himself lying around a moldy old castle, with only a slim chance that someone will come across it?




Denise P. - Sep 26, 2003 5:07 am (#33 of 298)

Now, if 16-year-old Tom has no understanding of anything beyond the Diary - how could he know that Harry is writing to him from 50 years in his future?

Ginny told him.




Joost! - Sep 26, 2003 5:20 am (#34 of 298)
Edited Sep 26, 2003 6:22 am

Maybe Riddle figured out it is now fifty (something) years after the diary was written through the information he got from Ginny, Harry and possibly Lucius (maybe others?). So he uses past tense.

Or Diary-Tom has some notion of time passing. Kinda like the Tin Man in the Wizard of Oz. He didn't change but still noticed time passing by until Dorothy released him from his motionless position. If it is the same for Diary-Tom he would gain no further knowledge of the world outside the diary (unless someone writes to him), but maybe he still "feels" himself or the diary aging. Like a prisoner counting the days in his cell, without knowing what happens outside. Of course a prisoner would age, while Diary-Tom apparently doesn't, he still looks like a 16 yr old boy.

About the Diary changing the present Dark Lords memories. I was wondering why nobody drew a link to the Marauders Map. Remember it talking to Snape? It doesn't seem that Lupin, Wormtail or Sirius had any memories of this conversation after it occurred. They never mentioned it, and I think if you remember something that happened 20 years in the future(Is this correct?), they would.




zelmia - Sep 26, 2003 8:12 am (#35 of 298)
Edited Sep 26, 2003 9:13 am

But the Marauder's Map was an autonomous entity, greater than the sum of its parts, much like the Sorting Hat. Like the Sorting Hat, the Map, once created, had a life/existence of its own, completely independent of its creators.

Unlike these two items, the Diary was created specifically for preserving the life/existence of a particular person.

The reason I wondered whether or not the Diary Tom could have some connection with Voldemort is simply because he identifies himself as "A memory, preserved in a Diary."

Why do people keep diaries in the first place? To preserve their memories; to keep a record of events, of feelings, thoughts, etc. And the very act, the physical act, of writing these things down, means that there will always be a connection to the writer, albeit perhaps a subconscious one.

This, then, must be why the Diary was created in the first place. Voldemort would be guaranteed of immortality, but he would also always have a connection to his 16-year-old self.




Danny - Sep 27, 2003 12:27 am (#36 of 298)
Edited Sep 27, 2003 1:27 am

I wrote a very long and time-consuming post but either it got deleted or somehow I didn't click post? I'm not sure. I'm not going to rewrite it because I feel this thread's pretty much dead anyway. The only part I'll rewrite is the part to Shepherdess. I'm very sorry I offended you. I truly am. I meant it more like I'm going to deal with the point you made, not you personally. I shouldn't have worded it that way and I'm sorry.




shepherdess - Sep 27, 2003 9:32 am (#37 of 298)

Danny,

Apology accepted. Thank you. And please accept my apology if I over-reacted. I have had a very stressful (several) month(s), and I may have been overly sensitive.

But, I want you to know, that even if we disagreed with what you were saying (or how you were saying it), it is obvious that you put thought into your opinion. And that's what we like on this forum, people who post intelligent ideas. That's how we expand our understanding of the Potterverse.

Now how about we all put this behind us and move on. The forum is a great place and, as long as we are respectful, we can all enjoy it together.

Now, back to that diary...




zelmia - Sep 28, 2003 8:19 am (#38 of 298)

There were some very interesting takes on the Diary over on the Lucius Malfoy thread that I think could be better explored here.

--> How did Lucius come to have the Diary in the first place? Was it bequeathed to him by Voldemort directly? Did he purchase it at one of those shops in Knockturn Alley? Could Lucius have found it when he was still at school and held on to it all these years?

--> Could Lucius have intended to use the Diary to take over as the new Dark Lord? Could he have fed the preserved Tom Riddle just enough information to free him from the Diary, but under Lucius' control? Could Lucius have intended to keep the Diary as a sort of hostage to get whatever he could when the real Dark Lord returned?




Joost! - Sep 29, 2003 1:53 am (#39 of 298)
Edited Sep 29, 2003 2:55 am

The question about where Lucius got the diary is an interesting one. Let’s look at the possibilities:

You-Know-Who himself could’ve given it to Lucius. But why would he have done this? Maybe to ensure his immortality; if LV were to die, the diary could be used to recreate him. This has the problem of LV having to tell Lucius he used to be Tom Riddle, the half-blood, I can’t see him do that.

Lucius could have purchased it in Knockturn Ally. That would mean either he bought it by accident (not likely, in my opinion) or he knew about the diary and Tom Riddle. The latter option is quite possible. However, then we’ve got the question: How he did know about it?

He could have found the diary in the Riddle House, assuming he actually is the owner. Then he must’ve known LV is Tom Riddle, that could be the case if LV told Lucius or if Malfoy sr. (Lucius father, Draco’s grandfather) was one of Riddle’s ‘most intimate friends’ at Hogwarts (this was discussed in the Lord Voldemort thread, #40 by S.E. Jones).

If Lucius father was indeed one of Riddle’s friends he could have received the diary. But I don’t think a 16 or 17 year old boy would give his diary away to his friend.

My guess is that Lucius found it in the Slytherin House in his schooldays, maybe clued in by his father, maybe by accident. This would probably mean Lucius didn’t figure out how to communicate with Riddle at that time, because I think Riddle would have used Lucius like he used Ginny. Or his father warned him in advance.

And there you have it, my longest post yet on this forum. I’m having the creepy feeling it’s full of spelling and grammar errors.




Madame Librarian - Sep 29, 2003 3:57 am (#40 of 298)

Joost!, excellent posting and spelling. Nary a boo-boo, nor a typo. The former editor in me bestows 5 points on your record!

Now as to content--also good thinking. I like the idea of Tom giving Lucius' dad his diary just before he graduates and goes on to recreate himself as V. He leaves it with him with the instructions that should something happen to him (V.), the diary is to be used to revive his essence in order to get into the chamber, or some such nonsense (haven't worked out all the magical ideas here obviously). So that's how it gets into the Malfoy household.

Ciao. Barb




shepherdess - Sep 29, 2003 2:55 pm (#41 of 298)

If the diary is basically to be used to bring him back to life (which would have to mean something had happened to him), Tom or LV, would have to have a LOT of trust in Malfoy. How could he be sure, if something happened to him, that Malfoy wouldn't just say "too bad, I'm head honcho now"? It's hard to imagine him having that much trust in anyone.




zelmia - Sep 29, 2003 9:52 pm (#42 of 298)

Except that Tom Riddle himself explains that he "...left behind a diary preserving my 16-year-old self so that one day, with luck... Salazar Slytherin's noble work.... etc."

The other thing is that I don't think it's any secret about his Muggle-born father because at the end of GF, all of the Death Eaters who appear do so in an ordinary Muggle grave yard, where Voldemort explains, "To get the bone of my father naturally meant I needed to return here where he is buried" (not an exact quote, but close enough).

Obviously, as an adult, Voldemort could have gone back for the Diary or had it sent for or something. But I don't think Young Voldemort handed the diary to anyone and said, "Here. Keep this for me, will you? In case I need it later..."

That said, Joost's theory is excellent and certainly poses a highly likely scenario for Lucius coming into possession of the Diary - which is even more compelling after learning about his direct connection with the Black family.




mollis - Sep 30, 2003 6:30 am (#43 of 298)

I also don't think it seems likely that Voldy would have entrusted the diary to someone. It seems more likely that it was hidden somewhere and left to be found many years later. Maybe Tom hid the diary in the Slytherin common room. Maybe they have any area where they keep/practice dark arts stuff, and Tom hid the diary in the wall or under a bookcase or some place where only another truly evil wizard would be looking. Then, while Lucius was in school he found it and kept it, not knowing exactly what it was(or Draco could have found it and taken it home to show his dad and daddy swiped it). After a time he figured it out and formed a plan to give it to some unsuspecting child and see what happened.




W J - Sep 30, 2003 9:23 pm (#44 of 298)

I always thought that maybe the diary stayed in Voldemort's possession until the night he tried to kill baby Harry. When the DEs realized that something went wrong, they went to Voldemort's hideout and gathered all his things for safekeeping before the MoM could arrive and find all of it. Lucius might have gotten quite a few items that belonged to Voldemort before he disappeared. Dumbledore even indirectly warned Lucius at the end of CoS not to let any more of Voldemort's old things turn up. Just a possibility.




shepherdess - Sep 30, 2003 9:30 pm (#45 of 298)

That seems much more likely to me than that he gave it to Lucius (or anyone else) for safekeeping (or future use).




Joost! - Oct 1, 2003 12:15 am (#46 of 298)
Edited Oct 1, 2003 1:15 am

W J, Voldemort keeping the dairy is possible. But why wouldn't he have put more of himself in to it? That way, when someone, like Ginny, used it an older and more powerful Dark Lord would appear.

Diary-Tom from CoS, as Zelmia indicated, wanted to open the Chamber of Secrets again. So I think it's most likely that he hid the Diary at Hogwarts, probably in the Slytherin House. I forgot the scenario of Draco finding the book, that's a likely option, Mollis.




Madame Librarian - Oct 1, 2003 1:53 pm (#47 of 298)

Joost!, perhaps V. didn't want to expose his older, nastier, more powerful self to the younger generation of Wizards. He ceased making additions to the diary when he was at his most charming and innocent-seeming so as to sway someone as naive as Ginny or even Harry--after all he's only, what 12 at that point. These kids would relate to him as another kid at H-warts. They'd be more receptive. He would not at all make them think of that awful Dark Lord their elders told them about.

I am getting anxious because these threads are just skirting that sticky problem of time travel and past self-awareness again. Not travel exactly, but the whole question of did Tom know that V. would fail the first time around; did V. know that Tom would be able to effect things at H-warts? And on, and on, and on....

Ciao. Barb




S.E. Jones - Oct 1, 2003 7:57 pm (#48 of 298)

Zelmia: The other thing is that I don't think it's any secret about his Muggle-born father because at the end of GF, all of the Death Eaters who appear do so in an ordinary Muggle grave yard, where Voldemort explains, "To get the bone of my father naturally meant I needed to return here where he is buried" (not an exact quote, but close enough).

You know, we've often wondered what happens to a wizard's body when they died, if they're buried, etc. Maybe sometimes wizards are buried in "Muggle graveyards"....

I agree with the idea that it was either picked up by Lucius when Voldemort fell or hidden somewhere. I agree with the idea that it may have been hidden in the Slytherin common room because it seems to me that Riddle left the diary for the same reasons that Salazar Slytherin left the CoS, to finish what he was unable to do, clear the school of Muggle-borns... Thus, Riddle would have left it where another Slytherin, or at least another pureblood, would find it......




W J - Oct 1, 2003 9:13 pm (#49 of 298)

Is it clear that all Slytherins are pureblood and/or evil enough to make use of the diary? It seems like just leaving it in the Slytherin common room would be risky.

Joost!, I have an old semi journal/diary from when I was in high school, so people do save stuff like that (at least pack rats do ), but Voldemort might not have been saving it for sentimental reasons. Maybe he kept it with his possessions (without altering it since he was 16) in the hopes that one day he could find someone to give it to just like Lucius did. Maybe Voldemort planned on giving it to an unsuspecting victim but never got around to it. Just a thought.




schoff - Oct 1, 2003 10:00 pm (#50 of 298)

You know, we've often wondered what happens to a wizard's body when they died, if they're buried, etc. Maybe sometimes wizards are buried in "Muggle graveyards"....

I honestly think some of his DE's would be too dense to get it. Crabbe, Goyle, Avery....Voldemort only told Harry (and Wormtail) that it was his Muggle father's grave. He just told the others it was his fathers.
Potteraholic
Potteraholic
Ravenclaw Prefect
Ravenclaw Prefect

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

Back to top Go down

The Very Secret Diary Empty The Very Secret Diary (posts #51 to #100)

Post  Potteraholic on Mon Jul 18, 2011 8:09 am

zelmia - Oct 1, 2003 10:35 pm (#51 of 298)
Edited Oct 1, 2003 11:37 pm

I can't help agreeing with the "left behind" theory, which Riddle pretty much clarifies in the Chamber. He says outright that he left the Diary behind so that one day - with luck - he could lead another to finish Salazar Slytherins noble work.

That "with luck" is a bit tricky. I think it means that he left the Diary in such a way that perhaps only someone who was meant to find it would do so. Kind of the opposite the Philosopher’s Stone: "Only someone who wanted to find the stone - find it, but not use it - could get it..." So maybe only someone who wanted to find the Diary and use it would be able to get it. That "with luck" there would be such a person to come along.

And I agree that when Voldemort "went away" after he tried to kill Harry, someone - likely Lucius Malfoy - went and collected his things just like there were folks in the Order who went to get the Potters' things. I think this is where Lucius must have acquired the Diary, but how it got from Hogwarts to where Lucius picked it up is what I can't make fit.




Joost! - Oct 2, 2003 2:37 am (#52 of 298)
Edited Oct 2, 2003 3:38 am

W J "Is it clear that all Slytherins are pureblood and/or evil enough to make use of the diary? It seems like just leaving it in the Slytherin common room would be risky.

Why would the one who finds the Diary have to be pureblood and/or evil? Ginny wasn't evil, though she is pureblood. Riddle needed someone he could posses, can't that be anyone or does he only want to posses pureblood wizards?




W J - Oct 2, 2003 10:07 pm (#53 of 298)

'Sorry, Joost!, but I did not make it clear that I was responding to S.E. Jones (post #48) when I said that. She suggested that Riddle/Voldemort would want to leave it where a Slytherin would find it so that the Slytherin pureblood could carry on Riddle's work.

You are correct about the diary needing to find a victim, but just leaving it to luck whether or not a victim would find it is still risky. I think the diary needed someone like Lucius to choose a victim for it.




S.E. Jones - Oct 2, 2003 10:13 pm (#54 of 298)

Actually I meant a Slytherin or pureblood. I think it would be more poetic in Voldemort's mind for Salazar Slytherins great work to be finished by either a member of his own house or a member of the cast for which he thought he was fighting.....




W J - Oct 2, 2003 10:32 pm (#55 of 298)

True, S.E. Jones, and I think you may be right because the diary would need someone to find a victim for it. I don't think Riddle/Voldemort would have just left it behind and take a chance that the right person would find it. I think that he was waiting to find the best victim for the diary or to choose someone (Slytherin or pureblood) who could find a victim for it.




zelmia - Oct 4, 2003 12:04 am (#56 of 298)
Edited Oct 4, 2003 1:05 am

If you put it that way, that the Diary needed a "victim" to be able to work, it wouldn't really matter what House that person came from or whether or not they were a "pureblood". He could just as easily left it in the Restricted Section of the Library or something. I think the "with luck" refers simply to the need for the person to be willing to pour out their soul to the Diary, to Riddle.

There may have been any number of people who found the Diary over the last 50 years but simply didn't really use it properly, at least as far as Riddle was concerned. Perhaps they didn't take it seriously enough when Riddle wrote back to them.




Joost! - Oct 4, 2003 3:07 am (#57 of 298)

I think Riddle needed a pureblood to possess and open the Chamber of Secrets, but that's just a feeling I have...

Zelmia, if various people found the Diary, then how did it end up with Lucius? He did take it seriously, but did not open the chamber. As I said earlier, that's probably because he didn't understand the use of it, but it could also be that he got it when he was no longer a student at Hogwarts and had no way of going there to open the Chamber (actually: let Riddle open it).

The reason why I think the Diary was to be found by a Slytherin is that it would be easier for Riddle to talk to someone who has more or less the same ideas. It's more likely to find such a person in the Slytherin House than in one of the others.




zelmia - Oct 4, 2003 10:25 am (#58 of 298)
Edited Oct 4, 2003 11:27 am

Joost! we don't know how Lucius got the Diary. That is one of the things we are trying to explore here. Lucius is 20 years younger than Riddle so it is possible that other people discovered the Diary's hiding place before Lucius came to Hogwarts.

But I don't think it matters about the "talking to" someone. What matters is that the person "...put too much of herself into the Diary. Into me..."

Riddle doesn't want to "talk to" the person writing in the Diary. He wants them to do the talking. Only in that way can Riddle feed off of their soul, which he needs to be able to possess their body to do his bidding. So it really wouldn't matter what House the person was in.

Riddle might very well have left the Diary in the Slytherin Common Room. It's as good a theory as any. And Lucius may very well have been packing the Diary around since his own school days. That could also be true. But if it is, I wonder why Lucius did not make this known to his Master; try to return it.




shepherdess - Oct 4, 2003 11:28 am (#59 of 298)

Both Ginny and Harry are Gryffindors and they opened the chamber. Didn't Ginny even control the basilisk? (Well, you know, Riddle through Ginny.)




Joost! - Oct 4, 2003 11:38 am (#60 of 298)

Perhaps the term "talk to" is too simplistic, but remember, at the time the Diary was created, Riddle was a teenager. He mentions in CoS that he found talking to Ginny boring. If he had his choice, I think he would choose someone more like himself. I can image it would be difficult for a brilliant 16-year-old boy to keep a conversation going with an 11 year old girl. Of course after fifty years he jumped at the chance to use the first person to write to him.

And Zelmia, I wasn't dismissing your idea of the Diary traveling via various people to end up with Lucius. I was actually hoping you would have a theory about how this would have come about.

In my opinion, Lucius finding the Diary at Hogwarts is the most likely scenario. Although there are other possibilities. Lucius is a clever man, I think, he wouldn't tell the Dark Lord about the Diary if he didn't have to. Say You-Know-Who gave out a reward to the one who returns his old diary, Lucius would probably give it back to him, saying Draco found it (Assuming that Lucius is able to lie to his boss, which is quite possible. schoff made some interesting comments on this: schoff "Lucius Malfoy" 10/2/03 11:50am).




S.E. Jones - Oct 4, 2003 12:52 pm (#61 of 298)

I still think Riddle would want them to be a Slytherin or a pureblood for the simple fact that it would be poetic justice in Riddle's mind.... I don't think it needed a victim so much as a tool for his use, a means to his end....




zelmia - Oct 5, 2003 9:56 am (#62 of 298)
Edited Oct 5, 2003 11:12 am

And Zelmia, I wasn't dismissing your idea of the Diary traveling via various people to end up with Lucius

Oh. Sorry about that, Joost!. My misunderstanding. But I do see, now, what you mean about the "talking to". I had forgotten Riddle's remark about how boring his conversations with Ginny were. Excellent point!

Well, the only clues about where he might have stashed the Diary that we have come from what Riddle says in the Chamber:

"I decided to leave behind a diary, preserving my sixteen-year-old self in its pages, so that one day, with luck, I would be able to lead another in my footsteps, and finish Salazar Slytherins noble work."

Slytherin House is the most likely place to have left it. For one thing, he wouldn't have had access to many other places, even as Prefect/Head Boy. And if he is simply leaving the Diary for someone else to find, those choices are even more limited because, from what little we know of the castle, the only acceptable school-wide common areas (meaning that students don't need permission to go there) are the Great Hall and the Library.

So Slytherin House seems most likely and that puts it in a good spot for Lucius to have found at some point when he was at school (c. 1966-73). But would Lucius have known its true significance at that point? Dumbledore says "Very few people know that Lord Voldemort was once called Tom Riddle." Was Lucius one of the "very few?" Or did he simply understand the Dark elements to this object and keep it for its own sake, only later, after becoming a Death Eater, coming to realise what it really was?

I think the answer rests solely on when Voldemort actually began his rise to power. In the film, Hagrid says something like "About 13 years ago..." But does it say anywhere in the text when Voldemort started gathering his followers? Because that would make a difference to how Lucius would have responded to finding the Diary, if indeed he was the one to do so.

I am going to go out on a bit of a limb and assume that Voldemort was already something of an icon - but probably only secretly - for people like Lucius Malfoy by the time he got to school. After all, it would have been 20 years since Riddle had left. The Original OP had already been formed by 1980, (when Harry was born) but by that time, Voldemort was fully in power. For that to happen, he must have been rallying supporters for some time, even as early as the 1960's when Lucius was at school.

Okay your turn




Madame Librarian - Oct 5, 2003 10:21 am (#63 of 298)

Zelmia, didn't V. say something to the effect that he started referring to himself as Lord Voldemort while at H-warts, but only amongst a few of his closest friends/followers? Could that have included members of the Malfoy and Black families (e.g., Lucius’ and Sirius's dads)? Do I have my years straight here?

Ciao. Barb




zelmia - Oct 5, 2003 10:44 am (#64 of 298)
Edited Oct 5, 2003 11:49 am

Yes, that's what I was thinking, Barb. Although you've elucidated better in a few sentences than I did in an entire paragraph. Thanks!

TOM MARVOLO RIDDLE = I AM LORD VOLDEMORT "It's a name I was already using at Hogwarts. To my most intimate friends only, of course." (CS - The Heir of Slytherin)




schoff - Oct 5, 2003 12:15 pm (#65 of 298)
Edited by Oct 5, 2003 1:20 pm

Zelmia: Well, the only clues about where he might have stashed the Diary that we have come from what Riddle says in the Chamber....So Slytherin House seems most likely and that puts it in a good spot for Lucius to have found at some point when he was at school (c. 1966-73)....I think the answer rests solely on when Voldemort actually began his rise to power....I am going to go out on a bit of a limb and assume that Voldemort was already something of an icon - but probably only secretly - for people like Lucius Malfoy by the time he got to school.

My turn!

P/SS, US, Ch1, 10

"You can't blame them," said Dumbledore gently. "We've had precious little to celebrate for eleven years."

This is said the night DD leaves Harry at the Dursleys. Using the Sir Nick (CoS) timeline, the year is 1981 (Harry was born in 1980, and is now 1 year old). Voldemort started his public rise to power in 1970 (1981-11=1970).

CoS, US, ch18, 329

"Very few people know that Lord Voldemort was once called Tom Riddle. I taught him myself, fifty years ago, at Hogwarts.’

CoS is set during 1992-1993. DD makes this quote at the end of the year. 1993-50=1943. Since the 50 is an exact number (Harry found the date on the diary--CoS, US, ch13, 231), and not rounding, then Tom opened the chamber during his fifth year, when he was 16 (CoS, US, ch17, 312). That year ended in 1943.

Malfoy is now 41 (OoP, US, ch15, 307). OoP is set in 1995-1996 (Harry's fifth year--see the timeline). I'm going to take the 1995 number, since the article mentioning Malfoy's age was printed before Christmas. 1995-41=1954. So Malfoy was born in 1954. 1954+11=1965, the year he started Hogwarts.

Malfoy Hogwarts Timeline

• First year: 1965-1966
• Second year: 1966-1967
• Third year: 1967-1968
• Fourth year: 1968-1969
• Fifth year: 1969-1970 [Year Voldemort showed up again]
• Sixth year: 1970-1971
• Seventh year: 1971-1972

Tom Riddle/Lord Voldemort Hogwarts Timeline

• First year: 1938-1939
• Second year: 1939-1940
• Third year: 1940-1941
• Fourth year: 1941-1942
• Fifth year: 1942-1943 [Chamber opened first time, Myrtle killed, Hagrid expelled]
• Sixth year: 1943-1944
• Seventh year: 1944-1945 [Head Boy, also the year DD defeated Grindelwald (1945)]

(1938-11=1927, the year Tom Riddle was born.)

So Malfoy had a minimum of three years at Hogwarts while Voldemort was actively (and publicly) rising to power. If Tom left the diary at Hogwarts hoping someone would find it and use it, and assuming Tom left the Diary his seventh year and Malfoy found it his first, then the minimum number of years the diary was left unattended at Hogwarts is 20 (1965-1945=20). That’s a really long time! This does not indicate a good idea to me. I think it’s more likely Tom kept the Diary with him, and either gave it to someone, or someone found it in his later possessions. Even if Tom did leave the Diary at Hogwarts, I seriously doubt it was Malfoy who found it, given the 20 year difference.

NOTE: I'm adding these quotes:

GoF, US, ch30, 601

"The years of Voldemort's ascent to power," he [DD] said, "were marked with disappearances." While I honestly believe DD is referring to his 11-year quote above, for the Malfoy timeline I did not take into consideration that this might mean Voldemort was not publicly rising to power, which Malfoy might have been aware of. I can only positively determine 3 years at Hogwarts for Malfoy under Voldemort's public rise.

CoS, US, ch18, 329 ‘He disappeared after leaving the school...traveled far and wide...sank so deeply into the Dark Arts, consorted with the very worst of our kind, underwent so many dangerous, magical transformations, that when he emerged as Lord Voldemort, he was barely recognizable.’ I think this is referring to Voldemort’s non-public rise to power, when he resurfaced in 1970. 1970-1945=25 years Voldemort had disappeared, off learning Dark Arts.




zelmia - Oct 5, 2003 1:12 pm (#66 of 298)
Edited Oct 5, 2003 2:18 pm

Nice work, Schoff!

Agreed. 20 years IS a long time. But Riddle himself explains "I decided to leave behind a diary..." I also agree that it's not the best idea. Especially when, again as Riddle himself says, "...so that one day, with luck I would be able to lead another..." It's just not a very well-thought-out plan by any means.

And that's why I suggested earlier on the thread that there may very well have been others who came across the Diary before Lucius - or anyone else. I am not married to the idea that Lucius got the Diary while still at school. I was simply positing a theory off the top of my head about how Lucius might have obtained the Diary.

On the other hand, it is the very remark "...consorted with the very worst of our kind..." that led me to the think of the possibility that Lucius could have been the one who found it, and known what the Diary was, etc. If Lucius’ father was one of "the very worst of our kind" Lucius might even have gone looking for the Diary.

Here's a couple more ideas to kick around:

Another possibility is Snape. Snape came to school "knowing more about the Dark Arts..." He is another one who appears to be, at minimum, a second generation Dark wizard. He certainly had done his homework when it came to curses and jinxes. So Snape, too, could have been another closet Voldemort supporter by the time he made it to school. If Snape had the Diary when he and Lucius were both Death Eaters together (before Snape turned spy), Lucius could have gotten it from Snape that way.

A third possibility is Regulus Black. Now, the Blacks were - apparently - all Slytherins too. [I know that people don't think Sirius was, but that doesn't matter right now.] Suppose that Sirius's father got hold of the Diary shortly after Riddle had left it. Assuming that Pere Black went to Hogwarts, he would likely have been pretty close in age to Tom Riddle, maybe even one of Riddle's "most intimate friends". Pere Black bequeaths it to his "good" son, Regulus, as a reward for joining Voldemort or simply as a gift, etc.

But Regulus doesn't want to use the Diary the way it was intended. He is too squeamish about killing all the little Muggle-born children or something. Maybe that's why he was killed. Maybe it was Lucius who was sent to kill Regulus and that's how he got the Diary. But he never used it the way it was intended, hence Voldemort's "Lucius, my slippery friend" remark in GF.

Back to you...




schoff - Oct 5, 2003 1:58 pm (#67 of 298)
Edited by Oct 5, 2003 2:59 pm

Zelmia: But Riddle himself explains "I decided to leave behind a diary..." I also agree that it's not the best idea. Especially when, again as Riddle himself says, "...so that one day, with luck I would be able to lead another..." It's just not a very well-thought-out plan by any means.

What if Tom didn't write the Diary until after he left Hogwarts? That leaves Hogwarts out of the picture entirely. I really don't think Tom left the diary around hoping someone would find it. I think a better interpretation of the "with luck" and "leave behind" lines would be Tom was hoping he could find someone later who would use it, like an heir he could bequeath stuff to. That puts the power back in his hands, and not fate's. The "so that one day, with luck I would be able to lead another..." really sounds like something people say when they want a son.

Also--your other suggests fall under the same problem as Malfoy finding the Diary at Hogwarts: too much time elapsing. I really think Malfoy got hold of the Diary some other way and a lot later, and Hogwarts was never in the picture until Ginny showed up.

But he never used it the way it was intended, hence Voldemort's "Lucius, my slippery friend" remark in GF

I still think this line indicates that Malfoy had no dealings with Voldemort in reference to the Diary. See my "Lucius Malfoy" post Malfoy was all alone in his plan to re-open the Chamber.




zelmia - Oct 5, 2003 2:16 pm (#68 of 298)
Edited Oct 5, 2003 3:22 pm

You have some really great ideas, schoff and I agree with most of them. Again, I am really just flinging some possibilities - however remote they may be - out there in the hope that order will emerge from chaos

However, Riddle DID write the Diary "preserving my 16-year-old self." That much, at least, is clear from the text of CS. Now, whether he was physically present at Hogwarts or back at the Muggle orphanage or somewhere else is not known. But he was definitely still underage when he wrote/created the Diary.

But that's an exceptional point about how people say things like that ["one day with luck... lead another..."] when they want a son. So, you're thinking that Riddle-later-Voldemort was keeping the Diary until someone came along that he could give it to himself? Well, why not Lucius? Doesn't he seem the most likely candidate? And if that's the case, I stand by my earlier observation regarding the "slippery friend" remark.




schoff - Oct 5, 2003 2:44 pm (#69 of 298)

However, Riddle DID write the Diary "preserving my 16-year-old self." That much, at least, is clear from the text of CS.

If Voldemort wrote the Diary after he left Hogwarts, he could still be preserving his 16-year-old self, as Voldemort remembered it (I'm not saying it was a long time after leaving Hogwarts, just some time). It would skew the memory just a little. That, to me, would fit with "Diary Tom's" statements that seem to indicate that Diary Tom knew what was happening in the real world while being stuck in the Diary for 50 years. His whole "Voldemort is my past, present, future", "Dumbledore did keep an annoyingly close watch on me after that" show this slight tendency (Note: most of the Harry defeating Voldemort quotes I would credit to Ginny telling him). I could easily write a diary now about my 16-year-old self, and it would be fairly accurate, but it would be influenced by the years I've lived since, so it wouldn't be an exact replica of how I lived and felt (and remembered) when I was 16.

Granted, Tom was very smart, but the Diary seems to be very complex--the kind of complexity where I would imagine "ancient" and "dark" magic would be needed, possibly found during Riddle's time delving in the dark arts, right after he left Hogwarts. Perhaps Tom wrote the Diary while at Hogwarts, but didn't enchant it until later.

Are you suggesting that the Diary would be like a surrogate son for Riddle?

That wasn't what I was thinking, but it does make me think. I was thinking that Tom was probably thinking one day he would have an heir to hand things down to. Whether that heir was a biological child or a devoted follower is up for grabs.




Joost! - Oct 6, 2003 12:48 am (#70 of 298)

Schoff: ‘If Voldemort wrote the Diary after he left Hogwarts, he could still be preserving his 16-year-old self, as Voldemort remembered it’

That's possible, but don't you think that if Riddle wrote the Diary at that age (and more powerful), he would've put himself as he was at that moment in it?

The question what Riddle did with the Diary (hide it at Hogwarts or take it with him) depends on what was the actual reason for its creation. As I understood it, it was created so the Chamber of Secrets would be opened again. If this it the case, there’s only one likely place to keep the Diary, in my opinion: at Hogwarts. This also rules out the possibility of Riddle handing it over to his son, because the son of Riddle would be a descendant of Salazar Slytherin. He should be able to open the Chamber without Riddle’s help. I think Riddle knew he would not become a father and that’s why he wrote the Diary.

Maybe we’re over estimating the use of the Diary. I think Zelmia made a very strong point with’ ‘It's just not a very well-thought-out plan by any means.’ Maybe it’s just a ‘prank’ of an evil teenager with very strong ideas. And fifty years later the Dark Lord forgot about it, because in his eyes it was not that important. It certainly doesn’t seem to fit in his later goals.

If the Diary was made for other means than just opening the Chamber, to recreate Tom Riddle or maybe something else we don’t know about, anything is possible. It could be more important to You-Know-Who, if it helped him to rise to power. But I don’t see evidence for that.




zelmia - Oct 6, 2003 8:41 am (#71 of 298)
Edited Oct 6, 2003 9:44 am

I agree with Joost! that the most likely place to have left the Diary would be at Hogwarts. But I also think that think schoff is on to something with the surrogate heir idea. Riddle didn't "leave behind" a diary solely for the purpose of one day leading another to open the Chamber. He also left it as insurance of his own immortality.

Riddle explains to Harry that Ginny "...put too much into the diary, into me. Enough to let me leave its pages at last." In other words, Riddle isn't planning for a son/heir. He himself is the heir.

Riddle (in the Diary) and Voldemort (at that point, just a Mist) must still be connected on some level for the Diary to have any real purpose. We now know that Voldemort is a brilliant Legilimens. But he may have already been using this skill while still at school. ("If I say it myself, Harry, I've always been able to charm the people I needed.")

In any event, Voldemort can connect with anyone he wants to and over great distances. If he had a sense that the Diary had been opened and was monitoring that situation, eventually he would be able to inhabit the newly-liberated Riddle, even if only psychically. Riddle would be able to go to Voldemort, and bring him back to full strength. Riddle would then stand at Voldemort's side, technically as both the father and son to the modern Voldemort.




zelmia - Oct 6, 2003 9:39 am (#72 of 298)
Edited Oct 6, 2003 10:40 am

Something else - to clarify an earlier point: In PS/SS Hagrid explains to Harry (Hut on the Rock chapter) that Voldemort had started gathering followers "about 20 years ago." So that puts his public rise to power circa 1970. That fits in with Schoff's timeline perfectly.




Joost! - Oct 7, 2003 3:45 am (#73 of 298)
Edited Oct 7, 2003 5:04 am

Once again, Zelmia, you started a whole train of thoughts in my head. Let me just pose a few questions and maybe try to answer a few:

Are Voldemort-the-Mist’s powers as a Legilimens as strong as the New-And-Improved-Voldemort’s? If so he must have known about Diary-Tom stepping out of the Diary, their connection must be gazillion times stronger then the connection between Harry and the Dark Lord.

So why doesn’t LV (the new) know about Lucius' plans with Ginny? Or more accurately, why does he say Lucius never searched for him? Doesn’t he know it was Lucius, who gave Ginny the Diary or weren’t the other DEs allowed to hear about it? Lucius never mentioned it either, so it seems to me Lucius was either embarrassed that his plan didn’t work out or he did something he wasn’t supposed to do.

If Diary-Tom could be used to be inhabited by Voldemort-the-Mist, did Riddle create the Diary for that purpose? Then how did he know what was going to happen forty years in the future? Another prophecy? That would explain why Voldemort reacted the way he did, when he heard about Trelawney’s prophecy. He seems to believe in them. Why did Lucius wait 11 years to use the Diary?

Was the Diary created to become a surrogate son to Riddle/Voldemort, some day? Why? Perhaps to serve as a safety if Voldemort were to be killed? The phrase ‘I decided to leave behind a diary...’ seems to indicate a sort of last will. Zelmia said it very eloquently: ‘ He himself is the heir.’. It’s possible that the Diary was created when Riddle already had become The Dark Lord and knew he was never going to have a real son.

Today I reread an old thread and came to this post: W J "Key things from book two?" 12/22/02 7:31pm, here W J indicates we shouldn't believe anything Diary-Tom says. I think she’s right, but why would he lie to Harry down in the Chamber of Secrets? The things Diary-Tom explains, leave too many questions to be the whole truth, in my opinion.

While torturing my brain with these questions I thought of another thing: Lucius still has the Diary in his possession, could he or Voldemort use it again?




Madame Librarian - Oct 7, 2003 7:57 am (#74 of 298)
Edited Oct 7, 2003 8:58 am

Wait...I thought the diary was destroyed. Oh, having just seen the movie last week, am I remembering the scene when Lucius comes to DD's office. Does DD return the ruined diary to him? Is the movie accurate? Help me, I not near a book here.

Anyway, another angle on this as to why Ginny ends up with the diary. Perhaps Lucius was so steamed at Arthur, he just took advantage of Ginny's presence at the book shop and in a fury shoved it into her cauldron thinking, ..."there,... that'll show that Muggle-loving Weasley and his whole tatty clan! She's young, stupid, can't recognize dark magic yet, first year at Hogwarts, and so what if it this doesn't quite follow Master's instructions."

Ciao. Barb




Sinister Kittens - Oct 7, 2003 8:02 am (#75 of 298)

Madame Librarian I don't have a book either but I think (emphasis on think) that DD returns the book to Malfoy, because it is after the book is returned that Dobby is freed.




Madame Librarian - Oct 7, 2003 8:10 am (#76 of 298)

Joost! asks: While torturing my brain with these questions I thought of another thing: Lucius still has the Diary in his possession, could he or Voldemort use it again?

Why in heaven's name would DD return a functional dark magic item like the diary to Lucius? I would suppose that Harry un-magicked it with the talon. I'm hoping, Joost! that it can never be used again. If there is even darker magic than could revive it, well, I guess that's all worked out already in JKR's clever methodology.

Ciao. Barb




D.W. - Oct 7, 2003 8:23 am (#77 of 298)
Edited Oct 7, 2003 9:24 am

Haven't got my COS handy so I can't give you the exact quote, but I am sure Harry gives the diary to Lucius with his sock in it, thinking that Lucius will pass it to Dobby - thus freeing him - which he does.




Madame Librarian - Oct 7, 2003 9:08 am (#78 of 298)
Edited Oct 7, 2003 10:24 am

OMG, DW, does that mean that there's a way that it could still work? Wouldn't DD be fully aware of that danger and that Harry had given it to Lucius thinking it was powerless? Now I'm confused.

Wait a minute...could this be the small thing in CoS that JKR meant in that interview? Yikes!

Ciao. Barb

Edit--This is a point that I'd also like to make on the "Small thing in CoS," so I'll repeat it there (it came up in the matter of course anyway).




popkin - Oct 7, 2003 12:28 pm (#79 of 298)

Hi. I just finished reading (perusing really) all your comments, and early on in the debate I had a real breakthrough. I posted it in the Lucius Malfoy thread, thinking it fit there best, but after reading the rest of your posts, I think you all would enjoy this observation:

I was reading through (from the beginning for the first time) the Very Secret Diary thread when I had a big WHAT IF moment.

WHAT IF Uuuh. I'm already starting to get confused. I've got to go look at a time line - I'm losing it....

Okay. Thank you Lexicon Steve for all your reliable info. One trip to the Lexicon and I've got it figured out.

Tom Riddle graduates from Hogwarts in June of 1945

Lucius Malfoy was 41 in the fall of 1995

He would have entered Hogwarts thirty years previous, in the fall of 1965

Three generations of Hogwarts students pass through between 1945 and 1965:

• Fall 1945 - Spring 1952
• Fall 1952 - Spring 1959
• Fall 1959 - Spring 1965

Harry, Ron, Dean, Seamus and Neville remain in the same room from the time they enter Hogwarts at 11, apparently until they graduate.

If this is true for all the students in all the Houses, then Lucius Malfoy would have been placed in Tom Riddle's old room.

I'm guessing that is how Lucius came into possession of so many of Tom Riddle's old school things. Tom probably had them hidden somewhere in his room (possibly in his bed or under it or the dresser, and Lucius might have the very same bed and dresser), and at some point in his stay at Hogwarts Lucius found Tom's hiding place.

That was the end of my post. I am going to further speculate that Lucius did end up in Tom's old bed, with his old dresser, in the same space. Being an effective Legilimens and Occlumens, and the most talented Dark Wizard (ever, or in 1000 years?), Tom could have enchanted the bed to look for a worthy wizard to find the hiding place for all Tom's old school things. Lucius was the first wizard to foot the bill.

Once Lucius was determined to be worthy, the enchanted bed could have guided Lucius dreams - to discover Tom's hiding place, to recruit worthy DEs, to wait until 50 years had passed (since Tom's fifth year) and plant the diary in a shy and lonely first year's hands. Lucius was in turn compensated for his cooperation by what he received from LV's memories and instructions helping him to rise in real power (being in control of those in power). He also would have been trained to complement LV - to be able to anticipate his needs, moods, or desires. This might be why LV is lenient with Lucius in GOF.

Gotta Go. Please forgive my errors, I haven't time to edit. Bye.




zelmia - Oct 7, 2003 12:48 pm (#80 of 298)
Edited Oct 7, 2003 1:58 pm

Harry gives the Diary back to Lucius. Lucius opens it, finds Harry's nasty sock in it, and tosses the sock aside. Dobby then picks up the sock, etc.

Joost! thank you for putting all of those great points together in one post They are scattered throughout this thread and the Lucius thread so this is great!

So why doesn’t LV (the new) know about Lucius' plans with Ginny? Or more accurately, why does he say Lucius never searched for him? Doesn’t he know it was Lucius, who gave Ginny the Diary or weren’t the other DEs allowed to hear about it? Lucius never mentioned it either, so it seems to me Lucius was either embarrassed that his plan didn’t work out or he did something he wasn’t supposed to do. ---No, I don't believe the other Death Eaters were supposed to know about it. Voldemort would had to have given the Diary assignment to someone he could trust - which is likely a very short commodity in that organization. If the other DE's had found out about such a thing, perhaps they would have just held on to the Diary and Voldemort would have been a prisoner for all eternity, while somebody else took over (Lucius? maybe.)

I think the newly-risen Voldemort does indeed know about Lucius’ plan with Ginny. Or certainly what Lucius did. I think that, yes, his skills as a Legilimens are just a strong when he is only a Mist (well, think about it: he's already only a Mist. Isn't that all you need?) So when Voldemort says, "Lucius, my slippery friend" he is referring NOT to Lucius’ behaviour at the QWC (he remarks on this separately), but to something else. To the Diary incident.

As I mentioned on the Lucius thread, the subtext of this little exchange (GF) is this: Voldemort is sizing Lucius up. He knows about the little fiasco with the Diary, knows that Lucius did not use the Diary either as planned (my suspicion), or at least in a constructive way to revive the Dark Lord. He also knows that Lucius has entrenched himself with the Ministry ("I am told that you have not renounced the old ways, but to the world you put on a respectable face.") This makes Lucius a somewhat valuable asset - for the time being. His decision made, Voldemort says simply, "I shall expect better from you from now on". Lucius can breathe easier - for now ("Thank you, Master. You are too forgiving...")

I offer up this suggestion: that Voldemort discussed the possibility of not making it back from the Potters. He knew about the Prophecy - or at least enough of it - and would have been foolish (which he can be) not to fear that something might go wrong. He conspired with Lucius about the Diary, instructing him that if something were to go wrong, etc. [Before you ask, maybe Voldemort just told Lucius where to find the Diary.] But Lucius didn't follow the plan. He held on to the Diary for 11 years.




D.W. - Oct 7, 2003 12:51 pm (#81 of 298)

Madame Librarian, I had assumed that when the ink drained out of the diary/Tom "faded away" then that was the end of that. Now however I am beginning to be convinced that even if the 16-year-old Tom from the diary can't be "reactivated" as in COS then maybe there is something else significant about the diary? Any Ideas?

Popkin, I like your theory about Lucius finding the diary. Anything is possible! Donna.




popkin - Oct 7, 2003 1:52 pm (#82 of 298)
Edited by Oct 7, 2003 2:55 pm

"I am beginning to be convinced that even if the 16-year-old Tom from the diary can't be 'reactivated' as in COS then maybe there is something else significant about the diary? Any Ideas?"

D.W., Harry uses the diary to free Dobby. That was pretty significant. Also, it gives Dumbledore the opportunity to say several things to Lucius:

"If Harry here...and his friend Ron hadn't discovered this book, why -- Ginny Weasley might have taken all the blame. No one would ever have been able to prove she hadn't acted of her own free will..."

"Imagine the effect on Arthur Weasley and his Muggle Protection Act, if his own daughter was discovered attacking and killing Muggle-borns...Very fortunate the diary was discovered, and Riddle's memories wiped from it."

"I would advise you, Lucius, not to go giving out any more of Lord Voldemort's old school things. If any more of them find their way into innocent hands, I think Arthur Weasley, for one, will make sure they are traced back to you..." **

This last comment probably foreshadows another item making it into "innocent hands", and a final battle between Arthur and Lucius Malfoy. (I can't remember where I read about King Arthur besting Malfoy in a fight and killing him. It's somewhere in this forum.)

# *Note: Dumbledore knows Lucius has Voldemort's "old school things". This is another support for the theory that Lucius discovered (or was led to discover) a stash of Tom's stuff in his room at school - and that Lord Voldemort did not meet with Lucius sometime after his (Tom's) graduation to give Lucius anything directly.




zelmia - Oct 7, 2003 2:17 pm (#83 of 298)

While I am not discounting your theory Popkin - I agree that it is as likely as any we have posited so far, and well thought-out, I might add - I would like to point out that it doesn't necessarily follow that Lucius discovered Riddle's old things while at school. There are quite a number of ways he could have obtained them, which we've have touched on here - not the least of which would be to simply have purchased them at Borgin and Burkes or some similar shop.

I have to say that I think Lucius did not find the Diary while at school. He may have been instructed to collect it while at school, especially if his father was one of Voldemort's "most intimate friends." (For more on this, see above posts) But I don't think he stumbled across it.




popkin - Oct 7, 2003 2:45 pm (#84 of 298)

Actually, I don't think he stumbled across it either. I think he was led there by 16-year-old mist Tom - by means of magic planted in the room when the "right guy" ended up in his old room.

I've posted more on these thoughts in other threads (Lucius Malfoy and Something Small in COS That Will Be Big in Book 6). I feel like I am repeating myself a lot, so I won't post them again here.




zelmia - Oct 7, 2003 2:57 pm (#85 of 298)
Edited Oct 7, 2003 3:59 pm

Okay. But let me clarify something for everyone on this thread:

When we are saying Voldemort-the-Mist (or simply the Mist), we are referring to the Voldemort without a body - his last known form between PS/SS and GF.

Riddle (we haven't really been using "Tom") refers to the 16-year-old character who resides in the Diary.

But since that character also refers to himself (if only briefly) as Voldemort, and since we have dabbled in the possibility of a Riddle who has emerged from the Diary (if all had gone according to plan), we have also coined Voldemort the Younger.

Voldemort the Younger refers to the fully incarnated form of Tom Riddle.




popkin - Oct 7, 2003 3:25 pm (#86 of 298)

Aaaagh! I see a fault. I guess I just wanted it to work, and it doesn't. The third generation following Voldemort's graduation would have been from Fall '59 to Spring '66. Since Lucius enters Hogwarts in Fall '65, he would not have been in Tom's old room.

Nevermind. (ala Gilda Radner)




Joost! - Oct 8, 2003 3:43 am (#87 of 298)
Edited Oct 8, 2003 4:48 am

Too bad it didn't work out, popkin, it would've been nice to know my favorite theory on this subject Lucius finding the Diary at Hogwarts) could be correct. Good research, though.

I personally use the name Tom Riddle (or just Riddle) to indicate the man who went to Hogwarts and later disappeared (1927(?)-1970)

Voldemort or Dark Lord or You-Know-Who for Riddle between 1970 and present. Although one can argue about when Riddle actually became the Dark Lord.

Voldemort-the-Mist for the period from Harry when got his scar to Voldemort’s resurrection in GoF (1981-1995).

Voldemort-the-New from 1995 onwards

And just to be clear, I don't think these are all different characters. I just use these terms to indicate what point in time I'm talking about.

Normally I use Dairy-Tom or Diary-Riddle to indicate the "thing" that wrote back to Ginny and Harry in CoS, including the scene inside the Chamber of Secrets. And I do think this is a different character than the "real" Voldemort.




zelmia - Oct 8, 2003 10:42 am (#88 of 298)
Edited Oct 8, 2003 11:44 am

Thanks, Joost! for clarifying that. I knew I didn't have it all there.

I still agree with schoff - for now - that too much time would have passed for Lucius to simply have stumbled across the Diary. He would had to have known about it ahead of time. And I think it's because he already knew about Voldemort before going to school - the covert rise to power. I don't think Lucius was directed by any kind of magical interference to do this, but simply instructed about the Diary's location.

Mind, that's IF this is how Lucius obtained the Diary in the first place, which I am not entirely convinced of.




zelmia - Oct 14, 2003 2:23 pm (#89 of 298)
Edited Oct 14, 2003 3:25 pm

Something just occurred to me:

Perhaps the Diary was originally created by Slytherin himself and the 16-year-old Riddle was sort of sucked into it, becoming prisoner in its pages. Perhaps when Dumbledore says, "...is the last remaining ancestor of Salazar Slytherin..." this is exactly what he means!

Maybe Riddle put too much of himself into the Diary, at first. He was so excited to find out information on his mother, then later the Chamber, etc. What if he learned all of this from the Diary? Maybe that's why he was so eager to "leave its pages at last". He'd never intended to be there in the first place. Just food for thought...




popkin - Oct 14, 2003 2:40 pm (#90 of 298)

Well, he couldn't have been trapped there in the same sense that Ginny was, because her bones were going to lie in the chamber forever. The diary Tom was going to gain life by killing Ginny and using her soul to flesh out his diary self. We know that Tom Riddle himself finished out his last two years and Hogwarts - no one questioned that his physical appearance had changed. So, unless Salazar Slytherin looks exactly like Tom Riddle, they did not change places.

Also, we know where he purchased the diary. Is it New Hangleton?

That does not mean that Salazar didn't help Tom Riddle with the creation of the diary. Maybe he used a book from the restricted section, and Salazar's spirit was infused into it? Maybe a portrait of Salazar, possibly in the Slytherin common room, gave Tom instructions? There are many ways JKR could use to make it possible for Salazar himself to be Tom Riddle's mentor and teacher.




schoff - Oct 14, 2003 2:44 pm (#91 of 298)
Edited by Oct 14, 2003 3:46 pm

Yeah, like the Bloody Baron...

EDIT: Okay! Clearly, my little ghost smiley isn't going to work!




Joost! - Oct 15, 2003 6:39 am (#92 of 298)

The Diary was purchased in a Muggle shop on Vauxhall Street in London, so unless Salazar Slytherin is still alive I don't think he created the Diary. Besides, doesn't Diary-Tom point out that he made the Diary and put himself in it, but of course, he could've been lying. It's a nice change of view on the subject, Zelmia, but it doesn't work, in my opinion.

I must say that popkin's suggestion of Slytherin taking Riddle's place, would be an interesting plot twist, but that's something for another thread, I think. It is also entirely possible that Slytherin helped Riddle with the creation of the Diary via a book from the restricted section of the library. Although it could just as well be some other book. A book by Salazar Slytherin would be almost a thousand years old and I don't think such a book would be in the library, but wizards are probably better at keeping things in their original shape ("Reparo").

Then there's also the possible connection with Grindelwald, who could've helped Riddle.

My guess is that Riddle figured it out on his own. According to DD he was a genius, so he probably would be able to create such a piece of Dark Magic.




zelmia - Oct 15, 2003 8:56 am (#93 of 298)

Yeah, I think so too... But HOW? How did he create it on his own? Like popkin said, we all know that Riddle did finish out his Hogwarts career. So how could he have done both? How could he have preserved himself in the Diary while still going on in real life?




popkin - Oct 15, 2003 2:31 pm (#94 of 298)

Zelmia, I think it's like looking in a mirror, or watching an image of yourself on video. It's a reflection of Riddle - not Riddle himself.

I guess its like taking a wizard painting one step further. The image is set - unchanging. The Riddle in the diary will never advance beyond his sixteen year old self. He is obviously able to learn things (like that Harry has defeated the real Tom Riddle), but he will always understand events as a 16-year-old version of Tom Riddle.




Joost! - Oct 16, 2003 12:11 am (#95 of 298)

If Diary-Riddle is able to learn then he's able to evolve. If a lot of people would feed him information by writing in the Diary, Riddle would be more than a 16-year-old boy. I like your comparison with a wizard painting, popkin, it explains how there can be two "versions" of Tom Riddle, a real one and a paper one.

I also think that when he left the Diary he started growing old, physically. Of course we never saw that since he got killed so soon.




popkin - Oct 16, 2003 6:44 am (#96 of 298)
Edited by Oct 16, 2003 7:46 am

Joost!, maybe the diary-Tom would evolve after being fed a lot of information, but I don't think he could grow old. He might decay as the book decayed, but his general appearance would always be the same as the day he was created - just like a painted character or a ghost remains the same no matter what he or she might experience after the date of creation (or death, in the case of a ghost).

To me, it's like The Picture of Dorian Gray. Dorian's character did evolve and decay, but his physical appearance remained the same. Like Dorian, somewhere there might be a reflection of the degradation of diary-Tom but his appearance to the world would likely remain handsome.

Of course, all of this is just my own speculation. Since none of it happened, JKR would have the final word on what could have happened to diary-Tom if he had "lived".




zelmia - Oct 16, 2003 10:10 am (#97 of 298)
Edited Oct 16, 2003 11:12 am

Ooh! Great analogy! And didn't the same thing happen to Dorian Gray? Didn't he end up dying only when the Picture was destroyed? (I can't remember. I read it when I was about 7 or 8.) Because maybe that's how Tom Riddle created Diary-Riddle: By using the same principals as the wizard paintings. Why couldn't you just preserve yourself using words as a medium in the same way you could be preserved in an image using paint? So all we have to do now is figure out how wizard paintings work




S.E. Jones - Oct 16, 2003 11:41 am (#98 of 298)

popkin - Aaaagh! I see a fault. I guess I just wanted it to work, and it doesn't. The third generation following Voldemort's graduation would have been from Fall '59 to Spring '66. Since Lucius enters Hogwarts in Fall '65, he would not have been in Tom's old room.

Where does Draco fit into this? Could he have Tom's old dorm room? Popkin, since you've already got half the math down, what do you think?




schoff - Oct 16, 2003 9:20 pm (#99 of 298)
Edited by Oct 16, 2003 10:46 pm

Okay, I'll take a stab at it and let Popkin rest! For all date info, see my previous post.

Voldemort enters Hogwarts Fall 1938. He leaves Spring 1945. This lets the first generation after Voldemort to inhabit his room in the Fall 1945.

• First generation: Fall 1945-Spring 1952
• Second generation: Fall 1952-Spring 1959
• Third generation: Fall 1959-Spring 1966 Lucius Malfoy entered Hogwarts in 1965, therefore he would not have received Voldemort's old dorm room.
• Fourth generation: Fall 1966-Spring 1973
• Fifth generation: Fall 1973-Spring 1980 Since Harry was born in 1980, and I doubt Lily had Harry the same year she graduated, Snape probably didn't have Voldemort's dorm room either (assuming Lily and James were the same age)
• Sixth generation: Fall 1980-Spring 1987
• Seventh generation: Fall 1987-Spring 1994 Harry and Draco entered Hogwarts in 1991, so Draco would not have received Voldemort's old dorm room either.

I like the theory, Popkin, but I don't think it works out either.




S.E. Jones - Oct 16, 2003 9:53 pm (#100 of 298)

Thanks schoff! Yeah, unfortunately I don't see how it could work either....
Potteraholic
Potteraholic
Ravenclaw Prefect
Ravenclaw Prefect

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

Back to top Go down

The Very Secret Diary Empty The Very Secret Diary (posts #101 to #150)

Post  Potteraholic on Mon Jul 18, 2011 8:16 am

schoff - Oct 16, 2003 11:29 pm (#101 of 298)
Edited by Oct 17, 2003 12:38 am

I just wanted to add this note: Lucius Malfoy was born in 1954 (see my timeline). This is 2 years after the first generation (after Voldemort) left Hogwarts. If (and this is an ENORMOUS if!) Lucius' father found the Diary, he could conceivably have entered Hogwarts in 1945 and received Voldemort's dorm room. This would have been only a summer difference (Spring 1945 - Fall 1945). Lucius' dad would probably have known who Tom Riddle was, since Tom was so well known before he left (Special Services, Head Boy, Genius Student). Maybe the Diary at this point wasn't powerful enough to suck anyone in.

Personally, I think this scenario is a little too complicated for the story, but I thought I'd bring it up.




mollis - Oct 17, 2003 7:07 am (#102 of 298)

Wow!!! You guys have been busy while I've been gone!

That would have been so cool if it had worked out for Lucius or Draco to have been in Tom's old room. But, for all we know, there could have been changes/updates to the dorms where rooms were switched around, or maybe class sizes got very small after Voldy's reign and a couple of years shared the same room (to prevent the only Slytherin boy in a certain year from being alone). Or, it still could have been hidden in the common room somewhere.

Boy it's good to be back!




Romulus - Oct 17, 2003 7:45 am (#103 of 298)

While I am not a massive fan of the dorm room theory, there are a number of ways that Lucius and Riddle could have had the same room. What if, for example, there are more than 7 dorm rooms in Slytherin and first years are assigned new ones randomly? What if one had to be redecorated at some point? What if a belligerent group of fifth sixth years decided that the first year dorm room was nicer and swapped with them?

So no need to abandon the theory if you don't want to. And remember, there are also other places in the Slytherin dungeons where Riddle could have hidden the diary and it turns up in Lucius hands years later. And the Room of Requirement theory is a very interesting one.




zelmia - Oct 17, 2003 4:22 pm (#104 of 298)
Edited Oct 17, 2003 5:33 pm

I guess the only problem I have with that timeline is that Riddle is clearly at least 15 in June of 1943 - although Harry puts him at 16 (CS). This would mean that he would have begun his Hogwarts career by Fall Term as far back as 1937. In other words, if Riddle was finishing his 6th year in June of '43, that means he would have started at Hogwarts Fall of 1937.

I think Riddle's Hogwarts career looks more like this. I have based this on Harry's description of Riddle being 16 in June of '43, therefore a 6th year:

• Year 1 = Fall term '37 to Summer term '38
• Year 2 = Fall '38 to Summer '39
• Year 3 = Fall '39 to Summer '40
• Year 4 = Fall '40 to Summer '41
• Year 5 = Fall '41 to Summer '42
• Year 6 = Fall '42 to Summer '43
• Year 7 = Fall '43 to Summer '44

With this in mind, that means that his old dorm room would have become available in Fall of 1944.

• 1st Gen = '44 - '51
• 2nd Gen = '51 - '58
• 3rd Gen = '58 - '65
• 4th Gen = '65 to '72 (Lucius Malfoy's years)
• 5th Gen = '72 - '79
• 6th Gen = '79 - '86
• 7th Gen = '86 - '92

So the possibility for Lucius to have discovered the Diary while residing in Riddle's old dorm is looking a lot more credible.




S.E. Jones - Oct 17, 2003 7:06 pm (#105 of 298)
Edited Oct 17, 2003 8:08 pm

Zelmia: In other words, if Riddle was finishing his 6th year in June of '43, that means he would have started at Hogwarts Fall of 1937.

"In my fifth year, the Chamber was opened and the monster attacked several students, finally killing one." (CoS13) Riddle was in his fifth year in June 1943, thus he started in Fall of 1938. As for being 16 and not 15, he probably had a birthday towards the end of the year, like Fred and George turned 17 in April of their sixth year....




schoff - Oct 17, 2003 9:15 pm (#106 of 298)

CoS, US, ch18, 329 "Very few people know that Lord Voldemort was once called Tom Riddle. I taught him myself, fifty years ago, at Hogwarts.’

CoS is set during 1992-1993 (Sir Nick's Death Day party confirms this). DD makes this quote at the end of the year. 1993-50=1943. Since the 50 is an exact number (Harry found the date on the diary--after Valentine's Day in 1943--CoS, US, ch13, 231), and not rounding, then Tom opened the chamber during his fifth year, when he was 16 (CoS, US, ch17, 312). That year ended in 1943. It had to have started in Fall 1942. Voldemort's fifth year was Sept 1942-June1943. I agree with SE Jones. Tom probably started his fifth year at the age of 15 and had his 16th birthday before June 13th. It's possible his birthday is in mid-winter (December, January, February), like Trelawney suggested about Harry in GoF. (Note: See the Trelawney thread about this idea.)




S.E. Jones - Oct 17, 2003 10:54 pm (#107 of 298)

Schoff: It's possible his birthday is in mid-winter (December, January, February), like Trelawney suggested about Harry in GoF.

Hm, interesting...notice how Harry and Voldemort were born in opposite, extreme seasons (by extreme I mean not the mild, erratic seasons of spring and fall, but seasons of more constant temperament...)... Harry, born in the middle of summer, and Voldemort, born in the middle of winter.....




schoff - Oct 17, 2003 11:33 pm (#108 of 298)
Edited by Oct 18, 2003 12:40 am

I just wanted to add these quotes to my last post:

"It had taken me five whole years to find out everything I could about the Chamber of Secrets and discover the secret entrance..." (CS 17 US312)

This indicates to me that Tom opened the Chamber at the end of his Fifth year. Myrtle died on June 13th--the end of the year. This would have been "five whole years" after Tom started Hogwarts. Unless he waited an entire year in addition to this before starting to kill people, which I doubt. If he had the knowledge he needed to use the Chamber, I can't imagine him waiting until the end of his sixth year before using it. I would think he would have tried it at the beginning of the year, not the end.

"I decided to leave behind a diary, preserving my sixteen-year-old self..."(CS 17 US312)

If Tom opened the Chamber and killed Myrtle at the end of his Fifth year, then he was 16 at the end of his Fifth year. Fifth years are 15/16, not 16/17, especially if they're a genius like Tom (meaning he wasn't held back in order to be oldest in his class). I guess it could be argued that Tom didn't open the Chamber until the end of his Sixth year (usually at age 16/17, but if he had a birthday like Hermione's, where he turned 16 right after his sixth year started, and then stayed 16 throughout the whole year) but I seriously doubt this. If that were the case, then he would have been researching for six whole years, not five.

Granted, Tom could have skipped a year, but I think DD might have mentioned this. Plus, I'm subscribing to Occam's Razor here, and the simplest explanation is that Tom opened the Chamber at the end of his Fifth year, when he was 16. That would place his Fifth year as 1942-1943, because this was definitely the year the Chamber was opened, according to Nick's date (1992-50=1942, the beginning of the school year which ended in 1943).

Of course, I don't know if this post is helping or hindering my case... Hoping for the former! Plus, I really like the Trelawney idea!




schoff - Oct 18, 2003 12:06 am (#109 of 298)
Edited by Oct 18, 2003 1:09 am

EDIT (because I'm just too late for my last post): Uh, maybe I'm more tired than I thought....I completely missed SE Jones posting the quote that verifies that Tom opened the Chamber in his Fifth year. "In my fifth year, the Chamber was opened and the monster attacked several students, finally killing one." (CoS 13 US241) And I so logically tried to state my cases too! Sorry about that.




zelmia - Oct 19, 2003 9:59 am (#110 of 298)
Edited Oct 19, 2003 11:02 am

Yes, you are all absolutely correct, of course. So that puts the timeline at... What, this?

• Year 1 = Fall term '38 to Summer term '39
• Year 2 = Fall '39 to Summer '40
• Year 3 = Fall '40 to Summer '41
• Year 4 = Fall '41 to Summer '42
• Year 5 = Fall '42 to Summer '43 (Chamber of Secrets, etc.)
• Year 6 = Fall '43 to Summer '44
• Year 7 = Fall '44 to Summer '45

Now, it is still mathematically possible for Lucius to have been assigned to Riddle's old dorm. If he was 41 in December of 1995 then obviously his birth year was 1954. However, if he had just turned 41 - meaning he had a November or December Birthday - then he would likely not have gone to Hogwarts until the next year began. So the outside chance is still there for Lucius to have been given Riddle's old room. We would need to know Lucius’ exact birthday.

• 1st Gen = '45 - '52
• 2nd Gen = '52 - '59
• 3rd Gen = '59 - '66
• 4th Gen = '66 to '73 (outside possibility of Lucius’ years)
• 5th Gen = '73 - '80
• 6th Gen = '80 - '87
• 7th Gen = '87 - '93

Mind, I am not really a big follower of the "Lucius discovered the Diary while at school" theory. But it could still be possible.




schoff - Oct 19, 2003 12:39 pm (#111 of 298)

Mind, I am not really a big follower of the "Lucius discovered the Diary while at school" theory.

Neither am I, but I'm sure having fun with the math!




S.E. Jones - Oct 19, 2003 1:38 pm (#112 of 298)

Zelmia: However, if he had just turned 41 - meaning he had a November or December Birthday - then he would likely not have gone to Hogwarts until the next year began. I don't this so. We haven't seen anything in the books that would suggest such a cut-off date for ages, Hermione turned 11 in September (after the school year started). Of course, Fred and George were already 11 when they entered Hogwarts, having had a birthday in April. So, Lucius could've gone "after the next year" if his birthday was after the year changed over (January on), but that wouldn't explain how he was already 41 in December.....




schoff - Oct 19, 2003 2:07 pm (#113 of 298)

he was already 41 in December.....

Actually, he was already 41 in September. Malfoy's age is listed in the article in ch.15, US307. On US318, Harry gets detention from Umbridge for the Quirrell comment. Same page Angela yells at Harry for getting detention, and McGonagall comes over: "Are you telling me...that the warning I gave you last Monday you lost your temper in Professor Umbridge's class again?" Last Monday (Ch.12 US248) was Harry's first DADA class, which was held on the first day of classes. Umbridge was made High Inquisitor the second week of school.




S.E. Jones - Oct 19, 2003 2:17 pm (#114 of 298)
Edited Oct 19, 2003 3:20 pm

My point exactly, schoff. He turned 41 before the start of the school year, so he would have started Hogwarts in Fall of 1965, and not 66...




zelmia - Oct 19, 2003 11:05 pm (#115 of 298)
Edited Oct 20, 2003 12:08 am

Actually, SE, your point seemed to me to be that "We haven't seen anything in the books that would suggest such a cut-off date for ages..." Technically, maybe not. But it is generally accepted that since "term begins on September the first" that this is the cut off date. Hermione is the only real exception we have seen for this. September 1 is the "cut-off for ages" of just about every country I can think of.

But the point is moot (and not "mute" as I have seen on this forum) since, as schoff points out, Lucius was already 41 at the start of the school year. The real point is that the "Lucius discovered the Diary because he got Riddle's old room" theory simply couldn't be possible - at least, not with our current understanding of how the dorm rooms are assigned.




S.E. Jones - Oct 20, 2003 8:35 am (#116 of 298)

Zelmia: Hermione is the only real exception we have seen for this.

Why would Hermione be the only one who got to be an exception? The wizarding world seems to have many different traditions, such as becoming of age at 17 while the rest of Britain seems to use 18. And, I have been at schools whose cut-off date was not the start of term or September 1....

BTW, I agree that Lucius couldn't have gotten the diary by being placed in his old dorm room....




popkin - Oct 20, 2003 11:13 pm (#117 of 298)

WOW! There was a big jump in the number of posts one day, and I put off reading this thread again. Little did I know that my faulty theory was being discussed. It was fun reading all your posts.

While reading, it did occur to me that even though the chamber was definitely opened on June 13, 1943, and that it was at the end of Riddle's fifth year, it doesn't confirm that Riddle was 16 at the time of the opening. He could have been 15 at the time it was opened if he had a birthday between June 14 (my birthday ) and August 30.

Riddle would not have created his diary on the same day that he opened the chamber. He would have created the diary after the events on the 13th. I assume he would have preserved his current self at the time of the creation of the diary - not his self at the time of the opening of the chamber. That way, he would have known some of the events following the opening of the chamber (like killing his parents).

So, Riddle could have been 15 on June 13, 1943, but it does not alter the timeline to allow for Lucius to be in Riddle's old dorm room. Even if Riddle were 15, it still would have been his fifth year, and he still would have graduated in June of 1945.




Joost! - Oct 21, 2003 12:29 am (#118 of 298)

Since I am on the "Lucius discovered the Diary while at school" side, I'd have to go with mollis' theory:

"...for all we know, there could have been changes/updates to the dorms where rooms were switched around, or maybe class sizes got very small after Voldy's reign and a couple of years shared the same room (to prevent the only Slytherin boy in a certain year from being alone). Or, it still could have been hidden in the common room somewhere."

We don't know how dorm rooms are assigned, at I find it very likely that not all years have an equal amount of students...




Peregrine - Oct 21, 2003 9:13 am (#119 of 298)

Do we know for sure June 13th was the first time he opened the Chamber? Maybe it was just the first time he lucked out and managed to kill someone (which seemed to be a complete accident).




mollis - Oct 21, 2003 10:03 am (#120 of 298)

Well, Joost, I am thrilled that someone agrees with me! Whether we can get the math to work out right with the years or not, really may not matter. So many things could have happened that there is no way to predict which room Malfoy or Voldy had. It just seems to make sense that Voldy would have hidden the diary while at school and either Lucius or Draco discovered it and Lucius figured out what it was.




popkin - Oct 21, 2003 11:23 am (#121 of 298)

Peregrine, the Chamber of Secrets was opened before Moaning Myrtle was killed:

"Of course I know about the Chamber of Secrets. In my day, they told us it was a legend, that it did not exist. But this was a lie. In my fifth year, the Chamber was opened and the monster attacked several students, finally killing one..." (COS US p241 ch13)




zelmia - Oct 21, 2003 2:51 pm (#122 of 298)
Edited Oct 21, 2003 3:54 pm

Okay. Points to ponder: (1) June 13th doesn't really have to do with the Chamber. Well, it does, but.. Anyway, its significance is that that is the date that Riddle framed Hagrid for Myrtle's murder.

(2) Riddle says "...preserving my 16-year-old self..." So he was 16.

(3) Riddle also says that the Chamber was opened "... in my 5th year..." So he was finishing up his 5th year on June 13th. That also means that he must have turned 16 during his 5th year (like Ron) and not during the Summer (like Harry).

So how do we figure the math on this? Well, we know for sure that Riddle was 16 on June 13th 1943. That puts his birth year at either 1926 or 1927. But June of 1943 is the end of Riddle's 5th year. So that makes it most likely that his birth year is 1927. His first year at Hogwarts, then, would have been Fall of 1938.

1st year = 1938-1939 -- 2nd year = 39-40 -- 3rd year = 40-41 -- 4th year = 41-42 -- 5th year = 42-43 -- 6th year = 43-44 -- 7th year = 44-45

How does this relate to Lucius Malfoy? Well, as several of you have pointed out, Lucius is 41 early in the school year (1995) putting his birth year at 1954. His first year at Hogwarts would therefore have been 1965. (Again, since his birthday clearly falls very close to the beginning of the school year, we can be pretty certain of when his first year at Hogwarts would be).

1st gen after Riddle = 1945-52 -- 2nd gen = 52-59 -- 3rd gen = 59-65 -- 4th gen = 65-72 (Lucius Malfoy's years) -- 5th gen = 72-79 -- 6th gen = 79-86 -- 7th gen = 86-93 (too late for Draco).

So Lucius could have found the Diary, assuming that no one else had before him. And assuming that the dorm assignment thing is what we thought, etc etc. I said all this before




S.E. Jones - Oct 21, 2003 8:36 pm (#123 of 298)

Riddle would not have created his diary on the same day that he opened the chamber. He would have created the diary after the events on the 13th. I assume he would have preserved his current self at the time of the creation of the diary - not his self at the time of the opening of the chamber. That way, he would have known some of the events following the opening of the chamber (like killing his parents).

I assumed he created the diary the next year, after he realized that he couldn't re-open the Chamber. "Well, [Dumbledore] certainly did keep an annoyingly close watch on me after Hagrid was expelled. I knew it wouldn't be safe to open the Chamber again while I was still at school. But I wasn't going to waste those long years I spent searching for it. I decided to leave behind a diary..." (CoS17).




popkin - Oct 21, 2003 10:37 pm (#124 of 298)

Zelmia, since June 13, 1943 is the end of Riddle's fifth year, he started his fifth year in the fall of 1942. That's canon.

Working your way backward from 1942, '41=4, '40=3, '39=2, '38=1. Riddle started at Hogwarts the fall of 1938.

However, your post got me to thinking... If Lucius turned 11 after September 1, he would have started school just before he turned twelve - not just after he turned 11. That would mean he started his first year at Hogwarts in 1966, and he could have been in Tom Riddle's old dorm room.

:I wish I could find a hyperactively happy emoticon right now to put here!:

It works! It works! Thanks, guys, I had given up, but you made me think about it some more, and it works!




Joost! - Oct 21, 2003 10:41 pm (#125 of 298)
Edited Oct 21, 2003 11:41 pm

Zelmia: "3rd gen = 59-65 "

That's only six years, not seven.




popkin - Oct 21, 2003 11:08 pm (#126 of 298)
Edited by Oct 22, 2003 12:29 am

[revised timeline - altered from Schoff's]

Malfoy is now 41 (OoP, US, ch15, 307). OoP is set in 1995-1996 (Harry's fifth year--see the timeline). I'm going to take the 1995 number, since the article mentioning Malfoy's age was printed before Christmas. 1995-41=1954. So Malfoy was born in 1954. 1954+11=1965, [assuming Lucius' birthday is after September 1, we add 1 year, and he begins at Hogwarts September 1 of 1966.]

MALFOY HOGWARTS TIMELINE:

• First year: 1966-1967
• Second year: 1967-1968
• Third year: 1968-1969
• Fourth year: 1969-1970 [Year Voldemort showed up again]
• Fifth year: 1970-1971
• Sixth year: 1971-1972
• Seventh year: 1972-1973

TOM RIDDLE/LORD VOLDEMORT HOGWARTS TIMELINE:

• First year: 1938-1939
• Second year: 1939-1940
• Third year: 1940-1941
• Fourth year: 1941-1942
• Fifth year: 1942-1943 [Chamber opened first time, Myrtle killed, Hagrid expelled]
• Sixth year: 1943-1944
• Seventh year: 1944-1945 [Head Boy, also the year DD defeated Grindelwald (1945)]

(1938-11=1927, the year Tom Riddle was born.)

ANOTHER TIMELINE FROM SCHOFF - sorry the pretty colors didn't transfer]:

• First generation: Fall 1945-Spring 1952
• Second generation: Fall 1952-Spring 1959
• Third generation: Fall 1959-Spring 1966
• Fourth generation: Fall 1966-Spring 1973 [same years as Lucius' time at Hogwarts]
• Fifth generation: Fall 1973-Spring 1980 Since Harry was born in 1980, and I doubt Lily had Harry the same year she graduated, Snape probably didn't have Voldemort's dorm room either (assuming Lily and James were the same age)
• Sixth generation: Fall 1980-Spring 1987
• Seventh generation: Fall 1987-Spring 1994 Harry and Draco entered Hogwarts in 1991, so Draco would not have received Voldemort's old dorm room either.

In 1994, Malcolm Baddock and Graham Pritchard are sorted into Slytherin. (GOF US p178,180 ch12) So, they could be in Riddle's old room.




schoff - Oct 21, 2003 11:23 pm (#127 of 298)
Edited by Oct 22, 2003 12:26 am

popkin: Put a <*br> after each line you just want to return and not double space.

It's just b for bold. <*b> for bold, <*/b> to end bold. Don't forget the / (and take out the *).

EDIT: I'll delete this post later, after Popkin gives up on HTML!




popkin - Oct 21, 2003 11:30 pm (#128 of 298)

Thanks, Schoff. It worked.




Jim the Potty - Oct 22, 2003 6:18 am (#129 of 298)

I wish I could find a hyperactively happy emoticon right now to put here.




schoff - Oct 22, 2003 8:48 am (#130 of 298)
Edited by Oct 22, 2003 10:18 am

Okay Popkin, here's my response:

1. Harry receives his "usual reminder that term started on the first of September..." (OoP 9 US160) While I'm pretty sure this means his first class starts on the 1st, I will allow that the 1st might be the day they take the train to Hogwarts.

2. Harry started his first day of classes the day after he arrived at Hogwarts for the Sorting Ceremony (OoP 12 US221). He had his first DADA class on the first day of school--either Sept 1 or Sept 2 (OoP 12 US225).

3. Malfoy's age is listed in the article in ch.15, US307. Harry gets detention from Umbridge for the Quirrell comment on page US318. Same page Angelina yells at Harry for getting detention, and McGonagall comes over: "Are you telling me...that the warning I gave you last Monday you lost your temper in Professor Umbridge's class again?" Last Monday (Ch.12 US248) was Harry's first DADA class, which was held on the first day of classes. Umbridge was made High Inquisitor before the second week of school, which means the article came out the weekend after the first week of school. This means Lucius must have been 41 before the first weekend of school.

4. If the Sorting Ceremony was on Sunday, Sept. 1st, then the first weekend was Sept. 7-8. If Harry's first day was Sept. 1st, and was on a Monday, then the weekend was Sept. 6-7. This means the latest date for the article being published is Sept. 8th (starting any other day than Sun/Mon would actually put the date of the first weekend earlier--I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt and using the latest possible date).

Ergo, Lucius must have been 41 before Sept. 8th.

From a JKR chat:

Q: When is Hermione's birthday?

A: Hermione's birthday is September 19th.

This is the problem: Hermione's birth year is put at 1980. This means she was 10 when she entered Hogwarts and turned 11 three weeks later. Since Malfoy was born before Sept. 19th, he probably also would have been 10 when he entered Hogwarts (if his birthday was between Sept. 1-8), leaving my original timelines intact (i.e. Lucius Malfoy's birth year is still 1954). Your timeline works only if Hermione was born in 1979, and is a year older than Harry.

Your turn!

(On a personal note: Zelmia and Popkin, I hope you aren't too mad at me for this. I'm really enjoying this thread! It's like a huge chess game! Your move, then my move, then your move, etc! Is it checkmate yet?)




S.E. Jones - Oct 22, 2003 9:17 am (#131 of 298)

If Lucius turned 11 after September 1, he would have started school just before he turned twelve - not just after he turned 11.

Well, as schoff just pointed out, Hermione entered Hogwarts just before she turned 11, so it's possible that Lucius did as well. From the Scholastic Interview (2-3-2000) "Every year Professor McGonagall checks the book, and sends owls to the people who are turning 11." That means that you only have to be turning 11 to enter Hogwarts, not have turned 11 already.

Just adding to schoff's wonderful stacks of evidence....




Peregrine - Oct 22, 2003 9:58 am (#132 of 298)

Not to interrupt, but, popkin, thanks for the heads-up on when the Chamber was opened! (I’m going to have to start hauling my books to work with me.)

Now please, carry on. I can’t wait for this to get worked out.




popkin - Oct 22, 2003 12:43 pm (#133 of 298)

Hey Jim! That was one great hyperactively happy emoticon (or a couple dozen). Thanks.

I now accede again to schoff's brilliant use of constant vigilance in deferring to canon.

But, the question remains, for me at least: Why did JKR let us know that Lucius is 41? It must be an important clue. I don't think she did it just because people on the forum wanted to know how old he is. After all, don't we also want to know how old James, Lupin, Molly, Arthur, Lily, McGonagall, Moody, Regulus, Dobby, Marchbanks, everybody is?




S.E. Jones - Oct 22, 2003 1:03 pm (#134 of 298)

Maybe she let us know his age so that we can make some connection between him and someone else. For instance, we know Snape is, what, 35-36? That would mean that he was a 1st year when Lucius was a 7th year. Maybe that's important somehow? Maybe it's supposed to be a clue as to how Snape got into the DEs, Sirius did say that he was part of a group of older Slytherins who almost all became DEs.....

Hm, maybe this should be taken to the "Lucius Malfoy" thread....




Emily - Oct 22, 2003 1:46 pm (#135 of 298)

How do we know that Lucius is 41?




Hem Hem - Oct 22, 2003 4:24 pm (#136 of 298)

From OotP, the beginning of Chapter 15. The Daily Prophet article reads, "...now that I know that Dumbledore is being subjected to a fair and objective evaluation," said Lucius Malfoy, 41, from his Wiltshire mansion last night."




zelmia - Oct 24, 2003 9:02 pm (#137 of 298)
Edited Oct 24, 2003 10:05 pm

So how do we figure the math on this? Well, we know for sure that Riddle was 16 on June 13th 1943. That puts his birth year at either 1926 or 1927. But June of 1943 is the end of Riddle's 5th year. So that makes it most likely that his birth year is 1927. His first year at Hogwarts, then, would have been Fall of 1938.

1st year = 1938-1939 -- 2nd year = 39-40 -- 3rd year = 40-41 -- 4th year = 41-42 -- 5th year = 42-43 -- 6th year = 43-44 -- 7th year = 44-45

___________________________

How is my timeline different than the one schoff put up? So I don't think your move counts, since it's the same one I did.

And sorry about my typo on the generation timeline. I don't know why I have put so much energy into this, to be honest since I don't really believe that is how Lucius got the Diary. Hmm...

Of course I'm not mad at you, schoff. I concur completely! I love this discussion as well. It can go any number of directions, in fact. I would like to find out how the diary was created in the first place.




schoff - Oct 25, 2003 10:11 pm (#138 of 298)

How is my timeline different than the one schoff put up? So I don't think your move counts, since it's the same one I did.

Sorry, Zelmia, you've lost me here. My last response was to Popkin concerning the Malfoy part of the timeline. You're talking about the Voldemort part of the timeline. Could you please explain this? (In case it's something I have to refute!)




zelmia - Oct 27, 2003 8:27 pm (#139 of 298)

Oh. Never mind then. Sorry, schoff. I thought it was the Voldemort part that was in question. I believe I did make a typo in putting up the Generations In Between timeline, and that's probably what your previous post referred to.

Actually, I've lost track on this whole thing, to be honest...




Denice - Nov 10, 2003 2:10 am (#140 of 298)

Let me get you away from maths for a while (I'll admit I hate it, although what you make of it is fascinating!). I think I found "proof" of New-Voldy knowing everything that Diary-Tom knows.

In the graveyard in GoF, Voldy obviously knows he could not kill little Harry because his mother died to save him. But where did he get that information? Very few people know about that, I doubt Wormtail is one of them (I hope I did not miss anything here). Personally, I think that is a secret shared between Dumbledore and Harry.

Except - Harry and Diary-Tom, because Harry told him in the Chamber!

Is there any other way Voldy could have gained that knowledge if not through his "memory"?




Joost! - Nov 10, 2003 6:40 am (#141 of 298)

All right, there's life on this thread again!

Good catch, Denice. I commented before on the connection between Voldemort-the-Mist (Who is an excellent Legilimens) and Diary-Tom, Voldemort must know something that went on while Riddle had his human form in the Chamber. Or was he too weak and too far away at that time? Maybe Voldemort realized Lily saved Harry by dying for him, when the Avada Kedavra bounced back, he had 13 years to think about it, maybe Quirrell told him.




S.E. Jones - Nov 10, 2003 7:00 am (#142 of 298)

I think that's the reason, Joost. Dumbledore pointed out that few people have the magical knowledge that Voldemort did. I'm sure, after 13 years, this clever guy was able to figure out what had happened....




Denice - Nov 10, 2003 7:02 am (#143 of 298)

Something makes me think Voldy did not realize what had happened when Lily died for Harry by himself. At least he did not in the years up to the events of Book 1 - otherwise, he should have known he and Quirrell could not touch Harry. By the way, why do you think Quirrell knew? From what I remember, when Dumbledore tells Harry, Quirrell is already dead... Maybe it is the way Voldy talks to Harry in GoF; what he says about the ancient magic he overlooked always seemed to tell me he did not figure out by himself (sorry I don't have the book here right now for the exact wording!).

Anyway, I am convinced that there is some connection of the adventures of Diary-Tom and the new Voldy. I don't know how this connection works (all those theories about time-travelling and clones made me dizzy ;-), but let's not forget how exceptionally clever Voldy was even at age 16! ), but I guess this is the important detail of Book 2 to come up again later.




Joost! - Nov 10, 2003 7:23 am (#144 of 298)

If Voldemort knew via Diary-Tom I think it can only be because of the Legilimency connection. If the conversation between Harry and Diary-Tom is part of the-real-Voldemort's memory he must've known what would happen if he tried to kill Harry and Lily.

The reason I think Quirrell could have told Voldemort about the ancient magic is because he was a DADA teacher and from what I understand he was quite good at his job. Besides, Harry surviving the Avada Kedavra is well known throughout the Wizarding World. I don't think it's a secret Lily protected her son, maybe if you know enough about Dark Arts and Defense Against the Dark Arts you're able to figure it out.

Maybe Voldemort knew Quirrell couldn't touch Harry and didn't care. Look at it this way; Quirrell didn't survive but Harry nearly died too, if it wasn't for Dumbledore Voldemort would've succeeded in killing his nemesis.




Ovate - Nov 10, 2003 7:34 am (#145 of 298)

I agree with S.E Jones, Voldemort would have figured it out in time. I'm sure that he knows about this type of "ancient magic", someone being protected by love and sacrifice just wouldn't be something he thought about much, but when Quirrell couldn't touch Harry without suffering great pain, Voldemort would have racked his brain and he would have thought of the answer eventually.




Denice - Nov 10, 2003 7:44 am (#146 of 298)

Joost, I don't quite understand why you think Voldy must have known what would happen if he tried to kill Harry as a Baby.

Okay, now there's that that time-travelling thing again (which I have to admit I don't feel comfortable with at all!), but Harry was already 12 when he told Diary-Tom. so that could not have influenced Voldy's actions 11 years before that.

Anyway, while I first thought you made a good point about Quirrell, I am not convinced yet. Voldy was affected personally by what happened when Quirrell touched Harry, living in the back of Quirrell's head. I think I remember him saying somewhere in GoF that his state was even worse after the Quirrell incident than before (I might be wrong about that, though - why didn’t I take my books?). Of course killing Harry is (almost) all he is after, but would he do something that's such a big risk for himself?




zelmia - Nov 10, 2003 11:25 am (#147 of 298)

Voldemort himself makes reference to Lily's sacrifice in the finale of PS/SS. [Not an exact quote:] "But your mother needn't have died... She died to protect you..." While I have never really understood exactly why Voldemort says this to Harry, I think it's pretty clear that he remembers it from the actual events as they occurred that Halloween night.

Still, I have always believed that Voldemort, The Mist has some direct connection to Diary-Tom simply because the Diary is a recording of his memories. Some of these memories must have seeped in at some point.

And I'm sorry, Denice but I am not sure what you are referring to with the "time travel/cloning" remark. We were suggesting earlier in the thread that the Diary was left behind deliberately so that Voldemort could quite literally become his own Heir. He would not be a clone of himself. He would be recreated - literally - through the pages of the Diary. The question is, of course, what would become of Voldemort the Mist once that had occurred. It's not Time travel really at all.




schoff - Nov 10, 2003 11:29 am (#148 of 298)
Edited by Nov 10, 2003 11:30 am

I dunno, Voldie's pretty good at remembering things immediately after the fact. He proves this in CoS with Fawkes ("I should have remembered Phoenix tears heal"). I think there might be other examples, but I don't remember. Voldie strikes me as someone who can connect the dots after the initial miscalculation.

Voldie probably figured out that it was probably Lily's sacrifice that saved Harry and destroyed him--it's really the only factor in the equation that's odd. He might not have known all the consequences of that though, like the inability to physically touch Harry.

Quirrell might have told Voldie the possible reason while he was under Voldie's control in P/SS but I think it's more likely Voldie figured it out on his own. I also don't think Lily's sacrifice is that common of knowledge, otherwise more people than Voldie would be trying to get around that "blood pact" that keeps Harry safe at the Dursleys.




zelmia - Nov 10, 2003 11:49 am (#149 of 298)

Good point, schoff.




Denice - Nov 10, 2003 11:38 pm (#150 of 298)

Zelmia, *I* don't think this is a matter of time travelling or cloning either, but I've read about both of these things earlier on in the thread - sorry, I'm too lazy to go back and find out who said what exactly.

I've come to agree with all of you that Voldy probably figured out by himself - I was so sure he didn't, but you convinced me... and isn't this what the forum is here for after all? ;-)

Anyway, I also agree with you, Zelmia, that there is something more to that Diary and Voldy's connection with it.
Potteraholic
Potteraholic
Ravenclaw Prefect
Ravenclaw Prefect

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

Back to top Go down

The Very Secret Diary Empty The Very Secret Diary (posts #151 to #200)

Post  Potteraholic on Mon Jul 18, 2011 8:19 am

Joost! - Nov 11, 2003 12:40 am (#151 of 298)

About the "time travelling": it has been implied on this earlier that everything that happens to Diary-Tom will become part of the real 16-year-old Riddle's memory (I'm not sure if this is what Zelmia referred to). I don't think that's true because then Voldemort would know what had happened on Halloween 1981 because Harry and Ginny told Diary-Tom in 1993.

Maybe it's not common knowledge that it was Lily's sacrifice that saved Harry, but it is known that Harry survived the Dark Lord's attack and his parents didn't.




zelmia - Nov 11, 2003 10:05 am (#152 of 298)

Actually, I had never thought of that! That Voldemort couldn't have known what the Diary-Tom knows because then Voldemort would have known what happened when he attacked the Potters and wouldn't have done it. Right?

Or maybe... he just didn't care. If the Diary was in place the whole time (which we know it was, since he created it at 16) then perhaps Voldemort wasn't particularly worried about what might happen when he went to attack the Potters, especially if, in a manner of speaking, it already had. His immortality was already assured by the Diary, which would have been confirmed by the fact that he did know what was going to happen. Make sense?




schoff - Nov 11, 2003 12:23 pm (#153 of 298)
Edited by Nov 11, 2003 12:25 pm

So he wanted to be a bodiless mist who restlessly wandered for 12 years, Zelmia? I'm not so sure. Remember--DiaryTom would have no knowledge of Voldemort's rebirth. DiaryTom only knew what Harry told him "And I've seen the real you, I saw you last year. You're a wreck. You're barely alive. That's where all your power got you. You're in hiding. You're ugly, you're foul--" (CS 17 US316) With only this knowledge, I can't imagine Voldie choosing the path he originally went with again, especially since he had no guarantee that he would be returned to his former self.




zelmia - Nov 11, 2003 1:22 pm (#154 of 298)

Well, that doesn't really tell him anything. "You're ugly, you're foul." Not really the same as "You're a bodiless Mist who has to live on the back of other people's heads!" But "You're barely alive..." Yes, but alive nonetheless. And all Voldemort cares about is that he isn't dead. So maybe he would choose that path.




Joost! - Nov 12, 2003 2:38 am (#155 of 298)

Schoff: "DiaryTom only knew what Harry told him"

That's not completely true, he also knew what Ginny wrote to him and what other people (Lucius?) perhaps wrote. I not sure what Ginny knew about Voldemort's state at the time.

But wouldn't Voldemort know he didn't get the Philosopher Stone or kill Harry in Harry's first year? And yet he tried. Maybe he forgot, for Riddle it was 50 ago that he learned about it...

I like the direction the discussion is heading.




zelmia - Nov 12, 2003 9:53 am (#156 of 298)

The thing about it is, the information he would have had in his memory (always assuming this is part of the Diary's function) would have been constantly changing with each new entry. By that I mean that, true Ginny Weasley wrote in the Diary in 1992. But for Riddle/Voldemort that information is always going to be coming from when he was 16 years old. I could see how that could become confusing.

And I've just thought of something else: perhaps that is why Voldemort chose Harry for the Prophecy and not Neville. He knew that he already had. And why it became so desperately important for Voldemort to hear the original Prophecy in its entirety, necessitating the break-in to the Dept. of Mysteries.

And actually, Voldemort's "Lucius, my slippery friend" remark has a much more sinister meaning (if that's possible) with this idea in mind. Because in giving the Diary to Ginny, Lucius would have completely clouded Voldemort's memories with foreknowledge of his own downfall. This makes Lucius’ casual handing over of the Diary an outright betrayal and should have warranted his immediate death. But, as I've pointed out before, Lucius must have seen this coming and worked quickly to install himself in a place of utility and need.

However, all that said, I still can't work out how this relates to the "plot" that Dobby warns Harry about. Could it be that Dobby, as a quiet yet intimate observer of Lucius Malfoy, had the wherewithal to piece Lucius’ actions together? Could it be that he could see in an instant all the potential consequences of one off-handed little action? He certainly did know that handing Ginny the Diary would open the Chamber of Secrets. Hmm...




zelmia - Nov 14, 2003 3:56 pm (#157 of 298)

I was really curious about what you all thought about my last post. Anyway, I just wanted to add that perhaps he foreknowledge is why he tells Lily to "stand aside". He knows that Lily's sacrifice is what will protect Harry so he tries to prevent her from doing it. What do you think? Anybody?




Joost! - Nov 14, 2003 4:34 pm (#158 of 298)

The way I see it (if the memory thing works this way, which I doubt), Riddle would get either sixty years of Dairy-Memories instantly from the moment he finished the creation of the Diary, or received memories from the conversations he had with Ginny and Harry (and Lucius?) and the time he was "corporeal" in CoS.

If either of this is the case, it will have gigantic consequences in the saga. First of all, the Dark Lord would know a lot of what was going to happen in the future (depending on how much Ginny told him), but he seems to lose a lot nonetheless. Or does he only appear to be on the losing side all the time? Is he working on a bigger plan? More important than killing "The One"? More important than getting the Philosopher Stone? Maybe, but it will take some good writing to explain it all.

It could also mean that Voldemort knew he would get in trouble but could do nothing to stop it. He was destined to be defeated by Harry. That would definitely mean choices are not as important as Dumbledore thinks...




zelmia - Nov 14, 2003 4:45 pm (#159 of 298)

Well 60 years worth of memories could explain why he was so keen to cheat Death. It might also explain why he's a bit ... well... cuckoo.




Joost! - Nov 15, 2003 1:17 am (#160 of 298)

I thought that too (the cuckoo thing), but this was after the Chamber was opened. So he wasn't really sane to begin with.




zelmia - Nov 17, 2003 3:38 pm (#161 of 298)

It might further explain his inability to remember what would seem to be a pretty important detail; for example that Phoenix tears have healing powers.

But since the Diary (and therefore the preserved 16-year-old self) was destroyed, perhaps Voldemort retained only certain memories. He tells Lily to "stand aside" because he can't really remember exactly what role she plays in the affair. He thinks he is circumventing the problem by trying to get her out of the equation. Only afterward does he come to realise that his actions would actually cause those particular results. Just a thought...




Joost! - Nov 20, 2003 7:36 am (#162 of 298)

Actually it was Diary-Tom that forgot about the Phoenix tears, not Voldemort-the-Present...

It's very likely that Voldemort forgot about the future because of the fifty (I made a calculation error in post #158) years of memories. I think it's just that Voldemort could do nothing to stop everything from happening, because it was destined to happen.




popkin - Nov 21, 2003 8:07 pm (#163 of 298)
Edited by Nov 21, 2003 8:09 pm

The closest thing to Tom's diary that we've seen is the Marauder's Map. Lupin, one of the creators of the map, who put some of his own personality in it, and who immediately recognises it when it turns up in Harry's possession, apparently has no knowledge of where its been all this time or who's possessed it. I think that once an object like the Marauder's Map or the Secret Diary is created it exists completely separately from the creator.

A change in subject: It occurred to me that 16-year-old Tom had the ability to possess people, since Diary-Tom was able to possess Ginny. He (Real-Tom) must have practiced to be able to do so, so it seems reasonable to assume that he possessed someone while at Hogwarts. Hmmmm..... It gets the wheels turning...




Joost! - Nov 22, 2003 5:33 am (#164 of 298)

popkin: "I think that once an object like the Marauder's Map or the Secret Diary is created it exists completely separately from the creator."

I agree with you on this, popkin, mostly because of the great consequences it would have if it really was part of Voldemort's memories. It's still fun to think about, though...

The possession of Ginny has always kept bugged me somehow. I think possession is an ability of the Diary (Ginny poured her soul in it) more than an ability of Tom Riddle. Without the Diary I don't think Riddle was able to posses anyone. Ginny poured her soul in the Diary

But how does this possession work? Before the scene with Tom Riddle and Harry in the Chamber, it seems there's only Ginny and the Diary. Ginny could open the Chamber of Secrets because Riddle "gave" her the ability to speak Parseltongue. But somehow Diary-Riddle became real, while Ginny (almost) died. When did he step out of the Diary? Was he a faint image from the moment Ginny wrote to him or did he step out at a certain point after she put enough of herself in the Diary?




zelmia - Nov 24, 2003 4:42 pm (#165 of 298)

I think it was after she put enough of herself because that's what he tells Harry. "She put too much of herself into the Diary, into me. Enough to let me leave its pages at last." And also, Ginny says that the last thing she remembers his Tom coming out of the Diary. I think she would have mentioned it before if he had - because she would have known something was definitely wrong then.

I think we were on to something back there with the "Riddle as own heir" idea. If he could possess people while still a teenager, then so much the better. So was he himself who opened the Chamber when Myrtle was in the girls bathroom? Or was it someone else?




mollis - Jan 8, 2004 7:32 am (#166 of 298)

I have a hard time believing that Tom could possess people as a teenager. He certainly wasn't using the diary at that point. I think that the ability to possess was something he learned during his non-corporeal years. He was able to get into Harry's head in OotP due to Legilimency. However, at the end, he possessed Harry's body for a short time. I'm not sure how he did that. Possibly by this point he has learned how to leave his own body and enter another's. Anybody else have thoughts on this?




zelmia - Jan 9, 2004 4:52 pm (#167 of 298)

Mollis, could you please explain what you mean by, "he certainly wasn't using the Diary at that point"? Do you mean that Riddle wasn't using the Diary as a diary, but only created the Diary with the specific purpose of preserving his 16-year-old self? Or do you mean that we have no evidence that he could possess people without the Diary to assist him?




Choices - Jan 9, 2004 6:41 pm (#168 of 298)

In the graveyard scene, Voldemort relates his experiences after he was almost killed by the AK curse that backfired on him from Harry. He says only one power remained to him and that was the ability to possess the bodies of others. It unfortunately does not say how long he had this power - was it from the beginning or acquired after he was grown?




Devika - Jan 10, 2004 4:31 am (#169 of 298)

I haven't read this thread, but I have a question... how could Ginny open the Chamber since she isn't a Parseltongue? Were the powers of the diary strong enough to actually put a power like this into her.




Madame Librarian - Jan 10, 2004 6:16 am (#170 of 298)

Wasn't she possessed by Tom when she started writing in the diary? With Tom in her head, so to speak, she did things as him. I don't think speaking Parseltongue is beyond this.

Ciao. Barb




Devika - Jan 11, 2004 7:00 am (#171 of 298)

That's one thing I was a bit confused about. I mean in what sense was she possessed by him. Was he inside her like some spirit or was he controlling her by some power… something like hypnosis? If it was the latter which I am more inclined to believe then how could this special power have gotten into her unless he was inside her. And I was also thinking if she did retain some of her Parseltongue abilities even after he left her... any ideas?? I think I'm getting a bit sleepy now.. I'm going in circles!




mollis - Jan 11, 2004 7:25 am (#172 of 298)

Zelmia- I meant that Tom hadn't placed his 16-yr-old self into the diary until after the chamber was sealed from the first attacks. So he probably wasn't possessing other students at the time, at least not through the diary. Tom was a bright student (prefect and head boy), but I think possessing someone would be very, very advanced dark magic. The kind he would have learned during his years after graduation (possibly while hanging out with Grindelwald?).

Devika- I would recommend reading this whole thread. We've gone back and forth and sideways trying to figure out how this diary worked. In my opinion, I think the diary, after been fed Ginny's deepest fears and secrets, was able to possess her (for short periods of time in the beginning, longer periods of time as the year went on) and control her actions. Ginny woke up not knowing where she had been or what she had been doing. That says possession to me.




Lady Nagini - Jan 11, 2004 4:22 pm (#173 of 298)
Edited by Jan 11, 2004 4:26 pm

Mollis, that brings up an interesting point. I haven't read the entire thread, but why would Riddle want to have his 16-year-old self preserved in a diary? After he had sufficient power to do so, didn't he believe he was invincible?

EDIT: Okay, I went back and searched the thread.

Zelmia (#71):Riddle didn't "leave behind" a diary solely for the purpose of one day leading another to open the Chamber. He also left it as insurance of his own immortality.

Hm...okay...so the theory is that this is another of his immortality experiments? In that case, why did he preserve himself as a SIXTEEN-year-old? He would just have had to work himself back up to his previous powers.




Devika - Jan 12, 2004 2:37 am (#174 of 298)

I'm not sure it was a way to preserve his immortality. He would have known that it isn't very difficult to destroy a diary. We saw how easy it was to get rid of 16-year-old Tom, simply by physically destroying the diary... that's all that is needed. I would expect a wizard as bright as Riddle to preserve his immortality in a more lasting way. Then I think that it is most likely that he did this to guide his heir to the Chamber.




FCBarca - Jan 12, 2004 4:48 am (#175 of 298)

Riddle left the diary so that someone would complete the 'Muggle-born eradication process). I'm sure Voldemort wrote the diary later in life and gave it to Lucius. Although doesn't Dumbledore say to Lucius something about not giving people any other of Voldemort's school things?




mollis - Jan 12, 2004 6:49 am (#176 of 298)
Edited by Jan 12, 2004 6:59 am

Actually, Tom created the diary containing his 16-yr-old self, because that's how old he was when he created it. When he is talking to Harry in the chamber he says " I knew it wouldn't be safe to open the Chamber again while I was still at school. But I wasn't going to waste those long years I'd spent searching for it. I decided to leave behind a diary, preserving my sixteen-year-old self in its pages, so that one day, with luck, I would be able to lead another in my footsteps, and finish Salazar Slytherins noble work. " Tom was somehow able to 'download' his entire memory into this diary, so if he had done it when he was 17 or 35, it would have been reflected in the diary-Tom. Diary-Tom was 16, and so was real-Tom when he created the diary.

Also I don't think that the diary was an attempt at immortality, it would have worked for that, but I think it's primary purpose was to guide another to open the chamber and kill Mudbloods. As Devika said, the diary was too easy to destroy for it to be an honest attempt at immortality.

FC - Why are you so sure the diary was written by Voldemort, rather than 16-yr-old Tom? If you read back in this thread, there are discussions about how Lucius got the diary. One of the ideas is that the diary was hidden in the Slytherin common room or dorm and Lucius found it while at school.




FCBarca - Jan 12, 2004 7:08 am (#177 of 298)

Because he would have been more likely to have been able to write it later in life. I just thought maybe he wouldn't be able to do that at school, he wouldn't know enough

I don't know what you are saying in the first paragraph? I wasn't saying that his older self would appear in the diary. I was saying that he may have created the diary when he was older. Although I do now believe he created it at school.

Remember that not many people knew Tom Riddle was Voldemort. So he probably didn't mentioned that he was Voldemort in the diary, Ginny only found out because what Dumbledore said afterwards. So that could have been the way he possessed Ginny, she just thought he was a normal person. I don't think the power of the diary is great enough for a person not to be able to break away. If Ginny had known that the person in the diary was Voldemort, she probably would never have written in it again.




mollis - Jan 12, 2004 7:24 am (#178 of 298)
Edited by Jan 12, 2004 7:25 am

Sorry FC, I should have been more clear. The first paragraph was in response to Lady Nagini's question: In that case, why did he preserve himself as a SIXTEEN-year-old? After the quote, I was just theorizing that if he had created the diary when he was 35, it would probably have contained his 35-yr-old self, mainly because I think it would be very difficult to pull only the knowledge/memories that you had when you were 16 out of your 35-yr-old brain. Hopefully that makes a bit more sense.

And I agree with you that the diary never told Ginny it was really Voldemort. Ginny would have had enough brains to hand it over right away if that had been revealed.




FCBarca - Jan 12, 2004 7:53 am (#179 of 298)

That was one of the reason's why I changed my mind from him creating it when he was older, because it would make sense that he would preserve his older self. It still doesn't mean that he would have to reveal himself as Voldemort, as all he did was answer with writing, he didn't show himself (if he did, Ginny wouldn't know what Voldemort looked like anyway).

But I do now believe that he created it while at school.




Joost! - Jan 13, 2004 2:25 am (#180 of 298)

One thing about the "insurance of his own immortality" Zelmia mentioned. Remember that when the Diary was destroyed Riddle was not fully human, since Ginny was still alive. I believe that had she died, Riddle would have become a real boy. This would not make him immortal but it would give him another shot at life. Thus increasing his chances to one day achieve immortality.




FCBarca - Jan 13, 2004 4:45 am (#181 of 298)

But he did create the diary so that someone will clear the school of Mudbloods.




Devika - Jan 13, 2004 7:20 am (#182 of 298)

Joost, I was always under the impression that even if Riddle became a real boy, he would still be destroyed by the diary. I mean the diary was his identity. I saw his coming out of the diary as a way of controlling the basilisk better and completing Slytherin's work with full force. I can't help it but I still can't associate Riddle with the later terrible Voldemort. I always imagined him to be a boy with relatively simpler ambitions than Voldemort at his height. He was still the 'darkest' 6th year student Hogwarts would have had, but I think he was still a 'child-version' of Voldemort.




mollis - Jan 13, 2004 7:34 am (#183 of 298)
Edited by Jan 13, 2004 7:34 am

Joost and FC Barca - I think you are both right. Riddle created to diary so that someone could follow it his footsteps and kill Mudbloods. A nice bonus to that process was the possibility for duplicating himself entirely, thus "giving himself another shot at life".

Devika - I have always thought that if Ginny had died, Tom would have been free of the diary. He said that Ginny poured herself into the diary, and that gave Tom strength, "enough to leave its pages at last". I understood it as Tom was basically sucking the life out of Ginny and into himself. When she had died, he would be free and alive.




Choices - Jan 13, 2004 10:30 am (#184 of 298)

I agree with Davika's comments - very interesting. It does raise the question, though, that if Ginny had died and Tom had been reborn as a result, could he have existed when Voldemort was also alive. Could there have been two of them? I thought the Tom in the diary was just a memory and therefore could not have come fully to life even if Ginny had died.




Madame Librarian - Jan 13, 2004 3:35 pm (#185 of 298)

Oh, my, this is getting tricky. Like time travel. What if Ginny had died, diary-Tom become alive again, and is able to take over/replace the not-quite-alive-yet Voldemort? There could be a similar magic he uses on this older, weaker self to absorb all the learned dark arts, all knowledge of who's who in the contemporary Wizarding World (I.e., his DEs, followers, MoM moles, etc.). Why am I doing this? It didn't happen that way. Sheesh!

Ciao. Barb




Choices - Jan 13, 2004 5:48 pm (#186 of 298)

Very good Madame. It certainly could have happened that way and that would have solved the problem of two Voldemorts.




shepherdess - Jan 13, 2004 8:46 pm (#187 of 298)

We know Voldemort has the power to possess people's bodies (Quirrell). If diary-Tom had succeeded in becoming alive, then Voldemort could posses his body (er... his body), or something like that. So there would still be one person (as opposed to two separate individuals). This is rather confusing, isn't it? I wonder if he would have had to repeat any of those spells and things he did to make himself immortal (or if he retained those in his "spirit form"-or whatever, and therefore they wouldn't need to be redone)? Now this is confusing even me.

Interesting that it says Ginny "poured herself" into the diary. Usually, someone "pours" their "heart" into a diary. Is there a difference here? If so, how did she pour herself into the diary? If not, is there a connection between Ginny pouring her heart into the diary, dying, and Riddle coming to life; and the supposed love in Harry, being the means to destroy Voldemort?




Joost! - Jan 14, 2004 2:03 am (#188 of 298)

FC Barca: "But he did create the diary so that someone will clear the school of Mudbloods."

The interesting thing is that only a descendant of Slytherin can open the chamber. Any offspring of Riddle would be able to do so, so why create the Diary? Did he expect he wouldn't have any children? Did he expect to die young? Or was it "just in case"?

Another thought, Riddle would know wizards can grow very old and perhaps his quest for immortality began at Hogwarts. So the possibility of Diary-Tom stepping out of the Diary while the real Voldemort is still alive must have crossed Riddle's mind when he wrote the Diary.

shepherdess: "Interesting that it says Ginny "poured herself" into the diary. Usually, someone "pours" their "heart" into a diary. Is there a difference here? If so, how did she pour herself into the diary? If not, is there a connection between Ginny pouring her heart into the diary, dying, and Riddle coming to life; and the supposed love in Harry, being the means to destroy Voldemort?"

It seems to be an odd use of words. But I think "pouring herself" and "pouring her heart" are the same thing. After all one does not really pour one's heart into anything, a heart is just a muscle after all I think what JKR meant was that Ginny wrote her thoughts in the book (both with her heart and her mind). If this has any connections with Harry and present day Voldemort depends on the powers of the Diary. If everything that happens with it somehow becomes part of Voldemorts memories of in some way effects him, it is possible. I don't think so, though.




mollis - Jan 14, 2004 3:39 pm (#189 of 298)

Shepherdess - This may be the thing in book 2 that will be big later on! Wasn't it book two that JKR said contained something big for later on? There could definitely be a connection.

Joost- I would guess Voldy didn't plan on having a nice family. He makes a reference to not wanting to waste all that time, so I would think that he created the diary as an insurance policy, in case he wasn't around and some worthy pupil turned up.




Choices - Jan 15, 2004 10:02 am (#190 of 298)

I think Riddle created the diary so that some hapless student would find it and become involved with it by writing their innermost feelings and dreams in it - then Riddle would have a person to possess. We know that is one of the things Voldemort does - possess the body of someone else to use for his purposes. Riddle knew that as a "memory", he would need the use of a body to reopen the Chamber of Secrets and put his plan into action and the diary was his way of accomplishing this.




zelmia - Jan 15, 2004 4:42 pm (#191 of 298)

WOW! I am happy that people have discovered the wonders of the Very Secret Diary at last.

Firstly, might I suggest that to those of you who haven't read this whole thread, to take the time to do so, as every single one of the points that were made recently have already been hashed out pretty thoroughly.

However, that said, I will briefly recap my personal opinions on these matters:

1) I think it's clear that Riddle created the Diary when he was still a teenager. (CS - The Heir of Slytherin: I knew it wouldn't be safe to open the Chamber again while I was still at school.... I decided to leave behind a diary preserving my sixteen-year-old self...)

2) Since the Diary's function is to suck the life out of the writer and put that life into Diary-Tom so he can "leave its pages at last" it seems clear - to me - that leaving its pages was always his intention.

3) Now, if that had happened, there would NOT have been 2 Voldemorts. Instead, Voldemort would have been able to mentor his own 16-year-old self, take over his body... whatever.

As for Riddle knowing how easily the Diary could be destroyed, the character is fallible. He is not omniscient. He is a 16-year-old boy with a huge ego (to say the least). That possibility simply wouldn't necessarily occur to him - in fact it didn't, just as it didn't occur to him about the healing powers of Phoenix tears. Nor did it occur to Harry. Harry destroyed the Diary by sheer impulse.

Unfortunately, I can't finish this right now since I am at work. Sorry...




popkin - Jan 19, 2004 2:54 am (#192 of 298)
Edited by Jan 19, 2004 3:00 am

I kind of thought that Lucius chose to have Voldemort return through the diary because it contained a sixteen year old version of Riddle, and Lucius thought he could surely control a teenager - even if it was Lord Voldemort. I don't think he could have, but I think Lucius thought so - otherwise I don't think he would have wanted Riddle to come back. In fact, I think the diary manipulated Lucius into thinking he could control a teenage Riddle so that Lucius would participate in a plan to bring Diary-Tom to life.

I think it was Lucius plan to use Diary-Tom (while all the while actually being used by Diary-Tom) to set up a puppet government with Diary-Tom as its head. Perhaps he even thought Diary-Tom could find and destroy the roaming spirit of Voldemort, since the two might not want to coexist and share power with themselves - and Lucius secretly fears the return of the current, extremely powerful Voldemort. Of course, once Diary-Tom had reached his true objectives and Lucius had outlived his usefulness, Diary-Tom would reveal his true plan and destroy the sadder but wiser Lucius. And I think Diary-Tom and Spirit-Voldemort could have worked things out to merge and coexist just fine. It would have been mutually beneficial.

That gets a little complicated with two Lord Voldemort's, multiple secret objectives, and tons of deceptiveness. Does it make sense?




Madame Librarian - Jan 19, 2004 4:54 am (#193 of 298)

popkin, good thinking there. I like your scenario of the motivations behind Lucius' actions. On a simpler level, I view some of Lucius' actions as being driven by a true hatred of half-bloods and a bit less (just a bit, not totally) than a desire for control. When the Chamber was created and the basilisk first "activated," the goal was to kill half-bloods, but when Diary-Tom first confronts Harry, he admits that that is no longer what he's after. Now, he's after Harry (after hearing Ginny relate the events that occur when Voldie is in power)! Is Lucius aware of this change of goal or is he still just hoping for the elimination of all but pure-bloods at Hogwarts (and eventually throughout the Wizarding World)? I think it's vague as to what Malfoy really wants and that's part of the "hook" of that particular character.

Ciao. Barb




Joost! - Jan 19, 2004 5:28 am (#194 of 298)

Barb, do you think it's a coincidence that Lucius gave Ginny the Diary right after he heard about Harry's fight with the Dark Lord in PS/SS? I'm assuming he knew about it since Dumbledore said the whole school knew and it wasn't a big secret.

I agree with popkin. Lucius had bigger plans with Diary-Tom. The only problem with this is that I believe the Diary is destroyed. And a failed power struggle that we'll never read about is a bit pointless. I doubt we will see the Diary again, but if we do it will be interesting.




Madame Librarian - Jan 19, 2004 10:32 am (#195 of 298)

Joost, didn't that scene in the bookshop take place at the end of the summer just as everyone is buying their school supplies? Wouldn't Lucius have learned about the battle at the end of PS/SS as soon as Draco gets home from school? In any event, I suspect that in order for the plot to play out as she wanted, JKR wrote it such that Lucius slipped the diary into Ginny's cauldron because it was his only opportunity to hand it off. He really had hoped to give it directly to Harry. (I think Diary-Tom even complains about this little mix-up, or was it Lucius himself?)

In the long run, I mostly agree that Lucius is after control, but he wants it for what he considers the purer purpose of eliminating half-bloods. Voldie's goal has evolved to something more all encompassing. He's less interested in getting rid of Muggles and half-bloods; that's below his notice now, too small a concern. He just wants everyone to accept him as the all-powerful, god-like leader of the whole world. You know, something clear and simple like world domination.

And, yes, I agree that we're not likely to see that diary again, though in the book, Lucius does leave with the diary (ch. 18, Cos). At least I think he does. It's a bit confusing--he's got it in his hand after he strips off the smelly sock and throws it to Dobby, but we never hear mention of the book again. So did he hang onto it during his lunge at Harry? Was he still holding it after his tumble down the stairs? As Ron would say, dunno. I'm always leery when such a crucial item like that ends up back in the hands of the bad guys.

Ciao. Barb




Choices - Jan 19, 2004 10:40 am (#196 of 298)

I was under the impression that Lucius was just used by Voldemort to get the diary into Ginny's hands. Do we have any evidence that Lucius even knew what the purpose of the diary was? Some of the previous posts make it sound like it was all Lucius' idea to use the diary. I thought Lucius was just the messenger.




mollis - Jan 19, 2004 11:22 am (#197 of 298)

Choices - I think that it is pretty commonly accepted knowledge that Lucius knew how the diary worked and that it would help the "killing Mudblood" cause. I (and possibly others) have thought that he probably found it at some point (maybe while at school)and figured it out over time. Possibly diary-Tom, after determining Lucius to be evil-enough, told Lucius to give the diary to a current student and he'd (the diary) take it from there. Apparently Lucius didn't tell the diary about Voldy's downfall at the hands of Harry, because Tom says he heard that from Ginny. I wonder if Lucius was too scared to tell diary-Tom of Voldy's defeat and that he's now vapor?!?




FCBarca - Jan 19, 2004 11:24 am (#198 of 298)

My opinion is that Voldemort gave Lucius the diary, because Lucius hates Muggles and Half-bloods more than most people. Lucius is probably a clever person, so Voldemort trusted Lucius and gave him the diary. Lucius then passed it on. The reason Lucius gave the diary to Ginny and none of the other's (apart from the flow of the book, because a lot of question's that people write on the forum, the answer is because of the flow of the book) is because she was the youngest and easiest to manipulate. I don't think it was anything to do with power. Just imagine what Voldemort would do when he returned to find Lucius power mad. He'd probably kill him, as he could cause trouble.




Choices - Jan 19, 2004 6:52 pm (#199 of 298)

That is my belief too FC - Voldemort gave the diary to Lucius and told him to give it to Ginny (I'm not sure if Voldemort or Lucius chose Ginny). She is the only logical choice of those close to Harry. Boys don't tend to pour out their "feelings" in a diary, Hermione is too smart to fall for it, so Ginny is the obvious one. She's young, female and impressionable. I think the plan came from Voldemort and Lucius had nothing to do with concocting it - he just delivered the diary as he was told to do.




Joost! - Jan 19, 2004 11:42 pm (#200 of 298)

If Voldemort gave Lucius the Diary it would have been before his attack on Harry and his parents. In GoF Lucius comments on how he didn't know Voldemort was not dead (I'm not sure about the exact quote, it's on this thread somewhere). So Lucius had the Diary in his possession for 11 years. But it was not until he heard about Voldemort being alive that he gave it to Ginny (that same summer). Why didn't he try to get it to Hogwarts before? Why right after the knowledge of Voldemorts return?

It's possible that Lucius found the book just before he passed it on to Ginny but then Voldemort didn't give it to him.
Potteraholic
Potteraholic
Ravenclaw Prefect
Ravenclaw Prefect

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

Back to top Go down

The Very Secret Diary Empty The Very Secret Diary (posts #251 to #298)

Post  Potteraholic on Mon Jul 18, 2011 8:25 am

S.E. Jones - May 27, 2004 2:02 pm (#251 of 298)
Edited May 27, 2004 3:03 pm

I know I've said this before, but I'll offer it up again. I think Riddle's "most intimate friends" may have been the fathers of his current DEs, or at least some of them, thus Lucius’ lack of surprise when Harry remarks that Voldemort is a half-blood. Just my personal opinion.




Madame Librarian - May 27, 2004 3:49 pm (#252 of 298)

Sarah, in other words, you think (as do I) that for some it is not big news that Voldemort is Muggle-born, if I read you correctly. What an interesting dynamic--to have some of your loyal followers in the know, others not. It does strike me as not the wisest course, given the already accepted evil tendencies of most of the DEs. What a powerful piece of information to have about Mr. Big. Then again, who knows what kinds of oaths, threats, curses, punishments are in place for those loyal ones? It seems that in Lucius’ case, his father must have slipped the news to him, perhaps as he was initiated into the adult DE circle (the inner-inner one as opposed to merely the inner one). This whole business might end up being a factor in the general unraveling of things as far as the DEs are concerned.

Gaaaa! What a complicated plot that woman has written!

Ciao. Barb




Mellilot Flower. - May 28, 2004 2:35 am (#253 of 298)

There are a ton of hexes and curses to keep people from telling others your secrets- Hermione came up with the SNEAK idea being a nice polite fifth year, just think of all the nasty things that Voldemort could think of.

Just out of curiosity- where does Harry tell Lucius that Voldemort isn't pure blood- I remember him telling Bellatrix, because of her reaction but if you're right and Lucius didn't react overly then I may have glossed over it slightly.

Also, this is a good point to think of one the best parallels between the WW and our own history- Hitler thought that German blonde hair blue eyed people were the best that there was, and yet he was Austrian and had dark hair and brown eyes.... people still followed him.

I don't think that we should underestimate Lucius' ambition at all- when it comes to the Diary he would have done his upmost not to actually allow Voldemort back, he's seen from past experience that Voldemort's approach doesn't work he got more power with his gold than he ever did following his Dark Lord. Not sure where that fits into my theories... but its an idea to go out there non the less.




Marie E. - May 28, 2004 12:45 pm (#254 of 298)

Chloe, I don't have my book right here so feel free to contradict me, but doesn't Harry tell the DE's in the Prophecy Room?




pedrobobo - May 29, 2004 7:54 pm (#255 of 298)

He did indeed tell the DEs about Voldie (sorry J. K.) being a half-blood in the hall of prophecy.

Here is the quote (From Chapter 35: Beyond the Veil)

(The DEs have already appeared and have been trying to convince Harry to hand over the prophecy)

" 'Shut your mouth!' Bellatrix shrieked. 'You dare speak his name with your unworthy lips, you dare besmirch it with your half-blood's tongue, you dare--' 'Did you know he is a half blood too?' said Harry recklessly. Hermione gave a little moan in his ear. 'Voldemort? Yeah, his mother was a witch but his dad was a Muggle -- or has he been telling you lot that he's pureblood?' "




haymoni - May 29, 2004 9:08 pm (#256 of 298)

I always wondered about that - Why did Hermione moan? Did she know that the DEs didn't know? How would she know that?

Or was she just afraid that Harry was egging them on?




The giant squid - May 29, 2004 10:31 pm (#257 of 298)

I think it's your second theory, haymoni. Note the word "recklessly" in reference to Harry...Hermione was afraid he'd gone too far.

I agree that the wording is a bit ambiguous, though. Why a moan and not a whimper or a sternly whispered, "Harry!"?

--Mike




Marie E. - May 30, 2004 1:17 pm (#258 of 298)

I think she was too scared of dying to worry about reprimanding Harry.




Dumbledore - May 31, 2004 7:23 am (#259 of 298)

I think she was saying that "smart-talking" with the Death Eaters could only lead to trouble.




zelmia - May 31, 2004 5:42 pm (#260 of 298)
Edited May 31, 2004 6:43 pm

Well, sorry to burst your bubble, but the majority of the Death Eaters learned that Voldemort was not a Pure Blood back in the "rebirthing" scene of GF. Voldemort tells all present - excepting Bella and Rastaban, who were still in prison - that he had summoned them there specifically because that was where he needed to perform the ceremony so he could use "the bone of the father" or whatever it was. Harry was tied to his father's gravestone, which no doubt has the name RIDDLE on it somewhere.

And Barb, one of our very early theories about how Lucius got the Diary was that Lucius’ father (whom we nicknamed Malfoy Sr.) had got hold of it, either through direct association with the larval Lord Voldemort, or some time later.




Dumbledore - Jun 1, 2004 1:47 pm (#261 of 298)

That's a good point about Zelmia. In addition to that, since we know that all the pure blood families are interrelated, Voldemort's would've shown up somewhere on the Black family tapestry. Voldemort, naturally, wouldn't have been blasted off by the lovely Mrs. Black! :-)




S.E. Jones - Jun 1, 2004 4:20 pm (#262 of 298)
Edited Jun 1, 2004 5:23 pm

Just because all pureblood families are interrelated, doesn't mean they are all related. There is a slight difference. I think the Black family tapestry just shows the Black family, like a family tree (at least that's my reading of it). It wouldn't show all the pureblooded families and every single branch, just the branches that matter to the Black family. For instance, Narcissa Black Malfoy is a Black by birth and thus on the tree, her husband, Lucius Malfoy, is on the tree because he married her. However, his family (siblings, parents, etc) isn't listed because it would be listed on some Malfoy family tree somewhere. Draco is only part Black by birth and thus shows up on the tree but his children would be Malfoys and so would show up on the Malfoy family tree. That's how it works with most pedigrees/family trees.

Therefore, Tom Riddle's mother may or may not be on the tree. It all depends on where her family (we don't know her last name) and the Black family cross over. (Narcissa and Draco would be a cross-over point.)




zelmia - Jun 2, 2004 7:53 pm (#263 of 298)
Edited Jun 2, 2004 9:00 pm

As I have spent the better part of my free time over the last 6 months in organizing photos and documents to put on CD-R disks for our own family tree(s), I can tell you that SE is exactly right. But this is the Diary thread so...




Catherine - Jun 3, 2004 6:40 am (#264 of 298)
Edited Jun 3, 2004 7:41 am

Sorry, Zelmia, but you're mistaken about all of the Death Eaters being present when Voldemort reminisces. Only Harry and Wormtail were present during Voldemort's "speech" about his Muggle father. The Death Eaters heard the account of how Voldemort lost his body and returned to them.

Chapter 33, p. 646 Scholastic Hardback:

"Listen to me, reliving family history..." he said quietly, "why I am growing quite sentimental...But look, Harry! My true family returns..."

The air was suddenly full of the swishing of cloaks. Between graves, behind the yew tree, in every shadowy space, wizards were Apparating."

So it is possible that many Death Eaters did not know about Voldemort's heritage until Harry taunted them with it at the Ministry.




haymoni - Jun 3, 2004 6:48 am (#265 of 298)

Keep reading, CA - I did the same thing. In the next part he tells the DEs that he needed the servant (Wormtail) and the bone of his father.

Now - since we haven't been told where wizards or even IF wizards are buried, we can only assume that they were in a Muggle graveyard and that the DEs would realize that his father was a Muggle.

That being said - Were the DEs that clever? Were they still smarting from the burning on their arms? Did they even know or care where they were? Were they still in shock over Voldemort's return?

It is completely possible that none of the DE's put 2 and 2 together. If they did, which one of them would be stupid enough to point out that their beloved Lord was a "Mudblood"?

I think, since they all believe in the pure-blood philosophy, they would just keep their mouths shut and follow him because he was taking them where they wanted to go - to a Mudblood, Muggle-free world.




S.E. Jones - Jun 3, 2004 1:23 pm (#266 of 298)

Well, we know from Crouch's wife that wizards are buried, so how do we know that they aren't buried next to Muggles or at least in graveyards that look like Muggle graveyards?

We don't.... yet.....




Catherine - Jun 3, 2004 4:06 pm (#267 of 298)

Haymoni,

You're right and Zelmia, you were right first!

I humbly abase myself. I shut my ears in the oven door!

Voldemort does mention his father as a "Muggle fool."

Quadruple OOPS! I somehow thought that he didn't mention that his dad was a Muggle.




Diagon Nilly - Jun 5, 2004 8:26 am (#268 of 298)

I agree with SE...however, I also think that with such an emphasis most wizards put in their superiority to Muggles, that most wizards would demand segregated graveyards.




snowflake - Jun 21, 2004 7:28 am (#269 of 298)

What I think is interesting with the Diary is, that at the end, "without thinking, without considering, as though he HAD MEANT TO DO IT all along, Harry seized the basilisk fang on the floor next to him and plunged it straight into the heart of the book." Is that how he is going to kill the present Voldemort, without thinking, without considering, because it was meant to be? Will this killing of Voldemort's memory mirror the future killing of the real Voldemort?




Mellilot Flower. - Jun 21, 2004 9:30 am (#270 of 298)

That’s a pretty nifty idea, he could also end up using some part of the very thing that Voldemort had been trying to use against Harry, in the case of the diary it was the basilisk, in this case it could be something vague like the prophecy... or something more specific like Legilimency, Voldemort's wand, some unknown thing yet to come...




Joost! - Jul 30, 2004 4:12 pm (#271 of 298)

I've been gone way too long...

Anyway, here's my view on the dairy (again).

If we have learned anything about Lucius, it would be that he is not an average DE. I'm not sure if he has a high rank in the organization, but he is one of the smartest characters in the books. I'm pretty sure he knew Riddle and Voldemort are one and the same.

That would imply he also knew what the Diary could do. He may have written in it, but being a lot more powerful/careful/wise/clever than 11 year old Ginny he could have found all he needed to know to succeed in his plan (whatever that was)

I agree with Mellilot that Lucius' ambition should not be underestimated and that makes his motives very sinister. One would think he was better off without the Dark Lord, so why did he plant the Diary the same summer Voldemort returned?

I can come up with 3 reasons:

1) He heard about Voldemort's return and either tried to help him (kill Mudbloods, kill Harry) or tried to somehow obstruct him. Maybe by creating a second Tom Riddle to fight the original Dark Lord. I'm positive Lucius knew about Voldemorts return in PS/SS because the rumour went through the entire school and somehow Dobby found out (Where else could he have heard it than at Malfoy manor?)

2) The Chamber was supposed to be opened 50 years after the last time. But wouldn't that mean it was opens every 50 years since it was created? or was it just 50 years after the first time?

3) JKR needed a plot for book 2 and it just happened to be this Diary and Lucius a year after book 1. Also she didn't realize the implications of Diary and of the knowledge of Voldemorts return in PS/SS.

I really hope it's not option 3 and option 2 seems odd somehow, so I'll put my money on option no. 1. I'm still not sure about Lucius' plan in CoS, and since we haven't heard much about it I wouldn't be surprised if we learn more about it in book 6.




zelmia - Jul 31, 2004 12:33 am (#272 of 298)

I agree with you, Joost. But remember we were talking at one point about the "plot" Dobby initially refers to so Lucius had to have discussed using the Diary for ... something... at some point where Dobby could overhear. Where I have trouble with it is how it relates specifically to Harry Potter.

Was the "plot" all this time to simply make him appear to be the Heir of Slytherin? And thereby discredit him once Voldemort returned to full power? Which Lucius must have known would happen. Again, the "my slippery friend" remark comes to mind.




Round Pink Spider - Jul 31, 2004 3:18 am (#273 of 298)

Although I agree that it might have been to help the Dark Lord return (not hinder -- JKR said that if the diary bit had succeeded it would have strengthened the present-day Voldie considerably), as I recall at the end of CoS, Dumbledore pointed out slyly that Ginny's involvement in the matter could have discredited her father and his Muggle Protection Act, which he was trying to get passed into law. Also, of course, Arthur was involved in all those raids, and at the beginning we saw that Lucius was beginning to feel the pressure.




zelmia - Jul 31, 2004 9:11 pm (#274 of 298)
Edited Jul 31, 2004 10:13 pm

Very true, RPS. But as we have discussed at length on this thread (I know it's a pain to go back and read ALL the posts, sorry) there seems to be more to the Diary's original intent than just Lucius’ use of it as a way to discredit Arthur. I mean, Lucius happened to have it. But what if he didn't?

We discussed very early on why Lucius had the Diary in the first place, and I don't believe that was why he was entrusted with its safekeeping. For one thing, there is no way anyone could have foreseen that Arthur would come up with a Muggle Protection Act, even if Lucius could see at once that he could use the Diary to foil him. Yes, that may very well be the extent of "the Plot" from CS, but again, why was it given to Lucius originally?




schoff - Jul 31, 2004 10:41 pm (#275 of 298)
Edited Jul 31, 2004 11:45 pm

It's most likely it wasn't given to him, Zelmia--especially for safe-keeping. I'm more than willing to bet that Lucius got his grubby little paws on that diary in some other way. Along with whatever stuff he has of the Dark Lord's.

Lucius is an opportunist. He probably found it when trying to salvage whatever he could when the Dark Lord first disappeared.

And I think you're wrong about the "no way anyone could have foreseen that Arthur would come up with the Muggle Protection Act." First off, Arthur works in the Misuse of Muggle Artifacts Office. Second, he's well known in the MoM. Third, it's most likely the Act was going to be written anyways, whether the author was Arthur or not.

That ticked Lucius, hater-hater that he is, off. He didn't want Muggles protected, and he definitely didn't want to go to jail for any of his, er, "poisons" and whatever they could appear to do (CS 4 51 US). He's clearly already ticked at Arthur in Knockturn Alley (and the anger has been brewing since before that point), and moments later when he gives Ginny the book. Smacks of premeditation to me. Hurting Ginny=hurting Arthur. Killing a few Mudbloods in the process--plus the possibility of DD losing Headmaster over it--was just icing on the cake.

I really doubt Lucius had any idea that Tom Riddle was capable of planning (or even able) to leave the diary. He probably thought it was just something that worked like an enchantment, not a real-life persona trying to call the shots.

Just another example of not being able to see all consequences of a not-very-well-thought-out plan.




TomProffitt - Aug 1, 2004 4:51 am (#276 of 298)

If Tom Riddle had succeeded with the diary plot in CS there would have been no need to get He Who Must Not Be Named a body.

"I decide to leave behind a diary, preserving my sixteen-year-old self in its pages .... "

The spirit of He Who Must Not Be Named, now hiding out in the Balkans would be able to go strait into this sixteen-year-old Tom Riddle. The Dark Lord returned to full power two years early.




zelmia - Aug 1, 2004 2:24 pm (#277 of 298)

-- I should have been more clear. When I said no one could have foreseen Arthur creating a Muggle Protection Act, I was thinking more of WAY back when Voldemort rose to power, first attacked Harry and became a Mist. I know that we don't agree on how Lucius obtained the Diary after that - or before that, even.




schoff - Aug 1, 2004 4:32 pm (#278 of 298)
Edited Aug 1, 2004 5:33 pm

Heh, no kidding about the disagreeing, Zelmia!

You're probably quite correct about the MPA not being a twinkle in anyone's eyes during VWI, but I wonder why it would take them an additional 12 years to finally put it into action. What could have initiated it? Voldemort's near return in P/SS?




zelmia - Aug 1, 2004 9:51 pm (#279 of 298)
Edited Aug 1, 2004 10:52 pm

That's what I was thinking as well. It may have been in the works for some time only we're just hearing about it in CS for the first time because that's when Harry first hears about it. That is a bit of a cop-out, I know. Then again, Lucius says something like "this new MPA..." So it does sound like perhaps the catalyst for this kind of legislation may very well have been Voldemort's near return.

If that is the case, then "the Plot" Dobby warns of may have been that simple after all: a way to discredit Arthur's MPA and implicate/eliminate Harry Potter all in one go.




schoff - Aug 1, 2004 10:11 pm (#280 of 298)
Edited Aug 1, 2004 11:12 pm

You know, Zelmia, that line from Dobby is pretty sinister. It's a very heavy line, particularly when coupled with its delivery. And it does sound like the planner(s) are the ones initiating it; but is it possible that Dobby knew of the potential consequences and not Lucius--by that I mean Riddle's near escape, not the potential body count.

Was Lucius the only one involved in the plot? Dobby says he's known about the plans for months (CS 2 16 US). Lucius certainly wasn't talking to Draco about them, as Draco was at school. Was Narcissa in on it? She seems overprotective, would she have allowed Lucius to do it while Draco was at school? Could other DE's have been involved because they had just as much to lose from the MPA that Lucius apparently did?

I really think Lucius was just counting on the potential deaths (making him an attempted murderer in my book), but perhaps Dobby knew better? Why would Dobby be worried about Harry if the Diary only attacks Muggle-borns? Harry's not a Muggle-born. Harry only becomes a target later because Riddle wanted him.

Ugh, too many questions. I have to start thinking of more answers.




zelmia - Aug 2, 2004 12:04 am (#281 of 298)
Edited Aug 2, 2004 1:07 am

I remember we were talking about this, it seems, very long ago. Back at the beginning of this Thread, I believe. We had discussed the "heaviness" of "Dobby's Warning" and I remember we also talked about its relationship to the Diary.

Was Dobby the only one with THAT kind of foresight? I think the answer we came up with then was, "Yes, perhaps." He is of a species/race of beings we know very little about, other than that they have, as George or Fred says, "Powerful magic of their own".

Then again, it seems that the only way Dobby could use that kind of foresight would be to know the extent of Lucius’ plan to use the Diary - which would, in turn, mean that Dobby would have to have knowledge of how the Diary works.

Hmm... You're right. Too many questions.... I too will ponder the answers..




Nathan Zimmermann - Aug 13, 2004 11:00 am (#282 of 298)

I have a question. How did the sixteen year old self of Tom Riddle/Voldemort learn of the existence of Harry Potter?




Chris. - Aug 13, 2004 11:12 am (#283 of 298)

Through Ginny. She kept writing in the diary about Harry and how he defeated Lord Voldemort. Tom Riddle was already using that name when he was at Hogwarts, so he discovered his future.




Archangel - Aug 13, 2004 10:38 pm (#284 of 298)

I wonder what other events did Riddle place in that diary. It couldn't have just been all about the Chamber and Hagrid's frame up.




zelmia - Aug 14, 2004 12:15 am (#285 of 298)

That's an interesting question, Archangel . One we haven't really discussed before. I would think that he would be able to recall any event within that time frame that he chooses. Remember that nothing "appears" to have been written in the Diary. But since it is Riddle himself who controls what is recalled, I personally think that he could show any event he wanted to.

Now as to the validity of that event, that's another question entirely. How much of that event can we take as "historically accurate", as it were, and how much is simply Riddle's own skewed interpretation of the event?




Madame Librarian - Aug 15, 2004 9:29 am (#286 of 298)

More questions about the Diary:

At the end of the book, who ends up with the Diary? Starting on pg. 337 (US paperback) of CoS, the scene proceeds with Lucius storming out of DD's office, kicking and beating Dobby. Harry asks DD if he can return the book to Malfoy, then he dashes after them. On the way (somehow, he's a multitasker contortionist, I guess) he rips off his shoe, pulls off his sock, stuffs the diary into the sock and hands to slimy package to Malfoy. Malfoy is appalled, rips the sock off the book, and throws the sock away. Dobby catches it and is free. There is no more mention of the dairy for the rest of the scene, but Malfoy was the last to have his hands on it.

In the movie Harry places the sock inside the diary (I'll bet they tried it the other way, and it was just too hard to do that and keep running; socks normally aren't big enough to jam a book into), and it's clear that Dobby is the last one to hold the diary. He announces his freedom and then zaps Lucius, as Lucius prepares to AK Harry (at least, it seems as if that's what he's about to say). I can't recall if Dobby is still holding the book or what. (Sheesh, I just watched the DVD Friday night and the scene is foggy in my memory.) Anybody? Maybe we shouldn't pay any attention at all to the movie choreography of this scene.

In the book there is no attempted curse. Malfoy just says, "You've lost me my servant, boy!" as he lunges as Harry. According to the book, he doesn't even have his wand out yet; that comes after he is thrown backwards and gets up again. The diary is never referred to again in that scene.

So does Lucius still have it? Is that going to be a problem in the future? Can it still function or be repaired? I suppose one argument against it being a danger is that DD would never had let Harry return it to Malfoy if the book still had any potential evil magic in it, the basilisk fang having drained everything totally out of it. Another argument of its unimportance now is the fact the JKR let the film version be so different, implying that Dobby ended up with the book, or at least not Lucius. But, coming from a long line of worriers, I am thinking there is a little window of chance that its ability to cause trouble is not over yet.

(*Takes deep, cleansing breath before launching into another question.*)

We get a pretty clear explanation of how Diary Tom is able to control Ginny, and the resulting lethal effect it has on her. Once Harry starts "communicating" with Diary Tom, why is Harry able to stay so unaffected? Is it just a matter of Diary Tom not using that draining/controlling thing because he didn't need to since Ginny was in the process of dying already and providing all the life force or whatever needed? (Terribly long sentence there.) I would think, since he admits that Harry is his real target now, this would be the best move--dump Ginny as controllee, switch to Harry, have him release the basilisk (or do it himself when the process is complete), get restored to life as Harry dies, kill Ginny. This seems like a win-win situation as opposed to the tactic he does take, leaving a chance that an unknown factor (like Fawkes) to ruin his grand plan.

And last, this was touched upon a while back on this thread, but I'm not sure where we ended up on this or if the topic just fizzled--if Diary Tom had succeeded, he would have co-existed with the present-day Voldemist. Now that's an interesting conundrum--who's the real one? And, why doesn't Voldemist kind of sense what's happening here? Can't he almost get the mind signals from Harry? Maybe not. Hmmm....

Enough!!

Ciao. Barb




Paulus Maximus - Aug 15, 2004 1:02 pm (#287 of 298)

I think if Diary Tom had returned to life, Lord Voldemort would have "possessed" him, and there would still be only one Voldemort.

Of course, I base that idea on the movie quote "Lord Voldemort will return, very much alive."




zelmia - Aug 15, 2004 2:32 pm (#288 of 298)

Barb, I think that was indeed, Riddle's plan ("My real target has been you"). But then Ginny steals the Diary back, much to Riddle's chagrin ("Imagine how disappointed I was when the next time someone wrote in my diary it was Ginny").

As to what happened to the "burned-out" Diary, you're right. It isn't really clear, is it? I tend to agree that there must be no further use for it because of Dumbledore: a) allowing Harry to "give it back"

b) explaining that no one will be able to prove that Voldemort was acting through the Diary

c) warning Lucius about giving away "any more" of Voldemort's old school things (in other words, "Don't try this again.")




Eponine - Aug 15, 2004 4:27 pm (#289 of 298)

As far as why Diary Tom wasn't able to control Harry, I thought that it took a while for him to be able to control Ginny. Ginny had been writing in the diary for quite a while before the first attack, hadn't she? Harry only wrote in the diary once to my recollection. I think it would probably take a little more than that for him to be controlled. Ginny was more susceptible to the diary too I think. She didn't really seem to have any friends, and the diary provided an outlet for her feelings, an outlet that wasn't going to be mocking her crush on Harry or judging her for being poor. Harry had friends to turn to, so he wasn't as likely to be pouring out his soul to a faceless friend.

How long did Harry have the diary after he found out how to use it until Ginny stole it back?




zelmia - Aug 15, 2004 7:14 pm (#290 of 298)
Edited Aug 15, 2004 8:15 pm

Exactly, Eponine. Ginny had been writing in the Diary for months and, literally, pouring her soul into the Diary.

To answer your question, I think Harry only had it a few days. But let's see... Hermione gets out of the hospital wing the first week of February or so (she tries the "revealer" on it). Then Harry figures out how to use the Diary on Valentine's day (when the dwarf causes ink to spill all over it). So that's only about a week, or two at most. Of course, Ginny steals it back something like the next day.




Archangel - Aug 15, 2004 7:25 pm (#291 of 298)

Do you think that Voldemort kept more diaries sort of placing his memories there every time he accomplishes something significant or something he wishes to keep a secret? Say, 1 diary for how he cheated death the first time or a diary when he found out that he was Slytherins heir. This might be a reason why Voldemort barely remembers who he was before he became Voldemort because those memories are no longer in him. He might be using these diaries the way DD uses a pensieve. What do you think?




zelmia - Aug 15, 2004 11:20 pm (#292 of 298)
Edited Aug 16, 2004 12:40 am

Archangel , I am going to say no on that one, although others may disagree. I happen to believe that the reason Riddle created the Diary in the first place was to become his own Heir (Zelmia 10/6/03 9:41am Actually, this discussion gets really juicy ).

I don't remember him saying that he barely remembers who he was before he became Voldemort. He seems pretty able to recap most of his own life in the Graveyard Speech in GF.




haymoni - Aug 16, 2004 6:36 pm (#293 of 298)

I think he had to stop what he was doing or he would end up going back to the orphanage. Better to live with Mudbloods than Muggles.

Who knew if he would ever have access to Hogwarts again? The diary was really quite a good idea.




schoff - Aug 18, 2004 9:57 pm (#294 of 298)

Barb: Once Harry starts "communicating" with Diary Tom, why is Harry able to stay so unaffected?

In addition to the length of time Harry had the book versus Ginny, I also think that what was written in the book helped Harry stay unaffected. Ginny wrote personal stuff, feelings, etc. Harry was very impersonal--he just asked it questions.

Archangel : Do you think that Voldemort kept more diaries sort of placing his memories there every time he accomplishes something significant or something he wishes to keep a secret?

No, I don't. That's a lot of work, and while young Tom may have been up to the challenge, I think Voldemort was more interested in preserving his real life, not the memory of one.




caro - Sep 11, 2004 7:59 am (#295 of 298)

I was just thinking at what could have happened if Tom had succeeded and I came with this idea.

Once out of the diary, 16-year-old Tom could have searched for present day Voldemort. Then the present day Voldemort would have been able to use his own body, just like he used Quirrell’s...

I would like to see what you think on this, so feel free to disagree with me.




Paulus Maximus - Sep 11, 2004 1:15 pm (#296 of 298)

"I was just thinking at what could have happened if Tom had succeeded and I came with this idea. Once out of the diary, 16-year-old Tom could have searched for present day Voldemort. Then the present day Voldemort would have been able to use his own body, just like he used Quirrell’s... I would like to see what you think on this, so feel free to disagree with me."

I swear I've said this before, but after seeing the movie, I very much agreed with that; 16-year-old Tom would merge with the present-day Voldemort, and as Tom said in the movie, "Lord Voldemort will return, very... much... alive..."




zelmia - Sep 11, 2004 1:43 pm (#297 of 298)

I think that's why Tom created the Diary in the first place. It would ensure his own immortality one way or another.




caro - Sep 11, 2004 5:25 pm (#298) of 298)
Edited Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

Paulus Maximus: Sorry that I came with this idea without reading all the posts first to check if it had been said. I didn't mean to copy or "steal" your idea.

Zelmia: Yes, I totally agree with you, it was just another way to make himself immortal.
Potteraholic
Potteraholic
Ravenclaw Prefect
Ravenclaw Prefect

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

Back to top Go down

The Very Secret Diary Empty Re: The Very Secret Diary

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

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