DD's Portrait
Jim Hawkins
portrait is seen to have appeared - of DD.
But he simply slumbers! Why does he not denounce Snape as his murderer, or
admit his error about Snape's allegiance ?
Since the portraits are perfectly able to converse he would surely want to
warn everyone about Snape ?
And later on he would surely want to continue his lessons with Harry ?
As things stand, Snape could even return to Hogwarts denying that he helped
the DEs but rather that he was simply chasing them away (nobody apart from
Harry and the DEs actually saw him kill DD).
Apologies if this has been discussed before.
Jim Hawkins
Joe Bednorz
<v6o2i.25630$8C7....@newsfe07.ams>:
Now you know why JKR said Dumbledore was giving her trouble in DH.
--
Welcome to NetHack. | I take what I'm given.
| You exploit the game.
All the best, | He's an abusive cheater.
Jove (Joe Bednorz)
dkots...@yahoo.com
Do we really know that much about how portraits work?
-DaveK
honeysuc...@bellsouth.net
DD would never approach things that way and until his burial on the
grounds he may not be able to communicate. We know that the portrait
can enter anywhere there is a portrait of that person hanging. I also
think the portrait has to be spoken to before it speaks the first
time. Some portraits are more active than others as we have seen in
the books. I think the old headmasters must help the new headmasters
until that persons death or recognized replacement is obtained. So
until McGonagall asks DD something or requests he looks in somewhere
for her I think he will just hang around watching, waiting and
listening. As far as continuing harry's private tutoring I believe it
to be over. DD can not search down objects through his painting unlees
their is a painting of him near a horcrux.
Paracelsus
Portraits appear to have very limited capabilities. In an interview, JKR
said that a wizard portrait is merely a faint imprint of the living
person which cannot do much more than repeat catchphrases. They are not
the actual spirit of the living person as a ghost is. The portaits we
have seen so far can pass messages back and forth and make comments that
reflect the attitudes of the living person but not much more. JKR has
not fully explained the limitations of wizard portraits, so we can only
speculate on what these might be. For example, it is possible that
Dumbledore's portrait will only be able to repeat things that he said
during his lifetime. This might mean that if the living Dumbledore never
told anyone his reasons for trusting Snape, his portrait will not be
able to reveal the secret. On the other hand, the portrait might assist
Harry and a critical juncture by reminding Harry of some important
lesson that Harry has forgotten.
drusilla
I think he might need a time before being an active portrait.
Richard Eney
Paracelsus <petersim@_nospam_shaw.ca> wrote:
<snip>
>Portraits appear to have very limited capabilities. In an interview, JKR
>said that a wizard portrait is merely a faint imprint of the living
>person which cannot do much more than repeat catchphrases. They are not
>the actual spirit of the living person as a ghost is. The portaits we
>have seen so far can pass messages back and forth and make comments that
>reflect the attitudes of the living person but not much more. JKR has
>not fully explained the limitations of wizard portraits, so we can only
>speculate on what these might be. For example, it is possible that
>Dumbledore's portrait will only be able to repeat things that he said
>during his lifetime.
Portraits can say things they haven't said in life:
when Phineas Black learned that Sirius was dead, he said the last of the
blacks is dead - nobody before him would have said that, and he wouldn't
have said it until after Sirius died. That also means that portraits
can learn new facts and respond appropriately.
That's a lot more than a faint imprint repeating catchphrases.
I wish JKR wouldn't try to describe things without checking what
she actually wrote.
=Tamar
Richard Eney
Especially if he took the Draught of Living Death. It may have to wear off.
=Tamar
Ron Hunter
Toon
>When Prof. McGonagall et al enter DD's office after his murder, a new
>portrait is seen to have appeared - of DD.
>But he simply slumbers!
It's tiring being a portrait late at night.
>Why does he not denounce Snape as his murderer, or
>admit his error about Snape's allegiance ?
How would the portrait know what happened to the real, and dead, Albus
DD? Not to mention, Harry already told them Snape killed DD by then.
Then again, when did anybody ever talk to him? And what would such an
admittance, if true, accomplish?
>Since the portraits are perfectly able to converse he would surely want to
>warn everyone about Snape ?
Would he? Might that not ruin a certain plan DD went to the trouble
of dying for?
>And later on he would surely want to continue his lessons with Harry ?
He would?
>As things stand, Snape could even return to Hogwarts denying that he helped
>the DEs but rather that he was simply chasing them away (nobody apart from
>Harry and the DEs actually saw him kill DD).
He left with them. And Harry's been right so far: Vs back. Draco was
up to no good. Don't trust Snape.
Toon
<inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>On Tue, 15 May 2007 20:46:32 +0100, Jim Hawkins wrote in
><v6o2i.25630$8C7....@newsfe07.ams>:
>
>>When Prof. McGonagall et al enter DD's office after his murder, a new
>>portrait is seen to have appeared - of DD.
>>But he simply slumbers! Why does he not denounce Snape as his murderer, or
>>admit his error about Snape's allegiance ?
>>Since the portraits are perfectly able to converse he would surely want to
>>warn everyone about Snape ?
>>And later on he would surely want to continue his lessons with Harry ?
>>As things stand, Snape could even return to Hogwarts denying that he helped
>>the DEs but rather that he was simply chasing them away (nobody apart from
>>Harry and the DEs actually saw him kill DD).
>>Apologies if this has been discussed before.
>>
>>
>
> Now you know why JKR said Dumbledore was giving her trouble in DH.
No, he just wouldn't accept having no feet is grounds for never
getting warm socks.
Toon
Harry could sling his portrait over his back.
Toon
NIgelis sure had free will. he even questioned and doubted Sirus'
death. Something the real one surely never said in his life.
Toon
wrote:
or coming to life tires a portrait out, and he was resting up to
become active.
Paracelsus
Are you sure? In life he may have been the type of person who was
always questionning and contradicting.
The point of killing off Dumbledore was to leave Harry alone. Harry
needs to find the Horocruxes and solve the mystery of Snape himself,
using what Dumbledore has already taught him. If the portrait was able
to feed Harry answers, that would defeat the purpose of Dumbledore's death.
honeysuc...@bellsouth.net
> Toon wrote:
> >On Tue, 15 May 2007 23:23:12 GMT, Paracelsus
> ><petersim@_nospam_shaw.ca> wrote:
>
You are right on it. DD would not have died if it were not necessary
for Harry to do this on his own with of course some help from his
friends.
drusilla
> On Tue, 15 May 2007 20:46:32 +0100, "Jim Hawkins"
> <jimha...@manx.net> wrote:
>
>> When Prof. McGonagall et al enter DD's office after his murder, a new
>> portrait is seen to have appeared - of DD.
>> But he simply slumbers!
>
> It's tiring being a portrait late at night.
But... IICR, in OotP and CoS all portraits sleep at night. For what we
know, they're only duty is to help the headmaster, they even probably
had something to do with shutting the office when DD left, so, it's more
than being just paintings. Perhaps at night they only wake up when the
new Headmaster needs them: not a temporary, like McG, but the permanent.
No Headmaster, no needs, they sleep. Just a theory.
honeysuc...@bellsouth.net
wrote:
When McGonagall enters DD office their hangs a new picture of another
dead Headmaster framed in gold looking down on her. She is trying to
find out what Harry and DD were doing while they were gone and he says
he can't tell her. Then She's consulting the head of houses to find
out if the school should close and Everard tells McGonagall that the
Minister of magic is headed her way. So she has to be recognized as
the new Head Mistress or the paintings would not inform her of these
things nor would they allow her to take over DD office. I do not
believe the paintings can tell McGonagall what Harry and DD were
keeping from everyone else even though he's now dead.
Toon
wrote:
Which are just pictures, and not one for talking.
Toon
<petersim@_nospam_shaw.ca> wrote:
>>NIgelis sure had free will. he even questioned and doubted Sirus'
>>death. Something the real one surely never said in his life.
>>
>>
>Are you sure? In life he may have been the type of person who was
>always questionning and contradicting.
Yes. I doubt he had much opportunity in life to question his last
descendants untimely death.
Toon
I think they hold massive parties at night and complain about how the
current headmaster runs things.
Joe Bednorz
<fd2o43dh6mq0b28hi...@4ax.com>:
This is a cleft stick of JKR's own devising. Harry has to be the
hero, but DD has to be there to keep Harry alive up until he's strong
enough on his own. Dumbledore has to guide Harry without giving away
too much of the endgame plot.
So instead of the saintly Dumbledore in book after book we get
Bumbledore, full of lame excuses and confused explanations. In HBP
finally, finally JKR gets to kill DD off. But that doesn't begin to
solve the problem due to the portraits.
There are similar tensions in the original Star Wars trilogy where Obi
Wan Kenobi tries to explain his previous BS. Only Alec Guinness could
convincingly play a ghost using something as mundane as bureaucratic
psychobabble.
Gandalf in "The Lord of the Rings" has a similar problem. It's
explained that Gandalf's mission is to be a catalyst. The struggle
itself must be decided by the efforts of the peoples of Middle-Earth.
Tolkien also has the deeper basing of faith. There are higher powers
for whom Gandalf is only a messenger. (NB: "Angel" means messenger.)
Those higher powers won't take over and defeat Sauron themselves. They
will ensure that Sauron can be defeated if the peoples of Middle Earth
resist him. (Note well the difference between "can be defeated" and
"will be defeated.")
JKR's use of portraits has come back to bite her. (FTM DD has plenty
of reason to come back as a ghost, if only to help Harry.) Dumbledore's
previous incompetent waffling is going to look like genius compared to
what his portrait will have to babble. Prepare yourself for lots of
"from a certain point of view" speeches. Or a clumsy authorial fiat
keeping Dumbledore's portrait from being helpful. We've already had one
example of that at the end of HBP.
--
Links to Gigabytes of free books on line, emphasis on SF:
<http://www.mindspring.com/~jbednorz/Free/>
All the Best,
Joe Bednorz
SPT
> When Prof. McGonagall et al enter DD's office after his murder, a new
> portrait is seen to have appeared - of DD.
> But he simply slumbers! Why does he not denounce Snape as his murderer, or
> admit his error about Snape's allegiance ?
> Since the portraits are perfectly able to converse he would surely want to
> warn everyone about Snape ?
> And later on he would surely want to continue his lessons with Harry ?
> As things stand, Snape could even return to Hogwarts denying that he helped
> the DEs but rather that he was simply chasing them away (nobody apart from
> Harry and the DEs actually saw him kill DD).
> Apologies if this has been discussed before.
>
> Jim Hawkins
You have to remember that Dumbledore is no spring chicken, being
nearly 157 years old at this time. In addition he had just finished
something of a hard day, what with swimming in icy water twice,
deliberately cutting his arm open, drinking a poison potion, flying
through the night air in wet clothing, getting killed, falling off a
tall tower, etc. It is enough to tire anyone out, let alone a
quindecanarian suffering from a terrible curse.
Frankly I don't see how anyone can begrudge the poor guy a bit of kip.
On May 17, 5:31 am, Joe Bednorz <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 May 2007 03:52:47 -0400, Toon wrote in
> <fd2o43dh6mq0b28hifot4fhrniq25e0...@4ax.com>:
First of all, Obi-wan's explanation of why he didn't tell Luke about
Vader is not "bureaucratic psychobabble". It is an explanation that is
reasonably consistent with the events shown in Revenge of the Sith. I
admit the "from a certain point of view" catchphrase is a very amusing
euphemism for "baldface lying". I use it myself. But clearly Darth
Vader is different from Annakin Skywalker. He is obsessed with power,
paranoid and vicious.
What was Obi-wan to do? Tell Luke that his father was Darth Vader, a
murderous, tyrannical Sith Lord? That would not have been true. Luke's
father was a hero of the Republic, a kind and loving man. The seed of
the Dark Side was in him, it is true. But it had not yet been brought
into bloom.
In a similar vein, I will not have you making slurs against Gandalf.
Even after he was sent back, no one, except possibly Frodo, did more
in the fight against Sauron than did the White Rider. Gandalf released
Theoden from Wormtongue's charm, drove off the Nazgul harrying
Faramir's retreat, fought in defense of Minas Tirith--- including
personally facing off against the Witch-king of Angmar at the breech,
despite knowing that he could not kill him and then fought in the
battle at the gates of Mordor. A mere "messenger"? Hardly.
Moving on to Dumbledore, I personally doubt that your prediction is
going to come true. I would be very much surprised if JKR does not
have an actual master plan. The revelation of the true reason for
Harry's connection to Voldemort may be tricky to tell, but I scarcely
think that it will be cobbled together nonsense.
Drusilla
Actually, they should have let Dolores enter the office. Then... fun time!
~consul
>> portrait is seen to have appeared - of DD.
>> But he simply slumbers!
> It's tiring being a portrait late at night.
>> Why does he not denounce Snape as his murderer, or
>> admit his error about Snape's allegiance ?
> How would the portrait know what happened to the real, and dead, Albus
> DD? Not to mention, Harry already told them Snape killed DD by then.
> Then again, when did anybody ever talk to him? And what would such an
> admittance, if true, accomplish?
I wonder if those portraits are there, and while it was a newly displayed, perhaps they are made/commissioned at an earlier time, and DD has talked to him before. It is only regularly ensconced on the wall after the death, like a new reveal.
--
"... respect, all good works are not done by only good folk. For here, at the end of all things, we shall do what needs to be done."
--till next time, Jameson Stalanthas Yu -x- <<poetry.dolphins-cove.com>>
~consul
> nearly 157 years old at this time. In addition he had just finished
> something of a hard day, what with swimming in icy water twice,
> deliberately cutting his arm open, drinking a poison potion, flying
> through the night air in wet clothing, getting killed, falling off a
> tall tower, etc. It is enough to tire anyone out, let alone a
> quindecanarian suffering from a terrible curse.
>
> Frankly I don't see how anyone can begrudge the poor guy a bit of kip.
"Get some rest then. If you haven't got your health, you haven't got anything."
-the Six-Fingered Man