I’m increasingly struck by the foreshadowing EY uses. Instead of pulling things out of his ass, he sets up whatever happens. Unlike the original series, I expect a satisfying ending where all the pieces fit together and make sense.
Along these lines, go back and look at the little chat Quirrell had with Harry after they broke Bella out of Azkaban. To summarize Quirrell: People are hypocritical and delusional pricks who will bleed their grandmothers for a nickel. They care nothing for people accused of crimes, but instead sadistically compete to show strength by abusing them. Being young and naive, you can still tolerate them, but once their idiocy strikes at something dear to you, you’ll despise them as I do, and decide it’s better to rule them than tolerate the abominations that inevitably follow when you don’t.
And what happens? Hermione is accused of a crime, which is transparently improbably, but people compete to sadistically abuse her regardless. Their idiocy strikes at something dear to Harry, and in his heart, he declares war on magical Britain, musing “Dark Lord” just doesn’t sound as bad as it used to.
EY and Quirrell couldn’t have spelled it out more clearly.
Shouldn’t this have occurred to Harry as well? When does he make the connection to that discussion?
It occurs to me, as I state in another thread below, that if Quirrell wasn’t looking for a distraction to steal the stone, but really just wanted to make a point to Harry, he has done it. He could easily now save the day with some evidence to exonerate Hermione, and even tell Harry that he did the whole thing just to show Harry who was right in their discussion after the breakout. As a bonus, when Harry finds out that Dumbledore was complicit in Narcissa’s murder, covering up for Bones for political purposes, Harry will see that Dumbledore was willing to trade Hermione’s torture execution for political gain.
And speaking of making a point, didn’t Hat and Cloak tell Hermione that Harry would sacrifice her if he had to? Maybe he’ll be able to make two points with one scheme. He’ll push Harry away from everyone but Hermione, but Hermoine away from him? Imagine Harry’s bitterness and desolation.
That’s pretty good.
But maybe the plot fails because Hermione doesn’t hate Harry for not saving her, and that’s something that Quirrell just can’t understand. Hermoine saves the day by thinking of others over herself, and keeping Harry off the Quirrell path. Seems a likely homily form EY.
I recently reread the chapter where Dumbledore gives Harry his rock. Its kind of shocking at how well it was written where the first time you are completely confused and the second time you are like, “Oh dumbledore you magnificent bastard’
Recap of Chapter 17 and how Dumbledore manages to act insane while still giving meaningful advice and not lying. ”Why?” Dumbledore repeated. “Ah, Harry, if I went around all day asking why I do things, I’d never have time to get a single thing done! I’m quite a busy person, you know.”
Dumbledore means that he doesn’t spend all day asking himself ‘why am i protecting the magical world’ he just goes out and does it. It doesn’t mean he just wanders around doing random acts.
“I’m sorry,” Harry said. He felt wretched at this point, he’d just told off Gandalf essentially, and Dumbledore’s kindness was only making him feel worse. “I shouldn’t have distrusted you.”
“Alas, Harry, in this world...” The old wizard shook his head. “I cannot even say you were unwise.”
Since Dumbledore was the one that wrote the note in the first place Harry WAS wise to distrust him. Dumbledore manipulated Harry like a puppet.
“So… why do I have to carry this rock exactly?” “I can’t think of a reason, actually,” said Dumbledore.
A current theory is that it contains the Philosophers stone, its certainly more important than just a rock. Dumbledore can’t think of a reason why he would need it but he is giving it to Harry Just In Case, hence why he can’t of a reason why Harry might need it. Its the same reason why Harry carries around a full med-kit.
edit: Okay as has been pointed out to me its a pretty poor theory that is almost certainly wrong.
“This,” Dumbledore intoned, “was your mother’s fifth-year Potions textbook.”
“Which I am to carry with me at all times,” said Harry.
“Which holds a terrible secret. A secret whose revelation could prove so disastrous that I must ask you to swear—and I do require you to swear it seriously, Harry, whatever you may think of all this—never to tell anyone or anything else.”.
This book is proof that Dumbledore intervened to make Lily Evans distrust Snape, who was the friend she is referring to. Snape whose entire existence is based upon his love for Lily had it taken away from him by Dumbledore. Quite a terrible secret indeed, but until you know that you think that Dumbledore just snuck into the girl’s dorms to mess with their mind.
A current theory is that it contains the Philosophers stone, its certainly more important than just a rock.
If it’s the Philosopher’s Stone, why would Dumbledore say it was James Potter’s Rock, or that he found it in Godric’s Hollow? Then again it might be a big rock from Godric’s Hollow that contained the (small?) Philosopher’s Stone embedded inside. But could Harry Transfigure it if he didn’t correctly know its current Form, or whatever the term is? Is it even safe to routinely transfigure the Philosopher’s Stone?
Which holds a terrible secret.
It also holds the hint that Dumbledore gave Lily that enabled her to come up with the dangerous potion that made her sister Petunia pretty, enabling her to marry Harry’s father Professor Michael E-V. Many people think this is the fabled “single point of departure from canon”. Could be important, but it’s hard to see how.
But EY has specifically said that there’s no single point of departure, so I’m not sure why people are searching for one. If nothing else, the Interdict of Merlin is a departure from canon(even if it took me a while to notice—it’s so natural that it seemed to fit right in), and that’s 1400 years into the past.
I seem to remember that someone else quoted him as saying there is a single point of departure, and that’s why we’re searching for one. Can someone please find the quote if it exists? I’m lazy.
Good point about Interdict of Merlin. But if that’s the one point of departure, I find it difficult to believe that Eliezer has a good explanation of why it generated so few changes after 1400 years of history that we still have a Potter vs Voldemort scenario at all.
Edit: Eliezer has written (at least) this description:
This is not a strict single-point-of-departure fic—there exists a primary point of departure, at some point in the past, but also other alterations. The best term I’ve heard for this fic is “parallel universe”.
I presume the Interdict counts as “other alterations”.
A current theory is that it contains the Philosophers stone, its certainly more important than just a rock.
It’s certainly not the Philosopher’s Stone. The only reason the stone isn’t at the Ministry (or Gringotts) is that Hogwarts provides the absolutely best protection:
“I do not own it, that thing which Voldemort desires. It belongs to another, and is held here by his consent! I asked if it could be kept in the Department of Mysteries. But he would not permit that—he said it must be within the wards of Hogwarts, in the place of the Founders’ protection—” Dumbledore passed his hand across his forehead. “No,” the old wizard said in a quieter voice. “I cannot pass this blame to him. He is right. There is too much power in that thing, too much that men desire. I agreed that the trap should be laid behind the wards of Hogwarts, in the place of my own power” (Ch 79).
I can’t see Dumbledore going and giving it to Harry to wear on his finger.
A current theory is that it contains the Philosophers stone, its certainly more important than just a rock.
It might just be a rock. It’d violate the rules of storytelling, but Dumbledore reasoned incorrectly, and the laws of probability are LAWS. *ominous thunder* That consideration could take precedence in an author tract like this one, Chekhov’s Gun be damned.
Magic in this universe is like a muscle, the more you use it the more powerful it becomes. Transfiguration in particular is mentioned as being extremely dangerous, but learning early in life gets you disproportionate gains in your adult transfiguration, hence why they even teach it to children.
Dumbledore is probably just building up Harry’s strength by constantly exercising his ‘transfiguration muscle’.
This book is proof that Dumbledore intervened to make Lily Evans distrust Snape, who was the friend she is referring to. Snape whose entire existence is based upon his love for Lily had it taken away from him by Dumbledore. Quite a terrible secret indeed, but until you know that you think that Dumbledore just snuck into the girl’s dorms to mess with their mind.
Where are you getting this? What makes you think he intervened to make her distrust Snape, and why do you think that’s the reason things didn’t work out with Snape and Lily? I don’t see this from the chapter.
Also, what’s the deal with Fawkes and the evil parents and him running away?
Dumbledore said the textbook contains a terrible secret. Telling a teenager how to make her sister magically pretty in a dangerous way is bad, but is it terrible?
So there’s this theory that the terrible secret is that Dumbledore screwed Snape. You think that’s wrong, but do you have an alternate suggestion for a terrible secret that has already been shown to the readers other than the Pretty, Pretty Potion of Doom?
I figured it was just Dumbledore fucking with Harry because he’s crazy, like when he told Harry to carry the rock with him, or when he said Fawkes was a chicken.
I don’t understand why the writing in the book would have worked to screw Snape. How could anyone guess that it would have that effect.
It’s not like Dumbledore shies away from flat-out lying when it suits him. Unless you think lying in writing and lying in person are meaningfully different?
I have a theory. In canon, the fact that Harry’s mother died for him produced some kind of magical protection. Harry had to live with his relatives during the summer to keep that protection alive.
Maybe in HPMoR, Dumbledore speculates that Harry can keep that protection in place by carrying a part of Harry’s old home (the rock) with him.
I think he meant the note that came with the Cloak that said to not trust Dumbledore since he’ll take the Cloak from Harry. which he didn’t, and then said:
But you and I are both gamepieces of the same color, I think. The boy who finally defeated Voldemort, and the old man who held him off long enough for you to save the day. I will not hold your caution against you, Harry, we must all do our best to be wise. I will only ask that you think twice and ponder three times again, the next time someone tells you to distrust me.
And considering that he wrote the note, and set up the mistrust in the first place...
Then Harry’s mind clicked on another implication, and he looked down at the steel ring on his left hand’s pinky finger, and almost swore out loud when he saw that the tiny diamond was missing and there was a marshmallow lying on the ground near where he’d fallen.
He’d sustained that Transfiguration for seventeen days, and would now need to start over.
Could’ve been worse. He could’ve done this fourteen days later, after Professor McGonagall had approved him to Transfigure his father’s rock. That was one very good lesson to learn the easy way.
It’s been a lot more than a month since then, but that’s the last we hear of it as far as I can tell.
And ever since, I’ve looked forward to the moment when Harry, lacking access to a wand, realizes that he has the means to launch a heavy object at a very high speed by simply ceasing the Transfiguration at the right moment while swinging his fist.
Earlier, Harry had unTransfigured his father’s rock from where it usually rested on his pinky ring in the form of a tiny diamond, and placed the huge gray stone back into his pouch. Just in case Harry’s magic failed entirely, when he confronted the darkest of all creatures.
EY and Quirrell couldn’t have spelled it out more clearly.
Shouldn’t this have occurred to Harry as well? When does he make the connection to that discussion?
Harry has repeatedly shown that he’s blind to Quirrell’s darker motives. It seems to be a necessary contrivance: if he turned against Quirrell before he came fully into his power, he’d lose. I can think of a fictional justification for it, though. He applies the same rationalization to Quirrell’s actions that we use when explaining our own, and he does it because he’s a copy of the person he’s making excuses for. It’s probably not psychologically realistic, but it’s neat enough that I could suspend my disbelief if it turned out to be the case.
All sorts of biases are at work in Harry towards Quirrell. Halo effect from his power, knowledge, competence, and rationality. Gratitude for saving Harry’s life. For helping against the bullies. For sharing the outerspace spell.
Respect for Q because he seems to respect Harry, and plays to his vanity. The Uber Competent adult mentor takes him seriously and tells him he is destined for great things, and includes in his plotting and actions. He’s the Dad Harry has always wanted.
Besides Hermione, he’s the only friend Harry has ever had. He didn’t quit in Azkaban because he couldn’t lose Quirrell.
I think that’s enough justification for a blind spot in this regard. It would just show that for all his brilliance, Harry is a human being,
So I guess I’m answering my own question. It’s reasonable for Harry to have this blind spot, and narratively useful for an author who wants to pontificate about biases. At some point, Harry’s going to have a talk with himself, or maybe even Quirrell, about how Quirrell spelled it all out to him, but he didn’t listen.
And to be fair to Harry, he does question Quirrell’s motives a good deal. His values him, while not entirely trusting him.
I haven’t been able to find the article at the moment, but there is evidence that we rationalize for friends, family, and allies in the same way we rationalize for ourselves. If you consider someone on ‘your side’, your brain can go through exceptional mental gymnastics to explain their behavior.
I’m increasingly struck by the foreshadowing EY uses. Instead of pulling things out of his ass, he sets up whatever happens. Unlike the original series, I expect a satisfying ending where all the pieces fit together and make sense.
Along these lines, go back and look at the little chat Quirrell had with Harry after they broke Bella out of Azkaban. To summarize Quirrell: People are hypocritical and delusional pricks who will bleed their grandmothers for a nickel. They care nothing for people accused of crimes, but instead sadistically compete to show strength by abusing them. Being young and naive, you can still tolerate them, but once their idiocy strikes at something dear to you, you’ll despise them as I do, and decide it’s better to rule them than tolerate the abominations that inevitably follow when you don’t.
And what happens? Hermione is accused of a crime, which is transparently improbably, but people compete to sadistically abuse her regardless. Their idiocy strikes at something dear to Harry, and in his heart, he declares war on magical Britain, musing “Dark Lord” just doesn’t sound as bad as it used to.
EY and Quirrell couldn’t have spelled it out more clearly.
Shouldn’t this have occurred to Harry as well? When does he make the connection to that discussion?
It occurs to me, as I state in another thread below, that if Quirrell wasn’t looking for a distraction to steal the stone, but really just wanted to make a point to Harry, he has done it. He could easily now save the day with some evidence to exonerate Hermione, and even tell Harry that he did the whole thing just to show Harry who was right in their discussion after the breakout. As a bonus, when Harry finds out that Dumbledore was complicit in Narcissa’s murder, covering up for Bones for political purposes, Harry will see that Dumbledore was willing to trade Hermione’s torture execution for political gain.
And speaking of making a point, didn’t Hat and Cloak tell Hermione that Harry would sacrifice her if he had to? Maybe he’ll be able to make two points with one scheme. He’ll push Harry away from everyone but Hermione, but Hermoine away from him? Imagine Harry’s bitterness and desolation.
That’s pretty good.
But maybe the plot fails because Hermione doesn’t hate Harry for not saving her, and that’s something that Quirrell just can’t understand. Hermoine saves the day by thinking of others over herself, and keeping Harry off the Quirrell path. Seems a likely homily form EY.
I recently reread the chapter where Dumbledore gives Harry his rock. Its kind of shocking at how well it was written where the first time you are completely confused and the second time you are like, “Oh dumbledore you magnificent bastard’
I’m still completely confused: what happened with the rock?
Recap of Chapter 17 and how Dumbledore manages to act insane while still giving meaningful advice and not lying.
”Why?” Dumbledore repeated. “Ah, Harry, if I went around all day asking why I do things, I’d never have time to get a single thing done! I’m quite a busy person, you know.”
Dumbledore means that he doesn’t spend all day asking himself ‘why am i protecting the magical world’ he just goes out and does it. It doesn’t mean he just wanders around doing random acts.
“I’m sorry,” Harry said. He felt wretched at this point, he’d just told off Gandalf essentially, and Dumbledore’s kindness was only making him feel worse. “I shouldn’t have distrusted you.”
“Alas, Harry, in this world...” The old wizard shook his head. “I cannot even say you were unwise.” Since Dumbledore was the one that wrote the note in the first place Harry WAS wise to distrust him. Dumbledore manipulated Harry like a puppet.
“So… why do I have to carry this rock exactly?” “I can’t think of a reason, actually,” said Dumbledore.
A current theory is that it contains the Philosophers stone, its certainly more important than just a rock. Dumbledore can’t think of a reason why he would need it but he is giving it to Harry Just In Case, hence why he can’t of a reason why Harry might need it. Its the same reason why Harry carries around a full med-kit. edit: Okay as has been pointed out to me its a pretty poor theory that is almost certainly wrong.
“This,” Dumbledore intoned, “was your mother’s fifth-year Potions textbook.”
“Which I am to carry with me at all times,” said Harry.
“Which holds a terrible secret. A secret whose revelation could prove so disastrous that I must ask you to swear—and I do require you to swear it seriously, Harry, whatever you may think of all this—never to tell anyone or anything else.”.
This book is proof that Dumbledore intervened to make Lily Evans distrust Snape, who was the friend she is referring to. Snape whose entire existence is based upon his love for Lily had it taken away from him by Dumbledore. Quite a terrible secret indeed, but until you know that you think that Dumbledore just snuck into the girl’s dorms to mess with their mind.
If it’s the Philosopher’s Stone, why would Dumbledore say it was James Potter’s Rock, or that he found it in Godric’s Hollow? Then again it might be a big rock from Godric’s Hollow that contained the (small?) Philosopher’s Stone embedded inside. But could Harry Transfigure it if he didn’t correctly know its current Form, or whatever the term is? Is it even safe to routinely transfigure the Philosopher’s Stone?
It also holds the hint that Dumbledore gave Lily that enabled her to come up with the dangerous potion that made her sister Petunia pretty, enabling her to marry Harry’s father Professor Michael E-V. Many people think this is the fabled “single point of departure from canon”. Could be important, but it’s hard to see how.
But EY has specifically said that there’s no single point of departure, so I’m not sure why people are searching for one. If nothing else, the Interdict of Merlin is a departure from canon(even if it took me a while to notice—it’s so natural that it seemed to fit right in), and that’s 1400 years into the past.
I seem to remember that someone else quoted him as saying there is a single point of departure, and that’s why we’re searching for one. Can someone please find the quote if it exists? I’m lazy.
Good point about Interdict of Merlin. But if that’s the one point of departure, I find it difficult to believe that Eliezer has a good explanation of why it generated so few changes after 1400 years of history that we still have a Potter vs Voldemort scenario at all.
Edit: Eliezer has written (at least) this description:
I presume the Interdict counts as “other alterations”.
Yeah, I never thought about it, Maybe D isn’t evil, making Snape suffering with Lili; maybe he was just trying to help Petunia.
Could someone explain how D made Snape suffer?
Telling lies, plotting, sneakering invisible in the girl’s dorm (writing in her book while invisible), so that Lili disliked Snape.
...or teaching Lily more about potions, by getting her to examine what would happen with different ingredients in various potions.
It’s certainly not the Philosopher’s Stone. The only reason the stone isn’t at the Ministry (or Gringotts) is that Hogwarts provides the absolutely best protection:
I can’t see Dumbledore going and giving it to Harry to wear on his finger.
It might just be a rock. It’d violate the rules of storytelling, but Dumbledore reasoned incorrectly, and the laws of probability are LAWS. *ominous thunder* That consideration could take precedence in an author tract like this one, Chekhov’s Gun be damned.
Magic in this universe is like a muscle, the more you use it the more powerful it becomes. Transfiguration in particular is mentioned as being extremely dangerous, but learning early in life gets you disproportionate gains in your adult transfiguration, hence why they even teach it to children.
Dumbledore is probably just building up Harry’s strength by constantly exercising his ‘transfiguration muscle’.
Wax on, wax off.
Reasoned incorrectly how?
Where are you getting this? What makes you think he intervened to make her distrust Snape, and why do you think that’s the reason things didn’t work out with Snape and Lily? I don’t see this from the chapter.
Also, what’s the deal with Fawkes and the evil parents and him running away?
I see you already replied to the post that explains this position.
Dumbledore said the textbook contains a terrible secret. Telling a teenager how to make her sister magically pretty in a dangerous way is bad, but is it terrible?
So there’s this theory that the terrible secret is that Dumbledore screwed Snape. You think that’s wrong, but do you have an alternate suggestion for a terrible secret that has already been shown to the readers other than the Pretty, Pretty Potion of Doom?
I figured it was just Dumbledore fucking with Harry because he’s crazy, like when he told Harry to carry the rock with him, or when he said Fawkes was a chicken.
I don’t understand why the writing in the book would have worked to screw Snape. How could anyone guess that it would have that effect.
It’s not like Dumbledore shies away from flat-out lying when it suits him. Unless you think lying in writing and lying in person are meaningfully different?
I have a theory. In canon, the fact that Harry’s mother died for him produced some kind of magical protection. Harry had to live with his relatives during the summer to keep that protection alive.
Maybe in HPMoR, Dumbledore speculates that Harry can keep that protection in place by carrying a part of Harry’s old home (the rock) with him.
I think he meant the note that came with the Cloak that said to not trust Dumbledore since he’ll take the Cloak from Harry. which he didn’t, and then said:
And considering that he wrote the note, and set up the mistrust in the first place...
Hence, Magnificent Bastard.
I think it’s still in his pouch.
(Edit: Whoops, this is wrong.) Chapter 30:
It’s been a lot more than a month since then, but that’s the last we hear of it as far as I can tell.
And ever since, I’ve looked forward to the moment when Harry, lacking access to a wand, realizes that he has the means to launch a heavy object at a very high speed by simply ceasing the Transfiguration at the right moment while swinging his fist.
How about while flicking his finger?
Chapter 43, before confronting the Dementor:
Aha! Well there you go, then.
Harry has repeatedly shown that he’s blind to Quirrell’s darker motives. It seems to be a necessary contrivance: if he turned against Quirrell before he came fully into his power, he’d lose. I can think of a fictional justification for it, though. He applies the same rationalization to Quirrell’s actions that we use when explaining our own, and he does it because he’s a copy of the person he’s making excuses for. It’s probably not psychologically realistic, but it’s neat enough that I could suspend my disbelief if it turned out to be the case.
All sorts of biases are at work in Harry towards Quirrell. Halo effect from his power, knowledge, competence, and rationality. Gratitude for saving Harry’s life. For helping against the bullies. For sharing the outerspace spell.
Respect for Q because he seems to respect Harry, and plays to his vanity. The Uber Competent adult mentor takes him seriously and tells him he is destined for great things, and includes in his plotting and actions. He’s the Dad Harry has always wanted.
Besides Hermione, he’s the only friend Harry has ever had. He didn’t quit in Azkaban because he couldn’t lose Quirrell.
I think that’s enough justification for a blind spot in this regard. It would just show that for all his brilliance, Harry is a human being,
So I guess I’m answering my own question. It’s reasonable for Harry to have this blind spot, and narratively useful for an author who wants to pontificate about biases. At some point, Harry’s going to have a talk with himself, or maybe even Quirrell, about how Quirrell spelled it all out to him, but he didn’t listen.
And to be fair to Harry, he does question Quirrell’s motives a good deal. His values him, while not entirely trusting him.
I haven’t been able to find the article at the moment, but there is evidence that we rationalize for friends, family, and allies in the same way we rationalize for ourselves. If you consider someone on ‘your side’, your brain can go through exceptional mental gymnastics to explain their behavior.