When Snape killed Dumbledore, did the majestic wizard really die?
Tolkien's resurrection of Gandalf in "The Two Towers" gives a shiver of hope to any Harry Potter readers who don't want to see the end of Hogwarts' headmaster.
Most of us would love to think Dumbledore isn't really dead. You have to love a guy who uses candy ("lemon drops," "Fizzing Whisbees") as the passwords to his secret office. And who, when asked by Harry in Book 1 ("Sorcerer's/Philosopher's Stone") as they stand in front of the Mirror of Erised (it's "d-e-s-i-r-e" backwards for newby Potter readers) what he most wants he says, a warm pair of socks. And who has a brother who's been in trouble with the law for what may be a rather perverted habit. Fun fact for newby readers: Dumbledore is an old English West Country (King Arthur territory) term for bumblebee. Albus means white. Here's a link to the Wikipedia entry on Dumbledore, which includes the meanings and allusions for all his names, including Percival Wulfric (think Beowulf) and Brian. And here's another link, to an excellent compendium of Dumbledore lore, including the allusion to the scar on his knee that was a perfect map of the London underground. I had forgotten about that.
All this -- the Gandalf reappearance, the affection most readers have for him, the symbolism of his pet and his Patronus being a phoenix, which arises from the ashes -- has led to a fruitful but, I believe, misguided thread of theorizing that Dumbledore will return. But how?
Author J.K. Rowling has said many many times, generally when asked about Harry's parents, that when you're dead, you're dead. Even in the wizarding world. She has said she always knew Dumbledore would have to die, because Harry must make his way alone. That's in keeping with the heroic epic genre in which she's writing.
Of course, knowing she'd have to kill Dumbledore doesn't prove he won't come back. Maybe she knew she'd have to kill him off because she knows his return plays a role in the climax? See, even I can try to make myself believe it.
But sorry. I'm afraid that when Dumbledore died, he died.
Friday, July 13, 2007
Dumbledore: Dead or Alive?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
11 comments:
I might be fuzzy on Potter details compared to some, but I know Gandalf, Frodo and their Old English roots.
And Rowling has said she's not a huge Tolkien fan.
If this link below doesn't work, Google Rowling and Nicorette to find the story:
http://www.time.com/
time/magazine/article/0,9171,1083935,00.html
I'd bet money (or lemondrops) that Dumbledore stays dead. And Harry dies. I can't imagine Rowling letting Harry fade away, as Frodo does.
On the other hand, in the interview linked above, Rowling says Dumbledore is no Jesus. But she doesn't say Harry is no Jesus. And she remarks that her sister sees her as quite similar to Dumbledore. So will she let her own horcrux stay dead?
I have to say that Dumbledore is dead yes, BUT he will guide Harry and his pals in spirit, ghost, or some other form. I just feel she can't leave Harry hanging for the last book.
She has stated this isn't the case. Her quote " You shouldn't expect Dumbledore to pull a Gandalf."
http://www.hpana.com/news.19531.html
Just to offer my two cents: I think that Dumbledore is really dead too, but since dead people in photos seem to be capable of interacting with the living I see no reason why Dumbledore shouldn't be able to continue offering advice to Harry or the other characters.
STOP POSTING POTENTIAL SPOILERS ON THE MAIN PAGE OF CHARLOTTE.COM. Please post these ideas behind a spoiler guard. You're ruining the books for everyone. I don't care if it's "your speculation." Make it a choice whether we read it - don't splash it on the Charlotte.com front page.
"STOP POSTING POTENTIAL SPOILERS ON THE MAIN PAGE OF CHARLOTTE.COM. Please post these ideas behind a spoiler guard. You're ruining the books for everyone. I don't care if it's "your speculation." Make it a choice whether we read it - don't splash it on the Charlotte.com front page."
Exactly! We haven't seen the movie but thanks for the spoiler? Jeez.
Um, I really don't think this qualifies as a spoiler.
This is definitely a spoiler for those of us that are watching the movies but not reading the books. Thanks a lot, charlotte.com.
Bob, I have to recommend that you read the books instead of blogs that advertise themselves as filled with speculation for the seventh.
That being said, PLEASE don't print any spoilers when the book comes out! Also - come on Mary, I want some more Potter Blog - the book's not out for a few days yet - this was really a fun break at work!!
And Meg is right, Bob. If you haven't read the books, why read this? Also - you should read the books - you're missing out on a lot. Half the stuff we are discussing here isn't even in the movies! People start reading!! One of the best things this series has done is get a bunch of kids who otherwise weren't reading, to read...thank goodness!
One thing that strikes me about all of JK's books is that they do follow the laws of real life -- whether Magic or Muggle. So if someone dies, there is no way she'd bring that person back to life, magic or no. What kind of message would that send to the millions of young people reading her books? That if someone you love dies, they might come back? She's not that selfish and cruel.
It's obvious to any HP fan that Dumbledore, as a former headmaster of Hogwarts, will be "present" through his portrait in the headmaster's office. Therefore, although he is in the spirit world, he will be able to communicate with Harry.
Now with book 6 being almost entirely devoted to "life in the pensieve," Dumbledore may leave a memory or two available for Harry to witness two important events:
(1) What Snape did to earn Dumbledore's complete trust (I imagine an Unbreakbale Vow, with perhaps Hagrid as the Bonder), and
(2) What agreement Snape and Dumbledore had about the latter's demise. I believe Dumbledore asked Snape to sacrifice him, if necessary.
Post a Comment