Donny comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 10 - Less Wrong

11 Post author: Oscar_Cunningham 07 March 2012 04:46PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (641)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: [deleted] 13 March 2012 11:38:31PM 16 points [-]

It would simply be bad writing to set up a mysterious and malevolent figure like Hat and Cloak and then reveal him as one of the story's established villains. It's redundant, a wasted move, to reveal that the villain was secretly a villain. It drains tension from the story to reveal that the heroes were only facing one opponent, not two. I would rule out the possibility just by assuming a competent author.

A point in favor of Hat and Cloak being Grindelwald: the playing card he chose to represent Dumbledore was the King of Hearts. ♥

Comment author: shokwave 14 March 2012 03:23:14AM 5 points [-]

It would simply be bad writing to set up a mysterious and malevolent figure like Hat and Cloak and then reveal him as one of the story's established villains.

Unless the reveal involved learning about the Voldemort-Quirrell symbiosis, or Voldemort-Hat-and-Cloak outsmarting Voldemort-Quirrell, or any of a dozen other dramatic reveals.

A point in favor of Hat and Cloak being Grindelwald: the playing card he chose to represent Dumbledore was the King of Hearts. ♥

At first I wanted to say "reading too deeply", but you have a point: the choice of card was not a throwaway line, it was intended to be mysterious, so it should have some depth worth plumbing.

Comment author: [deleted] 14 March 2012 05:41:45AM 6 points [-]

I like it here! Everyone's so gracious. Upvoted and thank you.

Comment author: LucasSloan 15 March 2012 12:46:55AM 0 points [-]

Unless the reveal involved learning about the Voldemort-Quirrell symbiosis, or Voldemort-Hat-and-Cloak outsmarting Voldemort-Quirrell, or any of a dozen other dramatic reveals.

You're postulating increasingly complex (ie unlikely) explanations to defend your theory. Donny's statement is strong evidence for H&C not being one of the existing villains.

Comment author: shokwave 15 March 2012 01:12:10AM 1 point [-]

That's a disjunction of several unlikely explanations; any one alone is enough to 'defend' my theory.

Comment author: prasannak 14 March 2012 07:42:41AM *  1 point [-]

Why do you think that particular Santa Claus was H & C ?

Sounded more like Lupin to me, with the 'getting into more trouble than James' reference.

Comment author: [deleted] 14 March 2012 11:47:30AM 0 points [-]

That Santa Claus is Hat and Cloak was the implication I took from this exchange. Still seems correct to me. It's the combination of his paranoid advice and ignorance of current events. Why would Lupin tell Harry to avoid Dumbledore? (That's the letter with the 'more trouble than James' reference.)

Comment author: LucasSloan 15 March 2012 12:54:56AM 0 points [-]

Why would Lupin tell Harry to avoid Dumbledore?

This is a good question, and we do in fact have evidence that Lupin doesn't totally trust Dumbledore - he worries that Dumbledore may have sent Harry off to evil step-parents.