= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 13, chapter 81
This is a new thread to discuss Eliezer Yudkowsky’s Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality and anything related to it. This thread is intended for discussing chapter 81, which should be published later today. The previous thread passed 400 comments as of the time of this writing, so it will pass 500 comments soon after the next chapter is posted, if not before. I suggest refraining from commenting here until chapter 81 is posted; comment in the 12th thread until you read chapter 81. After chapter 81 is posted, I suggest all discussion of previous guesses be kept here, with links to comments in the previous thread.
There is now a site dedicated to the story at hpmor.com, which is now the place to go to find the authors notes and all sorts of other goodies. AdeleneDawner has kept an archive of Author’s Notes. (This goes up to the notes for chapter 76, and is now not updating. The authors notes from chapter 77 onwards are on hpmor.com.) When posted, chapter 81 should appear here.
The first 5 discussion threads are on the main page under the harry_potter tag. Threads 6 and on (including this one) are in the discussion section using its separate tag system. Also: one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight,nine, ten, eleven, twelve.
As a reminder, it’s often useful to start your comment by indicating which chapter you are commenting on.
Spoiler Warning: this thread is full of spoilers. With few exceptions, spoilers for MOR and canon are fair game to post, without warning or rot13. More specifically:
You do not need to rot13 anything about HP:MoR or the original Harry Potter series unless you are posting insider information from Eliezer Yudkowsky which is not supposed to be publicly available (which includes public statements by Eliezer that have been retracted).
If there is evidence for X in MOR and/or canon then it’s fine to post about X without rot13, even if you also have heard privately from Eliezer that X is true. But you should not post that “Eliezer said X is true” unless you use rot13.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Comments (1099)
re-reading chapter 76 made me realise the prophecy could not be about Voldemort at all :
Let's look at this prophecy in detail :
"The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches,"
Vanquish, as Snape said, is a strange word to describe a baby accidentally toasting Voldemort, especially since we have evidence that this might not be what really happened. "Dark Lord" is used by EY quite loosely, and not as something specifically relating to Voldemort. Indeed, Dumbledore seems to worry that he could be this Dark Lord. Now, if we step outside of what we think we know about the prophecy...
Who is Harry trying to "vanquish" ? Who is it which Harry has "the power to Vanquish" ?
Dementors ? Death in general ? Dementors as an incarnation of Death ?
Could Death be considered as the Dark Lord ? I admit this is stretching the use of the word Dark Lord, but it does sounds interesting and more appropriate to Vanquish. Now, bear with me a moment and let's look at the rest of the prophecy : Born to those who have thrice defied him,
Now, while Lily and James have defied death 3 times, there's a million person in the same case on the planet. But WHO has defied Death three times in the Universe ?
The Peverell Brother. Harry's ancestors through the Potter Family.
Born as the seventh month dies, And the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal,
The Tale of the Three Brothers specifically says : "..."And then he [the third brother Ignotus, owner of the Cloak] greeted Death as an old friend, and went with him gladly, and, as equals, they departed this life." Harry having the Cloak works, as such. Alternatively, Harry "killing" Dementors make Death and he litteraly equals, in that they can destroy each other.
But he will have power the Dark Lord knows not,
The only unique powers Harry has are Dementor 2.0 and partial transfiguration Dementor 2.0 seems rather good.
And either must destroy all but a remnant of the other, For those two different spirits cannot exist in the same world.
I find really interesting that nowhere it is said that the dark lord "lives". "Destroy all but a remnant" could mean Dementing Harry, or Destroying all dementors except one, or giving Philosopher's Stones to everyone but without the death rate falling to zero (because accidental Death would still happen buit would not be an inevitability.
Note that this theory (still improbable, if I had to bet on it I wouldn't assign more than a 15 % chance for Death to be the "Dark Lord" of the prophecy) is still compatible with Dumbledore trying to trick Voldemort in a Dark ritual, or both of them interpreting the prophecy as in canon.
Well, so much for that !
IIRC, canon!Harry met a vampire in book VI. Does anyone know if they exist in the MORverse?
My instinct would be that rational!Harry would have already encountered them while researching immortality - especially since he frequently compares the wizarding world with D&D, where the primary form of magical immortality is to become an undead wizard, or "lich", although I doubt he would actually accept immortality via vampirism - they may be bound by magical law (or at least the Statute of Secrecy) but I expect it still screw with your utility function, magic and social/legal status.
I don't remeber him explicitly dismissing this path, which could be conservation of detail, indicative that vampires don't exist in MOR, or me misremembering.
I'm not sure if anyone has commented on this, but I just noticed it while rereading the Self-Actualization chapters:
Hermione went to tremendous lengths to be her own person rather than just something of Harry's, including becoming a general and fighting bullies. Now she has sworn herself into Harry's service and house forever. That is really sad.
That's only a legal formality, though. Harry hates the wizard society and wouldn't use its laws against her, and he'd discourage others from acknowledging it.
Still, Hermione (unlike Harry) cares what others think of her, so being surrounded by people who act as if she belongs to Harry is going to hurt her.
He's just (ab)used the laws of wizarding society to get Hermione out. I can certainly imagine him using his position over her if it is useful for solving the next crisis he has to deal with.
Also, Harry has a dark side, it might also do things.
The laws of Wizarding society are, broadly speaking, insane. There is a vast gulf between twisting or breaking a rule that makes no sense and violating the trust of a friend like Hermione.
"You can't put a price on a human life."
"I agree, but unfortunately reality has already put a price on human life, and that price is much less than 5 million dollars. By refusing to accept this, you are only refusing to make an informed decision about which lives to purchase."
It suddenly occurs to me that Dumbledore has seen two interactions between Harry and a Dementor. In the first one, it almost destroys him. In the second, he casts a Patronus that destroys it. Neither would seem to provide the kind of evidence that you would need to confidently assume that other Dementors would run away from you if you said "Boo" to them.
So, is this enough evidence for Dumbledore to decide that he's wrong about who broke Bellatrix Black out of Azkaban?
Time for a new thread, surely.
http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/bfo/harry_potter_and_the_methods_of_rationality/
Can we get a sub-reddit? I'm tired of finding out which is the right thread for the present, and all the posts are scrambled over multiple threads, etc.
A sub-reddit might also get new people to hpmor, as opposed to being on lesswrong.com
I don't have a reddit account, but I'd create one if hpmor was there.
http://www.reddit.com/r/hpmor
Did anyone archive the April Fool's chapter from ff.net?
The April Fool's chapter was never in fanfiction.net, it was in a site made to look like like fanfiction.net, where it still is.
Hypothesis: the Source of Magic is an AI with the goal to work in the way (magical) people really believe it should work. Or maybe, to make the world work in the way (magical) people really believe it should work. The strength of belief appears to be important, so a strong belief can override weak ones. On the other hand, when something is already "generally known" to work in a certain way, this is a very strong belief.
Examples:
1. Broomsticks work by Aristotelian physics [because it was what people believed when the broomsticks were invented, and now people just know (=believe really strongly) that's how broomsticks should behave]
2. Spell names and laws [inventors create spells by finding sounds they believe should work. When spells become known, they stabilize in that form]
3. Potions Law
4. Ritual magic [people really believe in sacrifices and not getting something for nothing]
5. Ghosts (and afterlife?) [effects of religious beliefs]
6. Harry's partial transfiguration [very strong belief, finds a loophole to not be in conflict with existing strong beliefs of other people]
Magic doesn't make sense to Harry because it now reflects lots of ad hoc rules and beliefs accumulated in centuries. Wizards and witches believe them from childhood. [No wonder they are half-insane.]
Interestingly, this hypothesis implies that Dumbledore's narrative causality may actually work - people do believe in stories.
Wow. That's just an absolutely fabulous theory. In one fell swoop, you explain why EY appeared to leave AI out of his largest story yet, plausibly account for a vast array of in-story phenomena, and rehabilitate a character (Dumbledore) who seems suspiciously irrational for someone who's supposed to have oodles of meaningful in-story-real-world accomplishments. The theory has falsifiable, concrete predictions -- for example, we should not expect the AI to care if Harry asks it really nicely to give everyone magic powers; nor should we expect magic to be able to do anything that a super-intelligent AI couldn't do (simulating cat-brains is AOK; uncomputably complicated time loops are not OK). The theory also seems to fit with Chapter 82's hint that people subsumed by pheonix fire are re-instantiated "instances" of a more general Fire. In other words, the AI can maybe call the "Harry" subroutine somewhere else if it wants.
I'm in awe.
One possible victory condition if the AI in fact is coded to enforce the beliefs of people with a particular genetic marker is for Harry to find a way to put that marker into most people / his friends using a retrovirus. Does anyone else find it in the least suspicious that Harry's father is an expert biochemist?
So, have there been any fundamentally uncomputable events in the story so far? :-)
Almost all the possible consequences of Quirrell's plot with Hermione might have helped Quirrellmort somehow:
The question is which set of events Quirrell most wanted to happen, and whether he will consider the events of Chapter 81 a success or a failure. Harry successfully saved Hermione, which might indicate failure if we take the plot at face value. But Quirrell would surely have foreseen Harry's going to any lengths to save Hermione, and Quirrell knows that Harry read that Rita Skeeter article. Perhaps he
The Harry-horcrux has a speaking part in Chapter 81, saying "DIE" when he looks at Dumbledore. If Quirrell's main goal was not to immediately rid Harry of all his strongest allies, but simply to further coax out Harry's Dark Side and further drive the wedge between Harry and Dumbledore, then he can count it as a success.
Maybe Quirrell didn't actually have one particular outcome in mind; maybe he just wanted to inch the pieces forward so he could plan his next move.
I do hope that tomorrow's chapter shows us what happened with Quirrell, how he got out of his interrogation without drawing attention, and what his mental state is about all this. If everything up to now has gone as planned, surely the rest of the arc will show Quirrell's attempt to make Harry believe that Dumbledore was behind it all. If everything has not gone as planned, if Quirrell did not expect to see Harry spend 250% of his fortune to save Hermione, then Quirrellmort will be pissed, and I shudder to think what his drastic next move might be.
Every possible result is a negative for Harry when his closest ally is accused of murdering his next closest ally. Even if he "wins" it is going to hurt, and it did. I can't square that with the motives of someone who wants to make Harry dark and strong. It is a big risk, especially when you are stuck in an interrogation cell for the grand finale.
With Eliezer's comments about how plots are better when they aren't needlessly complicated and the point isn't to trick the reader into wildly off-base or over-the-top-speculation, I've increased my probability of Harry being placed into Slytherin by the actual Sorting Hat up to 50%. If we assume that it was Dumbledore that veto'd the Hat's choice, why didn't he place Harry into Gryffindor? He would have been much closer to MacGonagal, Dumbledore's most loyal agent. Was he trying to keep him close to Hermione? Can anyone recall support for that in the text?
HPMOR!Harry's wand signalled itself to him by BLUE and BRONZE sparks, while Canon!Harry's one made red and gold. (IMO as a reference to the Phoenix, not Griffindor).
I'd take it as a strong hint from EY that Ravenclaw IS Harry true House.
This is another case of an issue that's supposed to be mysterious to the characters, but not to the readers. We know what actually happened: the Sorting Hat said "SLYTHERIN!" to try to scare the crap out of Harry, to make his life flash before his eyes, to make him think that his hopes and dreams were ruined, so he would get serious and vow right then and there not to become the next Dark Lord. But the Hat actually, truly meant him to go to Ravenclaw.
Harry acknowledges that this is what happened: "It had been an awfully cruel prank the Hat had played on him, but you couldn't argue with the results on consequentialist grounds."
No other characters know what happened, so it adds to Harry's mystique for them, but we, who saw the whole thing from Harry's point of view, ought to know better.
Harry is wrong sometimes. From his point of view Quirrell is awesome, and engaging his Dark Side is a perfectly valid option whenever he runs into a problem hard enough (despite his vow to not become the next Dark Lord). He acts more Slytherin than Ravenclaw most of the time.
If Harry had an image of himself as belonging to Ravenclaw and not Slytherin, and the Hat told him "You deserve this too" and then yelled out "SLYTHERIN!"... and then after a few seconds of silence yelled out "Just Kidding, RAVENCLAW!" - given that Harry knows nothing about any of the major players, and has no idea how powerful Dumbledore is and his usual crazy-style of plotting - than to him the most probable explanation is likely "The hat must've played a cruel prank on me to teach me a lesson."
But if he had knowledge of the politics and players in Hogwarts, didn't have such a strong self-identity as Ravenclaw, and hadn't had his "prank" mental network readily available due to the Hat scolding him about it just a few minutes beforehand, a neutral interpretation of the facts would've placed at least an equally high probability on someone meddling with his sorting, as on the Hat played its first prank in over 600 years.
Your "neutral interpretation of the facts" apparently ignores the facts that the Sorting Hat has never been self-aware before, that Harry is aware that the Hat is self-aware now, and that the Hat is borrowing a lot of knowledge and a little bit of personality from Harry's own brain at the time of the prank.
I just fail to see how you can take an explanation that fits 100% of the known facts, and then somehow, by applying
, you come up with a needlessly complicated and speculative idea that assumes the existence of secrets we have no clues about.
But Harry is a Slytherin. At his very core is his ambition to become immortal and reorganize the universe to his satisfaction. He wants knowledge, and he wants it for its own sake, but it's not his deepest wish. If he looked into the Mirror of Erised he'd see himself as the benevolent and omnipotent lord of the universe, not himself surrounded by books.
Just an odd thought about something Draco said in Chapter 48:
...is - is Hogwarts sentient? If it's animate, capable of creative expression, and self-constructing, it's not out of the question that Hogwarts might be in some sense intelligent or alive. It'd also explain some things about the Hogwarts security system, to say nothing about the Room of Requirement, in canon.
Thoughts on the whole "guess the solution" situation from last chapter.
When I first reached the end of the chapter and the "You have 5 days to find the solution" bit, for some frantic moments I was worried that Eliezer would let get Hermione go to Azkaban if we weren't sufficiently clever to find the solution. It seemed rather unlikely, because we didn't seem to be so very near the end of the whole of HPMOR (and surely Hermione's effective killing would have major repercussions).. but I had already known about the similar situation in Three Worlds Collide, so yeah, I couldn't be quite sure. I read the related author's notes trying to check for a confirmation or the opposite, but there was nothing clearly stated, only the hint that a solution should have been clearly foreshadowed.
At around this point, after a few brief seconds of considering begging Eliezer not to let Hermione get eaten by Dementors, no matter whether we find the solution or not -- I just decided to do the simpler and slightly less embarrassing thing and actually figure out the solution instead. (Reading the author's notes had convinced that it was meant to be a fair solution after all)
I must have come up with the idea in 5 minutes after that, as I was rereading the chapter. I don't remember the exact thought-process, but I do remember that the solution "snapped easily into place" as Eliezer mentioned. When I thought it, I was certain this was the solution. It was pretty much the only earlier significant discussion of the handling of debts in Wizarding society. From an authorial-perspective it explained why Fred&George's article had to talk about saving Arthur Weasley from the Imperius curse, instead of saving his life. That a trading-of-debts was possible was indicated in the very previous chapter (though the particular debts mentioned wouldn't have been valid).
So, yeah, once I had thought it up, I was pretty confident it was the real solution, enough to bet money on (and win some money) it. It had snapped into place.
During the later discussions I did think also about whether Malfoy will try to bankrupt the Potters in addition to the debt, because I did consider the fact that the monetary compensation of Arthur Weasley was also mentioned in that Rita Skeeter article... which thought was also partly behind several of my various specifications I listed at the time I did the bet-- it being a lesser debt, it being only part of the solution, etc, but I didn't mention it for two reasons (a) At this point Eliezer had already clarified that Harry's solution was really written, and that therefore my adding further details wouldn't actually help save Hermione (b) I had been sufficiently convinced by Malfoy "not for any price will I trade away vengeance", etc, that I thought it would most likely not be a monetary debt that Malfoy would seek in compensation.
(b) was wrong, because I didn't properly consider that Malfoy might make an offer that he believed it certain to be refused, and that would be obvious to all that he thought it certain to be refused. I should have considered this possibility, because after all Lucius had already done the same in the current chapter.
What I thought Malfoy might seek in additional compensation, or that Harry Potter might offer in additional compensation, if the two debts didn't cancel themselves out... would be an Unbreakable Vow towards the purpose of hunting down whoever was behind the plot to hurt Draco or the killing of Narcissa; much parallleling the earlier promise Harry made to Draco himself. I felt this was the sort of thing that might let both Lucius Malfoy and the Wizengamot save face; and yet would produce interesting consequences further down the line.
Progress of Eliezer vs JKR, Fvapr Ryvrmre unf fgngrq gung gur fgbel jba'g or ybatre guna gur frira obbxf, cre jbeq, naq gung vg'f zber guna unysjnl qbar
I don't get it pretty clear. Could you explain in few words?
The individual colored patches are the five first JKR books, and the overlapping patch is The Methods of Rationality, plotted by chapter and book, vs the number of total words written. MoR is now longer than all the first four books put together. The reason I made the graph was I was wondering if those two individual EY statements (rot13'd in my statement above) were would add up to make more than one bit of information, but they did not.
If Eliezer finishes Methods of Rationality at 150% of current length, we'd end up midway into the sixth book.
A matter with the Comed-Tea that was bugging me for a while:
Chapter 14:
Hypotheses: Comed-Tea on person = impulse to drink, Comed-Tea not on person = no impulse to drink.
According to Chapter 12:
So no matter what, even if you don't end up drinking it, you will get the Impulse before something funny happens.
Chapter 46:
So Harry has used up all of his Comed-Tea. (edit: it appears that Harry actually has tons left unless he's not mentioning some he drank/gave away, look at bottom of post)
...
WHY? WHYYY?!
It is apparent that you'll still get the impulse to drink whether or not you do end up drinking. So why didn't he save a can he's never ever going to drink?
Even if Harry will end up choking on his saliva, wouldn't the early notification of something ridiculous happening be helpful to him in any way? Like... it'd be an early warning to be prepared for whatever another person could say/do in conversation. Or if he's looking for interesting information, say from the library, he can just walk by all the shelves until he gets the Impulse-- that'd be an indicator that he's near the shelf that has the interesting book. There might be more uses.
Chapter 14:
The charm even works for other people. If, for example, Harry wishes to test whether or not someone knows that Voldemort is alive, he could see if he has the Impulse to give that person a drink, all while thinking about saying that "The Dark Lord is still alive". If he gets the Impulse, they don't know. If he doesn't, then they already know/has been suspecting that he's been alive.
Chapter 8:
In fact, just asking, "Are you feeling thirsty?" seems to be enough to trigger the charm's apparent spit-taking powers. Harry could think about talking about Voldemort, and ask if the other person's thirsty. If yes, they would take whatever he's going to say as a surprise, if no, then they won't. Geebus this thing is powerful.
edit: actually, I'm going to check the text and see Harry actually used up his supply. Be right back.
Chapter 7: “Two dozen cans please.” (24) He tossed a can to Draco and then started feeding his pouch... (23) (Harry's drinking one too) (22) Harry snarled, threw the can violently into a nearby garbage can, and talked back over to the vendor. “One copy of The Quibbler, please.” He paid over four more Knuts, retrieved another can of Comed-Tea from his pouch... (21)
Chapter 8: The boy reached into his pouch and said, “can of soda”, retrieving a bright green cylinder. He held it out to her and said, “Can I offer you something to drink?” (20)
Chapter 12: Harry reached into his pouch and whispered, “Comed-Tea”. (19)
Chapter 46: “Three sodas." (16)
Nevermind, Harry lied, he still has tons unless he's been drinking them and not mentioning it. However the Comed-Tea hasn't been mentioned since, so it might actually be all gone.
Chapter 17:
He doesn’t seem to choke after this, but there follow several occasions where might have, had he been drinking. Anyway, the sentence means he kind of does use the Comed-Tea to kind-of-sort-of-predict the future, albeit not systematically.
Regarding the counting, his line in chapter 14 might be meant to suggest he had been doing more experiments “not on camera”. There are only three occasions where he’s seen using it until then; he shouldn’t have been that frustrated about the explanation after that few tries.
Unless he actually followed through with saying that Voldemort is still alive, this wouldn't be enough.
Earlier thoughts on Comed-Tea here
I interpreted Comed-tea as the simplest example of backwards causality - an event A causing event B, where A occurs /after/ B in time. Eliezer introduced Comed-Tea to make the point that the HPMoR universe does not operate by what we imagine to be standard causality rules.
I suspect that, the same way that messing with Time somehow results in a message saying "NO", it would be similarly impossible to commit to drinking Comed Tea.
I wish to register my alarm at this:
Given that he was "amazed" at our performance this time, presumably an equivalent performance would pass the future test — but even if that's true it doesn't comfort me much.
I humbly beg our author to consider simply withholding updates, rather than issuing an ultimatum that may result in us never getting the "true" ending. "I won't post any more chapters until you solve this," rather than "I'm going to torch the last few years of your life if you're not smart enough."
I agree, this is a bad idea. I didn't figure out the answer when it was just for fun; my performance will probably only get worse under stress (and there's not much farther to fall from "uh... well, maybe it has to do with destroying Dementors, I give up").
I know this shows no confidence in my own rationality, or that of the other readers, but can we please just have a normal story?
There's nothing to worry about. We were presented with the same challenge in Three Worlds Collide. If we don't succeed, we will just get a false ending instead of a true ending.
A always thought the false ending was better.
What can I say? I'm a sucker for stories where everyone lives happily ever after. :-)
I agree. The "false" ending definitely ranks higher in my CEV than the "true" ending.
…did you mean "along with a true ending"? Because "instead of" is precisely what I fear, but your links seem to indicate that we might get both endings? I don't understand, and Three Worlds Collide predates my awareness of Less Wrong so I don't have firsthand knowledge of exactly how that went down.
I think he meant that in case of failure, the happy ending will simply become the "false ending" instead of the "true ending". Since we get both either way, there really isn't a difference.
Gotcha. As long as we do get to read the full, complete, unbesmirched and unabridged "good" ending, I can live with that.
Yes. The exact phrasing of the challenge was:
Question entirely unrelated to the current events of the story:
What would happen if a person bought a pack of Comed-Tea and committed to drinking one every morning with breakfast?
You might simply forget to do it, or the idea might simply not occur to you unless there are enough surprising events going to follow every morning. Or, if the idea occurs to you, it might be because there are a couple surprising events followed by a scary event that causes you to abandon the idea. (À la “do not mess with time”, but less obvious.) The space of possible stable time loops is huge.
Also, like somebody mentioned, it might not be perfect. It probably doesn’t work within Azkhaban, for example. The producer might simply make it “good enough” and expect that most people won’t bother to ask for their money back.
Harry sometimes successfully resists the urge to drink Comed-Tea, and then something spit-take-inducing happens anyway. It's just a prediction with a clever user interface, not an artifact of eldritch power (except to the extent that predicting the future constitutes eldritch power, which is a nontrivial extent).
Well, that depends on whether people's decisions to drink Comed-Tea are controlled by the Tea's knowledge (??) of when they're going to see something ridiculous and whether it can affect anything else. It also depends on how powerful the mind-control is.
If it just sends a "drink Comed-Tea" impulse whenever something funny's going to happen, the precommitment would probably beat it. If it controls your mind, either you'd only be able to decide that if you were fated for twelve consecutive days of surprises with breakfast, or you'd just forget about it when you weren't fated for a surprise. If it can control the rest of the universe to any extent at all, it'd probably try to make you decide to begin at a time when you were likely to face a lot of surprises, and then conspire to delay breakfasts or make you forget to drink it until something surprising was going to happen. And we can't rule out that, as a desperate measure, it could alter your sense of humor a little, or prompt you to, e.g., turn on the television at the right moment.
I thought about it a bit more, and I'm going to hazard a guess.
It's charmed to taste bad if drunk at the wrong times. If the customer insists on drinking it anyway, it won't work and they can get their money back.
It's already charmed to mess with your desires by making you want it at certain times. Why can't it be charmed to make you not want it when it won't work. You wouldn't even notice that your preferences were being edited.
How far can that charm extend though? If I had never seen a can of Comed-Tea (hey, I already haven't,) I'd want to try it out according to a consistent schedule. If a can of soda has the power to control people's minds without their ever coming in contact with it, we're already getting into realms of omnipotence-via-soda.
Is it just me, or does that NOT sound like someone who just found out that dementors, thought to be manifestations of fear, are afraid of her student? I'm guessing it's one of two things:
She's so relieved that one of her student isn't going to be tortured to death that she isn't really processing everything else that's going on or
She thinks the whole thing is a trick Harry and Dumbledore came up with, and dementors aren't really afraid of Harry.
Either one could lead to a very entertaining aftermath.
Or, she’s the head of Gryffindor, and she felt the need to at least appear to put up a brave front in support of her students.
Or, you know, relief + dry sense of humour = exactly that kind of reaction as a coping mechanism.
I am reminded of why I prefer British comedy to American - in American comedies everyone tends to be very obvious and melodramatic, while in British the tendency is more towards understated and deadpan. McGonagall's reaction fits perfectly into the latter category, trivialising the entire situation rather than mugging for the audience. (Not that some of the humour in the earlier chapters hasn't been overblown melodrama. Harry's parents leaving the room to have hysterics stands out as the most obvious example)
Fawlty Towers is a good example of the understated and deadpan nature of British comedy.
Or, in addition to everyone else's reasons, she's already working hard to maintain a calm demeanor for the sake of Hermione and Harry.
McGonagall is House Head of Gryffindor.
She is just that unflappable.
You have no idea how tempted I am to go back through the story and come up with a montage of Minerva sputtering incoherently / tearing her hair out / sticking her fingers in her ears and going la la la / at a loss for words / blurting something inadvisable / etc.
She's so unflappable that she's the best choice to demonstrate that a situation inspires the maximum amount of flap, I guess.
Unlike most of the room she knows Harry well enough that even him scaring a Dementor, no matter how surprising, wouldn't make her personally afraid of Harry; she might be worried about what trouble he could cause but she knows perfectly well that he wouldn't do anything to her. Besides it was less of a surprise for her since Dumbledore already told her Harry had developed a new charm.
I agree that her being afraid of Harry isn't something I would expect, but her comments make me think she isn't taking the situation seriously.
Or, she's simply ceased to be surprised at the extent of Harry's abilities outpacing her expectations of them.
Is there anyone keeping a history of the story? I suspect there are some clues to be gleamed from the edits.
(Note: I originally specifically asked for what was chapter 76 but now 77, but I realized that the thing I was looking for was there all along. Regardless I am still interested in a history.)
I think I figured out how Dumbledore knew about Harry wanting to change the rules of Quiddich. Instead of reading student minds he used the cloak:
(Emphasis mine. Well, of course, that he would use it is obvious and the note is not proof of anything, but that’s what triggered the idea. Also, it makes a lot of sense that Harry’s father would lend the cloak to Dumbledore for study.)
If he did this on the train platform (which would make sense as an opportunity to be mysterious to new students, or just to Harry) there’s a bit of other interesting stuff he might have heard. Whatever Draco cast (the description doesn’t quite match Quietus, and it was wordless or at least not heard by Harry), it probably doesn’t work for a cloaked guy near you, and certainly not Dumbledore if he really wanted to listen.
Then maybe the cloaked Dumbledore is the one that told Harry to talk to Hermione.
Would that make the mysteries less complicated, or more?
We already know it was McGonagall that told Harry to find Hermione, no? Where's the mystery?
Since we're doing this by chapter now, I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this, but I'm not sure where to put it otherwise.
I was rereading chapter 26, Noticing Confusion, and-- maybe I'm not the first person to notice this-- I was thinking of a certain other indestructible diary.
Surely Quirrelmort wouldn't give Harry that diary, right? But if the book is indestructible, and made of paper, there is magic involved. He does say Bacon was a wizard, but also that his experiments never got very far without a wand. Making books indestructible does not seem like not getting very far.
I thought it was fairly obviously that diary, and thus an effort by Quirrelmort to take over/destroy Harry the way Ginny was (almost) in canon. Harry has apparently avoided the trap entirely because he is under the logically reasonable impression that he needs to learn Latin to read Roger Bacon's diary. I'm pretty sure other people have reached the same conclusion in previous threads.
We then see a second effort to approximately the same end with the Dementor brought on school grounds (at Quirrelmort's instigation) with Harry's wand "accidentally" being left near the cage.
Jbeq bs Tbq fnlf bgurejvfr. (Pgey-S 'rnegu-funggrevat')
Prediction: Harry will try to explain the general concept of arbitrage to Dumbledore, and it will be blocked by the Interdict of Merlin.
Because otherwise, certain things about the wizarding economy make no sense at all.
Funny, but unfortunately people telling other people things is exactly what the Interdict of Merlin doesn't forbid.
The Interdict of Merlin blocking transmission of non-magical knowledge between living minds?
The magics of Echo Gnomics from the Counterweight Continent?
I don't quite understand. Arbitrage has nothing to do with magic.
It's a joke, I think. And if it is it's hilarious.
I laughed aloud.
It was't a joke, but rather a completely serious prediction of a joke. That's hardly the same thing at all.
That one is funny too.
Honest dilemma: Should Hermione decide to get the memories of casting the Blood-chilling Charm obliviated?
On one hand, one would think that messing even more with Hermione's mind should be a no-no. On the other hand, we're pretty sure it's a false memory, and it seems grossly unfair for her to have to remember attempting to commit a murder that she didn't truly attempt.
Second question: Regardless of what Hermione should do, will she so decide it?
Third question: If she doesn't so decide, will some helpful other person override said choice for her sake and obliviate her anyway?
If she wanted to do that, I'd have the memory extracted and saved as evidence.
If she does get the memory erased, she's going to be awfully confused when someone else inevitably brings it up again.
Edit: it occurs to me that you probably only meant the memory of performing the charm itself, not the memory of being put on trial for murder. But even if they did that, I suspect she'd imagine something just as bad to fill the space, knowing what was supposed to go in it.
Prophecy update!
Like most readers, I took Trelawney's magical clock for a listening device. What if it transmits instead of receives?
We've seen Dumbledore manipulating events into storylike patterns. He was the instigator of the three-way tie, and he precipitated Snape's fall and eventual redemption by the power of love.
In his Fortress of Regrets, Dumbledore gave the surface appearance of being terribly reluctant to allow his decisions to cause the deaths of others. But in the last chapter he was ready to let a small child be tortured to death - with much trembling reluctance, of course - in order to preserve his plans.
Could he have caused Trelawney to deliver the prophecy, triggering the other half of Snape's destiny, while feeding the Potters to Voldemort to create his orphan hero?
Dumbledore meant for Voldemort to have been killed by Lily's sacrifice. He believes it happened. Instead, Voldemort, taking the obvious trap (thanks Vladimir!) as a challenge to his wit (thanks Gwern!), pretended to lose (thanks buybuydandavis!), while fulfilling the letter of the prophecy in a manner maximally advantageous to himself.
He disarmed the trap by goading Lily into attacking him. He left a burnt husk of a body - not his, Avada Kedavra leaves no marks - and departed unharmed. Voldemort's not a ghost possessing Quirrell. He stole Quirrell's body the way he stole Harry's, although the defect in the copying process is different. He doesn't need Bellatrix's flesh to rise again. He rescued her, at least in part, while acting in the role of someone who'd been fooled by Dumbledore's ruse.
Events have followed the course of prophecy because someone created one as a deception and someone else played along as a counter-deception.
It looks viable to me. What do you think?
Ha! So Dumbledore inserts prophecy as a trap, and Voldemort plays along to set his own trap. Nice!
One reason I like implanted prophecy theory is that it would play into rationalist biases against prophecy. I expect magic to be explained as commands to some AI in Atlantis. But prophecy? Seeing into the future? Messages from Atlantis?
Maybe it's just my bias against backward in time causality, which he has really committed to anyway, with Comed-Tea. Me, I'd rather that prophecies are explainable by other means.
But wouldn't this imply that Dumbledore doesn't really see Harry as the destined savior against Voldemort? Maybe he is just saving him to use as a trap again, unaware that Voldemort had already seen through the trap and was playing it for his own purposes? Yeah, saving him as a trap again makes sense, since the dark ritual should still be binding.
As long as we're adding in people playing the prophecy, how about Lily and James? They could have been playing the honeypot knowingly, in league with Dumbledore. I'm reminded of Dumbledore bringing up Lily Potter as a heroine, and noticed the incongruity at the time, though I didn't notice my confusion, as it were. Now that I do, saying she was a heroine seems like she was promoted beyond her station, unless she played a knowing part in her sacrifice to attempt to bring down Voldemort. That would certainly qualify her for the ranks.
One thing - a Voldemort plan to upload into Harry could be said to keep the terms of the dark ritual by allowing Harry to live on a permanent basis. And Harry as Dark Lord also satisfies those terms.
I’m not sure I understand, what incongruity do you see there? IIRC, at least in MoR, the prophecy says something like “born to parents that have thrice defied him”, so James and Lily did take part in the war other than just trying to defend Harry when Voldemort came after him. (They had to have defied him three times so that he would know who the child is, assuming he went after him because of the prophecy.) That sounds kind of heroic even without them doing it just as a trap, given what used to happen to Voldie’s opposition.
McGonagall's description:
Point in your favor - when discussing heroines during his time as Headmaster at Hogwarts with Hermione, he suggested she might add both Alice Longbottom and Lily Potter to the list. I'd count that as a point in favor of "thrice defying" as membership to the club.
But still, does defying the Dark Lord thrice really put you in the top 3 witches of 40 years, and the top 15 or so witches and wizards? With all the people who died, with Dumbledore's room full of dead friends, there aren't others who had done more and risked more?
Lily and James were in hiding. Are they really the best examples of heroes in the last 40 years - two people in hiding from Voldemort?
Dumbledore:
Hiding in Godric's Hollow sounds more like the former than the latter to me.
Unfortunately, even in canon, "thrice defied" occurred offstage, so we don't know the details. Just to keep it clear, though, the prophecy occurred before the births of Neville and Harry, so well before the deaths of Alice and Lily, so whatever final defiances they had at their deaths are not part of the 3.
Yeah, so I can’t quite contradict you. (Also, I haven’t read all books, and for those I read I wasn’t very careful with the details.)
That said, my understanding was that first Lily and James fought Voldemort before they had Harry, and perhaps for a while afterwards. And presumably fought well, since they survived to do it thrice, and courageously, if they didn’t stop after the first time (which would qualify both as heroes). In contrast, the journalist mentioned at some point was killed, together with his entire family, after simply writing an article. He was possibly brave (or maybe just an optimist), but not quite heroic.
(It’s not perfectly clear, but the wording of the prophecy seems to suggest that they defied V. thrice before H.’s birth, and possibly again afterwards.)
My understanding was that they went into hiding after they learned that Voldie was going after Harry; presumably this was because of the prophecy, but it doesn’t mean they knew it was a trap (if it was). Note that in MoR Dumbledore says he taught Voldie & Co. not to go after families of the Order of the Phoenix just for blackmail—which obviously had to be before his death—which suggests that they went into hiding only because (and after) they knew Voldie had a better reason to go after Harry, the prophecy. But nothing (AFAIK) indicates that they’d be aware that it was a trap (if it was one).
Also, going into hiding is not necessarily selfish or cowardly (i.e., wanting just to protect themselves and their son). If they knew and believed the prophecy they could just be trying to protect the future defeater of Voldie. Everyone was surprised at baby Harry (apparently) destroying Voldemort, including those that knew the prophecy, so their theory must have been that he’d defeat him after he grew up.
But not what I'd call heroic, either.
On the other hand, it would be definitely be heroic to set yourself up as bait for Voldemort on what was fully intended as a suicide mission.
If we go with the theory that Dumbledore was setting a trap for Voldemort, based on a dark ritual, I would think it's rather important to make sure that Lily fulfills the dark ritual. IN fact, I think this theory requires that Lily and James are in on Dumbledore's plot, otherwise why not just apparate away? Have port keys set up? At least have Lily and James attack him together?
The prior odds that Lily will just happen to fulfill the terms of a dark ritual seem miniscule, even if we assume that Voldemort had been prepped to give Lily a chance to live.
If it was a plot by Dumbledore to have Lily perform a dark ritual, Dumbledore would tell her to increase the odds that she actually fulfills the ritual. Otherwise he's spending the lives of two members of the Order for a miniscule chance at killing Voldemort.
IN fact, if Dumbledore is going to do this kind of plot, he'd want to set it up in advance with the people involved, not draft them after he got the ball rolling, so that he could arrange a proper prophecy.
I’m not quite sure how you got to the dark ritual part. At least, I see no hint of this, nor any indication that Lily would go with it. Even if you’re going with the “love sacrifice as old magic” in canon and calling it “dark” just because it has a sacrifice, I’m not quite sure it would work if you did it with the explicit purpose of stopping Voldie (intent might taint the sacrifice). Dumbledore might create a situation where Lily would sacrifice herself for Harry, because Dumbledore intends to get rid of Voldie, but this (I think) requires that Lily not know about it, so that her intent is pure.
Canon is careless enough with details to be hard to use for explanations. For example:
It does sound weird, but then again if it were that easy even Voldie would have much more trouble killing people than it appears. http://harrypotter.wikia.com/ suggests that for side-along apparition (i.e., for taking someone with you who can’t do it themselves) the “passanger” needs to be a wizard, and might need to have a wand. So maybe they just couldn’t take Harry. Also, Voldie might just have a policy of casting Anti-disapparition jinxes when he attacks, it’s not clear how hard they are to make. Something like this might also explain why someone who’s hunted by Voldemort, even in hiding, doesn’t have with them a dozen intercontinental portkeys, just in case. (In MoR, at least. In canon they probably just didn’t think of it.)
If he’s actually thinking in story terms rather than faking it, he’d likely think it almost certain rather than minuscule.
Why did you link there rather than here?
Seems unlikely that the original prophecy was caused by Dumbledore, at least by the method of the magical clock. As in canon, Trelawney seems to have made the prophecy during a job interview, presumably before she was regularly sleeping with the clock. I expect that if Dumbledore wanted her to make a false prophecy at a specific time, something like an Imperius folled by Obliviation would be more expedient. Furthermore, we have seen Trelawney spontaneously prophecy in the dining hall; this prophecy at least appeared unplanned by Dumbledore.
Oh hey. And we have a confession.
I actually noticed the dissonance when I read this, that Dumbledore had apparently overlooked the biggest and most obvious tragedy of Harry's life. But I didn't realize what it meant. Whoops.
And more significantly:
There aren't really any other good candidates for what he might have done to cause this particular problem (even if he felt responsibility on account of e g. not having been able to beat Voldemort permanently himself it seems unlikely to phrase it like that).
Unnecessary detail, may or may not be the case. If he was aware of the trap, it would not matter whether this disarmed it; he just needed to not cast Avada Kedavra on Harry. Harry's memory of the event does not end with Voldemort casting the Killing Curse on him.
You're right. I would go ahead and flag everything in that paragraph as questionable. The method of Quirrell's possession, for example: perhaps Voldemort erased his mind and is possessing him through an artifact. It wouldn't change the overall picture.
Avada Kedavra leaves no mark, but getting killed by Lily's ritual sacrifice might. Even so, that the body was burned, which makes identification harder, is suggestive that it is not really Voldemort's.
Also, if there was no one left alive except Harry, how did they know it was Avada Kedavra that rebounded from Harry, instead of some other spell?
(When the Dementor attacks him, Harry sees the green flash and hears the words, but only when Voldie kills his parents, not when he’s attacked himself, as I recall.)
They could have tried Legillimency on baby Harry, but nobody actually mentions that, and other than Moody it doesn’t seem like anyone would think of it.
Looking at the last spell cast by Voldemort's want.
Yeah, I'm less confident in the notion that Voldemort survived Godric's Hollow, and it's not integral to the hypothesis, but that's the obvious explanation for a burnt body, and the last few chapters have given me a new respect for obvious explanations.
It's also difficult to see why Voldemort would want to pretend to die at Godric's Hollow. He was winning the war. Why pretend to lose, throw away what he had built up to then, and try an entirely different approach to gaining power? I think the more obvious explanation for the burnt body is that whatever ritual magic protected Harry was very destructive to Voldemort. I think it is clear that some ritual magic is involved here; how else can we explain the danger of Harry's and Quirrell's magic interacting? And the violence of their magics' interaction in Azkaban makes it plausible that if Voldemort were to cast a killing curse directly at Harry, he might end up as a burnt corpse.
I notice that I am confused.
I've been doubting Quirrel being Mr. Hat on a story-obviousness-basis, being partial to twists. But rationally, it makes no sense to very much doubt the obvious solution with no comparably well-supported alternatives (despite having reached for ones). I wouldn't wonder if that was even the moral there.
Why do you not consider Snape to be an alternative? Yes, Quirrelmort has gained a lot by Hat's actions, but: a) Quirrel could be manipulating Snape. b) Quirrelmort probably has an extremely accurate mental model of Snape.
What is your mental model of Snape?
"Uncertain, ask again later". Oh, all right. : I am fairly confident that whatever models the various masterminds in play have of him are inaccurate and have been getting rapidly more so ever since he had his little chat with Harry about Lily. I suspect that he is done with being anyones pawn. Moving into blind guessing territory, I wouldnt be surprised if his actual plot is to walk off with the philosophers stone in order to duplicate it, or something else completely unrelated to the political maneuverings.
I don't think it was an intended moral. The author has said he did not try to lead us astray (except for those two times, for which we forgive him insert-emoticon-that-indicates-I-joke-at-taking-on-airs).
But it does sound like it was a good opportunity to learn something.
Idea: Making the money back will be much more difficult than most people anticipate, including Harry.
Reason: Many wizards are highly motivated towards finance and would exhaust every opportunity to generate infinite gold. The rich wizards of the Wizengamot considered 100,000 galleons to be a lot of money.
First, imagine all the ways a wizard could make effectively infinite amounts of muggle money. Arbitrage. Use a time turner and win at the stock market. Use a time turner and win the super-lotto. Imperius (or love potion, false memory charm, groundhog day attack, etc) any billionaire and take part of their fortune. Mind trick some bankers with fake documents (as Dumbledore does in book 6). Go rob some banks with invisibility and teleportation (and/or a time turner). Use magic to secure a job with a 50 million dollar golden parachute with very generous terms. Make huge amounts of drug money as a courier via teleportation/portkey. Sell 5 galleon trinkets to muggle collectors for millions of dollars each. Etc., etc., etc..
Some of them are more risky, some of them are less risky, but I bet that any member of these forums could get at least $50 million in a week if we were wizards.
And yet, when they mention a price of 100,000 galleons people are shocked. The reaction does not look like it's 1/15th of a week's worth of effort he's got to worry about. Dumbledore views it as a major problem that Harry is 60,000 galleons in debt. We know from chapter 70 that it's a known thing that witches and wizards will trick a muggle with a love potion and rape them. Yet nobody thinks to slip Bill Gates a love potion, convince him to part with $2 billion, and blow Lucius out of the water with 100 million galleons. And these are among the most financially motivated people in all of wizardry, not the common population, who consider 2 million pounds as more than weekend spending money. I notice I am confused.
I'll brainstorm some possible explanations:
Gringotts won't mint your gold for a nominal fee: Griphook could have been lying, mistaken, or omitted something. Maybe you bring in a ton of gold and they just laugh at it for not having a special magical signature. Unlikely but possible.
Gold isn't available to purchase with muggle money: Wizards could own the gold exchanges and gold mines. They do nominal trading for electronics and jewelry, but the vast share of gold goes to the wizarding world. Possible, but it would drastically change the face of the real world (eg World Reserves would be a lie, and Ron Paul is a wizard).
The Department of Magical Law Enforcement is way more effective than I imagine: They can find and intervene in not only all cases of magic misuse (eg imperius or bank robberies), but check other means like love potions. Seems unlikely, considering the current crime investigation and how the last war went. Result - Arbitrage and stock/lottery manipulation work.
The wizarding world is full of complete inverse-omega class idiots: Always a good theory. But it doesn't sound right for the entirety of the wizarding world (including a ton of muggle-born) to act so completely stupid.
The financial tycoons on Wizengamot actually do this: Maybe most of the Wizengamot fortunes exist due to questionable sources. That would explain the majority of evil people doing the voting. Still, that doesn't explain the reaction to the 100,000 galleons.
The people who would do this are not on the Wizengamot: Maybe this does happen. Perhaps all the muggle-born realize how easy it is to live a life of luxury in the muggle world and do exactly that, and only venture into the magical world when the want to go shopping. They have the best conveniences of both worlds and none of the dangers of either. This... actually sounds kinda plausible. Plus, there isn't a great job market for muggle-born.
Something doesn't add up. The Wizengamot is full of bright, ambitious people, most of whom have dedicated their lives to finance (makes 4 unlikely). If they're arguing over lucrative ink importation rights it means they've already figured out arbitrage. They wouldn't worry about importing ink, if they weren't leveraging different prices between the market where they're purchasing ink and the market where they're selling ink. Something as simple as triangle arbitrage should be figured out immediately. If wizards already discovered arbitrage, but they don't try and arbitrage in the muggle markets directly, it would be evidence that 1 or 2 is in play. 3 and 5 are already unlikely, so I guess 1&2 or 6 make sense.
I'd be interested to see if Harry actually manages to make infinite money, and if so what it means about the world.
I think it's also important to remember that all these fancy smancy new ways of making money haven't really been around that long.
Wizards live to be more than a hundred years old, and in general don't have a bunch of children. There's been only a couple generations in which many of these money making methods have been around - for example, the stock market has only existed in a convenient form since, say, 1910? And this story takes place in 1992. Eighty years really isn't that long in wizard years. And while a small percentage ten-year-olds in the 1990s might happen to have some idea of how the stock market can be manipulated for personal gains, probably only a vastly smaller number may have known in, say, 1940 - before the information age.
The noble houses - the wizards that probably make up the majority of the Wizenagamot - are kind of implied to have been rich and powerful for a long time. If any of these people are young enough to have gone to Hogwarts after the thirties, and been humble enough to have taken Muggle Studies, and really paid attention when it came to the Great Depression, and happened to do background reading on the subject in order to exploit it, then sure, maybe it's already done.
But given the information we have, I doubt this is widely known and regularly done enough to be a problem for Harry.
Further, perhaps ambiguous evidence that Harry's machinitions won't be as successful or simple as he imagines. From Chapter 20, in reference to Quirrell's insistence that Dumbledore pay for Harry's Occlumency lessons with a neutral party:
Dumbledore immediately identifies Harry's money-making scheme as a terrible idea (even without knowing what exactly it is) and is actually willing to compromise his prior stance merely by being reminded how ignorant and childish Harry can be.
Dumbledore is probably the number one character, except for perhaps Snape, who has demonstrated the most knowledge of Muggle technology, culture, and institutions. I think it's a good bet that Dumbledore, hearing Harry's statement, immediately realized that Harry had hatched some hare-brained scheme with all kinds of horrible consequences that were obvious to Dumbledore, with his knowledge of both worlds, but opaque to Harry.
For what it's worth, I interpreted this exchange as Dumbledore recognizing why it would be bad for someone to read Harry's mind. In other words, a competent plotter who didn't have society's interest at heart could implement Harry's ideas successfully to cause significant harm. I didn't take the exchange to show that D believed the ideas wouldn't work basically as intended with a minimum of unanticipated consequences.
In short, Lucius Malfoy shouldn't be able to read Harry's mind to gain a destabilizing amount of wealth.
Why not just chose a muggle institution that has a lot of gold and is corrupt enough you don't mind stealing from(shouldn't be hard) and walk in under the cloak of invisibility, alohomora the locks and fill up the bag of holding with gold? I agree that sounds too easy to not already have been done though.
I think this one would fall under the jurisdiction of the DMLE. In Canon, there were a few scenes with Arthur Weasley in which he discussed criminal cases involving wizards using magical powers against muggles.
Theres also a psychological dimension to consider. To most wizards, and especially the rich pure bloods who this would be most relevant to, muggles, muggle-borns and anything associated with them are incredibly low status. Mere knowledge of muggles is seen as a major social negative (see treatment of Arthur Weasley). As such they would have a strong incentive not to investigate muggle knowledge, and if you suggested to Lucius that he made his fortune and power from dealing with Muggles his brain might actually explode from shame.
Yes, but if it were just that, you would except a few low-status wizard to suddenly become very rich through muggle-side tricks. Arthur Weasley is probably too Gryffindor to do it himself, but since he has quite a lot of work with wizards doing tricks with "muggle artificats", you could except a few of them to get very rich by fiddling with the muggle world (especially muggle born, at 11 you know about stock markets and lottery) if it were so easy.
My best guess is that it's illegal and the law enforcement is strong enough to not be worth the risk. Like, if you suddenly arrive at Gringotts with gold coming from nowhere, an investigation is done, and if that gold comes from a "muggle source", you're in trouble.
I disagree. Harry can do partial transfiguration. If he cannot figure out ways to earn insane amounts of cash just through that then he is too retarded to be called rational (remember that he can actually extract resources in ways the wizarding world cannot - as I write in another place: mining ++).
Plus you underestimate the degree of separation between the two worlds plus the extreme lack of respect the wizarding world holds for muggles.
And about the 100.000 galleons: well if they're bright, ambitious and socially aware plus they're using questionable sources they SHOULD act surprised. Not acting surprised would give away their game to the idiots remaining.
I will be severely disappointed if EY will waste time on the money issue. It doesn't deserve much more than a paragraph. Perhaps two just to let us know that Harry won't abuse it, because he doesn't want to call too much attention to himself.
I really hope Eliezer doesn't spend more than a sentence on that - and even then I would want the sentence to be mild. Any more than that and it would strike me as too much use of explicit sloppy thinking to justify narrative convenience.
How would one legally extract money from partial transfiguration? If you have a large object you want transfigured, is it cheaper to hire the only wizard in the world who can do partial transfigurations, or a team of powerful wizards who can just work on the whole thing? And how often does that happen anyway? He could make money from teaching it, but that'd be slow.
Eliezer seems to believe that wizards are selectively stupid about economics, so you're probably right about the general issue. They could need to import it because they can't produce it locally at all.
Also, please don't use slurs.
I think partial transfiguration gains power by being a literal carving device. Normal transfiguration can force an object to take a shape, but they always revert. Partial transfiguration can carve pieces off selectively and have it be permanent. Eg, "the sculpture was always in the block of marble, I just removed what was not the sculpture." Although you'd need to set up incredible safety protocols. Presumably you'd transform the waste into a non-evaporative liquid while keeping a bubble headed charm on until you finite'd everything.
Harry Potter is his own little subtractive universal CNC machine. He's infinite axis; he can work on any material; he can work on any size. A mail order service could be a multi-million dollar a year business, depending on how tight he could control his tolerances. This goes doubly so because it's in 1991 compared to modern day.
Edit: Actually, I suppose sufficiently powerful wizards could do this too. They would just transfigure the whole block of steel into an engine+oil, drain it all, then finite it back so just an engine remained. And I don't think there's a big enough market for Harry to work exclusively on sculptures in the sides of the mountains or anything. Drat, foiled.
Slurs? (oh you mean "idiots"? I'd refrain from that in the future; I didn't mean to be offensive EDIT: later clarified to referring to retarded which I'll also refrain from using in the future... me not being a native speaker will end up being expensive karma-wise).
Transfiguring a whole mountain would: a) take more magical energy than most wizards could muster. b) not extract any resources.
Partial transfiguring has the distinct advantage of not having to transfigure entire objects (such as mountains). Perhaps a spell could also help with actually finding valuable resources.
Besides that partial transfiguration is an excellent break in/out spell (as seen earlier in TSPE) and I do not recall saying that Harry had to stay legal. He's shown already his ability to disregard the law (again TSPE) if he thinks it's worth it.
MixedNuts meant "retarded".
Neither of which are known to the Wizarding world, as evidenced by the Occlumency teacher's reaction to his discovery of it. (and his discovery of it, and his discovery of it... :) )
Your assessment of the Wizarding World's evaluation of the Muggle world. To the supermajority of Wizards, science is a total unknown. Economic and sociopolitical theory are terms they've simply never heard of.
They are isolated and effectively are like the apocryphal Chinese Emperor who burned his fleets because there was nothing left to discover; or the equally apocryphal Patent Office official who wanted to close the Patent Office in the 1800's because there was nothing left to invent.
So basically what you're seeing is what's called "hindsight bias". It is obvious to you, who knows what "Muggles" have, that the Wizards are vastly disadvantaged here -- insanely so -- but remember that as further demonstrated by Draco's total ignorance of Man's visit to the Moon, Wizards believe Muggles are "wallowing in the mud". The idea that they might LEARN from Muggles is actively suppressed by a concerted political campain by a powerful and long-standing major political faction.
"I wonder who came up with the idea of suspending liquid latinum inside worthless bits of gold. "
Remember, most of wizarding Britain is either people who were taken out of the muggle world at age 10-11 and don't come back, or people who never lived there at all. How many of them are actually going to understand finance well enough to have a sense of how to exploit it? And the ones who actually have money at Gringott's are almost by definition the ones who never even spent those 11 years in the muggle world, so they may well not have any idea that finance exists. And even if they do, the ignorance and prejudice is rather overpowering, and may well prevent proper use of it. Someone who has both seed capital and the knowledge of how to exploit the crap out of it is going to be rare, and the DMLE is likely going to step on anyone who gets too egregious about using wizarding advantages to do so.
(Edited first sentence for accuracy)
I don't believe this is correct. In fact, isn't there a section in MoR where McGonagall relates to Harry that less than 10 "muggleborn" Wizards are being inducted into Hogwarts that year? (With Harry being one of them?)
Right, I meant to edit that and got distracted. Replace with "Remember, most of wizarding Britain is either people who were taken out of the muggle world at age 10-11 and don't come back or people who never lived there at all".
Halfbloods are more populous, and their Muggle parents probably give them some nontrivial connection to the Muggle world.
"Halfbloods" the way you're thinking don't actually exist in MoR. Wizard + muggle = all their children are squibs. Yeah, half the children of a wizard/squib pair are wizards, but how often do you think that occurs? Canonically Harry is referred to as a halfblood because his mother was muggleborn; that sort of thing- not muggleborn, but not "pure"blood either- probably accounts for most of the population.
We don't know if this is the case. Looking at squib/wizard descent rates from wizard/muggle marriages would be an obvious additional test of Harry's genetic hypothesis, which he hasn't done. We don't know if Harry is correct about there being a single wizard gene.
I really don't get how the genetics works in either MOR or canon. In canon, there are wizards with one wizard parent and one muggle parent, who aren't squibs (Snape and Riddle for two). That implies it's dominant. Also, squibs in canon are born to 2 wizard parents (Neville's pure-blood and was thought to be one, and it's mentioned in the definition), and squibs are implied to be pretty uncommon, which they wouldn't be if they were all heterozygotes. In the end, though, I support EY's right to make it work out however he feels like, because canon is confused and self-contradictory and MOR's point about complex adaptations being either ubiquitous or absent is true.
In canon they call “squib” the non-magic-capable child of two wizards.
In MoR, that means the child has only one copy of the recessive magic gene. (Either mommy didn’t love only daddy, or one copy of the gene got messed up somehow.) But in MoR you need to distinguish between genetic|squib (has one copy of the gene), and genealogic|squib (can’t do magic but has wizard/witch parents).
All genealogical|squibs are genetic|squibs, but wizards use the word “squib” only for the former, since wizards don’t know much about genetics, and about the magic gene in particular. They call anybody who isn’t a part of magic Britain a muggle (genealogical |muggle), even though they might actually be genetic|squibs.
An example: Wizard Nasty Pants does the nasty with lots of muggle women a couple of centuries ago. He doesn’t like commitments, so he abandons the women to raise their children alone.
All his children are genetic|squibs, but they’re raised by muggles and—after Mr. Nasty dies because he tried that with a witch married to a Gryffindor—nobody knows they had a wizard parent.
Mr. and Mrs. Ancient Robes have a squib (Mr. Robes was often away on ancient business), and Mrs. Robes leaves him to be raised by a muggle family, because she doesn’t have the heart to see him killed (Mr. Robes is kind of old-fashioned that way), and claims he died at birth or something.
A couple of generations later the magic gene still exists in a lot of Mr. Pants’ and Mrs. Robes’ muggle-raised descendants: half a genetic|squib’s children are also genetic|squibs, if the other parent is genetic|muggle, and people used to have lots of kids until recently. But they’ll be genealogic|muggles, and any wizard will call them muggles, because they’re not known to have a magic parent.
And then, two of these genetic|squib descendants marry (either the two trees intersect, or a couple of kissing cousins decide to do more than kiss), and a quarter of their kids are wizards. Magic Britain will call them muggle-born (or mudbloods, depending on political inclination), although in fact they’re lost descendants of wizards.
Similarly, when Ms. Broad Horizons, a witch of liberal inclination, falls in love with young muggle (but genetic|squib) Bendsinister McPants, half her kids will be wizards, and Magic Britain will call them half-bloods.
Since there is a single magic gene (apparently), it is also possible that a mutation will toggle between the magic and non-magic alleles. So it is also possible, though probably much rarer, that a squib (or, even less likely, a wizard) appears from completely non-magical parents, or that two magic users have a squib or non-magic child, due to simple mutation. How likely that is depends on the complexity of the gene, but it’d have to be much rarer than the above scenarios, unless there’s magical interference in mutation rates for that specific gene.
Also, we cannot completely ignore the possibility of the "magic machinery" (the one that recognize the genetic marker) to have some kind of shuffling process that'll occasionally turn on or off the magical marker when an egg is fertilized. Either randomly, or based on events (triggers like "an egg fertilized exactly at the second where the moon is the fullest will have a high probability of having the magical marked added").
We have no hints towards that, so Occam's Razor would tend to give it a low probability, but it would seem coherent to me with the twisted, not really occamian, way magic seems to work. Harry's and Draco's experiment on the genes was low-scale enough so they had no chance of detecting any such shuffling.
But sure, adultery is a much more plausible explanation of why squibs would occasionally appear in pure magical couples, and why there are "muggleborn".
Or that there is no genetic marker at all and the machinery uses some algorithm of its own to determine who should have magic which is heavily biased towards children of wizards.
I agree with most of this. However, I think it is worth noting that JKR's understanding of biology is about as good as her understanding of math or astronomy so I don't expect her to have even thought of this sort of thing. I don't think the nature of complex adaptations is a great argument in this context given that we've already found that magic doesn't seem to act very much like what science tells us to expect in general.
While I support Eliezer's right to do what he wants, I suspect that Harry will turn out to be wrong about this, and that we'll find out in the story.
I think that taking advantage of muggles in lots of ways is against the law, so imperiusing or memory charming a billionaire would be forbidden. I wouldn't be at all surprised if people have thought of and maybe tried using time turners to cheat the muggle lottery, so I'd give fair odds that's illegal too. When it comes to arbitrage though, remember that while wizards in general may not be tremendously stupid, they tend to be incredibly clueless about the muggle world; remember that Arthur Weasley can pass as a premier expert on muggle artifacts. The fact that the values of gold and silver in the muggle world are totally divorced from their value in the wizarding world is likely to be very little known, and the concept of arbitrage may be completely foreign to them as well (look how primitive their whole financial system appears to be.)
The fact that Mr. Bester, Harry's occlumency instructor, said he wished he could remember "That trick with the gold and silver" implies that a) the idea is not obvious to most wizards, and b) he thinks he would at least stand a chance of getting away with it.
I completely agree. Recall also Draco's speech about muggles scratching in the dirt, and his reaction to Harry's estimate of the lunar program budget. It's not just wizards not paying attention to relative values of gold and silver in the muggle world---for the most part, the possibility that there could be a substantial amount of either in the muggle world doesn't occur to them. Now you might expect muggleborns to know better, even after making allowances for the fact that they enter the wizarding world at age 11. On the other hand, if a muggleborn is clever enough to see the potential for profit, they might also be clever enough to see what Harry apparently does not---that calling attention to the fact that the muggles are ripe for exploitation is a Bad Idea.
All good points, but I don't think Harry is planning on "calling atttention to the fact that the muggles are ripe for exploitation". He's presumably planning to make the money without anyone except one or two adults he needs for transportation/permission/whatever knowing how he did it.
I would actually suspect parents of a half blood (is there a name for this?) would be the weak link, rather than muggle-born children.
You've got people who have lived their whole lives as muggles, then suddenly they fall in love and get married and find out their spouse is a wizard. They've spent ~20 years in the muggle world and probably have a career of their own. No way they don't ask their spouse to spend a couple hours and let them both live like kings for the rest of their lives. And if they don't even get that much information about their other's life, that's some seriously messed up power dynamics in that household.
Also, as Harry himself speculates, muggleborns, like his mother, probably tend to fall into the habit of not thinking of muggles as Real People anymore, because it's too emotionally taxing, and they're living in a different world. They may stop concerning themselves with the muggle world much by the time they're grown up. The muggle raised wizards in the original canon certainly seemed to.
Certainly, the planning fallacy applies. And even if, for example, arbitrage worked the way it seems, and without the extra pitfalls that have been mentioned, there's a lot more to it than just swapping silver for gold and back. Harry's 11, he can't leave Hogwarts, his finances are tightly controlled by Dumbledore, 100,000 galleons = 1.7 million sickles ~= 17 tonnes of silver. Your dad doesn't just slip that into his back pocket. You're going to need help lifting it, security to guard it, vehicles to move it...
On the other hand, Harry has a lot of resources that haven't even been mentioned yet. There's a house in Godricks hollow for example, and the Granger's would probably be willing to contribute.
He hasn't even really made an accurate count of his vault. He described the stacks as a rough pyramid, but then estimates they're 20 wide and 60 tall - so in other words, each step of the pyramid is only three coins high. I made a small model out of poker chips, and it looks more like a flat than a stack. If it were a normal author, I'd figure the description was bad and the "estimate" was spot on, but EY is smart enough to realize that estimates aren't that accurate. Harry might have underestimated and already have 100,000. Of course, he might have over estimated instead.
Maybe he should learn a magical counting spell.
A good chance they could pay off the entire debt. They seemed very well off.
I've got a friend who is a dentist. He could pay it off if he wanted to. 2 dentists? If they had decent business sense, it wouldn't be a problem. This is in the US, however. I'd guess that pay scales are different in Britain.
I think you may be thinking of 100,000 dollars or pounds. 100,000 galleons is 2 million pounds.
And he still owes 60,000 galleons, which is 1.2mil.
A pair of dentists with over a decade of practice? My friend with 15 years of practice by himself could handle that. It's not pocket change, but this was to avoid the torture execution of their daughter. I think they could pony up for that.
This has its own problems, though. The Grangers were concerned enough when it seemed Harry might be dangerous, since he was temperamental at their house. They'd pull Hermione out of the wizarding world if they knew that she nearly got locked in a place that actively sucks away happiness.
Besides what dandavis says, even in canon Hermione memory-charmed her parents.
First, I don't know whether it's an option to bail out of the wizarding world at this point. She has a blood debt to Malfoy which has yet to be paid off by Harry. I'm sure Harry would be fine with whatever she chose to do, but I don't know that the wizarding world is going to let her walk, at least until the debt is paid.
And she better hide very well is she does walk, because Malfoy wants her dead. The only protection she has from that is the wizarding world.
Second, if a boy saves your daughter from a torture execution, throwing away his fortune, and going into hock for a fortune besides, you might feel obligated to pay down that debt, and even repay him his lost fortune, regardless of your choices about being a part of the wizarding world.
As far as transporting, Harry has a magical chest that contains entire rooms and can walk on its own. Dumbledore, Quirrel, or any bribeable adult wizard can teleport him to gringotts or to any muggle bank or jeweler he would like to go to, and there are definitely spells for swiftly transporting items across a room or whatever. I think by far a bigger problem would be getting any muggle bank to accept 17 tons of silver in a single transaction without any sort of possible background checks.
He's got plenty of time, and doesn't need that much seed money or that high a growth rate -- unless Lucius has a plan that'll get intolerable well before his payment comes due. I ran some numbers, and if he's making 3% profit on each of one-third of all trading days for six years (which I think is if anything conservative -- the arbitrage hack early in the story would be a couple orders of magnitude more profitable until someone catches on), he needs a principal of a little under 40 Galleons to break the 100,000 mark by the end of year 7. For 60,000, it's more like 25.
That's a decent amount of money if we're going by the prices we've seen for goods, but I'd be surprised if he couldn't borrow it from any of the suitably impressed adults he's surrounded himself with. Especially if they've got a motive to screw the Malfoys over.
Note that Harry secretly buried 100 Galleons in the backyard of his parents' house back in chapter 36, so having seed money is not an issue.
Upvoted for an essentially accurate analysis. However a minor nitpick: The marginal fees and resources involved will likely make this not very profitable if one started out with a small amount of money. So it would make more sense to start out with say at least a hundred Galleons or so. (Incidentally, why are Galleons capitalized? Is that convention? Other currencies like pounds, dollars and euros aren't generally capitalized.)
It seems to be a convention of fiction. Lots of fictional terms are capitalized when real-world analogues are near-universally left lowercase. (Species names immediately come to mind.)
The coin names are capitalized in the Potter books, yeah. Don't know why.
And for ridiculousness, have him start with a 100 million superlotto payout and get 5% instead of 3%. He'd have a couple hundred quadrillion dollars by the time he had to pay Lucius back. Obviously he couldn't earn that much. Aside from that much money not existing, they'd shut down all trades well before he got to the first trillion dollars.
But still, it'd be amusing to have him with a giant mountain of gold equivalent to all the worlds combined reserves. "Lucius, you just grab that double-life-sized solid gold statue of myself. Don't worry about the small change, I've got extra."
Well, sure, that's exponential growth for you. I'd actually rule out the scenario I present in the grandparent on narrative grounds: it's not interesting from a plot or a rationalist perspective to be interrupted every chapter or two with a description of Harry's latest trade, or even with his latest plan to wring another 5% out of his capital. (Maybe not that latter -- Spice and Wolf pulled it off. But that's a different kind of story.) Point is, this doesn't need to be attention-getting in or out of story, just repeatable. There are boring options that would work (day trading with a Time-Turner being only the first to come to mind). Since that's an unstable state for a story and the debt could easily have been omitted, at this point I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop.
I'm not expecting that shoe to come in the form of unexpected changes to the financial structure that the early chapters set up, though. That does paint the Wizengamot in a rather unflattering light, but these are people that have only the vaguest idea of what cars are -- an enormous blind spot concerning the Muggle world is quite consistent with the established culture.
Let's quote the current author's notes:
Now, yes, it is possible that Eliezer Yudkowsky's Author Note on this very chapter is a lie, and he will suddenly reveal a whole series of barriers to paying the debt that will shut off everything from arbitrage to time turners to Dumbledore using the Philosopher's Stone in the manner allowed in canon, without having given us any previous hints as to what they are. But I think Eliezer Yudkowsky is not lying, and that at least one of the many simple solutions proposed (or another simple solution) will work.
Like going off to live in a poor country if you have a first-world income to live on. I believe it's already been remarked that this is about how magical Britain views muggle Britain.
Some counter-evidence for getting gold being difficult: In chapter 27, Mister Bester (the Legilimens who trained Harry) said:
Implying that it was at least somewhat practical as a means for getting rich quickly.
Bester has only thought about it for a few seconds so there could be problems that would occur to someone who is knowledgeable about the wizarding economy if they thought about it for a bit.
I meant it as Bayesian evidence. (updating P(Arbitrage works) down on Bester regretting means updating up on him not Regretting)
Plus, this is stronger evidence for us than for Harry due to Conservation of Details and the recent disclaimer by EY that there are no red herrings, and that simple solutions != bad solutions (and in fact, the opposite is usually true).
ETA: Also, Bester probably thought about it more more than a few seconds, at least the first time he saw it in Harry's mind - Remember that he didn't just see those Ideas/secrets, he's also seen key moments of his previous conversations.
Not really. All sorts of arguments and fights over importation rights occurred even during the height of merchantilism. That importing goods can be profitable is a much more obvious claim than that moving goods between markets can be profitable. The second is more abstract. Moreover, they don't think of the Muggle world as that important, so the fact that the Muggle world has imbalanced prices may not be obvious to them as something to even think about.
maybe I'm forgetting some piece of evidence but couldn't the simple explanation be that muggle gold isn't actually wizard gold and vice versa? Magical signature as mentioned or any number of other ways.
Ha!
Remember when H&C told Hermione that Harry would sacrifice her if she became inconvenient to his plans for global domination? Guess Hermione can tell him to kiss her ass on that one.
I doubt she remembers any of that conversation.
I hadn't thought of that.
On the other hand, those statements seemed like manipulation to a purpose, and it's hard to see what's the point if you're going to wipe the memory of it away.
She doesn't remember * that iteration * of the conversation. She remembers the last one (unless it was obliviated after the duel), which is the one where she was successfully manipulated.
I don't think the point of the groundhogs day attack was to find a convincing lie. I'm pretty sure the point was to identify a convincing memory. Once that was identified the entire conversation was oblivated and the false memory inserted.
He obliviated Blaise, he'll have obliviated Hermione.
Yes, technically it looks like he obliviated her much later -- after the final conversation led her to either curse Draco or think thoughts that made that story halfway plausible.
Um... I haven't been participating in these threads until now (will do so vigorously now), but what are current theories on the reasons behind what Quirrellmort has done so far?
It's clear to me that Hat and Cloak = Quirrellmort. So what did Quirrellmort stand to gain from this ploy? Was he trying to deprive Harry of allies, to eventually force him to rely more on Quirrellmort? Or specifically remove Hermione as a Morality Chain? Is this about maneuvering Harry into a position where he will eventually feel he must make war on Magical Britain, with Quirrellmort acting as the Man Behind the Man? Setting up Harry as a fall guy when Voldemort makes his second play for control of Magical Britain? Very confused here.
It's interesting that Harry needed to consult his dark side to arrive at this solution. It seems that the dark side is the piece of Voldemort's soul put into Harry when Harry was made a Horcrux. But is there a telepathic connection to Quirrellmort? When Harry consults his dark side, does it result in general Voldemort-like thoughts, or does the dark side coordinate with Quirrellmort? If the latter, maybe Quirrellmort wanted Harry to call in the blood debt for some reason.
Let's assume that Hermione had actually been sentenced to Azkaban. How many advantages would Quirrelmort have gained?
There may be more that aren't coming to mind, but, well, the potential payoffs for Quirrelmort were pretty high.
I don't think Harry actually would have taken Dumbledore as an enemy if Dumbledore failed to save Hermione, as he clearly was trying and even using up political capitol. Only having Dumbledore stand in the way of Harry saving her would do that, and when Dumbledore realized just how determined Harry was he had the sense to step aside.
Also I'm not really sure how well "Delegitimized the Wizengamot in the eyes of Magical Britain" would have worked--rest of the world yes, but the papers were certainly doing a hatchet job on her. The question is how representative of the populace is the press? Obviously the biggest papers is Lucius's and Fudge's soapbox here and in canon, but there's more than one paper in those newsstands and dissent isn't illegal until the death eaters take over in the last few books. I'm going to go with "not at all representative of public opinion", but propaganda exists because it works and they sounded prepared to present a unified front.
The rest, though, sound like things he could have planned on and represent MASSIVE gains for Voldemort. I especially like the "Isolated Magical Britain from the rest of the wizarding world" one--I didn't even think of it, but it fits. He didn't just get rid of Hermione, he goaded his enemies into committing an atrocity against her.
Do we have any evidence that the rest of the magical world would care?
Yes. Weak evidence, but:
There’s also that “and in Asia, they tell other stories entirely” line (wording from memory, I think in the previous chapter). And at some point two characters say something to the effect that even Voldemort didn’t use the worst kinds of magic, or every country would have risen against him.
All suggests other countries at least look at what’s going on, but are reluctant to act unless things get Really Bad.
Mostly good points, but one issue:
If Quirrel were worried about this, he could have just not put all the effort into teaching her military command and battle magic (at a level so far beyond what is expected of his position). If light-side heroes like Hermione are something he's worried about, best to just not go around creating them.
Harry named two people in particular - Hermione and Draco - who made him less susceptible to Quirrelmort's influence. This plot nearly removed both of them from Harry.
So, Dementors Part Deux.
First, because someone had to say it:
(I guess Dementors aren't that smart.)
Secondly, I noticed that Harry's first Transfiguration lesson includes a photograph of a Dementor. What would that look like? What does Harry see, compared to everyone else? Why was he asking all the other students what they saw in the Patronus lesson without ever once thinking of that photograph?
Probably just a cloaked and hooded figure.
Next you'll be wondering why the robes in the picture don't decay.
That seems like it must be it, but it still doesn't make much sense. Page 5 has a woman with horribly discolored skin screaming in agony, page 6 has... a guy in a cloak! Oh no!
So add some sort of minor fear charm to that page of the textbook. Wizards aren't limited to paper and ink in their tools at conveying information to an audience.
Ministry-issued textbooks might not have the best dramatic pacing.
The kids know what's in the cloak.
Edit: While some points may remain useful for the sake of reference, this theory is disproved in Chapter 82, and Aberforth's death no longer lacks narrative purpose.
Who killed Narcissa?
Suspects:
Dumbledore
Bones
Lucius
Voldemort
Someone else
HJPEV tells us that this doesn't fit the headmaster's style. His style is curiously consistent.
There is one offhand remark, vengeance, and a practical cold-heartedness favoring Bones. "Why not Bones?" is only a little better than no argument at all.
Lucius is presented as a devoted family man. It would be inconsistent characterization for him to do this. That works for real life, but HP&tMoR is fiction, which must make sense.
Voldemort has reason not to do this, as it made a fool out of one of his tools and weakened his side by making them less willing to strike indiscriminately.
I have a 'someone else' theory: Aberforth killed Narcissa. Aberforth is dead, and meaningfully so due to Conservation of Detail. We know little else about him from HP&tMoR. Only that he didn't testify against his brother in the death of his sister, and his brother got quite stern when he died. Basically, this theory allows me to put a piece in a puzzle because it fits, not because the image on the piece makes me think it goes with the pieces next to the hole. Also, I get to write the following paragraph.
In a world where innocents are dying, where evil is winning and good people live in fear for their loved ones, one man had the courage to do what must be done. Aberforth Dumbledore is Narcissa's Immolator.
Aberfoth kills his enemy's wife, informs his brother of what he's done, and then dies either at his own hand or, less style-consistently, his brother's. He knows that his brother will take this atrocity/sacrifice and make the best of it, and in so doing he saved countless 'light side' family members.
He did it all to make up for killing his sister and allowing his brother to kind of take the blame. Maybe.
It has to be Dumbledore, by Conservation of Narrative Detail: There's no way that the conditions of Harry's promise to Draco would have been spelled out in such detail if learning the truth would be all it took to expiate it.
It's going to turn out that Dumbledore did intentionally burn an innocent Narcissa Malfoy to death, but for a justifiable reason (though it's going to be interesting to see what that could be), and thus Harry is going to have the impossible task of convincing Draco to let him out of the promise.
Other than my desire for Snape to kill Dumbledore, I don't see any reason why HJPEV should talk Draco into letting him out of the promise.
It is more important to the themes of the work for HJPEV to follow through on a promise so dramatically given, than to shirk it. Likewise, it would be important for Dumbledore to face the consequences as administered by HJPEV.
You have an interesting point about the promise. It is awfully detailed for something that would just be set aside. Still, it could have been so detailed just to allow a semi-light character like HJPEV to bond with a semi-dark character like Draco. Or maybe to allow the author to demonstrate the practice of thinking things through, through HJPEV. Or, as the Pedant One points out, something else entirely.
Always be aware that there may be a possibility you haven't thought of.
I disagree. The last part is an inference, and I think we have more evidence that the killing prevented any peace between Lucius and Dumbledore in Voldemort's absence.
(I don't know how much stress to put on this, but we learn that Draco thinks the death had this effect in the same chapter where he tells us to understand strange plots by looking at the outcomes. Seems at least 90% certain the author meant us to suspect Voldemort when he wrote that.)
Now, Donny just pointed out that Voldemort could have faked his death entirely by, say, transfiguring some chickens and burning them. We also know that his treatment of Bellatrix ensured her devotion to him would not count as a happy memory and would thus continue in Azkaban. I think he intended this effect, meaning he planned for the possibility of seeming to lose. It sounds like he planned for that from the start.
Setting fire to a chicken back in Chapter 17 should increase P(Dumbledore did it, and is a sadist). But supposedly DD's weakness lies in doing evil "For the Greater Good," not in having fond memories of the time he burned a woman to death. Seems more likely to me that he suspects Voldemort faked a burned body (per Donny's guess), but can't say so because he has no convincing explanation for why V hasn't visibly acted since then. So he just taught Harry to doubt such appearances.
Also there is the fact (mentioned by someone else, sorry I forget who) that Narcissa's sister, Bellatrix, murdered Bones' brother. Edit: I am an idiot, you already mentioned this.
Bringing in Aberforth is a really interesting idea. Now that I think about it, even given the wizarding wars, it is remarkable that so many siblings have died or nearly died:
Albus/Aberforth
Bellatrix/Narcissa
Bones/her brother (who, exactly?)
Petunia/Lily
The last one is interesting with the role of survivor exchanged as well, since there is a hint that Petunia may have threatened suicide in order to convince Lily to brew the beauty potion.
Also, Bones is the one who speaks up to stop Dumbledore from "confessing" to killing Narcissa.
I think it's Bones. Too many coincidences otherwise.
Eponymuse, I think I covered that with the word 'vengeance.'
Those coincidences are otherwise satisfied by the fact that Bones' motives are served by Narcissa's Immolation, whoever did it. Given what we know about her, she'd act the same way if Dumbledore or Moody were Narcissa's Immolator. Still, it does make some narrative sense for her be the one.
I am not at all confident that Aberforth was involved. I would like it very much, though, if someone could add something more to or take something away from the rickety scaffold propping this theory up.
Aberforth may have died just to emphasize the harshness of the war in ways the source did not. If that's the case, I'm making a red herring out of a pointless bit of the set. However, there was nothing in the text that tells us that Aberforth was a tragic casualty of a meaningless war or anything of the sort. For now he looks, to me, like a gun on the mantle.
Sorry, apparently I'm illiterate.
Also, I guess "siblings getting killed" isn't much of a pattern. Given that people were getting killed in the war, and that people have siblings, you can count the people getting killed as siblings.
It was meee. Also there's the Bellatrix idea.
/shameless self-promotion
I like this possibility, it furthermore postulates that Albus was confused for Aberforth which is very likely IMO.
There are so many ways for Harry to get money - I hope the debt doesn't become a major plot point. If there are downsides to the debt in terms of obligations to Lucius, Harry should just get the money and be done with it.
If the Supreme Mugwump doesn't want Harry to be indebted to Lucius, shouldn't he be able to call in a few favors and have it paid off tomorrow? There's the general blood debt to Harry. The general goodwill to Harry. The desire by others not to have the Boy Who Lived in debt to Malfoy.
There should be enough people in the Wizarding world who'd want to help Harry, or owe him, to pay off the debt immediately.
And then there's all the ways Harry could make money using magic in Muggleland. Get him an internet connection in Hogwarts and play the market using his time turner. The Grangers look like they have rather deep pockets and could provide Harry some decent seed capital, if not pay it off themselves. He did save their daughter from being tortured to death. If nothing else, he could just play the gold-silver arbitrage.
In fact, why not decide to be filthy rich and bankrupt the Old Money like Lucius in the magical world?
The debt really just shouldn't be a problem.
The Grangers are comfortable, but two million 1991!pounds is well beyond the capabilities of any dentist I'm familiar with.
They could happily provide a laundering service of sorts. If the goblins get suspicious of where Harry got the muggle money (which he will supposedly get via one of many ways outlined on this thread), he could just say that the Grangers gave it to him to rescue his daughter-- He earns money through them (stocks in their name, or whatever), and they turn around and give it back to him to trade into galleons for the Hermione-Rescue Debt.
I doubt the goblins would look into how MUGGLES managed to earn so much money. Especially if they already seemed to be relatively well-off.
Early '90s. That'd be a JANET connection, which was an academic network. I expect AOL or Compuserve might be possible. We're talking about the mists of prehistory here, i.e. before 1995. Heck, it was even before the National Lottery was operating in the UK (that started 1994). The stock market would be playable, if he had a suitable adult to front for him.
No, how he makes serious money in the muggle world in 1991 Britain may require actual research.
Eh no... Harry has Mining++ also known as partial transfiguration. Now EY didn't believe that to be enough so he also equipped Harry with an invisibility cloak a bag AND a suitcase of holding.
If Harry is really pressed for cash and some rules against arbitrage, stock market manipulation, insurance fraud (which he should be able to do to an amount that's not even funny to think about) exist, he still has one glaringly easy way of earning shit tons. He should be able to, as soon as he is allowed to use magic outside school (which IIRC is at 17 which is before his last year at Hogwarts' starts; the 31st of July to be exact) of doing the following:
a) Robin Hood his way through pretty much anything (Invis+teleport is an old classic) b) mine diamonds/gold/other valuable resources by using partial transfiguration, invisibility and if need be Apparation.Some mines in Somalia are just waiting for a wizard to abuse them... c) and of course just straight up gambling.
Sincerely: this stuff doesn't even require a lot of thinking. He could also just do some honest transport business of high quality wares... Teleportation is a whole lot faster than anything else I can think of.
There was virtually no online trading for individual investors until about 1994. You had to phone your full-service or discount broker and talk to him (or very rarely her) to make a trade.
Why does Dumbledore not give a quick Summary of the worst consequences of being in debt to Lucius Malfoy? It's hard to see how that could necessitate telling secrets that cannot be revealed in public, the laws involved should already be known. Naming a few of the "certain rights" Lucius would have shouldn't take more time than Dumbledore actually spends trying to convince Harry.
I wonder if the exchange rate of 1 Galleon = 17 sickles = 493 knuts is fixed by law or a floating exchange rate that just happens to be currently at that value. Perhaps that would explain the unusual ratios that are in use.
Does anyone know what countries did back when coins were actually made of precious metals?
It varied. Some countries used a bimetallic standard with fixed exchange rates, some used one as the standard and let the other float. There's even been trimetallic(gold/silver/copper) at times.
It's actually been a political issue which of those to use more recently than you'd expect(and no, I don't mean Ron Paul) - the 1896 US Presidential election was fought in significant part on a Democrat plan to move to a bimetallic standard away from straight gold, which was in the day an inflationary move designed to help indebted farmers. If you've ever heard of the "Cross of Gold" speech by William Jennings Bryan, that was it. A couple decades earlier, though, the US was bimetallic, and routinely had one metal or the other sucked completely out of circulation by prices changing faster than the official exchange ratio, as is to be expected of a system with fixed exchange rates and no capital controls.
The history of how to abuse commodity money systems(both from the public's perspective and from the minter's) is long and actually rather fascinating. If you ever hear someone talking about how gold is stable and can't be abused, you can feel free to laugh at them.
Mostly - fail.
For a detailed explanation, I recommend "The Big Problem of Small Change" - Thomas J. Sargent, François R. Velde published in 2002 isbn 0-691-02932-6
A common strategy was to ignore the problem and hope it goes away. It didn't - see Gresham's law - bad money drives out good. Another strategy was to debase the more valuable coins (make them of less pure metals), which has approximately the same effect.
All of which leads to "economic hardships" on the poor, which sounds a lot nicer than "the poor died in droves."
It seems strange, but the idea of a representational currency, coins that you can officially exchange for a fixed amount of gold, is actually a relatively recent invention. Not to be confused with fiat money - coins that you can't officially exchange for anything.
Edit: Did you mean "how did countries set the exchange rate in the old days?" If so, then typically the government reserved the right to mint coins, and the exchange rate was set by law.
No, you and Alsadius answered my question perfectly. It was more of a "oh god is this as collapse prone as it seems at first glance" question.
I guess the wizard world really is just jonesing for a total economic collapse.