|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue May 23, 2006 8:23 pm
It is mentioned at various times throughout the first 6 books. We know that Dumbledore has a scar on his thigh that is a perfect map of the London Underground, which he says has proved to be useful at times. Cornelius Fudge, when confronted with the concept that Harry's scar is acting as a warning signal for aspects of Voldemort's life, is skeptical and mentions another incident where Dumbledore suspected a scar as acting as a warning sign. I think this was a tongue-in-cheek reference to Dumbledore's own scar.
All that I can piece together, is that Gringotts is located deep below the Underground, as explained by Hagrid to Harry in Philosopher's Stone. If Gringotts is the next safest place to hide something after Hogwarts, is it possible that something of great importance (a horcrux perhaps?) is hidden in Gringotts and there is some way of locating it via the Underground?
Or is the mention of the map of the Underground another one of those quirky little things that Dumbledore says sometimes? I don't really like this theory, as JKR tends to follow the trend that if something is mentioned more than once, it is of some importance later on in the series. If Dumbledore would only have mentioned his scar in passing one time, then I could easily write it off, but because of the comment made by Fudge, I have to think that there is something more to his scar than we currently know.
Comments? Opinions?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 29, 2006 10:30 am
Where else is it mentioned other than the first book?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 29, 2006 2:10 pm
I'm trying to wrack my mind to think of the other place it happens ... it's at the end of a book when Harry is in the hospital wing and Fudge, Dumbledore and Snape are all there. I think it's GoF ... yes pretty sure it is GoF because Fudge gives Harry the winnings right afterwards and storms off. Yeah, in that little scene Dumbledore tells Fudge that Harry's scar is acting as a warning sign and Fudge makes some snide comment about how this isn't the first time that Dumbledore thinks a scar is acting as a warning beacon. It is kind of a tongue-in-cheek comment on Fudge's part, and I am nearly positive that it is in referrence to Dumbledore's scar. That and the first book are the only instances where Dumbledore's scar is mentioned, but in the wonderful style of JKR, we never hear something mentioned that obviously on two separate occasions and that something turn out not to be important. So I think we will hear more of that story in book 7.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 7:23 am
I only remember it being mentioned in the first book, and I honestly don't think it is anything of significance. It seems to me that it is just part of Dumbledore's character.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 8:04 am
DeeDee06 I'm trying to wrack my mind to think of the other place it happens ... it's at the end of a book when Harry is in the hospital wing and Fudge, Dumbledore and Snape are all there. I think it's GoF ... yes pretty sure it is GoF because Fudge gives Harry the winnings right afterwards and storms off. Yeah, in that little scene Dumbledore tells Fudge that Harry's scar is acting as a warning sign and Fudge makes some snide comment about how this isn't the first time that Dumbledore thinks a scar is acting as a warning beacon. It is kind of a tongue-in-cheek comment on Fudge's part, and I am nearly positive that it is in referrence to Dumbledore's scar. That and the first book are the only instances where Dumbledore's scar is mentioned, but in the wonderful style of JKR, we never hear something mentioned that obviously on two separate occasions and that something turn out not to be important. So I think we will hear more of that story in book 7. I haven't looked at that spot yet, but anyways, I think you are making quite a bit of a stretch. I mean, yes, Dumbledore has a scar shaped like a map of the London Underground, and yes, Gringotts is located under london... but I dont think that it is a map of Gringotts. Let's say it was... ok, then it would make sense if *Dumbledore* was hiding something. Plus, like you said, Gringotts is the SECOND safest place. And knowing how much we do about Voldemort loving Hogwarts, he would've hidden a horcrux in Hogwarts (which may be true). If Voldemort was the one with the scar, then yea... MAYBE, na, prolly not. But this doesn't really make much sense at all to me. The comment Dumbledore made about his scar in book one, was just a joke, adding to his character.Dumbledore is always saying things like that. For example, when harry asked what he most wanted, he said socks. And I don't at all remember them mentioning his scar again in any of the other 5 books. Pretty much, this theory doesnt seem real to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 3:45 pm
Valid opinions. It may be a bit of a stretch, but it was just a suggestion ... an inkling, if you will. And I was testing the waters to see if other people possibly noticed the mentions of scars as well.
Whether or not you agree with my opinion on Dumbledore's scar, there is another mention of it in book 4, GoF. The fact that you disagreed it was there at all prompted me to rifle through the book and find it.
GoF, Chapter 26: The Parting of the Ways. Pg. 764 in the adult paperback edition.
" 'Listen to me, Cornelius,' said Dumbledore, taking a step towards Fudge, and once again he seemed to radiate that indefinable sense of power that Harry had felt after Dumbledore had Stunned young Crouch. 'Harry is as sane as you or I. That scar upon his forehead has not addled his brains. I believe it hurts him when Lord Voldemort is close by, of feeling particularly murderous.'
Fudge had taken half a step back from Dumbledore, but he looked no less stubborn. 'You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before ...'
'Look, I saw Voldemort come back!' Harry shouted. ..."
I will admit that spewing random facts is a very Dumbledore-ish thing to do ... but why would JKR have Fudge mention a curse scar other than Harry's at this point if we had never heard of it before? The only other scar we have heard about prior to GoF is Dumbledore's. With a random mention such as that, I have to believe that the scar that Dumbledore mentioned in PS and the one that Fudge mentioned in GoF are one in the same. JKR is a genius at such things as that. She never says anything that isn't necessary for some reason, especially in an important scene such as the one quoted above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 4:12 pm
So I just finished reading the other posts in this guild, had logged off of Gaia and had happily begun another task, when a thought popped into my head.
What if the importance of Dumbledore's scar (yes, I am still running on the precept that it is important, so play along) is not it's shape but the fact that it was acting as a warning beacon? We know that Dumbledore is attributed with the defeat of Grindewald, and as a topic covered intensely in another post in this guild, we have "hints" from JKR that Grindewald will be of some importance in book 7. Connecting the dots, if Dumbledore's scar was sending warnings regarding Grindewald, the Ministry would of course have known about it and we are left with a very similar situation that Harry finds himself in at the end of GoF (clear warnings only understood by a few, and blatantly rejected by the Ministry).
This theory will take some more thought to work out, and in the style of JKR I'm sure it requires some backstory, yet unknown to us lowly readers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 7:12 am
DeeDee06 So I just finished reading the other posts in this guild, had logged off of Gaia and had happily begun another task, when a thought popped into my head. What if the importance of Dumbledore's scar (yes, I am still running on the precept that it is important, so play along) is not it's shape but the fact that it was acting as a warning beacon? We know that Dumbledore is attributed with the defeat of Grindewald, and as a topic covered intensely in another post in this guild, we have "hints" from JKR that Grindewald will be of some importance in book 7. Connecting the dots, if Dumbledore's scar was sending warnings regarding Grindewald, the Ministry would of course have known about it and we are left with a very similar situation that Harry finds himself in at the end of GoF (clear warnings only understood by a few, and blatantly rejected by the Ministry). This theory will take some more thought to work out, and in the style of JKR I'm sure it requires some backstory, yet unknown to us lowly readers. ok, i still have to check about the the excerpt on page 764, but it looks to me like you read it wrong or its a typo. Fudge is trying to push the fact the Voldemort has NOT returned... so why would he tell Dumbledore that yes, curse scars would show dangers... im pretty sure it says he HASNT heard of a curse scar acting like that... but i will have to check it out. right now both of my copied of it are locked in my brother's room. and about Dumbledore's scar... first of all, it does NOT at ALL look like it has much importance... and even if it did... DUMBLEDORE IS DEAD! AND BURRIED! i dont think his scar, even if it did mean anything, would be noticed by anyone anymore if it did, for whatever reason, show any warning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 7:13 am
plus, even if Fudge did mention he did hear of a curse scar... who says he's talking about Dumbledore's... plus, who ever said Dumbledore's scar is a curse scar
it *could* just be a regular scar...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 7:14 am
and no offense, but you are making crazy stretches. not only are you stretching things, but stretching off assumptions, making the odds show its even less possible. you are assuming a lot of things, with no real proof or anything to back it up...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 7:34 am
ok, i just checked, and it was a typo, either by you, or the book you have... but first of all, in the paperback book, its chapter 36, page 706. the book only has 734 pages. so i think something must've been up with you when you wrote this, you got the chapter, page, and quite wrong... u feeling ok? razz n e ways, it says :
"...I believe it hurts [Harry] when Lord Voldemort is close by, or feeling particulary murderous."
...
"You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've never heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before..."
so not only did you have this wrong, but it has NOTHING to do with Dumbledore's scar, no matter how much you want to stretch it. also, this also shows that his scar was only mentioned ONCE before, and that it was, simply, just a joke that added to Dumbledore's character.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:29 pm
Okay wow, calm down. There is absolutely no reason to attack me just because you disagree with my opinions. I just checked again, and yes I did get the chapter wrong, it is chapter 36, so a multitude of sorries for that one. But there are multiple editions in paperback, with Canadian, US, and UK versions all having different page numbers. In my book it is on 764, that doesn't necessarily mean it will be the same page in your book because we are obviously reading different editions. And after checking again, the word "never" definately does not appear in the sentence of question. It clearly says, " 'You'll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I've heard of a curse scar acting as an alarm bell before ...' ". So it is possible that one of our versions has a typo. If that is the case and the actual wording includes the "never" as you have stated, then my theory is out of the window. But if my version is correct then I'm still holding onto it.
I hope that I have been nothing but accepting of other people's opinions in this guild. Regardless, I certainly do not appreciate someone attacking me for mine. I am not pressuring people to see things as I do. I am just using this outlet to throw an idea out there and judge people's reactions to it. You could have very easily expressed that you do not agree with me without attacking me repeatedly. And just because you throw in the phrase "no offence, but ..." does not excuse you from being rude and derrogatory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 5:52 am
If I came off rude, im sorry. Maybe it was the fact that i had to keep coming back to the message, writing it in parts before i sent it (things have been crazy around here) now that i read my posts over, i did sound kind of rude, and i apologize. I am positive that my version is the correct one because then this would not make sense...
I mean, here Dubledore is, saying that Voldemort is back and Harry's scar is proof of that.
Fudge, who doesn't want to believe that, would disagree with him. It's like saying: You'lll forgive me, Dumbledore, but I agree with you.
and when i put stuff it CAPS, i really mean to in italics, im just a little lazy... sweatdrop again, im really sorry i came off as mean. i really didnt mean to be. its just some relatives are staying with us cause of the war in israel, they live close to the border and i live in a city more in central israel...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 5:58 am
heyy, i just wanted to say sorry again.. i was thinking about it and now i feel bad...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 8:54 am
Thanks for that. I know people (myself included) can get caught up in the moment when writing. I appreciate the apology. Thanks.
I am now on a hunt for other versions of book 4. It would make a HUGE difference if the "never" that you mentioned in your book is really there. It certainly is absent in my book. What an unfortunate word to have in a typo! It completely changes the whole meaning of the sentence whether it is there or not. So off hunting I go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
