The comment from JKR in that interview about how the wizarding and Muggle wars can feed off of each other, especially in conjunction with Grindelwald, is adding more fuel to a plot bunny I've had for a few months now.

I'm sure it's probably been used by plenty of other writers in the fandom, but so far, I've got Dumbledore defeating Grindelwald with the use of a magical device he gets from a Polish Jewish wizard who uses the device to hold traces of all those wizards/witches who Grindelwald has killed or led to be killed, and this helps to defeat him. I'm thinking of using some historical figures, namely Jan Karski to bring the item from Warsaw to London when he reports to the Polish government-in-exile and Churchill.

I might make passing mention to a Polish/Eastern European school for my main character to have attended, but that's still to be decided.

I really should start working on this before my bunny eats itself...

Oooh, nice Bunny.

I'd vote a Golem, myself, if you want to go with a Jewish/Central European magical device of attack/protection.

Go. Write.

I've threadsucked, both here and in Literary, and I'll definitely catch up. I'm sorry for jumping into an ongoing conversation while ignoring it, but I just wanted to unentangle some thoughts, before reading others and being able to respond to them. It's just that this whole idea keeps running in my head and I'm trying to quiet it down by writing it up, or something like it. Anyway:

Many books ago, in "Philosopher's Stone", we were introduced to the mirror of Erised, the one in which you don't see yourself as you are, but yourself as you wish you were, the fulfillment of your deepest wish. Then, a few books later, we saw in "Order of the Phoenix" (though didn't really saw them used) mirrors which were supposed to be used for communication, one of them given as a present to Harry from Sirius. But, in my mind's eyes, there are way more mirrors, reflections, echoes and the twisted form of all of these, in the characters and events themselves.

Now, I've never studied anything that can be remotely considered as literature in any level that is more than "please memorize what your high school teacher read aloud from the exam manual", so I may be so completely stating-the-obvious here that my posts should in fact be in whitefont for all those who thought they may read actual content, but these things are wondering around in my head, so I might as well try to un-entangle them on screen, if only for my selfish benefit alone.

There are the obvious parallels, with Harry and Voldemort, that have been going on pretty much from the start, but became much richer and deeper in this book. Especially since they are now tied stronger than ever to what I see as one of the main threads of emotional and moral importance in the whole series, that of our choices being what makes us who we are, more than anything else. In "Chamber of Secrets" it turned out that Harry can speak to snakes, much like Voldemort, and his scar gave him insight to Voldemort's emotions and thoughts in "Order of the Phoenix", just to name a few. They are both orphans, and - as silly as it may seem - both their parents were killed by Voldemort himself, in various stages.

In this book we learn that they both grew up without knowing about their special abilities, and both were told about them before they turned 11, and were invited into Hogwarts. The chapter in which Dumbledore tells the boy Tom Riddle about his abilities and future possibilities mirrors and negates the one in which Hagrid does the same for Harry, in "Philosopher's Stone". Harry's joy at the connection he found, at not being the one that stands out and belongs to nothing, is the complete opposite of Tom's reaction, trying to calculate what he can get out of this, making deals with Dumbledore, trying to hide past deeds. It has to come out of Hagrid and Dumbledore being so different, as from Tom's orphanage being quite different from number 4 Privet Drive, but still, most of the difference comes from the personality of the child himself.

And that thread, of isolation vs. sharing with one's friends and companions, goes all throughout the books. Harry finds himself friends in Hogwarts, a sort of an adopting family. He feels apart, lonely at times due to his past, abilities, fame or the misuse of them. He sometimes, more than once, feels that nobody can understand him, know what's going on with him, appreciate his courage and dedication. And yet, in the end, at the bottom line, he always turns to the help of his friends or the people around him. It's more obvious to me in "Philosopher's Stone", what with each one of Harry, Ron and Hermione solving parts of the obstacles being put in front of them on their way to the stone, each one playing their strength, collaborating in a joint effort. And that's what the ending of this book looked like, to me, with Ron and Hermione refusing to go anywhere than to Harry's aid, and Harry accepting their offer.

(continued...)

( continues...)

In contrast, it was emphasized more than once that Voldemort himself trust nobody, shares his thoughts and plans with nobody, or at least nobody he doesn't have to. He chose to isolate himself from everybody else. He started as a lonely child, who didn't really know how to connect to the others in the orphanage. Harry was described as similarly lonely. But while Harry chose to connect to his classmates, especially the Weasleys and Hermione, once he had the chance, Tom Riddle, who communicated in the orphanage through frightening the other kids, continued with his loneliness in Hogwarts. He had his followers, who admired him and did as he had told and later became his Death Eaters, but they are not friends, there was no true connection between him and his army.

And you know who else stands out in his loneliness, throughout the series? Dumbledore. He is another of the more obvious parallels to Voldemort, being practically his complete opposite in every way, starting with being his biggest opponent. The thing that was most emphasized in this book regarding that was, to me, the way they relate to death. Voldemort seems to fear it more than anything else, doing whatever he can to deny himself that fate, while Dumbledore treats it as a necessary part of life, in a way. He accepts death. Not happy about it or welcoming it, but accepts it. Just like it was described, again, in "Philosopher's Stone" regarding Flamel giving up the stone and passing away as a result.

And still, despite all their differences, Dumbledore seems to share Voldemort's loneliness. He is the best wizard of his time, more clever and powerful than anybody around him. He understand what's going on faster than anybody else, and is already planning ahead when they are struggling to realize what's around them. That sort of ability can easily create loneliness. When nobody can understand you, with whom can you share? Dumbledore's isolation is not out of choice, like Voldemort's, but a thing that's forced upon him by the outside world. And with all that, he still never stops reaching out to people. In fact, that's described as his greatest ability.

Dumbledore believes in people. Voldemort appeals to their lesser parts, their weaknesses and fears. It's enough to see how he recruited Peter Pettigrew, how he appealed to him, how Peter returned to him only out of fear of everything else, as an example for this. Dumbledore is exactly the opposite in how he treats people. Snape is the obvious example, but he's just one out of many. I think my favorite is how he made Gryffindor win the house cup in "Philosopher's Stone" by awarding the final points to Neville, for standing up to his friends and finding that courage and strength in himself. He sees the best that a person can do with what was dealt to them by life, and appeals to that. And again, it ties with the possibilities of choice. Since people have the ability to choose, to mold their own path from all those that rest at their feet, they also have that best in them. And Dumbledore is the sort of person who reminds people of that sort of choice.

So Harry and Tom had quite a similar childhood, surrounded with coldness and lack of love, and they chose to do a completely different thing with it. Dumbledore and Voldemort had quite a similar magnitude of talent and wisdom, and they chose to do a completely different thing with it. Upside-down mirrors, all the way. But it's not just them. Nearly every character, every action, has either a parallel, an opposite, or a twisted image - at least, each one that I can think of. In more than one case, there's a sort of a triangle, with two characters or events being the opposite of each other and one that is still undecided or can go both ways or is indeed some of both, in that instance. A bit like a mirror maze, with angles and double reflections, in which each image can be reflected by several other mirrors, in several quite different ways, while still being an image all of itself. I'm not sure my sentences make much sense at this point, sorry. I'll try to clear myself up. (continued...)

( continues...)

The first example I can think about, from "Half Blood Prince", regards mothers. I mean, yes, the book opens with the Muggle mirroring of all we know that takes place in the Wizarding world, and the Wizarding world itself may mirror the Muggle world - or our world, the one we actually live in when we're not inside a book - in many ways, but that's too wide for me to go into. In the second chapter, however, there's a mother who is trying to do anything in her power to protect her son. Narcissa, begging Snape to back her son up, and making him swear that he'd die otherwise. Similar motherly concern, to the point of death in order to protect the child, as Lily had so many years ago, in a much more dangerous and personal way. The fact that so far we only disliked Draco doesn't change the way his mother goes out of line (as can be seen by Bellatrix' reluctance) to do anything for him, even to cross Voldemort, even at a price of death of somebody else.

And still, it was different from Lily, not a straight-out reflection. First, of course, the death threat, not as immediate, wasn't on her, but on Snape. And she was trying to protect her son from his own choices and actions, while Harry was only born and prophecied upon, when his mother had sacrificed herself for him. And, of course, Narcissa went pretty much against her "boss", while Lily was openly his opposer, so there's a double betrayal and a double loyalty here. And still, the emotion behind the actions seems to me to be the same motherly love.

It's totally not the only twisted-reflection between Harry and Draco. Ever since the beginning, they were practically the opposites of each other, even in their looks, with Harry's black hair and Draco's nearly white one. They both had their two loyal companions, but while Harry's were his friends and he actually shared his emotions and thoughts honestly with them, Draco's were his lackeys and he mostly ordered them around. Again, with the loneliness out of choice, in a way. Harry was Dumbledore's favorite, and Draco was Snape's, and each of them seemed to represent their houses to the fullest, with many of the other kids looking up to them as a result of that.

In "Half Blood Prince" the similarities - and differences - even deepened. Harry was getting his private lessons from Dumbledore, after forming in the former book "Dumbledore's Army", while Draco was enlisted - despite his young age - to Voldemort's army, the Death Eaters. Harry had to try and fail and try again in order to follow Dumbledore's directions, with the memory from Slughorn, and even moreso in the cave, in which he had to fight every instinct he ever had in order to follow Dumbledore's painful orders. Draco, however, at the bottom line, on the tower, failed to fulfill his master's orders. He wasn't able to kill Dumbledore, wasn't able to turn against his old teacher. In a way, he's the opposite of Harry in this. However, since by failing to follow Voldemort's orders he revealed a glimpse of good in his character, he rose above the person he thought he had become to at least try and begin to fight for being a different sort of person, he in facts mirrored Harry's journey. Again, it's the choices who determine who you are, not your abilities, former intentions or upbringing. And Draco's choice positioned him, for maybe the first time, as the not-opposite of Harry, in his failure, as opposed to Harry's success, at this specific topic. While, of course, neither Harry's success to follow Dumbledore's orders, nor Draco's eventual accepting of him, did not save Dumbledore's life.

Oh, and if I've mentioned it already, there are the groups that form around the strong, leading figures in the books. "Dumbledore's Army" and the Order of the Phoenix were pretty much voluntary groups, formed since their members wanted to follow that specific character and believed in the same values and truths. (continued...)

( continues...) Voldemort's Death Eaters at least started by admiration and fear to Tom Riddle's strength and wisdom, but also due to the fear he brought to the hearts of the children and adults around him. When he was defeated, some of his followers were faithful to the death - or to Azkaban - and some fled. When he returned, again, there were many who appeared only due to their fear from his punishment had they failed to show up. The thing that held them together was in a way a thing that kept some of them away. And in "Half Blood Prince" we saw a different sort of group - the Slug Club, formed by part due to the teacher's selection of students, by part by their own wish to belong to it. A different way to manifest Slytherin's drive to power, just like Dumbledore's following, against ministry policy and school rules, is a way to manifest Gryffindor's spirit.

And the list just goes on and on: Grayback the werewolf as opposed to Lupin the werewolf. Percy Weasley and his relationship to his family, when compared to the Crouch family from "Goblet of Fire", duty vs. love and connection (which is especially interesting, to me, considering how Percy's story is not finished yet, and I still don't know what his choice - again that word - is, how he would position himself if duty and family conflicted with a death threat overhead). Harry and Neville, as the two children who could fulfill the prophecy, how different they are in character, how similar (even in lack of parents), how easily one of them could have replaced the other. The Black family, as opposed to the Weasleys on the one hand, and the Dursleys on the other (which also may tie very nicely, IMHO, if Regulus turns to be the mysterious RAB, having another relative-opposite-similar in the mix, showing Sirius' own rebellious character towards authority, from the opposite end of the spectrum). The house-elves: Dobby who tried to both save Harry in "Chamber of Secrets" while minimally hurting his master and now rejoices in his freedom, his opposite Winky who mourns hers after being as loyal as she could to her master despite what horrible things may happened in "Goblet of Fire", and then Kreacher, with his fierce loyalty and his bitter betrayal all at once in "Order of the Phoenix". Which is pretty much what I meant when I mentioned triangles.

All those reflections and opposites and twisted mirrors were there from the start, in fast, not just in the mirror of Erised, but in Voldemort's first appearance in the books itself. In "Philosopher's Stone", he was the back of Quirrel's head. The other side of the teacher who was supposed to show the children how to defend themselves from just that who was opposite them. And when Voldemort returned, the potion that gave him life was composed from reflections that he cast, or stood in front of him. There were the bones of his Muggle father, whose appearance Tom inherited and Voldemort denounced. There was the flesh of Wormtail, the traitor, the coward, the one driven by fear and resentment, who couldn't get along without his friends and sold them out, all molded by Voldemort's appeal to his worst characteristics. And Harry's blood. Harry who is so similar to Tom in so many ways - they both even look like their fathers, they both thoughts at first that their fathers were the full source of their power, they both changed their minds in a very different way, obviously, as they matured. Harry who was the downfall of Voldemort, who carries his scar, who may enter his thoughts, who has his snake-speak ability. Who is the embodiment of all that is his opposite.

And then, there's Snape. And the question of trust in people.

I don't get to read hardly anything from the various Harry Potter fandoms online, but even I can guess that one of the most heated arguments just about now regards Snape, whether he's really truly evil or following Dumbledore's orders. I don't want to state an opinion just now, because I want to say something else: how much I love that both possibilities (and even a third one) are all valid through the text, fully with Snape's motives for each one, and with that complex mirror-maze structure still reflecting and counter-reflecting, with each one. (continued...)

( continues...)

The first possibility, like I mentioned, is that Snape is evil, that he had worked for Voldemort all along, that he hid his true self for as long as he could, just like Voldemort did behind the handsome face of Tom Riddle, that he has no respect for anybody's life, only to the power and strength that he can gain from whatever is around him. He exploits Dumbledore and his shelter when it's convenient, he stays isolated in Hogwarts, no friends out of choice, and reveals his true nature when he can gain most of it. Just like Voldemort. With an addition of a pretence of deep regret, to fool Dumbledore, which Voldemort never managed to do, a background of being picked upon as a child, which again Voldemort never had, and nothing like the admiration and following that Tom Riddle already won. A sadder hurt version of Voldemort. And just like Peter Pettigrew, in another reflection, he won the strong shelter of the wizard world, when in fact he's a real traitor in disguise.

The second possibility is, of course, the complete opposite. In a pretense-inside-a-pretense, Snape can be the good trustworthy person Dumbledore believes him to be all along. He could have agreed to use the unforgivable curse himself on Dumbledore, in the flow of events that may bring the worst, which seemed to be happening after the cave and in the tower. If Dumbledore must die, then in his hands, in the way that may still give some advantage, that may keep the fight going in more than one front. Accused of evil, while still being on t he side of faithful and right. In that he may resemble Sirius, as much as the two hated each other. And in his faithfulness to Dumbledore, with following a set of orders which were horrible and painful and against his true nature to follow (as that argument overheard between them may suggest), he also mirrors Harry himself, following Dumbledore's orders in the cave, forcing him to drink the probably-poisoned potion, hurting him, in the onward look for the greater good, trusting that old wise wizard regardless of his own instincts and nature.

The third possibility is that he made an unbreakable vow. Breaking it results in death, and it could be that Snape was forced to make that vow, and now is simply afraid of death and is willing to do whatever he has to in order to save himself from that fate. But that also mirrors another character, another motive. Voldemort's greatest fear is death. That's what he's trying to avoid all along, that's what he fought hardest, created the horcruxes for - and won. But it still remains his greatest fear. And if Snape did what he had done out of the same fear, regardless of where his moral compass turns, then he reflects that fear, that made Voldemort do all these strange and horrible spells, in a most human - and horrid in itself - way.

And pretty much all that happened throughout the six books, and especially on the tower and in the run from it, may fit each one of these motives, all the way through. Even Snape's sharp denial of Harry's calling him a coward works in each one of those scenarios - either it's true and he's ashamed of it, or he had just done the bravest thing he ever had to do, or he finally revealed his true self. Dumbledore's plea was not specific, it was just a plea, which again could mean either that he wanted him to fulfill his most difficult part, or find courage and truth in himself, or appeal to the trust he had had of him for all those years.

So it all comes down to trust. Trust of a character's right choices. James trusted Sirius. The he wanted to show trust in Peter Pettigrew, and made him his Secret Keeper, showing him the deepest faith a friend can show, trying to make him feel as welcome and loved as possible, appealing to the best parts of him. Just like Dumbledore has been doing all along. And it failed. It was that same trust that threw James, Lily and Harry straight into Voldemort's wand. (continued...)

( continues...) In a strange sense, though, it was that trust who provided the chain of events that ended with Voldemort's curse being reflected upon him and his loss of power. And now, Dumbledore's ongoing trust of Snape, who wasn't just an untrustworthy friend, but also proved himself at least once as a member of the other side, by joining the Death Eaters, that trust seemed to result in Dumbledore's own death. Another failure. Another choice of betrayal.

From, IIRC, "Chamber of Secrets", I thought that one of the final confrontations in the end of the series will be Harry forced to trust Snape, without Dumbledore to lean on, to reassure him that this is the right way, to lead him. Plain and naked trust, either to give or not to. In "Half Blood Prince" while, as always, completely suspecting Snape himself, Harry trusted the Half Blood Prince's book wholeheartedly, without a second's hesitation (in fact it was Hermione, who follows Dumbledore in his trust of Snape, who mistrusted the Prince). He did go along with Snape, even without knowing it. And now what? Will he trust Snape? Will he trust Draco? Will he be right in doing so? Was Dumbledore? James wasn't - will Harry follow his father, or choose his own path, and in what ways?

And that's why I love that it could go either way, I think, why I like that complex structure that is playing in my head, the mirror images and reflections and twisted ones and then again. The very fact that it could go either way in a believable way that can be argued about. Even without any connections with the actual results and future events in the 7th book. Because now it's all up to the characters' choices. To looking at the situation and who they want to be and what they want to do with where they are and what they have, and that's what defines them. Not what already happened, but what they choose to happen next.

And, um, if you want to blame somebody for this long ramble, please hold responsible our system administrator who didn't e-mail us the needed passwords and kept me from the data I need to work on. Of course, I have other things I simply must do, but I preferred trying to write the obvious (though I really like the mess that it makes in my head), instead of feeling sorry for myself and trying to work on actual, well, other work. Ahem.

[Edit: Oops. I knew it was long. I had no idea it was that long. Stupid sieve.]

t does the dance of getting to read Nilly's HBP post first.

Good points, Nilly. I'll have to reread it when I';m not stuck at my desk worrying about my bosses walking by...

Second!

I love the way your mind works, Nilly. A lot of your points I'd thought of myself, but you've given me some new ones, too.