[stylist] Back to the Wizarding World

[Donna Hill]

Phyllis,
Yes, indeed, Harry's cloak was a quantum leap more powerful than the average
(though still quite rare) invisibility cloak. Harry's cloak was not "an"
invisibility cloak, it was "the" invisibility cloak -- the one and only
invisibility cloak that was part of the Deathly Hallows, the three objects
with superior powers handed down through the generations. But Dumbledore was
in possession of the cloak since borrowing it from Harry's father shortly
before his death. He had spent decades searching for and dreaming of the
Deathly Hallows, and he knew what it was.

Of course, Hermione could be lying or have misremembered, but I think either
of those possibilities is unlikely. I think we can at least trust that
Dumbledore said exactly what Hermione says he said.  The question becomes:
was Dumbledore being totally truthful with them? I think the answer to this
question has to be "No." 

So, why would Dumbledore tell them that the Dementors could see through
invisibility cloaks? Was he speaking specifically of Harry's cloak or of the
more common and less powerful cloaks? He does use the plural "cloaks." 

The mere use of the plural in this case points to evasiveness on
Dumbledore's part. After all, there's only one like Harry's, so making it
plural insinuates that he is referring at least in part to the lesser
cloaks.

Was this evasiveness an attempt by Dumbledore to shield Harry from the truth
about his cloak?   This would go along with Dumbledore's self-proclaimed
mistake -- his tendency throughout Harry's younger years at Hogwarts of
trying to conceal from him the truth about what happened the night his
parents died -- the truth about his true identity and destiny. Since
Dumbledore doesn't come clean with Harry until the end of book 5 after
Sirius dies, it can be assumed that this evasiveness is in effect in book 3.

But, the case could be made that deliberately warning Harry about the
Dementors was to make him even more careful than he needed to be. The
thinking would be something like a parent knowing that most of the time,
their child isn't going to get hit by a car when crossing the street. But,
the consequences of that once-in-a-while occurrence are too devastating, so
the parent warns the kid that they could be hit by a car, never mentioning
that it is statistically more likely that the driver will swerve and just
give the kid a good scare.

Personally, I lean toward both explanations and one more. Telling Harry a
half-truth fits well with Dumbledore's character flaw. It also is consistent
with Dumbledore's concern and fear for Harry. The other explanation  suits
the author's purposes. It steers the reader away from recognizing the true
nature of the cloak, which Rowling wants to reveal with maximum impact in
book 7.
Donna

-----Original Message-----
From: stylist [mailto:stylist-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of P. Campbell
Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2013 6:39 PM
To: Writer's Division Mailing List
Subject: Re: [stylist] Back to the Wizarding World

But wasn't Harry's cloak a bit more powerful than the average invisibility
cloak?  I could be mistaken, of course.

Phyllis 


_______________________________________________
Writers Division web site
http://www.writers-division.net/
stylist mailing list
stylist at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
stylist:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/penatwork%40epix.net