Skip to main content

harry potter - Why did Dumbledore 'put on' the Resurrection Stone (Ring)?


WARNING: Spoiler Alerts throughout this question...


Now, Dumbledore put on Marvolo's ring, knowing that it was the Resurrection Stone which was on the ring. He also knew (even though he "lost his head" in his excitement to see his family again) that the ring was a Horcrux and would "surely carry a curse":



When I discovered it, after all those years, buried in the abandoned home of the Gaunts - the Hallow I had craved most of all, though in my youth I had wanted it for very different reasons - I lost my head, Harry. I quite forgot that it was now a Horcrux, that the ring was sure to carry a curse. I picked it up, and I put it on...



-Deathly Hallows, Ch 35 - KING'S CROSS



Now when Harry realised that the Resurrection Stone was inside the Snitch, all he had to do was turn it three times for it to 'work':



He closed his eyes and turned the stone over in his hand three times. He knew it had happened, because he heard slight movements around him that suggested frail bodies shifting their footing on the earthy, twig-strewn ground that marked the outer edge of the forest.


-Deathly Hallows, Ch 34 - THE FOREST AGAIN



I may be missing something, but did Dumbledore incorrectly use the Resurrection Stone?


or did Harry just 'think' that he had to turn it thrice?


I'm assuming the answer may have been that Dumbledore wanted to have the ring on, and then turn it thrice whenever he felt like conjuring up his family; or that he simply "lost his head"; but he surely didn't need to put it on right?



What is the correct way to use the Resurrection Stone?



Answer



Dumbledore did indeed use the stone incorrectly. In his excitement to recall his lost family, he let himself forget that the ring was a Horcrux and he simply put the ring on. However since this was, at the time, one of Voldemort's horcruxes, putting the ring on triggered the curse that would have killed Dumbledore, which is why he made Snape promise to kill him rather than to allow Draco to do it.


After Dumbledore recovered the ring, he destroyed the Horcrux with the Sword of Gryffindor, which is to say he specifically destroyed the ring. The resurrection stone was not destroyed. The stone was then placed into the Golden Snitch for Harry to find.


Now, back to your question about whether he used it correctly. According to the "Tale of the Three Brothers", when Cadmus Peverell was first granted the stone by Death, he turned it thrice in hand and recalled is long-lost love from the grave. This established that turning the ring thrice in hand is the method of using the stone, and since the "Tale of the Three Brothers" is the source of Harry's only knowledge about the stone, he turned it thrice in hand to recall his loved ones prior to sacrificing himself to Voldemort.


Also, Tom Riddle was known to wear the Gaunt Ring openly during his time at Hogwarts, so it is unlikely that simply wearing the ring would allow one to use the Resurrection Stone


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Was the "pure soul" of Harry's what had really hurt Voldemort?

In the Order of the Phoenix, Voldemort possesses Harry, and it hurts. Greatly. I think that Dumbledore explained that it was because Voldemort's rotten soul was incapable of assimilating Harry's pure soul, that Voldemort didn't understand the love and friendship etc that Harry has in his heart. But, I think it was a lie. Remember that in Deathly Hallows, while looking for information regarding Horcruxes, it is discovered that it is in fact possible to merge a soul fragment back, but that the process was extremely painful. Now then, if Voldemort tried to possess Harry, and Harry had a fragment of Voldemort's soul, I think that it could have been the true cause of Voldemort's pain: the fact of having his soul so close of another fragment. I think that Dumbledore knew that fact, but had to lie to Harry because it was inappropriate to let him know that he had one of Voldemort's soul fragments at the moment. Is that right? Or was it truly the pure soul of Harry's...
Post a Comment
Read more

languages - Do we ever see written English in the Star Wars films?

In Empire Strikes Back , we see a transcription of what R2's beeps and bloops mean, but it's not English (sorry for the low quality, it's from the 2004 DVDs): I'd assume it's what Basic looks like when written, but is there some point in the the Star Wars films we see written English instead? (This sort of spun off from a discussion in How do people understand astromech droids? .) Answer At one point there was English but it has been phased out in subsequent versions of the films. Chris Gould at DVD Active did a comparison of all versions of each of the Star Wars films, and in his comparison of Episode 4 , there are a couple of screenshots showing how the power gauge for the Death Star tractor beam was changed. I imagine there are probably more to be found in his other comparisons but I haven't got around to reading those yet.
Post a Comment
Read more

star wars - What "exactly" happens when someone turns to the Dark Side?

When I saw the original Star Wars saga as a kid, the concept of the Dark Side imprinted in me was quite simple. You did a bad thing, so you're a bad person so you go to the Dark Side and keep doing bad things. Now, obviously this doesn't hold true in reality. In my mind it is perfectly reasonable for Luke to kill the Emperor and Vader and then just flee the Death Star and rejoin the Alliance. After all they are at war, those are enemy officers that have captured him and are taunting him by threatening with death of all loved ones and the whole operation was intended to kill the Emperor anyway. The same would hold true for Anakin. He could have killed Mace Windu to save the Chancellor and Padme but that doesn't mean he's going to then go mad and kill all Jedis including children. It doesn't add up from a merely psychological point of view. He had a set of objectives and that made him want to keep the Chancellor alive (quite valid by the way, Mace Windu is quite clums...
Post a Comment
Read more

star trek - Warning regarding forward saucer section in Nemesis?

In Star Trek: Nemesis , just before the Enterprise rams into the Scimitar, Picard sends a text message from his captain's chair arm pad to Troi — who is manning the helm in lieu of the crewman who was just blown out through what was once the view screen — indicating that she should put full impulse on standby. (Literally, if you watch the scene closely, Troi's console prefaces the order with "TXT MSG" !) My question is: Did Picard also somehow warn crew members in the forward saucer section about what was about to happen? The ramming of the Scimitar was a heat of the moment decision. Considering that he also resorted to calling the auto-destruct sequence shortly after (which ended up being offline), he probably was of the mindset that any losses would be acceptable in order to hault Shinzon's march to Earth. Still, I'm curious. Answer The original script indicates that he called for the crew to " brace for impact ". Whether that call (or the comma...
Post a Comment
Read more