Skip to main content

harry potter - Is there any info about how the paintings function?




So in both the books and the films Dumbledore's (headmaster's) office is filled with the paintings of previous headmasters. Even if the person the painting is of is dead they are still there and able to respond.


Do we know whether the paintings can think for themselves and learn and grow in wisdom? - although the fact they can learn or at least remember is demonstrated frequently.


Do they answer with all the knowledge of, let's say, Dumbledore would?


In my mind it's akin to being a ghost, or I guess even a horcrux of sorts. Leave behind some soul within a painting?



Answer



According to rems answer to this question, J.K. Rowling already answered.



Q: All the paintings we have seen at Hogwarts are of dead people. They seem to be living through their portraits. How is this so? If there was a painting of Harry’s parents, would he be able to obtain advice from them?


JKR: That is a very good question. They are all of dead people; they are not as fully realised as ghosts, as you have probably noticed. The place where you see them really talk is in Dumbledore’s office, primarily; the idea is that the previous headmasters and headmistresses leave behind a faint imprint of themselves. They leave their aura, almost, in the office and they can give some counsel to the present occupant, but it is not like being a ghost. They repeat catchphrases, almost. The portrait of Sirius’ mother is not a very 3D personality; she is not very fully realised. She repeats catchphrases that she had when she was alive. If Harry had a portrait of his parents it would not help him a great deal. If he could meet them as ghosts, that would be a much more meaningful interaction, but as Nick explained at the end of Phoenix—I am straying into dangerous territory, but I think you probably know what he explained—there are some people who would not come back as ghosts because they are unafraid, or less afraid, of death.




source from Accio quote, Edinburgh Book Festival, 2004


To sum up, let's say that paintings are like memories. People on paintings can only "repeat catchphrases", because they leave a part of their aura behind them, and only in places that were highly related to them. So yes, in a way, they leave something that could be assimilated to "a part of their souls", but that's all. They can give some advice, but nothing that you can't remember or expect from them.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

game of thrones - Who were the Kingsguard escorting Cersei?

Now to the question... During the scene where Cersei sits on the Iron Throne and is "sworn in" we see her escorted by seven members of the Kingsguard. Now this is what I would expect as that is the correct number. However, I have no idea who they are ! [embedded content] The books pay more attention to detail in this area, but the show is also diverging and outpacing in this regard. We can see that a few of the names are not possible on the show. I have listed the names from the books and given why the reason they could not be members on the show in bold. Ser Jaime Lannister, Lord Commander - Stripped of title Ser Loras Tyrell - Dead and also was never a KG on the show. Ser Osmund Kettleblack - Possible, but not mentioned by name Ser Balon Swann - Possible, but not mentioned by name Ser Meryn Trant - Dead Ser Boros Blount - Possible, but not mentioned by name Ser Robert Strong (aka Zombie Mountain) - Confirmed I know it can be confusing mixing the books and shows, but the qu

harry potter - Was Barty Crouch Jr. an Occlumens?

An Occlumens is a practitioner of Occlumency , while Occlumency means closing the mind. Despite being in the same school with two great Legilimens (Dumbledore and Snape), he was only discovered to be an impostor after the last round of the Triwizard Tournament in Goblet of Fire : “Moody,” Harry said. He was still in a state of complete disbelief. “How can it have been Moody?” “This is not Alastor Moody,” said Dumbledore quietly. “You have never known Alastor Moody. The real Moody would not have removed you from my sight after what happened tonight. The moment he took you, I knew — and I followed.” Does this mean that Barty Crouch Jr. is an Occlumens? Because if not, then Snape or Dumbledore would have found it out earlier, right? Answer It is not stated anywhere in the books that Legilimency was applied to fake Moody/Crouch jr. The conclusion Dumbledore made (quoted in the question) is based on pure logic, not Legilimency or any other magical means. So unless any other canon inform

transformers - How do Soundwave, Megatron, etc. change size and mass?

The original G1 Soundwave changed from a cassette deck (don't know what it is? Ask your parents!) to a robot that was the same size as robots that changed into cars. Similarly, Megatron changed into a gun that could be held by humans. And other robots, all of similar sizes, changed into objects of different sizes: cassettes, cars, trucks and huge jets. (One Autobot triple changer, Broadside , changed from an aircraft to an aircraft carrier!) Was this impossible feat ever explained? Or was it hand-wavey magic, like the Hulk ? Answer Although there wasn't even an acknowledgement of changes in size in the animated shows (i.e. that's just how things were), there have been a few explanations within comics. The ones listed and described by the Teletraan I Transformers Wiki are as follows: Parts compression (from Dreamwave comics): The notion that the Transformers in question, such as Astrotrain and Broadside, had many dense layers of armor in robot mode, which then slid ou

Why Was It 'Essential' That Voldemort Kill Harry Potter?

‘So the boy ... the boy must die?’ asked Snape, quite calmly. ‘And Voldemort himself must do it, Severus. That is essential.’ Deathly Hallows - page 551 - UK Hardcover - chapter 33, The Prince's Tale Dumbledore tells Snape it is 'essential' that Voldemort be the one to kill Harry, I'm assuming in order for the piece of Voldemort's soul in Harry to be properly killed as well. But why? Hermione destroyed the Hufflepuff cup; Ron destroyed the Slytherin locket; Neville killed Nagini; Harry destroyed the diadem and Tom Riddle's diary. So the Horcruxes were not immune to destruction at the hand of someone other than Voldemort. And as it ended up, Harry himself wasn't even a Horcrux, but rather just an unknowing host to a parasitic bit of Voldemort's soul. Why was it 'essential' that Voldemort be the one to kill Harry in order for the piece of Voldemort's soul to die? Answer I thought it had to do with the protection Harry's mother gave him b