Skip to main content

harry potter - Why was Dumbledore's portrait not given a more extensive role in the story?


Dumbledore's portrait was in the headmaster’s office, Harry could have interacted with it. McGonagall would have allowed him private conversations with it if necessary. Even if it was just an imprint, it would have been a powerful guide to Harry, answering any questions he might have had... but we don't see this, and instead Harry just struggles with himself over whether the Hallows really exist and if they're worth pursuing over the Horcruxes... do you think JKR forgot about this possibility?



Answer




Phineas Nigellus Black explained to Harry that people in portraits can only visit other portraits in the same building that their portraits are in, or other portraits of them (and the portraits in that building).



“Professor Dumbledore’s portrait – couldn’t you bring him along, here, into yours?’


Phineas Nigellus turned his face in the direction of Harry’s voice.


‘Evidently it is not only Muggle-borns who are ignorant, Potter. The portraits of Hogwarts may commune with each other, but they cannot travel outside the castle except to visit a painting of themselves hanging elsewhere. Dumbledore cannot come here with me, and after the treatment I have received at your hands, I can assure you that I shall not be making a return visit!”
- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Chapter 15 (The Goblin’s Revenge)




Dumbledore would therefore only be able to visit places with a portrait of him. The one at Hogwarts was probably the only one that existed at the time, so Harry would then only be able to visit him at Hogwarts. (Going to Hogwarts while it was controlled by Death Eaters would of course have been risky - Harry only went when he absolutely had to in looking for the Horcruxes.)


Dumbledore also actively didn’t want to tell Harry everything he needed to know all at once. He wanted Harry to find out about the Hallows slowly, so he’d have more time to develop wisdom and hopefully not be tempted by the prospect of the Hallows, as Dumbledore himself had once been.



“Why did you have to make it so difficult?’


Dumbledore’s smile was tremulous.


‘I am afraid I counted on Miss Granger to slow you up, Harry. I was afraid that your hot head might dominate your good heart. I was scared that, if presented outright with the facts about those tempting objects, you might seize the Hallows as I did, at the wrong time, for the wrong reasons. If you laid hands on them, I wanted you to possess them safely.”
- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Chapter 35 (King’s Cross)



That’s why he gave Harry the information about them in such an indirect way, leaving a copy of The Tales of Beedle the Bard for Hermione, rather than a more straightforward way of letting Harry know about them. Even if Harry had talked to his portrait, Dumbledore might not have told him, because it was part of his plan that Harry wouldn’t find out about everything all at once.





In addition, J.K. Rowling addresses this in an interview from both in-universe and out-of universe perspectives. In-universe, the explanation is exactly as laid out in the information in the books. Dumbledore wanted Harry to find out about the Hallows slowly so he’d have more time to gain the wisdom not to be tempted, and also couldn’t leave his portrait at Hogwarts - wizards in paintings can only go to other places where there was a painting of them or paintings in the same building.



Q: Why couldn’t Harry speak to a portrait of Dumbledore throughout the last book?


Well there are two reasons, three reasons actually… The last bit, why did he have to decode? As Dumbledore says to Harry…to tell Harry about the Hallows was to tempt him. And Harry, throughout all seven books has been incredibly impetuous and reckless. That’s one of Harry’s biggest flaws. He does tend to act without thinking, and Dumbledore knows this about Harry. He wants him to work it out slowly enough to gain wisdom along the way. That’s why he passed the information through Hermione, who is the most cautious person in the books, as you know. And Dumbledore says explicitly, so your good heart isn’t overcome by your hot head. Or I may have paraphrased myself slight there so forgive me. “She doesn’t even know her own book!” [laughter] Yes so that’s one reason. Harry needs to decode. He said, he does say in this book, he’s frightened by his decision not to race for the wand, because he had never chosen not to act. So that’s Harry’s real big coming of age moment, that he’s decided to hold back for the first time very in his life.


So the other two reasons that I have for him not to speak to Dumbledore’s portrait, first of all, I crated a lot of rules for this world and then later had to navigate my way around them. But this rule was always good, and the rule was that portraits could only move between portraits in the same building. so if I’m in a picture and you’re in a picture and we’re both in Carnegie Hall, then we can move into each other’s pictures. Otherwise we can only move only to other places where we have a portrait. You can’t just move willy nilly through all the – the Louvre, the Met – you can’t do a world tour, as a picture person. You are limited by geography. So there was that reason. And then lastly of course, the third reason, is it really would be too easy and I wouldn’t have had a plot.
- Carnegie Hall interview (October 20, 2007)



Out-of-universe, she says it would have been too easy for Harry and there’d be no plot. However, in this case the events do make sense in-universe, and it is consistent with what we know of the world and its characters. It’s also supported by evidence in the books, not just an after-the-fact statement.


Comments

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...

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.

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...

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...