Harry Potter Plot Hole
Sept 24, 2014 2:58:05 GMT -6
Post by sapphire on Sept 24, 2014 2:58:05 GMT -6
... Please someone prove me wrong. (Also, some spoilers ahead, in case anyone here has been living in a hole for the past ten plus years.) 
But I just realized that there is a pretty major plot hole in the entire series.
The first book describes these massive celebrations through the Wizarding World because Voldemort is dead, and everyone already knows that Harry Potter was the one to defeat him - it can't be more than 24 hours after the fact that people are calling him "The Boy Who Lived."
The thing is, how do they know already? The only people present in that house when Voldemort attacked were James, Lily, and Harry. James and Lily are dead, and Harry is only a year old - not old enough to give any kind of testimony, even if he were talking at that point. If there were Death Eaters present, they probably would have killed Harry when Voldemort failed, and even if they didn't (out of fear that the same would happen to them, or some other reason), they would certainly not be in any hurry to announce to the world that their terrorist leader was dead.
So maybe there's a spell that would allow them to see the recent past? But even then, there's no body, so how are they so sure he's dead? If he just vanished, they'd assume he disapparated, and even if there was something more spectacular, it could have been another spell.
So a Pensieve? But Harry wouldn't be old enough to give his memories to them for that - we must assume it can only be done willingly by the memory-giver, judging by the uses we see of it in the books: always, it is the person to whom the memories belong extracting their own memories, whether through a wand or tears (in Snape's case). So not a valid option.
Finally, we know the three people who were first on the scene: Snape, Sirius, Hagrid. All Snape cared about was Lily, and he was too late to have seen anything, anyway, or he would have tried to save her. Sirius, ditto, except he was grieving for Lily and James. And then we have Hagrid.
Hagrid, who does not seem the type to buy into conspiracy theories. So, for him to very much doubt Voldemort's death (he calls it "codswallop" in the first book/movie), there must not have been any real, convincing evidence that Voldemort was, in fact, dead. His all-encompassing trust for Dumbledore certainly contributes to his certainty, of course, but Dumbledore, also, would not be likely to believe Voldemort still alive if there had been convincing evidence of his death. And so we know, even if it hadn't been heavily implied in the books/movies, that there was no body.
With no body, it would have taken far longer for people to find out about Voldemort's disappearance, if only because the Ministry and the media wouldn't know for sure yet. They might speculate, but no one would have been so sure as to announce it as fact and spark the massive celebrations that we know happened (at least they did in the first book, not sure if they were mentioned in the movie or not - haven't seen it for a while). If the Death Eaters knew for sure, they would most certainly have tried to cover it up as long as possible, but it's doubtful that even they would have known immediately - we know that destroying horcruxes does not affect them, because none of them react to the destruction of the other horcruxes.
There would have been no immediate celebrations, and likely no worldwide celebrations at all. And so, fewer people would have connected Voldemort's disappearance to Harry - it would have been uncertain exactly when Voldemort vanished. Hence, no "Boy Who Lived" reputation. Harry's fame is a driving force in the books - it alienates him from the Wizarding World and welcomes him to it, it causes certain key characters to hate him (or hate him even more), it creates consistent tension, and perhaps most importantly, it drives Voldemort to keep trying to kill him, if not for the prophecy then for his reputation (and since we don't know about the prophecy until the fifth book, the reputation bit is just as important for the plot).
..... I put way too much thought into this. And I apologize if any of it is incoherent. It's four a.m. and I was typing fast. Also I normally proofread before I post, but I'm not going to this time, because the post is long and sleep is a good thing.
But I just realized that there is a pretty major plot hole in the entire series.
The first book describes these massive celebrations through the Wizarding World because Voldemort is dead, and everyone already knows that Harry Potter was the one to defeat him - it can't be more than 24 hours after the fact that people are calling him "The Boy Who Lived."
The thing is, how do they know already? The only people present in that house when Voldemort attacked were James, Lily, and Harry. James and Lily are dead, and Harry is only a year old - not old enough to give any kind of testimony, even if he were talking at that point. If there were Death Eaters present, they probably would have killed Harry when Voldemort failed, and even if they didn't (out of fear that the same would happen to them, or some other reason), they would certainly not be in any hurry to announce to the world that their terrorist leader was dead.
So maybe there's a spell that would allow them to see the recent past? But even then, there's no body, so how are they so sure he's dead? If he just vanished, they'd assume he disapparated, and even if there was something more spectacular, it could have been another spell.
So a Pensieve? But Harry wouldn't be old enough to give his memories to them for that - we must assume it can only be done willingly by the memory-giver, judging by the uses we see of it in the books: always, it is the person to whom the memories belong extracting their own memories, whether through a wand or tears (in Snape's case). So not a valid option.
Finally, we know the three people who were first on the scene: Snape, Sirius, Hagrid. All Snape cared about was Lily, and he was too late to have seen anything, anyway, or he would have tried to save her. Sirius, ditto, except he was grieving for Lily and James. And then we have Hagrid.
Hagrid, who does not seem the type to buy into conspiracy theories. So, for him to very much doubt Voldemort's death (he calls it "codswallop" in the first book/movie), there must not have been any real, convincing evidence that Voldemort was, in fact, dead. His all-encompassing trust for Dumbledore certainly contributes to his certainty, of course, but Dumbledore, also, would not be likely to believe Voldemort still alive if there had been convincing evidence of his death. And so we know, even if it hadn't been heavily implied in the books/movies, that there was no body.
With no body, it would have taken far longer for people to find out about Voldemort's disappearance, if only because the Ministry and the media wouldn't know for sure yet. They might speculate, but no one would have been so sure as to announce it as fact and spark the massive celebrations that we know happened (at least they did in the first book, not sure if they were mentioned in the movie or not - haven't seen it for a while). If the Death Eaters knew for sure, they would most certainly have tried to cover it up as long as possible, but it's doubtful that even they would have known immediately - we know that destroying horcruxes does not affect them, because none of them react to the destruction of the other horcruxes.
There would have been no immediate celebrations, and likely no worldwide celebrations at all. And so, fewer people would have connected Voldemort's disappearance to Harry - it would have been uncertain exactly when Voldemort vanished. Hence, no "Boy Who Lived" reputation. Harry's fame is a driving force in the books - it alienates him from the Wizarding World and welcomes him to it, it causes certain key characters to hate him (or hate him even more), it creates consistent tension, and perhaps most importantly, it drives Voldemort to keep trying to kill him, if not for the prophecy then for his reputation (and since we don't know about the prophecy until the fifth book, the reputation bit is just as important for the plot).
..... I put way too much thought into this. And I apologize if any of it is incoherent. It's four a.m. and I was typing fast. Also I normally proofread before I post, but I'm not going to this time, because the post is long and sleep is a good thing.
)) xD
