Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (Harry Potter, #3) Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban discussion


125 views
Time Turners?

Comments (showing 1-15 of 15) (15 new)    post a comment »
dateDown_arrow    newest »

Isabel Song So I'm having this discussion with my best friend about harry potter, time turners, and changing the future... and we cant come to an agreement. It ends up being more about a conversation about changing the future and what that means, though. What do you guys think?? I tweaked the wording in a couple places to make it easier to understand for the rest of you, we usually know what the other is talking about so sometimes our conversations may sound like crazy-talk to others. I'll refer to us as person 1 and 2.

person 1
So... I'm watching the third Harry Potter... Couldn't they have just used the Time Turner to begin with?

person 2
but they're really not supposed to use it unless they really need to, and the less people they had, the better, so if they did it before they would've had ron, too

person 1
This is true (: but couldn't they have used then the night Harry s parents died?

person 2
but that wouldn't have changed anything, voldemort would've gone after them again. plus, that would be changing the past too much

person 1
But... They could've gone and left an anonymous note to Lily and James and everyone.else so that they'd be prepared (:

person 2
but they already knew he was coming.

person 1
But they couldn't known not to trust Pettigrew!

person 2
but still, that would be changing too much. you cant change everything to make it the way you want to, otherwise everyone would be using the time turners
and they wouldn't have believed the note, anyways, especially if it was annonymous

person 1
But doing this once thing could've saved soooooo Many lives! Not if it was written in the convincing CEW form (;
With ah looot of E&W (;

(by CEW she means toulmin writting: claim, evidence, warrant)

person 2
i dont think they would've believed it even then. because they were loyal to their friends. thats my point. they would've saved a lot of lives, but that would be changing the past too much.

person 1
Not if they did it rather immediately after... Because then the future wouldn't of happened for it to be changed (:

person 2
if they did what immediately after? if they hadnt trusted peter, the entire future would've changed!

person 1
If Sirius used the timer changer as soon as he knew Pettigrew was evil (so that would've been like a waaaay shorter time period) which would've been before the major bad stuff of Voldys reign.began (: so that wouldn't be changing anything majorly (:

person 2
well it would! and voldemort was already killing a lot of people even before then... it would've changed a lot, still, because if harry's parents had been saved and they somehow managed to keep away from voldemort, nobody would've defeated voldemort, since he was so sure it was harry that the prophecy talked about. and even if they hadn't trusted pettigrew,
that would've stopped voldemort from going after them. and if they kept away, voldemort would forever be unchallenged and continue to kill people, and there would've been that time period when voldemort was gone and didnt kill anyone!

person 1
Okay so maybe that wasn't the greatest time to cut in but if someone time travelled to just to kill Tom Riddle as a child by subtlety slipping some thing
in his bottle then everything would be perfect (:

person 2
but still, they didnt know what he'd be, and by the time it happened, it was too late and they'd have to go back a lot in time and that would be changing a lot of history and the whole future of the wizarding world....

person 1
One of those crazy seat into the future ladies would've (:

person 2
plus, how old are the time turners, anyways? if it was a old creation, then voldemort's side would've had it too, probably after stealing it, and they would've countered any changes in the past
and what???

person 1
They would've been like
"This baby... I'm getting a bad vibe from it... Here drink some tea baby... "
baby drinks and finishes
"Oh... OH!... This... This is a...s-s-sign"
"Of what my dearest freak?"
"An... OMEN! This baby is pure evil. Dr this blob of tea leave here? This says that He shall grow to ripe age of undetermined. Because he is EVIL. The way he drinks the tea shows that he will kill people and think it's cool. So really, let's just kill it"
"Um. No. Not my baby!"
"Too late... AVADA KEDARVA! Thank me later."
*peace is restored to the world*
But why didn't the bad side use them either??? I mean either way they just seem like such a useful tool amongst all the action and they don't use then at all!!!

person 2
that makes no sense. and plus you cant be seen by people in the past. and that still changes too much of the future.
but then they'd just keep living in the past, because one side changes them, the other side counters, and back and forth a million times
so maybe it's a newer creation

person 1
Haha yes it does! That what the crazy last would've done!!
Not if the future hadn't occurred though!

person 2
and that is an unstable way of telling the future. and how would they know it's bad? and if you mean like, a person from present time goes back to that and tells someone that he's bad, then how would that work? the other person with the baby wouldnt trust the person from the present time, and you're not allowed to be seen when you go back to the past

person 1
I mean it could've been as simple as subtlely pushing Voldys great great grandmother to wed another thus preventing his birth!

person 2
but if the future hadn't occurred that way, that would be changing EVERYTHING!

person 1
Not unless you write a note (:
Or you could just nuke the town where he lived (:

person 2
but that would be going back into the past a LOT and who would trust a suspiciously weird note? and if tom riddle hadnt survived, then that would've changed the whole future
if tom had been stopped or killed, that would've changed the whole future

person 1
But it wouldn't have been the future if it hadn't even occurred! Like if they time traveled in say his first year (just to use a number) none of the stuff that happened from second year onwards would be changed (:
I like the idea of nuking his house (:

person 2
but that's my point! if things were changed so the future hadn't occurred, that would be changing the future! because tom was going to become voldemort, and if that was changed, then voldemort wouldn't've existed, which would've changed the future. it doesnt matter when you go back in time to change something in the past, because it was still going to happen in the future. and plus nobody knew at that point he was going to be evil.
if you make it so that a certain future doesnt occur that would happen otherwise, that's changing the future! it's the same thing!
if you traveled to his first year and like, killed him, you would've changed the future
he didn't have a home

person 1
It wouldn't be changing it because changing implies that you're taking something and making it different buuut this wouldn't be charging it because nothing happened to begin with. It wouldn't be changing it would be happening (:
Fine, we'll nuke his room (;

person 2
but you're changing it! because it's not happening! it was going to happen, then you changed it so it doesnt happen. you're taking his life and making it different by killing it. so you're changing the future. it was going to happen, but then you killed him so its not going to happen
what do you mean, nothing would happen to begin with? he was going to become voldemort in the future, you change that and his life by killing him, that future is gone, which changes what the future looks like, because the future would've had voldemort but now it doesnt

***
The end. So basically it comes down to: is making a certain future not happen the same thing as changing the future? I think it is.


Dana yes


Danielle person 2 well it would! and voldemort was already killing a lot of people even before then... it would've changed a lot, still, because if harry's parents had been saved and they somehow managed to keep away from voldemort, nobody would've defeated voldemort, since he was so sure it was harry that the prophecy talked about. and even if they hadn't trusted pettigrew, that would've stopped voldemort from going after them. and if they kept away, voldemort would forever be unchallenged and continue to kill people, and there would've been that time period when voldemort was gone and didnt kill anyone!

It was a prophecy so it had to happen but now Neville would have been the Chosen One instead of Harry.


Danielle Time turners are closely regulated by the Department of Mysteries. Hermione was super lucky and trustworthy enough to recieve one that year.
Oh and remember all of the Time Turners were destroyed in the battle at the Department of Mysteries in the 5th book.
I don't know if this helps you or your friend, but I do hope it helps.


Danielle Oh the answer to your original question: yes. Perfect example is Back to the Future. I can't remember which one it is but the one where the old man gets the sports records and goes back in time to give it to a younger him making him in an altered future rich.


Isabel Song Danielle wrote: "person 2 well it would! and voldemort was already killing a lot of people even before then... it would've changed a lot, still, because if harry's parents had been saved and they somehow managed to..."

Neville could have been the one Voldemort sought after, but he thought it was Harry that the prophecy spoke about, which is why he decided to go after Harry's family. I wonder if Voldemort would've gone after Neville if he managed to kill Harry...


♥Zee♥ It was the fact that Voldemort chose to go after Harry that Harry became the child of the prophecy...And yeah, he probably would've went after Neville if he had killed Harry.


Michael It's the curse of the Time Lords.


August H All of that just turns into a paradox. if you change the future,then you would never even have CHANGED it because you didn't need to.but the you would have to if it never happened. Know what i mean? its confusing, like the cretin's paradox : a cretin says "all cretins are liars" think about it.


Ahlaam For every little change, there will/could be a big consequence. Changing the past could lead to having a much much bleaker future than this one. No one can predict the consequences of such an action. The whole killing Tom Riddle part, he is a child at that point. That would be murdering a child, that Tom Riddle has not countless of people so why should he suffer for something he hasn't done (I know he wasn't an angel when he was a kid, he was more like the devil but still...). Who from the light would have the guts to kill a child? This becomes a question of morality and would the Order be any better than the Death Eaters.


Nicole Nelson I also thought that the time turner could only be used over shorter periods of time, whereas you couldnt go back years and years and kill baby tom. Also, if you went back that far then you would have to live all those years again as your grown age and then come to what was your present day to see yourself as your younger age. I think they were always meant to only work in shorter time period situations, not giving either side as much of a chance to use them as a counter/counter tool.


message 12: by Ricco (last edited Dec 07, 2011 05:39PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Ricco Wizard's Second Rule:
"The Second Rule is that the greatest harm can result from the best intentions."
From: Stone of Tears by Terry Goodkind


B-zee I think time turner was used to 'plan' the future, because the other things never happened. Like when Harry's patronus saved him from the past, it wasn't begun by Harry's death than he came back to save his own live. He's saved, and future told him why.
Fantasy is about making your own world with your own rule. That what Rowling did.


message 14: by Kate (new) - rated it 5 stars

Kate if they had just used the time turners to kill tom riddle there would be no reason for the books. because harry and nevvile would both be ordenary kids well as ordernary as a wizard can be


Kathleen Danielle wrote: "Time turners are closely regulated by the Department of Mysteries. Hermione was super lucky and trustworthy enough to recieve one that year.
Oh and remember all of the Time Turners were destroyed i..."


Also, Time Turners are extremely rare. One of the reasons that the Ministry of Magic regulates them so heavily is related to how Hermione explained it—"Prof. McGonagall told me about awful things that have happened when wizards have meddled with time." They could end up killing their past or future selves by mistake, and if the time turner was allowed to expire (i.e., return to real time with all of the events altered) it would be even more difficult to go back in time enough to "correct" it or undo someone's death.


back to top

all discussions on this book | post a new topic


Books mentioned in this topic

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (other topics)