Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
discussion
Why didn't Harry use the room of requirement?
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Will
(new)
-
rated it 4 stars
Dec 06, 2013 11:53AM
It seems very obvious to me that Harry should have walked into the room of requirement, thinking, "I need to kill Voldemort", and portkeys to where all of the horcruxes were would appear. Or he could have given Dobby a wand, and he probably could have defeated Voldemort easily.
reply
|
flag
Hmm, good question. That would've been to easy though, or not possible
I would assume that the room can only conjure what you can imagine. Thus, if you needed a restroom, there appears a restroom. You need a place to hide something? Here's a big ass room where other people have needed the same thing in the past.If you needed a portkey to get you somewhere, it won't give you one to an unknown location.
I also don't think it'd give you want you need if you didn't know what it was you needed. For instance, "I need something to destroy a horcrux." You don't know what you need so it can't give you what you need.
Right, Hai. Harry had no idea where the horcruxes were. Besides, if he was thinking "I need something to kill Voldemort", the Room wouldn't necessarily provide portkeys to the locations of the horcruxes. He and Dumbledore were the ones planning to kill Voldemort by destroying his horcruxes. The Room didn't know that.
Good points. Plus they said that creating port keys was really complicated magic, and probably not something that the room had the ability to do. It might be able to provide you the things you need to do it yourself, but couldn't actually make one for you.Otherwise, Draco could have said, 'I need something to allow the Death Eaters into Hogwarts'. It wasn't that simple.
Also, at the point that Harry really started hunting horcruxes, he didn't have access to the room. Going back to Hogwarts at the end was his last ditch effort to destroy the last of the horcruxes. He probably guessed he wouldn't make it out alive and Voldemort was already going to be hunting him down.
Although, I sort of wonder why someone didn't use a time turner, while they were still in existence, to go back and take care of Voldemort before he became Voldemort. Maybe stop his mother from putting the love spell on his father...
When he used a time turner the first time, he had to RELIVE all the time he went back. I don't know if the time turner turns forward. It might not be a good idea to test that...
I know. I was thinking that someone might think it was worth it to sacrifice to be able to get rid of the threat of Voldemort. Maybe someone who's family he killed and wouldn't care to live in the present anyway.
The time turner doesn't change time, it allows you to go backwards in time. There's a difference.If you notice, when Hermione and Harry go back to save Buckbeak, it was imperative that their past selves never see their future selves, which they didn't do. But at the same time, those future selves also intervened in certain situations in which their past selves needed help, but didn't know where it came from. For example, Harry throwing the rock at his own head to warn himself that the executioner was coming, or when Hermione screamed to draw the werewolf Lupin away from her past self, to save her own life.
Think of it as a specific set of events, always happening the way it's suppose to, only there are two instances of yourself in this set amount of time. There are no changes to the events that happen. It always happens the way it's suppose to happen.
yeah, it's complicated.
We only saw how things were changed because of Harry and Hermione going back in time. If they hadn't, there would have been no rock thrown at Harry to get his attention. Stepping back from the whole thing, you can imagine two or more possible outcomes, but in the situation, you're only aware of what happened in your reality.
Harry remembers being hit by the rock because he went back in time to do it. But he doesn't remember the way things were before his future self went back in time to do it.
And there must have been that possibility because future Harry didn't exist when the original events were happening in real time.
Not to sound like a nerd, but assuming that there are alternate realities - which is the assumption made by suggesting that going back in time is even possible - then that must mean that different outcomes are possible.
We didn't see the original series of events where they're caught at Hagrid's, and Buckbeak and Sirius are killed. We only saw the changes made possible by time travel. Meaning that without time travel, things would be different. Which means that it is possible to affect the past by going back and doing something about it.
Yeah, time travel opens up a whole can of worms. There are so many what if's and maybes.
But assuming there's only one time line, only one set of events happening, then my previous answer should just about cover it.
---
Of course, if we're talking about the infinite realities theory, then anything is possible. In one reality, Tom Riddle is the boy who lived and Harry Potter because the one who shall not be named. Ron's the head of the class and Hermione joins Slytherin. Whole mess of worms.
But my point is, if there's only one time line, time travel is impossible. There's no stone hitting Harry and no saving Buckbeak or Sirius. Because like I said, future Harry and future Hermione didn't exist yet when those things happened in real time, so they must have been different."Yeah, time travel opens up a whole can of worms. "
Lol, no kidding!
"Of course, if we're talking about the infinite realities theory, then anything is possible... "
Very true. And I'm the kind of person who loves to think about all the what ifs :)
Ah, but there's the flaw in your logic. In this situation where time travel *is* possible, it's still one timeline. Both the present and future versions of Harry and Hermione are existing at the same time. The closest metaphor I can think of that makes sense is like watching a movie on DVD. You watch it once and you see the main character play out his role and the movie ends. Then you watch it again, knowing everything that happens. Except this time, you notice a guy, who's always in the background. He's always there, and not integral to the plot or anything, but he plays his part. But if he wasn't there, the events wouldn't have unfolded the way it did when you watched the movie the first time.
All one time line.
And ditto, I also like to think about the what ifs =)
It's like infinite Harry and Hermiones. I read several books like that. Past and future happen at the same time with infinite copies, so time must therefore be an illusion unless you are limited to one reality... Yeesh. This is why people can't time travel.
Hai wrote: "Ah, but there's the flaw in your logic. In this situation where time travel *is* possible, it's still one timeline. Both the present and future versions of Harry and Hermione are existing at the sa..."You're still focusing on the product of changed events. What about what happened before the future character existed?
I mean, I don't exist in tomorrow yet, so supposing time travel was possible, I would have to live through to tomorrow one way, and then relive it a different way when I go back in time and change something.
There can only be one timeline if the characters going back in time don't do anything to affect events. Which is impossible unless they're invisible to everyone in the present time and can't touch anything. Even if all they do is hang out in the background, they're still having an affect on anyone who sees them or anything they touch.
If they change even one thing, they change the entire reality.
For example, supposing someone goes back in time and no one sees them, but they move a pencil on a desk. That's it.
They've still created a new reality because without their interference, the pencil stays where it was before they moved it in another reality.
Kristen wrote: "Although, I sort of wonder why someone didn't use a time turner, while they were still in existence, to go back and take care of Voldemort before he became Voldemort. Maybe stop his mother from put..."Going back in time and destroying Voldemort would create a paradox. Because then he wouldn't exist to do the horrible things that inspired your future self to go back in time.
The Harry Potter version of time travel seems to indicate that time only has one line, but it's not necessarily straight. Which is why a person can experience parts of it twice from different positions.
Harry and future Hermione didn't exist yet when those things happened in real time, so they must have been different.
But remember, Dumbledore existed to witness it all. I think it was the disappearance of Buckbeak that inspired Dumbledore to tell Hermione to use the time-turner. He simply figured out that they already did.
supposing someone goes back in time and no one sees them, but they move a pencil on a desk. That's it.
They've still created a new reality because without their interference, the pencil stays where it was before they moved it in another reality.
I suggest you read The Missing by Margaret Peterson Haddix. Those books are all about time travel, and it includes an interesting feature that time travelers can see shadows of what would have happened if time wasn't changed. It also includes this idea that when time is changed it works to correct itself. So if a time traveler frightens a bird from it's perch, it will return once the apparent danger has left and then continue as it would have if the time traveler was not there.
So with your pencil example:
In original time, a person picks up that pencil and writes a note with it. In altered time, a time traveler moves that pencil. And then the first person picks it up from it's new location and write the note with it and time continues as it was supposed to. So, yes, time has been altered, but not in a significant way.
Kristen wrote: "I mean, I don't exist in tomorrow yet, so supposing time travel was possible, I would have to live through to tomorrow one way, and then relive it a different way when I go back in time and change something."Maybe you don't exist to you tomorrow, but you exist to you yesterday...
Mkay, here's the dealio. This is a paradox. You are about to be run over by a car, but someone pushes you out of the way. tomorrow, you go back in time a day and push yourself out of the way without being seen. closed loop. also a paradox. so plausible.
Also, I did preface that theory with "assuming there's only one time line" there wouldn't be a second time line in which Harry and Hermione don't go back in time.
Julia wrote: "Going back in time and destroying Voldemort would create a paradox. Because then he wouldn't exist to do the horrible things that inspired your future self to go back in time."
Gotta agree with this. This paradox is not a closed loop, thus would probably be impossible. But with quantum mechanics in the state that it's in these days, who can really tell.
"Closed loop" - that's a very good phrase for what we're talking about.
More on the time travel discussion: JK Rowling posted some info about time travel on Pottermore."All attempts to travel back further than a few hours have resulted in catastrophic harm to the witch or wizard involved..."
Basically, in Harry Potter's world, time travel is only feasible for a few hours. More than that and it becomes extremely dangerous.
Amith wrote: "https://notionpress.com/story/view/53...This is a short story that I wrote and submitted for a competition. I'd love it if you could give it a read and vote for it!"
Amith, please stop sticking this in the middle of threads. Put it in a new thread. Title it "Short Story" or something like that. You can put it in a lot of different book forums (books similar to the story you wrote) so you get a diverse audience.
Putting it in the middle of an unrelated thread like this makes it spam. For that reason, no, I won't read it.
Julia wrote: "More on the time travel discussion: JK Rowling posted some info about time travel on Pottermore."All attempts to travel back further than a few hours have resulted in catastrophic harm to the witch or wizard involved..."
Basically, in Harry Potter's world, time travel is only feasible for a few hours. More than that and it becomes extremely dangerous.
"
I think Hermione made a point to Harry about not being seen. Something about wizards doing it before and their past selves killed their present selves, and the Ministry of Magic being in a huge kerfluffle about it.
Hai wrote: "I think Hermione made a point to Harry about not being seen. Something about wizards doing it before and their past selves killed their present selves, and the Ministry of Magic being in a huge kerfluffle about it."Correct. The article on Pottermore that I referenced talks about somebody who went 500 years back in time, then returned to present time. She not only died (possibly from aging during the return), but about 25 of her relatives vanished from present time.
Yes, going too far back in time is extremely dangerous.
Answering the question about why Harry didn't use the room of requirement. It's the Room of Requirement, it is supposed to give the user a room that the person requires, not an object that the person requires. It couldn't give the user portkeys.
I think there was also some magical physics law which explains why it can't give you specific items, such as food. These other items which you might need may be an extension of consumable items, thus, the room could not provide it.
Because it just wasn't logical to do
Hai wrote: "The time turner doesn't change time, it allows you to go backwards in time. There's a difference.If you notice, when Hermione and Harry go back to save Buckbeak, it was imperative that their past..."
Hermione was the one who threw the rock and hit Harry in the head, wasn't it? Or was that just in the movie? Anyway, the rest I agree with.
Barbara wrote: "Hermione was the one who threw the rock and hit Harry in the head, wasn't it? Or was that just in the movie? Anyway, the rest I agree with."That's just in the movies.
Barbara wrote: "Hermione was the one who threw the rock and hit Harry in the head, wasn't it? Or was that just in the movie? Anyway, the rest I agree with. "It's been literally years since I've read or watched this, so I'm not too sure which. Principle remains unchanged though.
Wizards aren't capable of logic.
I think the reason why Harry couldn't just use the room of requirement, thinking, "I need to kill Voldemort", is explained when Harry tries to figure out what it is that Draco Malfoy is doing in there. In the Halfblood Prince Harry spends a lot of time walking by the room of requirements thinking that he needs to know what Malfoy is up to, with no success since the room can only handle very specific needs, like: "I need a bathroom" or "I need a place to hide"
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
