by DonRetrasado » Fri Apr 26, 2013 2:42 am
This is actually pretty funny. I should start reading the comic again if he's gonna be doing these for a while.
HP fan wrote:I see your point, ipdf3. I apologise, Sahan. My impression is that although the origin of the Deathly Hallows explained in the tale was probably invented, all the magical properties explained in it were actually true, as later some of them are proven to be true in-universe, leading to believe that all of them could as well be true. I am not sure if this really places me in any "sect", but I do not really care.
Nonetheless, now that I think of it, the Death-prevention property does contradict a previous law of the Harry Potter universe, which stated that nothing could stop the Killing Curse, with the exception of the ancient "sacrifice out of love" protective magic that made Harry Potter survive in the first place. But so far as we know, there could be more exceptions, and Harry's Invisibility Cloak might well be one of them, as it is not proven otherwise along the story; no one is killed while covered by it.
I guess we might never know unless Joanne Rowling decides to explain it further, although she might have explained it already and I might just be uninformed about it, since I have not checked all the canon information that there is out there. I find that universe fascinating and in spite of that I have not yet got to research in Pottermore or some other sources of information.
Anyway, I like the aproach Eliezer Yudkowsky took in his fanfic, Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality, about there being more exceptions to the unstoppability of the Killing Curse, such as a version 2.0 of the Patronus Charm. I definitely love his work, with all the analysis of the universe that he does.
I suppose that since it is kind of open to interpretation, I take back that this example is not true "per se". Personally I still like to think that Harry's Cloak would work effectively preventing death, and yet, he could as well be killed and then covered with the Invisibility Cloak similarly to what happened to him when he was in the Howarts Express in the end of the seventh chapter of the sixth book.
The problem I see with the hypothesis of Harry Potter's Invisibility Cloak systematically preventing death is that if someone wearing it were to suffer an accident that normally would kill them, they would remain alive and suffering and doomed, as they would die as soon as they were uncovered in order to be healed, and if they became unable to uncover themselves, they would be in terrible pain until someone uncovered them, which could take forever. And I guess that there would still be kinds of damage that would end up being fatal no matter how protected by the Cloak one were, because in the end magic cannot solve everything, so maybe all the Cloak would do is prevent the Soul from "going on". This seems to be TV Tropes' Fridge Horror in its finest.
waaaaaaaaaaaaaaugh
This is actually pretty funny. I should start reading the comic again if he's gonna be doing these for a while.
[quote="HP fan"]I see your point, ipdf3. I apologise, Sahan. My impression is that although the origin of the Deathly Hallows explained in the tale was probably invented, all the magical properties explained in it were actually true, as later some of them are proven to be true in-universe, leading to believe that all of them could as well be true. I am not sure if this really places me in any "sect", but I do not really care.
Nonetheless, now that I think of it, the Death-prevention property does contradict a previous law of the Harry Potter universe, which stated that nothing could stop the Killing Curse, with the exception of the ancient "sacrifice out of love" protective magic that made Harry Potter survive in the first place. But so far as we know, there could be more exceptions, and Harry's Invisibility Cloak might well be one of them, as it is not proven otherwise along the story; no one is killed while covered by it.
I guess we might never know unless Joanne Rowling decides to explain it further, although she might have explained it already and I might just be uninformed about it, since I have not checked all the canon information that there is out there. I find that universe fascinating and in spite of that I have not yet got to research in Pottermore or some other sources of information.
Anyway, I like the aproach Eliezer Yudkowsky took in his fanfic, Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality, about there being more exceptions to the unstoppability of the Killing Curse, such as a version 2.0 of the Patronus Charm. I definitely love his work, with all the analysis of the universe that he does.
I suppose that since it is kind of open to interpretation, I take back that this example is not true "per se". Personally I still like to think that Harry's Cloak would work effectively preventing death, and yet, he could as well be killed and then covered with the Invisibility Cloak similarly to what happened to him when he was in the Howarts Express in the end of the seventh chapter of the sixth book.
The problem I see with the hypothesis of Harry Potter's Invisibility Cloak systematically preventing death is that if someone wearing it were to suffer an accident that normally would kill them, they would remain alive and suffering and doomed, as they would die as soon as they were uncovered in order to be healed, and if they became unable to uncover themselves, they would be in terrible pain until someone uncovered them, which could take forever. And I guess that there would still be kinds of damage that would end up being fatal no matter how protected by the Cloak one were, because in the end magic cannot solve everything, so maybe all the Cloak would do is prevent the Soul from "going on". This seems to be TV Tropes' Fridge Horror in its finest.[/quote]
waaaaaaaaaaaaaaugh