-4

This might sound like a very dumb question, but bear with me.

Acording to the question Does Death really exist in Harry Potter?

Death is presumably real since it gave 3 different objects to the Peverell Brothers. So, let's examine:

Is Death ever seen outside that encounter with the Peverell Brothers?

The youngest and smartest brother doesn't trust Death and asks for something that could hide him from the eyes of Death himself, so Death reluctantly gives him his Cloak of Invisibility. Afterwards, the brothers go their separate ways.

I presume that if Death had such a device, he would use it. But then, Death gave it away!

So, if Death itself couldn't be invisible, would someone be able to notice Death coming, and be able to fight it? Heck! From what we know, Voldemort would fight against Death if given a chance. Take a look at this part:

"That very night, another wizard crept upon the oldest brother as he lay, wine-sodden, upon his bed. The theif took the wand and, for good measure, slit the oldest brother’s throat.

And so Death took the first brother for his own."

Why wouldn't Death simply kill the first brother? Would the wand be able to defeat Death?

So, consider that someone managed to get hold of both the Elder Wand and the Cloak of Invisibility. That would mean that Death doesn't posess the cloak of which it could go unnoticed, and that it would be at least scared of facing the Master of the Elder Wand, let's also not forget that at some point Dumbledore & Harry posessed the 3 Deathly Hallows thus both becoming Masters of Death at some point.

Harry:

  • Stone from the Ring
  • Wand from Voldemort
  • Cloak during his first year

Dumbledore:

  • Stone from the Ring
  • Wand from Grindelwald
  • Borrowed the cloak from Harry

So, essentially, we have two characters that became MASTERS OF FREAKIN' DEATH, should, for example Voldemort kill Harry, and posess the three hallows, would he be able to , should Death come to him, be able to see and kill Death?

Community
  • 1
Oak
  • 1,427
  • 16
  • 27
  • 9
    The answer in the question you linked to is awful and wrong. As per HP canon, "Death" doesn't exist - it's a made-up character in the In-universe book/legend. According to Dumbledore, the Hallows were made my Peverell brothers, not Death. – DVK-on-Ahch-To May 12 '14 at 17:22
  • 3
    Well, if that's so, that'd f my whole question – Oak May 12 '14 at 17:23
  • As such, the entire premise of this question is wrong. A made-up character from a fable isn't "deadly" or "not deadly". It doesn't exist. – DVK-on-Ahch-To May 12 '14 at 17:23
  • Assuming the premise is wrong, then yes, a made up character wouldn't be/not be deadly. In that sense I strongly agree with you, regarding the part about Death being real or not, I really don't know (as it's not such a straightfoward thing) – Oak May 12 '14 at 17:26
  • there's zero in-universe evidence that Death is real. All we have is a legend recorder by fable collector. Do you think (in our universe) that Snow White and Seven Dwarves were real merely because they are in Brother Grimm's books? I added the answer to your linked question to that effect. – DVK-on-Ahch-To May 12 '14 at 17:47
  • I noticed =), but please keep in mind that this Question was based on the other question's awnser :P – Oak May 12 '14 at 17:52
  • @DVK could you reference where (and, if suitable, how) does Dumbledore express that "the Hallows were made by Peverell brothers, not Death"? edit I think answer by Slytherincess makes the references and the quotes, along with the note that their content is arguable, arguably contradictory, and up to interpretation. – n611x007 Jul 30 '14 at 15:54
  • @Oak what stops you thinking that Death has or can create another invisibility cloak? – n611x007 Jul 30 '14 at 16:42
  • Also worth noting that Dumbledore didn't technically possess all three Hallows at the same time: http://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/52448/did-anyone-ever-possess-all-three-hallows?rq=1 – Möoz Nov 07 '14 at 02:46
  • @DVK-on-Ahch-To To be fair though one might argue that even if Death doesn't exist in reality he does exist in the imagination of Beedle the Bard and many others and the imagination is indeed very powerful: deadly even. Not saying it applies here necessarily but what I am saying is in the context of the story was he actually deadly? You could analyse it and philosophise about it quite a bit actually although perhaps not looking at canon solely. Killing Death however can be said to be no: Dumbledore explains what Master of Death means: one who willingly accepts their mortality. – Pryftan Oct 06 '17 at 15:04

2 Answers2

6

The problem is Dumbledore kind of contradicts himself on whether the Hallows are real, which makes it very hard to directly answer this question.

On one page Dumbledore says this:

‘The Hallows, the Hallows,’ murmured Dumbledore. ‘A desperate man’s dream!’

‘But they’re real!’ [Harry]

‘Real, and dangerous, and a lure for fools,’ said Dumbledore.

Deathly Hallows - page 571 - Bloomsbury - chapter thirty-five, King's Cross

On the next page he says this:

‘So it’s true?’ asked Harry. ‘All of it? The Peverell brothers –’

‘– were the three brothers of the tale,’ said Dumbledore, nodding. ‘Oh yes, I think so. Whether they met Death on a lonely road ... I think it more likely that the Peverell brothers were simply gifted, dangerous wizards who succeeded in creating those powerful objects. The story of them being Death’s own Hallows seems to me the sort of legend that might have sprung up around such creations.

Deathly Hallows - page 572 - Bloomsbury - chapter thirty-five, King's Cross

Are you asking, Should Death be real, would he be deadly?

Slytherincess
  • 164,854
  • 146
  • 684
  • 899
  • Having that issue with wether death is real or not, then yes, I'd still love to get an awnser to my question, should It be real, would he be deadly? – Oak May 12 '14 at 17:29
  • There's no contradiction. The Hallows are real. Their origin legend isn't. See http://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/56124/976 – DVK-on-Ahch-To May 12 '14 at 17:46
  • @DVK - Technically, there is a contradiction in Deathly Hallows. Analysis of it is a totally separate thing. – Slytherincess May 12 '14 at 17:49
  • 1
    @Slytherincess - the only "contradiction" is that JKR (or may be it was Dumbledore?) is a piss-poor communicator and uses an ambiguous word in 2 different meaning. The Hallows are real (as in, they are existing objects). The LEGEND of Hallows (gift of Death) isn't. – DVK-on-Ahch-To May 12 '14 at 19:20
  • I think that, at issue here, is that Dumbledore believes Death does not exist, but with so many strange magical creatures he hedged his bet by saying they were probably produced by very talented wizards. That said, it probably is only legend in universe. JKR does like leaving some mystery. – methuseus May 18 '14 at 13:55
  • @DVK - See I interpret it as both are real. The legend exists, therefore it is real. The objects exist, therefore they are real. But were the Hallows fashioned by Death? Probably not. I read it as Dumbledore said (at one point), that the Hallows were likely made by the Peverell brothers, who were exceptionally skilled wizards who like to take a walk on the wild/dark side. I don't think that canon quite reaches the point where it demonstrates Death was actually the creator of the Hallows. Basically what Methuseus said. :) – Slytherincess May 18 '14 at 23:22
  • @Slytherincess - when I said the "LEGEND of Hallows" is not real, I meant the CONTENT of the legend, not the fact that the legend exists as a literary artefact. – DVK-on-Ahch-To May 18 '14 at 23:55
  • @DVK - I understood you. I was just explaining how I see it as it is right now (meaning, I'm open to interpretation and other POVs). :) – Slytherincess May 20 '14 at 18:33
  • @DVK I think you may be taking a quick jump to a very specific conclusion. That since there is lack of evidence of the existence of "Death", the character should not exist. You do this by utilizing an interpretation of the so called "Occam's razor" which seems to be popular anyway. To contrast: "since my knowledge lacks any evidence to the existence of Death, albeit also lacking evidence to the contrary, it's better (for me) to assume that such character should probably not exist, since I'm against or neutral to the question of such existence anyway." - or, I think it more likely – n611x007 Jul 30 '14 at 16:05
  • @naxa - extraordinary assertions require extraordinary evidence. The evidence that Death doesn't exist: nobody in-Universe met it/him. Evidence that it does exist: there's a fable in a book of other made-up stories with Death as a character; and there are 3 magical artefacts which in no way necessitate Death's existence to have been created by wizards. "No Death" evidence wins hands down. – DVK-on-Ahch-To Jul 30 '14 at 16:08
  • @DVK: I think such evidence cannot be suitably proven. Death is "by design" killing people. Should anyone meet Death, wouldn't be coming back. I believe most of supernatural ideas cannot actually be proven due this kind of think, I remember Kant attempting to point something like this out. So it leaves one with virtual evidence vs. a tale. – n611x007 Jul 30 '14 at 16:10
  • @naxa - That's not "proof". That's a random guess. And as such, to a rational mind, deserves to be lumped in with other random guesses, NOT with valid theories that can be evidentially proven. – DVK-on-Ahch-To Jul 30 '14 at 16:12
  • @DVK I wish we could talk about this for a little time in an on-topic space. Wonder, both of our cases, what it gives one, to stick to a particular, maybe virtual, standpoint used for one's kind of rhetorics. Why does our conversation seems to grow to the form of a flame-war? How did I trick myself when I found a justification? What needs my wonder or attention instead? – n611x007 Jul 30 '14 at 16:38
  • @DVK-on-Ahch-To I don't know if that really equates to there is no evidence that Death doesn't exist as such. Perhaps it's because it's only a short story without much beyond it (just dialogue between Harry and Dumbledore). I liken it to the subject of is there such a thing as god? The burden of proof lies on those claiming something exists but that doesn't mean there is evidence a god doesn't exist either (or I can't think of any off the top of my head). It however does seem likely that 'Death' doesn't exist in the literal sense at least; figuratively of course he does. – Pryftan Oct 06 '17 at 15:09
  • @n611x007 'That since there is lack of evidence of the existence of "Death", the character should not exist.' Nevertheless the burden of proof lies on those who claim something exists. It doesn't mean that we can prove that Death (esp so for a story in a story!) but until Death is proven to truly exist the general view of the sound mind is and should be that Death does not exist (even if there is no actual evidence). Figuratively he certainly can exist; literally it's up to those believing (keyword too) that he does exist. – Pryftan Oct 06 '17 at 15:12
  • @Slytherincess I fail to see the contradiction. It could be said that in the first quote Dumbledore is saying that people who believe in it and being Master of Death are desperate dreamers (which they are); Harry counters they're real and Dumbledore says that they're a real and dangerous lure. But look at what Grindelwald did. That was dangerous; look at what Dumbledore did even with the Ring! A fatal mistake! The second quote is Dumbledore saying that it's unlikely the tale is true but that doesn't contradict anything to do with the objects themselves (he actually says they are real). – Pryftan Oct 06 '17 at 15:17
  • @DVK-on-Ahch-To Sorry. I meant to say I don't know that there is evidence that Death doesn't exist as such. The rest is the same; there is no evidence Death does exist and therefore a sound mind would say that Death doesn't exist until he can otherwise be proven to exist (which for a logical mind which I gather includes you as well as me it means never). – Pryftan Oct 06 '17 at 15:24
0

The fact that they came from Death is attributed to being likely to be wrong. They had been proven to be exceptional wizards, so it is said that they had most likely created the hallows themselves, rather than them being a gift from Death.

ZenLogic
  • 4,223
  • 4
  • 28
  • 34
  • Could you reference (and optionally quote) what "proof" are you talking about? – n611x007 Jul 30 '14 at 16:40
  • 1
    OK, it may not have been proven, but they are at least thought to be very good wizards, Dumbledore mentioned it in the kings cross chapter of the deathly hallows I believe – ZenLogic Jul 30 '14 at 16:50