I wouldn't be surprised if he takes turns looking old; that would just mean he hasn't been drinking much of the elixir lately. I haven't watched the movies, so if he drinks it on screen and doesn't get younger then fuck the movies, I guess.

 

Could the Imperius curse be used to force someone to speak the truth? Or would the subject of the curse be to influenced by the casters’ biases to do so?

 

Should be possible Crouch Jr mentioned that one of the reason he had Moody under the Imperius curse, was so he can question him.

 

Do we know who became Deputy Headmaster/Headmistress after McGonagall became Headmistress?

 

As far as I am aware there is no indication in any canon or even ambigously canon materials. Though I think we can assume that it would be one of the other heads of houses. My personal guess would be Slughorn, since he got lots of experience, is well connected and has proven his bravery in the battle of Hogwarts where he lead the people of Hogsmead into the battle and ended up dueling Voldemort alongside Mcgonagall and Kingsley.

 

Changing the subject (although the previous posts were very interesting)...
Why didn't Harry use the mirror Sirius gave him? (even before the night of the department of mysteries debacle)
He seems eager to go live with Sirius the very night he meets him. Why not try to stay in contact when he could do so easily?
Didn't Sirius tell him how the mirror works at all?

 

Sirius didn't tell him anything directly, only that it was a way to contact him in case Snape was difficult. The instructions on its use were on the back of the mirror.

As for why Harry didn't use it, IIRC he doesn't want Sirius to act recklessly and put himself in dangerous situations for his sake. He feels that if he calls Sirius for help, he'll rush to Hogwarts to curse Snape in person and get arrested, or something. So as soon as he gets the mirror, he throws it to the bottom of his trunk without even unboxing it and swears to never use it. He probably forgot he even had it before he was back to the castle.

 

Because Harry didn't know about the mirror until after Sirius died. Sirius just gave him a package telling Harry to use it if he needs him, but Harry forgot about it and only unpacked it after Sirius died.

 

Oh thanks I didn't remember that he gave him a package without really explaining what was inside. It's really stupid/sad... Better communication would have saved his life (if he'd said it was from James, they used to use it at school Harry would definitely have been interested) - and Sirius may not have gone stir crazy on house arrest if he could have chatted with Harry regularly.

 

Are we given a reason in canon for Dumbeldore interviewing Trelawney at the Hog's Head? Interviewing candidates for a teacher's post at the most prestigious school of the country in a seedy pub seems strange to me... Or even any pub to be honest (but then I'm not working in education so...)

 

Because that is where she was staying as she didn’t have much money.

 

It's mentioned in Half-Blood-Prince that Trelawney was staying in the Hog's Head at the time because she didn't have much money.

It also makes sense why Dumbledore wouldn't insist on another location, since this was during the height of the first war against Voldemort, and Dumbledore would be disinclined to allow some stranger into Hogwarts, especially since the interview was mostly just a courtesy, with Dumbledore not intending to give her the job. The Hog's Head in particular, is located just near Hogwarts and is owned by Aberforth , who is Dumbledore's brother a member of the Order of the Phoenix.

 

Ah I didn't take into consideration that they were in the middle of the first war. Looking at the context it makes more sense... thanks!

 

So another question, that you probably will be able to answer easily enough...
How can Dumbeldore be certain of Tom Riddle's backstory?

Dumbeldore "discovered" Tom Riddle Jr when Tom was 11. Even if he made enquiries at once to know where he came from, he's still basically gathering gossip a decade after the events.

So the facts we can be reasonably sure of: Tom the muggle run off with Merope then broke up and went back to his parents/estate as Merope was pregnant.

But why is he sure it is with a love potion? If Merope was a squib how could she brew it? Is brewing potions possible for somebody without magic? Or was Merope simply uneducated and brewing a love potion is so simple that anybody can do it? Or did she simply buy it somewhere... but with which money? How does Dumbeldore know it was a love potion and not other things (like a glamour to make herself prettier and a confundus to make him obsessed with her)... seems there are endless possibilities to mess up with Riddle.

It makes sense that Dumbeldore is word of God concerning magical theory but this looks like he presents as facts a story he felt fit his narrative: opposed to Harry who has the power of love, and it doesn't matter that he basically bullied a 11 y. o. orphan (not to mention treating Mrs Cole like crap) by convincing himself the child was born evil anyway - because, you know it totally justifies it.

I mean I don't like Dumbeldore bashing, but it really bugs me, so I hope I missed something...

 

Merope was not technically a squib; she was just bad at magic. Dumbledore does not know this for a fact; he admits to guessing about most of what happened without his having a memory for it. He knows the witch showed up at Wool's at the end of her rope, having sold her possessions. There is no instance where Dumbledore bullies young Riddle; he's actually a bit extra forgiving by hearing what Riddle did with magic (hurting people, controlling animals, stealing things) and then simply telling him that it will not be tolerated at Hogwarts.

 

I'd say setting his wardrobe on fire would be quite traumatising, no?

 

Especially to an orphan, who presumably has very little (even if it was an illusion).
I certainly wouldn't describe it as "forgiving".
Rather like "I'm stronger than you so you have to behave"... which is about the same as "obey me because I'm the bigger bully"

 

Dumbledore deduced that a love potion was involved from the circumstances of elopement and return of Tom Riddle.

Merope didn't have the benefit of a Hogwarts education, but it is likely that Gaunts were teaching themselves. Maybe Merope's mother pulled a Molly and taught her about love potions.

Dumbledore went a little bit overboard in making the point that Tom's stealing ways won't be tolerated at Hogwarts, but I don't think it was bullying.

 

He has very little, yes, like the other orphans from whom he stole things.

In the actual passage, you'll note that Riddle is more concerned with getting a wand of his own than what evidently did not actually happen to his ill-gotten possessions. It should not surprise us too greatly that he desires the ability to set things on fire. If you take a moment to read the rest of the chapter, it is perfectly clear that this kid is a little monster who hurts people and then either mind-controls them or frightens them into covering for him.

Dumbledore does not simply frighten Riddle into compliance, nor is he trying to get Riddle to obey him specifically, but the rules of Hogwarts and the laws of the Ministry. By excusing his actions as 'inadvertent'- he explains in a later passage he knows they were not- he is allowing Riddle to get away with hurting the other children without any punishment whatsoever. All he has to do before leaving the orphanage is return what he's stolen. I'm at a loss as to why Dumbledore should have observed Riddle's behavior and not administered a stern warning at the very least.

 

So it's alright that Dumbeldore, who is an adult and an educator, takes away what a child has. Because said child took away things from others? Which one of them should know better and do better? Besides, regardless of Tom's reaction, choosing to demonstrate magic that way is pretty messed up. And DD couldn't know Tom's reaction in advance, it's justification after the fact. It's like saying the way the Dursleys treated Harry is alright because Harry turned out ok in the end.

I agree that not letting Tom's behaviour slide was necessary but that's not what Dumbeldore did. He only showed him Tom should beware of more powerful people than him. Well then Tom strove to become the more powerful to dictate the rules to others... first contact with a wizard told him that might makes right, so that's what he does.

I don't think DD is a horrible person, we are all the product of our time and education... but he's a terrible educator.
And he's not responsible for Tom's behaviour (who was already pretty messed up at 11), but he certainly didn't help. He tried to oppose him, not help him.