Grindelwald and Dumbledore: Joint Character Analysis

The relationship of Dumbledore and Grindelwald is intricately complex on multiple levels. It has now been revealed by Jo that Dumbledore did indeed love Grindelwald.

Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished?
Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?

NOTE:
This thread, nay, this forum will not tolerate homophobia or Dumbledore bashing. Whether you agree or not with homosexuality is not the topic here. Members who choose to dispense with the hate and the nastiness will get a one-way ticket to bansville.

I really think Ariana's death was the only thing that stopped Dumbledore seeing through his plans with Grindelwald. It separated them physically and in Dumbledore's mind emotionally as they were to blame for his sister's death. Without that, I think Dumbledore would not have been the Dumbledore we knew.

Would their friendship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
No, it would not have. Even if Ariana had not died, a duel still would have taken place among Albus, Aberforth, and Gellert. Grindelwald began to duel Aberforth because of his disagreement, and I do not think that Albus's desire to act "For the Greater Good" would have overpowered his love for his family. He still loved Aberforth and Ariana - he was simply bored with having to be the leader of the family. The duel, not Ariana's death, brought understanding to Albus about what he was doing and Grindelwald's true character.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished?
I would assume that Albus would have changed dramatically if his relationship with Grindelwald flourished. However, as I have already stated, I doubt the friendship would ever have lasted, even without the duel. Eventually Albus would realize Grindelwald's Dark intentions, and whatever Albus said about the Greater Good would not convince him to succumb to Dark magic.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship to his lost friend, or just guilt?
I think a combination of both. I think, as Albus stated, that Grindelwald had time to think of his actions in Nurmengard, and he felt guilty for what he did, remembering what Albus had become. This guilt was, therefore, tied to thoughts of Albus, and he knew that he still cared for him. However, I also believe that Grindelwald had no desire for the Elder wand to get in Voldemort's hands - whether because he did not want Voldemort to rise to power for his own, Good reasons, or whether he did not want another Dark wizard to challenge his name in history, I do not know.

1)Would their friendship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
Maybe but not for long due to Grindelwald's anti-Muggle views..

2) Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished?
Yes..he could have dabbled in the dark arts and participate in anti-Muggle activities

3) Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship to his lost friend, or just guilt?
i guess it is an act of friendship of his lost friend

Would their friendship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?

I truly doubt it. It tore them apart and it made them go their seperate ways. Even if it didn't ruin their friendships, I truly believe that after Grindelwald would start putting his plans to action, Dumbledore would realize that he would not want to go through with helping him. I think he would feel too guilty and as if he wasn't doing the right thing.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished?

Absolutely. He would not be the Dumbledore we know and love but much much worse. Perhaps as bad as Voldemort. If they went through with their plans, it would poison and de-humanize Dumbledore.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship to his lost friend, or just guilt?

Both, I think. Obviously, after a long time to think about what he did, he felt remorse but it also had to do with the fact that he saw what a good man Dumledore became and it made him want to be a better person and a better friend.

I have one question...

How was Dumbledore able to defeat Grindelwald even though he had The Elder Wand?

First of all, I have to say this took me completely by suprise. There's no way I could have seen it coming.

Would their friendship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
No. Even before her death, Albus, Grindelwald, and Aberforth were already having a huge argument and duel. Even if it hadn't ended in Ariana's death, I feel like Albus would have realized that his total estrangement from his brother was not something he wanted.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished?
Definitely. You heard all the stuff, both from Aberforth and Rita Skeeter, about how they were planning all of this "For the Greater Good" of wizardkind. For one, I don't think that if Ariana hadn't died, he would have ever become the "champion of Mudbloods and commoners." He might have eventually realized what horrible things he was doing and broken off the friendship with Grindelwald, but I doubt he would have done a total 180 without his sister's death.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship to his lost friend, or just guilt?
I'm not sure. I want to say both, but we don't really know enough about Grindelwald's personality to know if he was actually a friend of Albus, or if he didn't feel any affection for the guy he had planned so much with, and the guy who had later brought him to his downfall.

However, something tells me that by the time Albus defeated him, Albus had been out of his company and among the real world long enough to learn compassion and sympathy, and it was for this reason that although he defeated his friend and took the Elder Wand, he didn't kill him, and didn't hand him over to the Ministry where he'd be locked up in Azkaban with a thousand dementors. Instead, he left him in his own prison, where he had fifty years to think about his misdeeds - with his power, and with his friends. I'd say both.

I was surprised that there was a relationship between Grindy and DD prior to the duel. However, it explains a lot, especially why Dumbledore never went for the MoM post. It also explains why Grindy never went for Britain - he knew well DD's abilities, and didn't want to hasten the eventual battle.

I don't think the friendship would have survived even if DD's sister hadn't died. DD seemed to be idealistic in his writing, and as soon as he saw what Grindy wanted to do "for the greater good" he would have left. But the pursuit of the Hallows and other superiority things affected DD tremendously - he lived almost his entire life trying to "undo" the damage to himself he caused.

Would their friendship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place? If the whole incident of that fateful day hadn't taken place then yes their friendship would have continued till the day when another similar incident took place. I mean their friendship would never have been a life long one because of the ambitions of Grindelwald.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished? He would have been like his young self till the day he would be friends with Grindelwald, once their friendship would have severed (which would have happened if it hadn't happened that day).

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship to his lost friend, or just guilt? It was more out of guilt.

I actually loved the motif of this friendship. On the structural level, it is a very nice allusion to Philosopher's Stone, when we first find out about Dumbledore defeating Grindelwald. On the other nad, it does explain a lot about Dumbledore's attitude and his unceasing battle against the Dark Arts. He had not only idelological, but also personal reasons to fear and fight them, being once almost-tempted.

Would their friendship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
Hmm…I’ll go with ‘no’ for now. I think (or hope) that Albus would have sensed the danger and the wrong in what he and Grindelwald were


Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished?
Oh yes. Had he not realised the wrong path they were headed down, I think Albus may have taken things too far.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship to his lost friend, or just guilt?
Probably more of guilt. I don’t think Grindelwald missed his old friend that much, considering he was so concerned with becoming Master of Death.

You know what the weirdest thing is? I liked this dude from the moment he was introduced. Grindlewald was cool. But of course not his bad deeds. But in the end he was redeemed. Then again I like anti-heros in general.

Would their friendship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
I think it just very well might have survived. I think they definitely would have been friends a lot longer than they were for those few months. I think that Ariana's death was a huge, brutal wake-up call for Dumbledore. He didn't want to see Grindelwald for what he really was. Ariana's death really forced him to open his eyes and accept what he saw. It's quite possible their friendship and Dumbledore's continued refusal to see Grindelwald for what he really was might have last a very, very long time had Ariana not been killed.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished?
Yes, I think he definitely would have. I would like to think that Dumbledore would have at least regretted or felt uneasy about the things he did toward the end of his life though.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship to his lost friend, or just guilt?
I really don't know. Grindelwald is still quite mysterious; we don't really know very much about his personality.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship to his lost friend, or just guilt?

I don't think it was either. I think it was defiance of Voldemort himself, and didn't really have anything to do with Dumbledore or any sort of guilt feeling.

We really don't have much to go on, but Grindelwald seems like a very strong personality. The wand boosted his power. And the Elder wand attracts the sort of person who would kill to get that kind of power, and ultimately would do anything for power. I think he still saw the wand as his and didn't want to give it up to anyone, Voldemort especially.

Lets compare the similarities and differences between Lord Voldemort and Gellert Grindelwald from the point they were young Hogwarts graduates to evil tyrants.

I think the main difference is that Grindelwald thought that what he was doing was good for wizard kind, for 'the greater good'. But with Riddle, by the time he had graduated from Hogwarts he was already killing and making Horcruxes. So, for Grindelwald, he was, in some twisted way, doing what he thought was better for wizard kind. Voldemort just wanted immortality.

Would their friendship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
Maybe--I can actually see them being friends, although I would think they would not be close friends as the years went by. Remember, they had a lot in common--both intellligent, energetic, visionary men (albeit with a less-than-respectable vision, as it turned out), who wanted to make a name for themselves and improve the lot of magical people. Yes, Grindelwald was a bad guy, but that may have been blunted if he had maintained a friendship with Albus, so he may have ended up somewhat prejudiced, but not a truly dark wizard. Also remember, Albus had no real reason to like muggles when he was young, considering what "they" did to his sister--the muggle world and muggleborns are lucky that Albus didn't take that event and allow it to color his future impressions of muggles as cruel, abusive beasts who deserved what bad fortune they got. I can easily see a young Albus continuing to have cordial relations with Grindelwald over the years, not agreeing always, but not overtly antagonistic.
Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished?
Yes, as above, I imagine he would be a lot less tolerant of muggles and muggleborns, although his decades of experience would hopefully keep him decent. He would, I imagine, have been a lot more power-seeking if he had stayed in Grindelwald's camp over time.
Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship to his lost friend, or just guilt?
I suspect it's mainly remorse at what he'd done, so I guess I'm going with the guilt option.

Everybody in this thread seems to think that Dumbledore may have become evil if he had stayed friends with Grindelwald. What about the opposite? Could Grindelwald have become a member of the OOTP later in life and perhaps even a teacher at Hogwarts? Would Voldemort ahve been defeated sooner if Grindelwald was a member of the OOTP?

Lets compare the similarities and differences between Lord Voldemort and Gellert Grindelwald from the point they were young Hogwarts graduates to evil tyrants.

I think the main difference is that Grindelwald thought that what he was doing was good for wizard kind, for 'the greater good'. But with Riddle, by the time he had graduated from Hogwarts he was already killing and making Horcruxes. So, for Grindelwald, he was, in some twisted way, doing what he thought was better for wizard kind. Voldemort just wanted immortality.

Wasn't Grindelwald a Durmstrang student?

I agree on that. Voldemort never would have hid the secret of the elder wand like Grindelwald did if the positions were reversed

Would their friendship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
Dumbledore said that he ignored the signs that Grindelwald was not a man to associate himself with. Dumbledore probably would've ended their friendship once Grindelwald's true colors were something he could no longer ignore.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished?
I'm firm on the idea that Dumbledore would've ended his friendship with Grindelwald once he realized what Grindelwald was planning to do. He would not be the same person we know him as, but I believe he would end up fighting against Voldemort even if his friendship flourished for a while.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship to his lost friend, or just guilt?
I believe spending time in Nurmengard alone may have caused him to feel some form of remorse for his actions.

Everybody in this thread seems to think that Dumbledore may have become evil if he had stayed friends with Grindelwald. What about the opposite? Could Grindelwald have become a member of the OOTP later in life and perhaps even a teacher at Hogwarts? Would Voldemort ahve been defeated sooner if Grindelwald was a member of the OOTP?



Wasn't Grindelwald a Durmstrang student?


Grindelwald was a Durmstrang student who, if I recall correctly, was kicked out. He already was notorious as a kid.

I doubt Grindy would have become a "good guy" under DD's influence. I think they would have parted ways as soon as Grindy did his first murder for the greater good. It took years in the prison of his own making for him to begin showing remorse.

Would their friendship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
No way. Dumbledore knew of his dark deeds before, he just kept trying to persuade himself otherwise. Sooner or later he would come to his senses.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished?
Yes. He was never influenced by Grindelwald's evil ways but he would still like power.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship to his lost friend, or just guilt?
I think it was both. He had a lot of time to think these things over in Nurmengand.

I'm not convinced that DD would have remained evil if he had stayed with Grindy.... I definetely think that it's unquestionable that his turn-around happened at the moment of Ariana's death, but who's to say he wouldn't have backed out at some point anyway? DD never showed himself to be inherently evil (that we know of in cannon), just talented. Grindy had already demonstrated his evil ways by the time he met DD.

Would their friendship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?

I doubt it, if you read carefully the letter, there isn't much of ambition in Dumbloder's writing, he only wants to prove his power, dose not want to hurt. I think he knew Grindelwald liked the dark arts and was way more ambitious about a non-muggle community. So i think they would eventually separte.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished?

Maybe, and maybe not. I see Gellert as a man who like do things out of strength more than reasonable words. But i think Dumbledore would have known the they had different intersts.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship to his lost friend, or just guilt?

Both, I think. Such a long time in that cell, maybe he continued mailing Dumbledore, who knows. I think he would have been devastated when Dumbledore died, and didn't want to give away the wearabouts of the elder wand to a such powerful wizard.

Would their friendship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
I think that even if she didn't die, after many more months of friendship, Grindelwald's dark side would become more and more apparent and Dumbledore would realize he could not help Grindelwald. Either that or he could of somehow convinced Grindelwald to be less evil, unlikely though.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished?
The loss of his sister was one of the moments in his life that defined his character. If their friendship flourished he would have turned out different, how different? who knows.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship to his lost friend, or just guilt?
After spending all those years locked up by himself, I believe that he learned from his mistakes and in his last action he saw how wrong dark wizards like himself are and wanted to prevent VD from succeeding.

The relationship of Dumbledore and Grindelwald is intricately complex on multiple levels.

Would their friendship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished?
Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship to his lost friend, or just guilt?

Ariana:

I think their friendship would have survived until Grindelwald proceeded to put his all-conquering plans to work. Dumbledore was hungry for power, but was apparently opposed to Grindelwald's tendency toward violence, and even felt guilt while collaborating with him. Ariana was a catalyst to ending their relationship, rather than a show-stopper.

Dumbledore:

Dumbledore was misguided by Grindelwald, I think. Eventually I'm sure his conscience would have told him to stop the friendship and put his foot down against his "friend". In his letter, Dumbledore predicts that they will eventually clash on the amount of violence to be used in their conquest. From this I think Dumbledore was never a violent person, whereas Grindelwald had a natural inclination toward blood-thirstiness.

Grindelwald:

HIs defiance against Voldemort was probably due to one of two things: his guilt for past crimes committed by his hand, and his knowledge that Voldemort's rise to power would probably come to naught. I felt that Grindelwald had an air of someone who considered Voldemort foolish and naive, as though he knew Voldemort was bound to fail.

I think that it would have been much more difficult for Dumbledore to see the error in his thinking had Ariana not died and had he stayed friends with Grindelwald. As he is in the books, we see that Dumbledore has learned control over his search for power, but that he knows that he is still vulnerable and keeps himself out of what he knows would be dangerous situations. I think this shows that he may have been evil (in a sense) and continued on the path he had been on had he remained friends with Grindelwald.

1. I think their friendship would have survived had Ariana's death not taken place because Grindelwald wouldn't have left in such a hurry. Albus would not have felt guilty and forsaken his old ways. He and Grindelwald would have no reason not to continue with their plan to enslave muggles and establish a ruling wizard class.

2. Dumbledore would definitely have been a different man if their friendship had survived. In his youth, he was a powerhungry skilled young man who was wrapped up in his great ability and very, very proud. He resembled young Tom Riddle in many ways. Dumbledore admits himself that he wasn't always the best person but that he changed his ways after Ariana died. Had this not happened, and he and Grindelwald continued their friendship, I think they would have become partners and possibly taken over the magical world. Dumbledore admits that power was always his weakness and without anything restraining him (Ariana's death) and with someone adding fuel to the fire (Grindelwald), he would have become immersed in the power much like Voldemort and Grindelwald did.

3. I think that in the end, after spending most of his life rotting away in Nurmengard, Grindelwald realized his errors and knew that Albus had been right. I think his defiance was both an act of friendship and guilt. He remembered his old friend Albus and wanted to make things right. Also, he felt guilty for his actions and saw that Voldemort had become what he had almost become. This was a terrible realization and I'd like to think that Grindelwald's attitude was for Dumbledore.

Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
I think their friendship would have, however I do not think they would have had a relationship. We do not know if Grindelwald was gay or not, and I do not think he was. I think he found a friend in Dumbledore, a friend that understood him from an intellectual standpoint. However, this was what I thought Dumbledore had found as well, before Jo told us otherwise. I still stick by what I said, I do not think Dumbledore would have been friends or lovers with Grindelwald for very long, because I refuse to believe that Dumbledore would believe in the same "Greater Good" that Grindelwald believed in.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished?
If they has stayed friends, we would never have seen the Dumbledore we saw in the books. He would have been the dark wizard instead of the great one.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?
Probably just guilt. After years of being locked in his own prison I find it hard to believe that Grindelwald hadn't come to the conclusion that what he did was wrong. I don't think Grindelwald wanted Voldemort to succeed, Why? There could be a number of reasons.

I have one question...

How was Dumbledore able to defeat Grindelwald even though he had The Elder Wand?

Grindelwald probably didn't excpect to see Dumbledore, or the meeting made feelings and memories turn up that was very unexpected. He probably didn't fight to kill and then Dumbledore was a more skilled wizard.
During his entire life Dumbledore fought against the bad (not always evil) and had become a master of spells to hurt and stop but not kill his opponents.
Grindelwald always tried to hurt lethaly or kill his opponents and he obviously dind't want to kill one of his best friends ever and therefore he was less skilled.

I don't think Gellert Grindelwald (G.G) would have become one the "good guys" seeing as he was already searching for the Hallows before he met Dumbledore (he carved the mark into a wall at Durmstrang). I got the impression that it was Dumbledore who followed G.G's lead and not the opposite. When G.G left Godrics Hollow Dumbledore dropped most of his thought about "the greater good".

I think that the love he had for G.G might have made him see things in a different light than what he really thought.
As for the question of Voldemort and G.G it's clear that Voldemort only and always thought of himself. He never had a friend to share his veiws with and he never needed it. Voldemorts way in life was never to die, to alone defeat everything.
G.G wanted ALL wizards to be above muggles. It's not good in anyway but it made him able to feel "better" than Voldemort I think.
So when Voldemort wanted the wand he (G.G) understood that Voldemort could never use it properly.
He might as well during all those years in prison have though alot about the friend who put him there, all for the greater good. But his one thought turned against him.
G.G could have felt remorse to Dumbledore, that he left. Maybe he loved him, who knows what was said between the two of them?

I don't think Gellert Grindelwald (G.G) would have become one the "good guys" seeing as he was already searching for the Hallows before he met Dumbledore (he carved the mark into a wall at Durmstrang). I got the impression that it was Dumbledore who followed G.G's lead and not the opposite. When G.G left Godrics Hollow Dumbledore dropped most of his thought about "the greater good".

I think that the love he had for G.G might have made him see things in a different light than what he really thought.
As for the question of Voldemort and G.G it's clear that Voldemort only and always thought of himself. He never had a friend to share his veiws with and he never needed it. Voldemorts way in life was never to die, to alone defeat everything.
G.G wanted ALL wizards to be above muggles. It's not good in anyway but it made him able to feel "better" than Voldemort I think.
So when Voldemort wanted the wand he (G.G) understood that Voldemort could never use it properly.
He might as well during all those years in prison have though alot about the friend who put him there, all for the greater good. But his one thought turned against him.
G.G could have felt remorse to Dumbledore, that he left. Maybe he loved him, who knows what was said between the two of them?

I don't think Gellert Grindelwald (G.G) would have become one the "good guys" seeing as he was already searching for the Hallows before he met Dumbledore (he carved the mark into a wall at Durmstrang). I got the impression that it was Dumbledore who followed G.G's lead and not the opposite. When G.G left Godrics Hollow Dumbledore dropped most of his thought about "the greater good".

I think that the love he had for G.G might have made him see things in a different light than what he really thought.
As for the question of Voldemort and G.G it's clear that Voldemort only and always thought of himself. He never had a friend to share his veiws with and he never needed it. Voldemorts way in life was never to die, to alone defeat everything.
G.G wanted ALL wizards to be above muggles. It's not good in anyway but it made him able to feel "better" than Voldemort I think.
So when Voldemort wanted the wand he (G.G) understood that Voldemort could never use it properly.
He might as well during all those years in prison have though alot about the friend who put him there, all for the greater good. But his one thought turned against him.
G.G could have felt remorse to Dumbledore, that he left. Maybe he loved him, who knows what was said between the two of them?

I was, even more than surprised, relieved when I heard the news about Dumbledore's homosexuality. I had finished Deathly Hallows with a relatively negative feeling toward Dumbledore, especially regarding what he wrote in his letter to Grindelwald about taking over the Muggle population. I couldn't help think that it was his own darn fault that Ariana died, whether he dealt the killing blow or not (and surely he felt this way too.) This new information absolved Dumbledore a bit for me. Not only did it deepen the anguish he must have felt upon Ariana's death, but it really showed how strong he was -- his love for Grindelwald caused arguably the worst event in his life. And yet, he still championed love's power for good throughout it, which is just such a beautiful notion...

I personally have no idea why Jo didn't include this in the book, even if subtly. I would have been content in having far less time to brood over my newfound dislike of Dumbledore. Even if it does upset people who believe that homosexuality is immoral, I think the the integrity of the plot and the truth in the art are more important.

1. Perhaps, I'm not completely sure. If Dumbledore snapped out of it, as I'm sure he would've, probably not, but you never know Dumbledore. I mean, I don't think anyone thought he was gay until now.
2. Friendship, no. I'm sure Dumbledore would've snapped out of it. However, I think if they pursued a relationship, and it stuck, the wizardin world would be a very, VERY different place.
3. Yes, I think Grindelwald did it because he felt guilty, both for his general actions, and for defying the trust of his friend.

Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?

Dumbledore was in love with Gellert. In love. Love can be blind and if his love was returned then yes, it would've lived and Dumbldore would not have been this great character that he is. He accepted and understood for example Snape. If Ariana hadn't died Dumbledore wouldn't have got this humongous wake up call and seen all the evill that GG actually was impriting in his mind!

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished?

Without doubt. But how? I think that Dumbledore would have been attractet to the dark side. He himself said that he was attracted, very indeed. But it was his lost of sister, brother and now as we can see, lover, that made him see it. See what he was doing and see that it was very wrong. And I think that they wouldn't have let the relationship florish. You know, it was like in the 1880's or something. Being gay was like worse than being að double rapist and murdere. It was just forbidden. By law and is still tabu in some countries. Why would the wizarding community be diffrent from the muggle? Being gay=> very bad boy. Look what happened to Oscar Wilde! awww:(

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?

Both. He had a lot of time to think about it you know... 50 years is a long time. I think this scene in the book is now very important. as I see it now it is that Gellert was trying to protect him, maybe indicating long lost love. Who knows, maybe he didn't know that Dumbledore was dead by then, who knows. But he was protecting Dumbledore and the wand.. but mostly Dumbledore. I hope.


Well, this has been the most strange day... after my reaction of Dumbledore sudden gay'ness my sister tells me that she's gay! Just because I was so happy for Dumbledore and his gay'ness I think... Well, strange enough, I am pleased and happy for them (my sister and Dumbledore) for coming out of the closet the very same day... like totally awesome!

I think and hope that one of the major characters in history of literature, Albus Dumbledore, is gay will help people to come out of the closet. My sister did so, the very same day and I am so proud of her! You have to accept what you are and who you love and I think that is exactly what Dumbledore did. He accepted his love for Gellert Grindewald and accepted being gay. I hope that this will help people to be them selves, it doesn't matter if the person you love is a man or a woman. It does matter that you love him/her and is happy.

Dumbledore being gay totally surpised me!
When I read it I was just thinking about all the brokeback mounain/harry potter movies parodies on youtube that are going to crop up more often.
And I think we might see a few more dd/gg fanfics now...
rather than all those ones about lupin/sirius. i don't like those fanfics, lol...they're both straight, ******!

But still, I've got a question-were they actually together or was it only dumbles?

Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?

I don't think it would have -- unless Dumbledore could have convinced Grindelwald to take a more moderate path. In King's Cross (DH), Dumbledore tells Harry that deep down he always knew that Grindelwald was the person in the violent duel at their home, but he didn't want to admit it. Sometimes love makes us blind, at least for a while. Even if Ariana had survived, I think that Dumbledore and Grindelwald would have to part ways because their principles were different.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished?

I don't think so. Dumbledore would have eventually become the person he did anyway -- Dumbledore learned some things sooner than he would have because of Grindelwald's actions and Ariana's death. But I believe Dumbledore would have become the same person we see in the series.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?

My view is that it was an act of friendship/love for Dumbledore, both because he knew Dumbledore would have wanted to stop Voldemort getting the wand, and also because gaining the wand would mean the desecration of Dumbledore's tomb (as Harry so intuitively surmised).

Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?

No. I think because I have the very strong feeling that it was one sided. Granted there is the possibilty that GG was gay as well but that doesnt mean he loved DD or was even interested in him in that fashion.

Even if they were involved, it could not have been true love in any respect because if it were GG would never had made any step to pull DD away from sibilings who clearly needed him. Love is NOT selfish. GG was definitly selfish.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished?

I think so. If he had stayed he may have become so caught up in the **** that GG was feeding him he would have truly and fully become the kind of person most of us would not like. He may have ended up being the kind of person who would say "Voldemort had the right idea". Thank God that didnt happen.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?

I think it was two things.
Guilt over his past actions and the realization that his punishment for them was just.

Also I have a feeling that GG was smug as ever, had learned his lesson, saw someone similar to him making the same mistakes, and decided to rub it in his face that he would not give into his plans willingly.

Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
I am actually going to disagree with the majority here and say yes, I think so. It seemed to me that it was the shock of Grindelwald leaving immediately after her death shocked Albus more than the fight itself. The fight would have come about between the brothers regardless of Grindelwald and if he had ever come into the picture just because of the nature of the two boys and their polar opposite temperaments. I think it would have taken longer, but a fight would have broken out regardless. I've seen it with my own brothers.
So I think if Grindelwald had stuck around and been a friend/more to Albus after the death of his sister, their relationship would only have grown. And if Ariana hadn't died, I think they would have remained friends regardless of the three-way duel.
One reason I think this way is because Dumbledore was in love. It seems to me that people are either overlooking this fact or underestimating the power of love and what it does to people's choices.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished?
Oh, most definitely. I think he would have retained his own beliefs in some part of himself, but I think he would have been led down a much darker path out of his love for Gellert.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?
I believe it was a last act of friendship/love for the man he once knew and possibly loved. I doubt either man ever found love again in their lives, and it seemed to me that it was his last act of protecting the person that he himself so irrevocably hurt.

I heard that Dumbledore's feelings for Grindlewand were not returned. Did Grindy even know? Was Grindy even gay himself?:relax:
I think Grindlewand's actions about not telling the truth to Voldy about the Elder Wand has nothing to do with his sexuality- he could have been heterosexual.
I feel sorry for DD- his character just keeps on getting more complicated. I would never have guessed and I would have been fine not knowing, not because i have anything against gays, maybe its because he was an old man (dead now) that makes it seem like "a little too much information".
I think JKR is trying to eliminate prejudice- she's already told us that its our actions that count over than what our blood heritage is, and now a character who everyone admires is gay.:tu:
I think everyone will be talking about this for a while.

I believe it was a last act of friendship/love for the man he once knew and possibly loved. I doubt either man ever found love again in their lives, and it seemed to me that it was his last act of protecting the person that he himself so irrevocably hurt.

I think Harry picked up on this as well. He mentioned at KC that Grindelwald may have defied Voldemort to "keep him from breaking into your tomb."

If that was the case, it might suggest that Grindelwald still retained feelings for Dumbledore.

What I'm confused about is whether Dumbledore's love for GG was reciprocated? I've read somewhere that it was unrequited - does anyone have a quote confirming/denying that?

What I'm confused about is whether Dumbledore's love for GG was reciprocated? I've read somewhere that it was unrequited - does anyone have a quote confirming/denying that?

I believe Jo didn't specify. She just said Dumbledore was in love with Grindelwald nd was terribly let down; and that his love was his great tragedy.

What I'm confused about is whether Dumbledore's love for GG was reciprocated? I've read somewhere that it was unrequited - does anyone have a quote confirming/denying that?

I'm sure it was mutual on some deep levels. Just reading DH shows how deeply involved these two were together, going to save the world, :D but JKR does compare DD as Bellatrix was to Voldemort. Meaning, DD had a blind love that was obsessive and intoxicating, which after it devastated his family and exposed his foolishness it abruptly ended with sobriety and abstinence, imo. It was his main fork in the road to becoming a sage & a Merlin to Harry.

Just as Snape was changed forever, so was DD by such a blow of tragic love. I think this is a very good reason why DD understood and trusted Snape. It's what shaped and changed both of their lives more than anything else till their deaths, imo.

Here is the word for word from JKR Friday night:

Did Dumbledore, who believed in the prevailing power of love, ever fall in love himself?

My truthful answer to you... I always thought of Dumbledore as gay. [ovation.] ... Dumbledore fell in love with Grindelwald, and that that added to his horror when Grindelwald showed himself to be what he was. To an extent, do we say it excused Dumbledore a little more because falling in love can blind us to an extent? But, he met someone as brilliant as he was, and rather like Bellatrix he was very drawn to this brilliant person, and horribly, terribly let down by him. Yeah, that's how i always saw Dumbledore. In fact, recently I was in a script read through for the sixth film, and they had Dumbledore saying a line to Harry early in the script saying I knew a girl once, whose hair... [laughter]. I had to write a little note in the margin and slide it along to the scriptwriter, "Dumbledore's gay!" [laughter] If I'd known it would make you so happy, I would have announced it years ago!


Luna blessings... :tu:

I hope that Grindelwald's refusal to help Voldemort was due to remorse and his old feelings of friendship/love for Dumbledore.

I would like to think that GG did feel remorse and more for the man whom he had let down so badly all those years ago and tried to stop Voldemort from breaking DD's tomb.

Jo did not say that DD's love was unrequited and so I would like to think it was resiprocated by GG.

While DD did find his responsibilities cumbersome, he would not have thrown them away and when Ariana died, GG knew that DD would change and he would most likely come down and hard on most of his plans. DD's eyes now would be a lot more open and his deductions harsh and his stance firm and uncomprmising.

It all began and ended with the death of his sister for him; that was the turning point and while I feel DD would not have become an equal to GG he would have gone a long way with his lover and he would have created a solid enough mess that would take more than a lifetime to undo.

GG running away also showed that he knew DD would change and not only that but he would also demand GG change too, and GG was not prepared to do so. So he threw away all that they shared and broke DD's heart in the process and made him the icon we know today.

But DD defeating GG even when GG had the Elder wand shows us that GG did have feeling, maybe buried under layers of darkness but still there or maybe DD was more skilled and more determined to redeem himself of that day when Ariana was killed.

But DD defeating GG even when GG had the Elder wand shows us that GG did have feeling, maybe buried under layers of darkness but still there or maybe DD was more skilled and more determined to redeem himself of that day when Ariana was killed.

Wow, I think you hit the Elder Wand mark right-on here. :tu: The power and force of the curse is given by its caster. I think you're exactly right to suggest GG didn't have his heart in it to kill DD.

Here's some canon to support this idea too:

But the importance of some of Dumbledore’s achievements cannot, I venture, be denied. What of his famous defeat of Grindelwald?
“Oh, now, I’m glad you mentioned Grindelwald,” says Skeeter with a tantalizing smile. “I’m afraid those who go dewy eyed over Dumbledore’s spectacular victory must brace themselves for a bombshell— or perhaps a Dungbomb. Very dirty business indeed. All I’ll say is, don’t be so sure that there really was the spectacular duel of legend.
After they’ve read my book, people may be forced to conclude that Grindelwald simply conjured a white handkerchief from the end of his wand and came quietly!”

This also implies Rita knew more about their relationship, imo, then she talks straight away implying Harry had a weird relationship with DD too.

The homosexual connotations are there from a Rita POV. :lol:

Besides, GG mocked & taunted Voldemort daring his death knowing DD's connection to the Wand. GG died for Dumbledore in the end, though DD had already passed "On".

I wonder if GG knew DD was dead?


Luna blessings... :tu:

I wonder if GG knew DD was dead?

I think he did. He seemed aware of Voldemort and that he had risen to power again. If Voldemort's regime reached his ears in Nurmengard. And Harry seemed to think that Grindelwald wanted to protect the wand so Voldemort wouldn't break into Dumbledore's tomb, and I'd like to think that as well. :)

I'm curious...when JKR said Dumbledore was "let down"...does she mean the love was unrequited, or there was a relationship and Dumbledore was disappointed when he realized GG wasn't as good as he thought? I prefer to think there was a relationship (and that GG felt remorse later in life because of his love). That's what I assumed, but I saw someone mention that Dumbledore wasn't loved back. So what's the general consensus on that?

I'm curious...when JKR said Dumbledore was "let down"...does she mean the love was unrequited, or there was a relationship and Dumbledore was disappointed when he realized GG wasn't as good as he thought? I prefer to think there was a relationship (and that GG felt remorse later in life because of his love). That's what I assumed, but I saw someone mention that Dumbledore wasn't loved back. So what's the general consensus on that?

JKR's actual statement doesn't say anything about Albus' love for Gellert being unrequited or not. I think it is just journalists not reading through what she said properly! :lol:

I also like to assume that there was some sort of relationship, too :love:. I think JKR just meant "let down" in the sense that he refused to accept that Gellert had gone so dark after he ran away from Godric's Hollow.

I'm curious...when JKR said Dumbledore was "let down"...does she mean the love was unrequited, or there was a relationship and Dumbledore was disappointed when he realized GG wasn't as good as he thought? I prefer to think there was a relationship (and that GG felt remorse later in life because of his love). That's what I assumed, but I saw someone mention that Dumbledore wasn't loved back. So what's the general consensus on that?According to this (http://www.newsweek.com/id/50787) news report:


'One fan asked whether Albus Dumbledore, the head of the famed Hogwarts School of Wizardry and Witchcraft, had ever loved anyone. Rowling smiled. "Dumbledore is gay, actually," replied Rowling as the audience erupted in surprise. She added that, in her mind, Dumbledore had an unrequited love affair with Gellert Grindelwald, Voldemort's predecessor who appears in the seventh book. '


The rest of her comments, from a different (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2007/10/20/j-k-rowling-at-carnegie-hall-reveals-dumbledore-is-gay-neville-marries-hannah-abbott-and-scores-more) reporting source, said:

"Dumbledore fell in love with Grindelwald, and that added to his horror when Grindelwald showed himself to be what he was. To an extent, do we say it excused Dumbledore a little more because falling in love can blind us to an extent? But, he met someone as brilliant as he was, and rather like Bellatrix he was very drawn to this brilliant person, and horribly, terribly let down by him."


This is in line with canon:"Oh, I had a few scruples. I assuaged my conscience with empty words."
***
"Did I know, in my heart of hearts, what Gellert Grindelwald was? I think I did, but I closed my eyes."
***
"The Resurrection Stone---to him, though I pretended not to know it, it meant an army of Inferi!"
***
"Grindelwald lost control. That which I always sensed in him, though I pretended not to know, now sprang into terrible being."
***
"Well, Grindelwald fled, as any but I could have predicted."

Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished?
I don't think that their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana didn't die. I think first or last but Dumbledore would see that Gellert wasn't such a good person as he saw him. Ariana's death made this moment to come earlier and opened Dumbledore's eyes about the true indentity of Gellert.

Also I think Gellert was of these kind of people, who don't need to love or to be loved (like Voldemort for example). And I believe Grindelwald never shared Dumbledore's feelings who was for him as some sort of a puppet because of the love Dumbledore felt towards him, I'm not sure Grindelwald did really appreciate this friendship.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?
I think it was mostly guilt, maybe also an act of friendship. I believe he didn't have any friends when he had fled after Ariana's death. So probably he remembered these times and felt guilt.

According to this (http://www.newsweek.com/id/50787) news report:


'One fan asked whether Albus Dumbledore, the head of the famed Hogwarts School of Wizardry and Witchcraft, had ever loved anyone. Rowling smiled. "Dumbledore is gay, actually," replied Rowling as the audience erupted in surprise. She added that, in her mind, Dumbledore had an unrequited love affair with Gellert Grindelwald, Voldemort's predecessor who appears in the seventh book. '


The rest of her comments, from a different (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2007/10/20/j-k-rowling-at-carnegie-hall-reveals-dumbledore-is-gay-neville-marries-hannah-abbott-and-scores-more) reporting source, said:

"Dumbledore fell in love with Grindelwald, and that added to his horror when Grindelwald showed himself to be what he was. To an extent, do we say it excused Dumbledore a little more because falling in love can blind us to an extent? But, he met someone as brilliant as he was, and rather like Bellatrix he was very drawn to this brilliant person, and horribly, terribly let down by him."


This is in line with canon:"Oh, I had a few scruples. I assuaged my conscience with empty words."
***
"Did I know, in my heart of hearts, what Gellert Grindelwald was? I think I did, but I closed my eyes."
***
"The Resurrection Stone---to him, though I pretended not to know it, it meant an army of Inferi!"
***
"Grindelwald lost control. That which I always sensed in him, though I pretended not to know, now sprang into terrible being."
***
"Well, Grindelwald fled, as any but I could have predicted."

I'm inclined to go with your second reference as it seems to be a direct quote versus someone's memory of what was said. In the quote there is nothing about love being unrequited and I think that it is likely the reporter got his facts mixed up.
That is what I'm choosing to believe, anyway. :lol:

JKR clarifies this a bit at a press conference in Toronto today...Jo continued on to say:The plot is what it is,” said Rowling. “(Dumbledore) did have, as I say, this rather tragic infatuation but that was a key part of the ending of the story so there it is. Why would I put the key part of my ending of my story in Book One?” Rowling said Tuesday she found it “freeing” to out Dumbledore, adding that the passages about him will mean different things to different readers.
“I think a child will see a friendship and I think a sensitive adult may well understand that it was an infatuation,” she said. Full article (http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/article/269527)

I didn't like Deathly Hallows, I was disappointed, and now I like it even less. Supposedly she was making Dumbledore more human, revealing faults. Well--I thought the fault was that he was tempted by power in his youth. This revelation completely undercuts that. She's saying, he was infatuated, he was blinded to Grindelwald's evil. So really he wasn't tempted because we all have a dark side, he was just blinded by love. If Grindelwald had been a woman, using this explanation would be just as disappointing. Blinded by love, how trite.

Perhaps Albus and Gellert 's friendship would have lasted longer if Ariana hadn't been killed. As to whether Albus Dumbledore would have been a different person, well, he was already plotting with Grindlewald and justifying it by saying it was for "the greater good". If their relationship had continued, it's likely Dumbledore would have gotten in deeper; possibly to the point of no return. As he pointed out, The attractions of power had a corrupting influence on him.

As to how Albus Dumbledore was able to defeat Gellert Grindlewald despite his possession of the Elder wand, I would put it down to Grindelwald's reluctance to kill his friend. After all, they had not parted company because they ceased to like each other, Grindelwald fled because he thought he would be accused of Ariana's death. Nobody really knew whose spell was responsible, but all three felt guilty. Albus and Gellert still loved and respected each other as wizards and people. That was why Albus kept his distance from Grindlewald despite Grindlewald's crimes until he couldn't ignore them any longer. He wasn't keen on fighting his friend. That was why he used minimal force and merely defeated and imprisoned Grindlewald in his own prison.

I think Grindlewald's defiance of Voldemort was multifaceted. 1) Yes his past friendship with Albus Dumbledore had something to do with it. He may or may not have heard that Dumbledore was dead. If not, he would have wanted to protect him. If he knew of Dumbledore's death, he might have wanted to prevent the desecration of his grave.
2) He knew how dangerous the Elder wand could be in the wrong hands, and Vlodemort was quite dangerous enough already. Grindlewald saw no reason to help him .
3) Grindlewald had nothing to lose. He was already in prison, and already at the end of his life. He could afford to resist Voldemort. What was the worst Voldemort could do to him? Kill him? He was ready to die.

I'm inclined to go with your second reference as it seems to be a direct quote versus someone's memory of what was said. In the quote there is nothing about love being unrequited and I think that it is likely the reporter got his facts mixed up.
That is what I'm choosing to believe, anyway.
I am chosing to the believe that as well. I think the that the love was returned, which would make Grindelwald taking off right after Ariana was killed that much more tragic and heartbreaking for Dumbledore. I think it also explains why Grindelwald never invaded Brition and why Dumbledore took 5 years to face him. That is how see the relationship and what happened afterwards, but I understand that since it isn't in the book others have the right to view it differently. :)

Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?

I would like to think that it wouldn't have survived in a way, because I believe that in essence Dumbledore was a good person who was swayed by his love for Grindevald and because of this, embraced Grindewalds beliefs and opinions.

I would think that it would have lasted longer, but that eventually Dumbledore would have rethought his beliefs and realised that while he did love Grindewald, he couldn't support him.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished?

It's entirely probable that he would have been a totally different person to the man he eventually became.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?

I would like to think that it was, that he did love Dumbledore, because I want Dumbledore's love for Grindewald to have been reciprocated.

Does anyone happen to know if Dumbledore and Grindlewald actually had a relationship or was it an unrequitted love?

Before I answer I want to state that all people read books as it relates to what they know in their own lives. What I may hold true and see one way may not be what you see, but it does not mean either of us are wrong.


Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place? Dumbledore was upset with the muggles for their treatment of his sister, what it caused for his Father, what it lead to concerning his Sister, and the death of his Mother. It has also caused him to miss out on things. Into his life came a handsome, intelligent, person, who swept him off his feet, seducing him with promises of righting, wrongs, fixing the world, learning more about magic, flattering him about his knowledge, mastery, and his intelligence. I don't believe what caused the rift between Grindelwald and Albus was Ariana's death but actually happened before that, when Grindlewald attacked them both. It was that instant, not what followed, that allowed Albus to see the lack of compassion, and empathy within who he thought was his perfect companion. I think at that moment that Albus knew that he projected compassion and empathy unto Grindlewald, because if he had any of it he would never have tried to harm his family. Grindlewald was not the person, he had thought and felt his was, so the relationship was over before the actual death of Ariana, even if the comprehension of it by Albus might have taken awhile.


Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished? It is the bad things in our lifes which seem to have the most effect on us. You can only tell who someone is if you see them handle the bad times. We all handle good times well. Still I don't think the relationship would have lasted. Dumbledore would have eventually sensed the lack of compassion and empathy in his partner.


Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt? I would hope that Grindelwald would have eventually found some humanity within himself and was protecting Dumbledore. Sadly and rarely do people who lack empathy ever find it. That is what serial killers so dangerous. They feel for themselves and their situations but none for the victim or the victims family. I would find it more likely that he did not want his name to be overshadowed by Riddles.

Does anyone happen to know if Dumbledore and Grindlewald actually had a relationship or was it an unrequitted love?

I picture it as an unrequitted love.

I am chosing to the believe that as well. I think the that the love was returned, which would make Grindelwald taking off right after Ariana was killed that much more tragic and heartbreaking for Dumbledore. I think it also explains why Grindelwald never invaded Brition and why Dumbledore took 5 years to face him. That is how see the relationship and what happened afterwards, but I understand that since it isn't in the book others have the right to view it differently. :)But in 20/20 hindsight I can see that Dumbledore loved Grindelwald. He was as Jo put it infatuated with him. However, I don't see anything that shows Gellert returned Dumbledore's love. The canon that we have says he was afraid of Dumbledore, and that is why he didn't bring his reign of terror into England. I do think he stayed out of England because of Dumbledore, but I definitely think it was because of his presence, not because of his love for him. All signs point to the fact it was an obsession on Dumbledore's part and a friendship on Grindelwald's part.

All signs point to the fact it was an obsession on Dumbledore's part and a friendship on Grindelwald's part.

I can see Grindlewald suspecting the infatuation and using it to his advantage as well. He seems like the kind of person who would manipulate another person's feelings to get his own way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunabell14
Does anyone happen to know if Dumbledore and Grindlewald actually had a relationship or was it an unrequitted love?


I picture it as an unrequited love.

"Grindelwald’s aunt, Bathilda Bagshot, says of their meeting: “The boys took to each other at once.” " To me that is far from unrequitted. They were as much taken with each other's intelligence, logic, knowledge, mastery of magic, views on their world, as they were totally enchanted with each other. They worked hard studying the hallows, side by side enjoying each other viewpoints. That is as far from unrequited as possible.
Unrequited under Websters;not reciprocated or returned in kind

If they took to each other, wouldn't the relationship had to be "returned in kind"?

I can see Grindlewald suspecting the infatuation and using it to his advantage as well. He seems like the kind of person who would manipulate another person's feelings to get his own way.I agree. I don't think Dumbledore would have agreed to take over the Muggles with any other person beside Grindelwald, and I think Grindelwald only planted the idea because he saw how Dumbledore reacted to him. Dumbledore had found an equal, Grindelwald had found a partner, and I think they used their friendship to satisfy their own personal means.

With this new found information, I wonder then if Slughorns knew? Was his comment about obsessive love actually about Dumbledore, and not as some surmised, to mean Snape?

I didn't like Deathly Hallows, I was disappointed, and now I like it even less. Supposedly she was making Dumbledore more human, revealing faults. Well--I thought the fault was that he was tempted by power in his youth. This revelation completely undercuts that. She's saying, he was infatuated, he was blinded to Grindelwald's evil. So really he wasn't tempted because we all have a dark side, he was just blinded by love. If Grindelwald had been a woman, using this explanation would be just as disappointing. Blinded by love, how trite.

No. It's not *just* blinded by love infatuation OR tempted by the power of "the greater good". It's precisely both AND youthful idealism too. Millions of people fall into this "hopeful faith" in their youth to varying degrees. It's perfectly understandable and believable too.

It's also a reason Dumbledore could understand and trust Snape too. Lily loved Snape as a friend, & JKR has said that relationship would have gone further too but for Snape's mistakes.

According to this (http://www.newsweek.com/id/50787) news report:


'One fan asked whether Albus Dumbledore, the head of the famed Hogwarts School of Wizardry and Witchcraft, had ever loved anyone. Rowling smiled. "Dumbledore is gay, actually," replied Rowling as the audience erupted in surprise. She added that, in her mind, Dumbledore had an unrequited love affair with Gellert Grindelwald, Voldemort's predecessor who appears in the seventh book. '


This just goes to show Newsweek has a reporter that can *not* get their facts straight. :lol: Their opinion is a glaring mistake, and now it's being repeated falsely as if there is an inkling of truth to it. It's false. Why?

"Grindelwald’s aunt, Bathilda Bagshot, says of their meeting: “The boys took to each other at once.” " To me that is far from unrequitted. They were as much taken with each other's intelligence, logic, knowledge, mastery of magic, views on their world, as they were totally enchanted with each other. They worked hard studying the hallows, side by side enjoying each other viewpoints. That is as far from unrequited as possible.

Unrequited under Websters: not reciprocated or returned in kind.

If they took to each other, wouldn't the relationship had to be "returned in kind"?

You brilliantly answered this with canon. There is more canon too. :)

These two were infatuated with love together for many reasons. Was Dumbledore soon awakened and shaken, as if from a horrifying nightmare that revealed its tragedy? Yes! Losing his sister abruptly shocked him back to reality, but even then they both would have feelings for what was positive and negative about the experience. It's just that DD had a sobering loss of true love later realizing his tragic mistakes in judging GG character too. He could not love GG in a relationship sense anymore, but I believe the canon shows they still cared for each other too. It was a tragedy that each later probably realized their mistakes. GG too and that's why he mocked Voldemort to be the ultimate loser. GG died caring for DD on some level, though he probably had a lot of mixed feelings about it.

Anyway, this Love Infatuation Tragedy for "the greater good" shaped Dumbledore into the great wizard he became and saved Harry's life obviously. :D

This is why I'm deeply disappointed that JKR didn't use the word 'infatuation' either through Rita, Doge, Muriel, or Dumbledore himself in KC. Just as understanding Snape and Lily is critical to the story, for both Harry and us, so was this DD-GG relationship too. In fact, it's far more important. No, we did *not* need any sexuality or "love thoughts"; we needed to know the depth of "first love" by infatuation. It's possible and probable there never was any sexual experience, nor did we ever need to know that. We needed to know more of the infatuation, and its tragedy within the story shaping DD's life and all of HP.

JKR could have done that with just a sentence or a paragraph. Then if she still needed to 'out' DD now, we would all already know exactly why!

IMO, it's a tragedy we find this out three months later completely outside of canon. What I am pointing out in this post has nothing to do with Dumbledore being gay, but it has EVERYTHING to do the with the entire theme of Harry Potter.

LOVE.


Luna blessings... :tu:

Latest news item:

JKR described the infatuation as a key part of her convoluted plot and confirmed today that she knew that the Dumbledore was gay even before writing the first book.

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-5839.html

Also, I saw a video where JKR stated she wrote for 7 years before book one was published and she *probably* knew he was gay before finishing the book or by book one. She did say she just kind of knew without a specific moment or idea that it came to her to remember "that moment". I'll note she keeps notebooks, so I'll bet it's in there somewhere. :lol:

With this new found information, I wonder then if Slughorns knew? Was his comment about obsessive love actually about Dumbledore, and not as some surmised, to mean Snape?

That's a good question...Slughorn alone among the teachers would be in position to know Dumbledore well enough to know about the relationship with Grindelwald.

I do think that this revelation explains a lot - not the least of which is the four to five year period where Grindelwald didn't attack England while Dumbledore refused to go after Grindelwald. The pieces fit, to me.

I can see Grindlewald suspecting the infatuation and using it to his advantage as well. He seems like the kind of person who would manipulate another person's feelings to get his own way.

I have thought about this as well and I agree that I could see Gridelwald being manipulative in this way, the only problem I have with it is that I would think that Dumbledore would have a tainted view of love afterwards. To know that he had been manipulated in that way, yet he still believes in the power and beauty of love and to me it makes sense (IMO) that the feelings were mutal. So that Dumbledore not only to loved, but was loved in return...

However, I don't see anything that shows Gellert returned Dumbledore's love. The canon that we have says he was afraid of Dumbledore, and that is why he didn't bring his reign of terror into England. I do think he stayed out of England because of Dumbledore, but I definitely think it was because of his presence, not because of his love for him. All signs point to the fact it was an obsession on Dumbledore's part and a friendship on Grindelwald's part.
I think canon can be interpreted either way on this. Although, I repect your opinion and I know there are others that feel that same way. I on the other hand like to think that Grindy did love Dumbledore and I think his final actions of trying to thwart Voldy and feeling sorry for his actions prove that as well. :)

I have thought about this as well and I agree that I could see Gridelwald being manipulative in this way, the only problem I have with it is that I would think that Dumbledore would have a tainted view of love afterwards. To know that he had been manipulated in that way, yet he still believes in the power and beauty of love and to me it makes sense (IMO) that the feelings were mutal. So that Dumbledore not only to loved, but was loved in return...


However, even if Dumbledore did leave Grindelwald with a tainted view of love, he may have revised his view of it after being with others. He was over 100 years old, he likely dated others after Grindelwald seeing as they were so young when they were friends.

However, even if Dumbledore did leave Grindelwald with a tainted view of love, he may have revised his view of it after being with others. He was over 100 years old, he likely dated others after Grindelwald seeing as they were so young when they were friends.
:agree: This could very much be the case and for Dumbledore's sake I hope he did have other good relationships. But since all we have is his friendship with Grindy on page that is how I feel about their relationship. :) But, like I said before since Dumbledore was outed by Jo and not in the books, people can choose to see it either way.

Did Grindelwald and Dumbledore actually have a relationship though? Or was it unrequited? It seems to me that DD should be slightly more skeptical of 'love' than he is when talking to Harry, because of this thing with Grindelwald and the way it turned out. Surely he should be warning Harry of the dangers of love, rather than the fact it'll save him?
Not sure. (?)

I don't think Dumbledore had any other relationships. Jo said he was not married because he never found an equal, after finding Grindelwald, his equal, I don't think he ever loved again.


I think canon can be interpreted either way on this. Although, I repect your opinion and I know there are others that feel that same way. I on the other hand like to think that Grindy did love Dumbledore and I think his final actions of trying to thwart Voldy and feeling sorry for his actions prove that as well. :)Well you see it your way and I see it mine. :) But I don't see any evidence that suggested Grindelwald loved Dumbledore, and the only thing that has ever been brought up was the fact that Grindelwald didn't attack England. But this could easily be explained as Grindelwald's fear of his former best friend. Also I have heard the fact that Grindelwald didn't help Voldemort as another reason, but Grindelwald had been locked up in his own prison for years, I think he finally had time to think through everything, and realize that he was wrong. If he had loved Dumbledore, why didn't we ever see anything between them before Dumbledore had to defeat him?

Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
I think Dumbledore saw the "bad side" of Grindewald that day/night. The really Bad Side. We know now that Gridewald wasn't really that great a guy, so I don't think their friendship/relationship would have lasted forever, but certainly longer.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished?
I don't think he would be Head of Hogwarts. And he would be more open. I don't know why, I just have this feeling :lol:

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?
Bit of both I think. He most certainly missed Dumbledore, he must have been guilty about how his relataionship/friendship...

.

But I don't see any evidence that suggested Grindelwald loved Dumbledore, and the only thing that has ever been brought up was the fact that Grindelwald didn't attack England. ?
Great Lord Godric, I have the utmost respect for your viewpoint. I would like to point out something odd about Grinddelwald and his behavior. He felt threatened enough about losing his relationship with Albus he risked attacking Albus' brother and sister. He must have been highly upset just with the thought of losing Albus in his life, and to his plans to have not realised that Albus would not allow anyone to torture his family, not even him. Grindelwald was either highly upset about losing Albus, or he could have thought he control Albus enough emotionally that he could handle the fallout concerning his actions. Either way, Grindelwald had to have a strong connection to Albus, and not just Albus to Grindellwald. We all know of Grindelwald's intelligence and how knowledgable he was, and how easily he gather followers quickly which would express a knowledge of human behavior. Maybe the word you are searching for with Grindelwald was not love, but obsession in how much he could use Albus for what he needed and how much Dumbledore fed his ego, because of how amazing Albus was himself. It was obvious in his rash behavoir that he was "emotionally" entangled with Albus the question is what emotions.

Great Lord Godric, I have the utmost respect for your viewpoint. I would like to point out something odd about Grinddelwald and his behavior. He felt threatened enough about losing his relationship with Albus he risked attacking Albus' brother and sister. He must have been highly upset just with the thought of losing Albus in his life, and to his plans to have not realised that Albus would not allow anyone to torture his family, not even him. Grindelwald was either highly upset about losing Albus, or he could have thought he control Albus enough emotionally that he could handle the fallout concerning his actions. Either way, Grindelwald had to have a strong connection to Albus, and not just Albus to Grindellwald. We all know of Grindelwald's intelligence and how knowledgable he was, and how easily he gather followers quickly which would express a knowledge of human behavior. Maybe the word you are searching for with Grindelwald was not love, but obsession in how much he could use Albus for what he needed and how much Dumbledore fed his ego, because of how amazing Albus was himself. It was obvious in his rash behavoir that he was "emotionally" entangled with Albus the question is what emotions.

So you think it was just mutual obsession rather than actual love?
If so, I think maybe I agree; however, that would not make DD necessarily gay - just obsessed. Depends how you define 'love', I suppose.

On the unrequited love issue I guess canon could be taken either way and I certainly respect those whose opinions are different than mine. Personally I agree with artemis1964 and LOVEWEASLEYS04 and believe that there was love on both sides.

On the unrequited love issue I guess canon could be taken either way and I certainly respect those whose opinions are different than mine. Personally I agree with artemis1964 and LOVEWEASLEYS04 and believe that there was love on both sides.

Real love?

Real love?
That's a good question. It certainly could have been just an infatuation. They may not have been together long enough for it to be real love. I'm not sure...

That's a good question. It certainly could have been just an infatuation. They may not have been together long enough for it to be real love. I'm not sure...

Depends how you'd define real love, I guess. Mutual obsession? Infatuation? I don't know whether there's a difference. I think they were both probably very caught up in each other mentally because of the intelligence thing. But emotionally? No idea.

That's a good question. It certainly could have been just an infatuation. They may not have been together long enough for it to be real love. I'm not sure...

In my view of the world to have true love(note I did not say real love) both sides are willing and able to give support, caring, comfort, to each other in good times and bad. It also means they are in love with each other as that other person truely is. This rarely happens in my view. I think Dumbledore was capable of this love. I even think he probably thought he was in love with Grindelwald for who he thought he was. The problem is Grindelwald. I don't think he was capable of this type of love in his life at this time.At this time in his life he had already lost his capability of that kind of emotion. He admired Albus. He enjoyed Albus being entranced by his intelligence, knowledge and mastery of magic. Having Albus around made him feel good, and he wanted to keep him with him to do what he wanted to do. He even was emotional enough about Albus to fight his brother and sister to keep him. What Grindelwald's problem was he lacked empathy and compassion for other people, muggle or pureblood. Without either of those things, how could you support someone, without understanding their true needs? How could you love and support someone, when you are the most involved with you, and what you want. I think Grindelwald was emotional, especially over losing something he wants or needs. I am not sure if he is capable of truly being in real love, ever.

To completely spell it out, I think Dumbledore was really deeping in love with who he thougth Grindelwald was, which was shattered as soon as Grindelwald attacked his family. He never got over what he felt, but it helped to make him who he was. Grindelwald was obsessed with Albus, all he stood for, and all they could do to further Grindelwald's desires.

Great Lord Godric, I have the utmost respect for your viewpoint. I would like to point out something odd about Grinddelwald and his behavior. He felt threatened enough about losing his relationship with Albus he risked attacking Albus' brother and sister. He must have been highly upset just with the thought of losing Albus in his life, and to his plans to have not realised that Albus would not allow anyone to torture his family, not even him. Grindelwald was either highly upset about losing Albus, or he could have thought he control Albus enough emotionally that he could handle the fallout concerning his actions. Either way, Grindelwald had to have a strong connection to Albus, and not just Albus to Grindellwald. We all know of Grindelwald's intelligence and how knowledgable he was, and how easily he gather followers quickly which would express a knowledge of human behavior. Maybe the word you are searching for with Grindelwald was not love, but obsession in how much he could use Albus for what he needed and how much Dumbledore fed his ego, because of how amazing Albus was himself. It was obvious in his rash behavoir that he was "emotionally" entangled with Albus the question is what emotions.Do we actually know the reason why Gellert and Albus fought? I can't remember what but I was wrong.

Do we actually know the reason why Gellert and Albus fought? I can't remember what but I was wrong.
It is my honor to answer your question. (Really you should thank my service dog, who fetched me the bag of books which I have read but have not reshelved.) I looked it up because I wanted to be sure. On page 717 in Deathly Halllows Albus is talking to Harry about what brought him back to reality in his relationship with Grindelwald. His brother was yelling at him about watching properly after Ariana instead of chasing after Grindelwald and the Hallows. "Grindelwald lost control. That which I had always sensed in him, though I pretended not to, now sprange into terrible being. and Ariana... after all my mother's care and caution... lay on upon the floor."
Skipped a bit here.
""Well , Grendelwald fled, as anyone but I could have predicted. He vanished,...."
So they really never actually had a fight, it was really Aberforth, Ariana, and then Grindelwald.
According to Aberforth on page 566 of Deathly Hallows Grindelwald used the Cruciatus Curse on him after he would not agree that Ariana would have to be hidden, and Albus had a greater mission in life after he and Albus would "led the ziards out of hiding and taught the Muggles their place?"
Aberforth told of Albus trying to stop him and although he never said who's actually killed Ariana.

I hopes this answers your question. :wave:
Post Script from the service dog, I do take UPS shipments of smoked pig ears! I cannot accept beef rawhides because I have over 300lbs per sq in jaw pressure and can easily rip off a piece which does not digest, but will stop up my intestines. Thank you and please ship quickly."

It is my honor to answer your question. (Really you should thank my service dog, who fetched me the bag of books which I have read but have not reshelved.) I looked it up because I wanted to be sure. On page 717 in Deathly Halllows Albus is talking to Harry about what brought him back to reality in his relationship with Grindelwald. His brother was yelling at him about watching properly after Ariana instead of chasing after Grindelwald and the Hallows. "Grindelwald lost control. That which I had always sensed in him, though I pretended not to, now sprange into terrible being. and Ariana... after all my mother's care and caution... lay on upon the floor."
Skipped a bit here.
""Well , Grendelwald fled, as anyone but I could have predicted. He vanished,...."
So they really never actually had a fight, it was really Aberforth, Ariana, and then Grindelwald.
According to Aberforth on page 566 of Deathly Hallows Grindelwald used the Cruciatus Curse on him after he would not agree that Ariana would have to be hidden, and Albus had a greater mission in life after he and Albus would "led the ziards out of hiding and taught the Muggles their place?"
Aberforth told of Albus trying to stop him and although he never said who's actually killed Ariana.

So this does answer my question, but it doesn't prove the point you made earlier.

I would like to point out something odd about Grinddelwald and his behavior. He felt threatened enough about losing his relationship with Albus he risked attacking Albus' brother and sister. He must have been highly upset just with the thought of losing Albus in his life, and to his plans to have not realised that Albus would not allow anyone to torture his family, not even him. Grindelwald was either highly upset about losing Albus, or he could have thought he control Albus enough emotionally that he could handle the fallout concerning his actions. Either way, Grindelwald had to have a strong connection to Albus, and not just Albus to Grindellwald. We all know of Grindelwald's intelligence and how knowledgable he was, and how easily he gather followers quickly which would express a knowledge of human behavior. Maybe the word you are searching for with Grindelwald was not love, but obsession in how much he could use Albus for what he needed and how much Dumbledore fed his ego, because of how amazing Albus was himself. It was obvious in his rash behavoir that he was "emotionally" entangled with Albus the question is what emotions.

This is not what happened at all. "I did not want to hear that I could not set forth to seek Hallows with a fragile and unstable sister in tow.
"The argument became a fight. Grindelwald lost control. That which I had always sensed in him, though I pretended not to, now sprang into terrible being. And Ariana...after all my mother's care and caution...lay dead on the floor."
<snip>
"Well, Grindelwald fled, as anyone but I could have predicted. He vanished, with his plans for seizing power, and his schemes for Muggle torture, and his dreams of the Deathly Hallows, dreams in which I had encouraged him and helped him. He ran, while I was left to bury my sister, and learn to live with my guilt and my terrible grief, the price of my shame."
Grindelwald never showed was upset about having to leave Dumbledore. He simply fled, no signs of remorse, nothing. That is not love, nor strong friendship in my eyes, but that is not what I am arguing.

In my view of the world to have true love(note I did not say real love) both sides are willing and able to give support, caring, comfort, to each other in good times and bad.

Not necessarily, in my opinion. Sometimes true love happens to people who are not ready for it and don't know ho to handle it. Sometimes people run away from it. Sometimes it's just impossible. I would imagine that, if Grindelwald was Dumbledore's true love, it would eb something like this - that Grindelwald wasn't capable of handling such a thing back then, and he deemed other things more important. But I think he probably had time, in his life in prison, to see the big picture and realise this was the biggest thing ever to happen to him. IF he ever loved Dumbledore, that is.

In my opinion, Dumbledore was more in love with Grindelwald than vice versa. We know that Dumbledore is capable of love and devotion, at least we saw this in the older Dumbledore of the books. In his youth, Dumbledore spent most of his time studying. Grindelwald, on the other hand, already had a certain reputation when he arrived in England. In my view, he was excited to have found a young man like Dumbledore - ingenuous, naive and bored out of his mind. If he returned the feelings Dumbledore had for him he was probably too selfish and psychotic to feel true love for him. But in my opinion, he was not keen on duelling Dumbledore a few years later because if he ever came close to loving someone it was probably Dumbledore. After a life of imprisonment, he chose to protect his old friend/love and in this case action speaks louder than words. This is of course only speculation.

If he returned the feelings Dumbledore had for him he was probably too selfish and psychotic to feel true love for him.

I respectfully disagree. In my opinion and experience, true love has little to do with ability or personal chracteristics, or anything connected to the particular person. It just happens, you don't adopt it or initiate it or decide to feel it. In my experience, it can happen to anyone, no matter how unprepared or narrow-minded or even "evil" they maybe (and therefore unable to handle it or even recognise it). I feel rather strongly about this. So in my opinion, it's entirely possible that Albus and Gellert were ecah other's true love, only the circumstances and Gellert's character/values/aims/whatever prevented him from recognising it then, or from fully appreciating what it means. But I also think that's it's just as possible that they weren't each other's true love, but Albus was simply infatuated and suffered a crude wake-up call when Gellert fled after having brought about the death of his sister.

I respectfully disagree. In my opinion and experience, true love has little to do with ability or personal chracteristics, or anything connected to the particular person. It just happens, you don't adopt it or initiate it or decide to feel it. In my experience, it can happen to anyone, no matter how unprepared or narrow-minded or even "evil" they maybe (and therefore unable to handle it or even recognise it). I feel rather strongly about this. So in my opinion, it's entirely possible that Albus and Gellert were ecah other's true love, only the circumstances and Gellert's character/values/aims/whatever prevented him from recognising it then, or from fully appreciating what it means. But I also think that's it's just as possible that they weren't each other's true love, but Albus was simply infatuated and suffered a crude wake-up call when Gellert fled after having brought about the death of his sister.

I do see your point but we know too little of Grindelwald to be sure that he did not have sociopathic tendencies like Voldemort or another personal disorder that left him unable to really feel love.

I do see your point but we know too little of Grindelwald to be sure that he did not have sociopathic tendencies like Voldemort or another personal disorder that left him unable to really feel love.

Don't you think it is possible that he did feel love, but was unable to deal with it? Sociopathic, maybe, but he did show remorse, I think, whereas Voldy would never.

I do see your point but we know too little of Grindelwald to be sure that he did not have sociopathic tendencies like Voldemort or another personal disorder that left him unable to really feel love.

Yes, you're probably right. I'll add this possibility to my speculation on their feelings/relationship :)

I agree with people who are saying that Dumbledore was more in love with Grindelwald than than the other way around. Part of this is though because we don't really see much of Grindelwald ~ We only ever hear about Dumbledore duelling him from other people and then the little snippets throughout DH.

That's not to say that I/we could be wrong though, what is love to one person might not be love to another and every relationship is very different and unique. I kind of find it a little difficult to get my head around Dumbledore being in love with grindelwald despite what JK Rowling says. I always pictured it as a meeting of minds and almost equals (although Albus would be the better person!). Infatuation maybe because I almost saw Dumbledore as being asexual. But that could just be me.

Not necessarily, in my opinion. Sometimes true love happens to people who are not ready for it and don't know ho to handle it. Sometimes people run away from it. Sometimes it's just impossible. I would imagine that, if Grindelwald was Dumbledore's true love, it would eb something like this - that Grindelwald wasn't capable of handling such a thing back then, and he deemed other things more important. But I think he probably had time, in his life in prison, to see the big picture and realise this was the biggest thing ever to happen to him. IF he ever loved Dumbledore, that is.

Love has so many meanings. I was explaining the differences to me, and I think I need to explain further. To me real love is when one person(note the one) person is in love with the other person. "True love" is when both parties are in love with each other in a healthy way, and live their lives out together.
The fairy tale happy ending, which I pray would happen more often. Ok lets talk examples. The Weaselys, they are both in love, commited, healthy, fairytale ending, thus "True Love". Ginny was really in love with Harry, but until Harry was really in love with Ginny, and their relationship moved into a commited, healthy, both really in love, then it was not "True Love". I was not implying someone was not truely in love, I was only calling the fairytale relationship "True Love". Sometimes being in love, means you walk away from the person you love for their health, well being, and happiness. You were truely in love, but this was not a "True Love".

So this does answer my question, but it doesn't prove the point you made earlier.

This is not what happened at all. "I did not want to hear that I could not set forth to seek Hallows with a fragile and unstable sister in tow.
"The argument became a fight. Grindelwald lost control. That which I had always sensed in him, though I pretended not to, now sprang into terrible being. And Ariana...after all my mother's care and caution...lay dead on the floor."
<snip>
"Well, Grindelwald fled, as anyone but I could have predicted. He vanished, with his plans for seizing power, and his schemes for Muggle torture, and his dreams of the Deathly Hallows, dreams in which I had encouraged him and helped him. He ran, while I was left to bury my sister, and learn to live with my guilt and my terrible grief, the price of my shame."
Grindelwald never showed was upset about having to leave Dumbledore. He simply fled, no signs of remorse, nothing. That is not love, nor strong friendship in my eyes, but that is not what I am arguing.

That was exactly my point, He was upset enough in losing Albus he butted into a fight between Aberforth and Albus because Aberforth was trying to remind Albus of his responsibilites. He used a curse which risked him going to jail. If he was not upset about losing Albus, he would not have cared enough to get involved. If Grindelwald had nothing to protect, or nothing he desired from Albus, why would he even have expended the energy to get into the fight, or risk going to jail. It takes emotion to fight to keep someone (love is not the only reason people fight for other people, selfish desire is a huge reason)l As for the way he left, it was the same reason that he had no problems with attacking Aberforth and Ariana, he was protecting himself(already being in enough trouble to be expelled from school, an unplanned murdered girl could stop all of his plans) , and he lacked any empathy for anyone else and how his actions caused them pain. He had to have realised when Albus tried to stop him from hurting his brother and sister, he had lost him, so there was nothing left for him there, and he did not care what Albus wanted if it did not fit into his plans. He had plenty of emotion for himself, and his own desires. Grindelwald wanted what Albus offered him. Albus helped fill the desires he wanted. As I said before Albus was capable of love, and I don't think Grindelwald was at that time of his life.
Prime example the BTK killer. During his interviews he was without emotion talking about what he had done to his victims(his tone was dry, and matter of fact), but he started crying only when talking about not being with his family and how he felt not having what he wanted. He lacked total empathy for other people, but he was more than capable of emotion concerning himself.
The relationship was emotional on both sides, of Grindelwald and Dumbledore, but for different reasons. Albus in love with who he thought Grindelwald was, and Grindelwald believing that he had found someone who could help him complete his desires, which to him was the best thing he could have found.(Noting that like Riddle he lacked the understanding of love, so a relationship that offered to complete and fulfill his desires were everything he could ever want or dream of.)
Please note here, that I have not discussed anything beyond emotions and nothing about a physical relationship.

I got the feeling that Grindelwald loved Dumbledore in his own way. I think it may not have dawned on him at the time just how much - but in the end he died rather than give away the location of the Elder Wand. I think he later realized it. Nonetheless, both Dumbledore and Grindelwald may have had other relationships in the interim, so it could have just been a first love, lingering rememberance type of thing for both of them...

That was exactly my point, He was upset enough in losing Albus he butted into a fight between Aberforth and Albus because Aberforth was trying to remind Albus of his responsibilites. I don't see why we are debating, we seem to believe the same thing. But anyway: "Invincible masters of death, Grindelwald and Dumbledore! Two months of insanity, of cruel dreams, and neglect of the only two members of my family left to me.
"And then...you know what happened. Reality returned in the form of my rough, unlettered and infinitely more admirable brother. I did not want to hear the truths he shouted at me. I did not want to hear that I could not set forth to seek Hallows with a fragile and unstable sister in tow."Dumbledore and Grindelwald were planning to take over the Muggles. Aberforth came in and stopped them, reminding Albus of his sister. Grindelwald got upset, Grindelwald never planned taking over the muggles before, but he was perfectly capable of it. He met Dumbledore and they shared their ideas for domination, Grindelwald finally saw his dream becoming a reality, he could rule the Muggles. But Aberforth was trying to strip Grindelwald of that, that is why he blew up.

As for the way he left, it was the same reason that he had no problems with attacking Aberforth and Ariana,He didn't attack Aberforth and Ariana - they don't know who was responsible for Ariana's death.

The relationship was emotional on both sides, of Grindelwald and Dumbledore, but for different reasons. Albus in love with who he thought Grindelwald was, and Grindelwald believing that he had found someone who could help him complete his desires, which to him was the best thing he could have found.(Noting that like Riddle he lacked the understanding of love, so a relationship that offered to complete and fulfill his desires were everything he could ever want or dream of.) I agree - and this is the boundary at which I believe their relationship stopped.

I have one question...

How was Dumbledore able to defeat Grindelwald even though he had The Elder Wand?

Yeah! I was wondering the exact thing! Im rereading the 7th book right now and I stopped at that part-I just dont get it! How can an unbeatable wand get beaten? The book said, "And Grindelwald used the Elder Wand to become more powerful. And at the height of his power, when Dumbledore knew he was the only one who could stop him, he dueled Grindelwald and beat him, and he took the Elder Wand." This was right after Harry talked to Mr. Olivander and Griphook. So Dumbledore won the duel?:hmm:

Yeah! I was wondering the exact thing! Im rereading the 7th book right now and I stopped at that part-I just dont get it! How can an unbeatable wand get beaten? The book said, "And Grindelwald used the Elder Wand to become more powerful. And at the height of his power, when Dumbledore knew he was the only one who could stop him, he dueled Grindelwald and beat him, and he took the Elder Wand." This was right after Harry talked to Mr. Olivander and Griphook. So Dumbledore won the duel?:hmm:

:welcome: newbie19!

I always thought that calling the Elder wand "unbeatable" was a bit of an exagerration. It is an extremely powerful wand, yes, but I don't think it's unbeatable. IMO, having the Elder wand doesn't automaticaly mean the owner can win in a duel. Intelligence and skill is required in order to win one. Dumbledore knew that he was smarter than Grindelwald, and could beat him because of that. So, basically, Dumbledore was more talented and won through skill and talent.

:welcome: newbie19!

I always thought that calling the Elder wand "unbeatable" was a bit of an exagerration. It is an extremely powerful wand, yes, but I don't think it's unbeatable. IMO, having the Elder wand doesn't automaticaly mean the owner can win in a duel. Intelligence and skill is required in order to win one. Dumbledore knew that he was smarter than Grindelwald, and could beat him because of that. So, basically, Dumbledore was more talented and won through skill and talent.

It is also possible that Grindelwald did not wholeheartedly want to beat Dumbledore because this may have meant killing or hurting his only friend/love.

Originally posted by Moriath
It is also possible that Grindelwald did not wholeheartedly want to beat Dumbledore because this may have meant killing or hurting his only friend/love.

I think so too. Harry was able to even mend his broken wand with the Elder Wand. It was powerful. and Jo says the duel between DD and GG was the ultimate in wand dueling.

Still DD won and I think because somewhere GG had a very little somethig for DD and that most likely did not allow him to duel to win.

Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
I think that Ariana's death was a catalyst to ending their friendship/relationship. I do believe it would have happened eventually since many of Grindelwald's ideas went against Dumbledore's beliefs deep down, even though he went along with it in the beginning. I think he was infatuated with the power and possibly in love with Grindelwald, which I believe is why Dumbledore agreed with Grindelwald's plans at first. Eventually though, Dumbledore would have drawn the line and not gone along with Grindelwald as his plans became more and more evil in nature - at that point, Dumbledore wouldn't be able to be in denial about them, and as a result, the friendship would likely have come to an end.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished?
It's hard to say. If their friendship had continued and Dumbledore had gone on to join Grindelwald in carrying out his ideas, it's possible that Dumbledore would have been tempted a lot more by power than he was. He might have been willing to go along with some of Grindelwald's plans before realizing they were wrong. But as I mentioned above, I do think there would have been a point where Dumbledore wouldn't have supported Grindelwald's ideas due to his inherent nature.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?
I think it might have been a bit of both. Grindelwald might have harbored some feelings of friendship and/or love toward Dumbledore after all these years. As far as we know, Grindelwald hadn't sunk so far into evil like that he was unable to love, so I do believe it's possible he could had feelings for Dumbledore when he defied Voldemort (or at the very least feelings of friendship). But I also think he might have been feeling guilty for what he did. Additionally, I think he also just didn't want another person to get ahold of the Elder Wand if he couldn't have it.

Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?

I think so. Dumbledore was very much in love with Grindelwald and I don't think he would ahve let go. I also think Grindelwald was in love with Dumbledore too; and that partnership would have destroyed the world in their quest for the greater good. Though I do think Dumbledore may ahve opted out of what Grindelwald was planning, if and when he saw to what lengths he was prepared to go all for the greater good IMO.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished?

Yes; he would not have been so understanding IMO. He would have become a dangerous man, if this friendship had indeed flourished IMO.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?

I like to think that Grindelwald too, was in love with Dumbledore and while he did run away, I think he never forgot Dumbledore. It looked as if he was protecting Dumbledore's tomb from being broken by not revealing about the wand to Voldemort. So I would say friend/lover.

[B]Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?

I'm sorry to say I think so, for some time anyway. I think Ariana's death was the slap in the face, the wake-up call that Albus needed to see beyond his feelings for Grindelwald, to the person he truly was. Although, having said that, I believe that even if Ariana had survived the fight, seeing Grindelwald using the Cruciatus curse on Aberforth might have opened Albus' eyes too. People can be willing to overlook a lot when they love someone, so it took something major for Albus to realise that his plans (seeking the Hallows for power, world domination, mwaahaahaa,) with Grindelwald were a bad idea and that Grindelwald was an unpleasant character.



Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished?

I think so, he would have gone further down the path of Dark Magic and even if he had eventually drawn back, it would have left deeper scars than it already had. He would have become even more estranged from Aberforth and I doubt their later uneasy reconciliation would have occurred. (I think we hear that they were on better terms in later years)


Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?


I think it was both. Grindelwald had had a lot of time in Nurmengard to brood over what he had done and also, what he had lost. I think, if he had reciprocated Dumbledores' feelings for him, he would have wanted to do something positive for him, after all those years thinking about it. I believe guilt played a part, too, he had come to regret his actions, the lives lost at his hands, and so wished to stop someone who would only cause death and destruction.

I think that Grindelwald's defiance of Voldemort shows him to be a better man than Voldemort, he was willing to die, eventually, to prevent the Elder Wand falling into the ownership of a murderous tyrant, rather like he had been. He could have attempted to bargain with Voldemort (for all the good it would have done him, but he didn't)

Grindewald more than likely did all that for several reasons, latent affection for DD, remorse, guilt, and also a little anger for someone who was trying to take his place in history, ie Voldie.

I think that Grindelwald's defiance of Voldemort shows him to be a better man than Voldemort, he was willing to die, eventually, to prevent the Elder Wand falling into the ownership of a murderous tyrant, rather like he had been. He could have attempted to bargain with Voldemort (for all the good it would have done him, but he didn't)I really liked that Grindelwald didn't betray the Elder Wand to Voldemort. I do think this shows a streak of redemption and repentance in Grindelwald, something Voldemort never had. That is really the difference between them - the fact that underneath all of the mistakes and horrible things Grindelwald did, he was still human and still had the capability to do something good. And I also agree that he still probably harbored some feelings for Dumbledore, which likely influenced his decision to defy Voldemort. I can imagine that being imprisoned (in a prison of his own creation, no less), that he'd have had a lot of time to reflect on the past and his association with Dumbledore. He could have also felt that if he and Dumbledore couldn't be the ones to unite the 3 Hallows, then no one should get that chance.

I really liked that Grindelwald didn't betray the Elder Wand to Voldemort. I do think this shows a streak of redemption and repentance in Grindelwald, something Voldemort never had. That is really the difference between them - the fact that underneath all of the mistakes and horrible things Grindelwald did, he was still human and still had the capability to do something good. And I also agree that he still probably harbored some feelings for Dumbledore, which likely influenced his decision to defy Voldemort. I can imagine that being imprisoned (in a prison of his own creation, no less), that he'd have had a lot of time to reflect on the past and his association with Dumbledore. He could have also felt that if he and Dumbledore couldn't be the ones to unite the 3 Hallows, then no one should get that chance.Wow, I completely agree with all of this. :D At first I thought he was almost like Voldemort, because all we ever heard about was how he was controlling and a manipulator, but it showed he truly felt remors. :)

I think the main difference between Grindelwald and Voldmeort, was in their ability to love; they were both evil; but I like to think that somewhere inside him, Grindelwald never stopped loving Dumbledore and that was why he lost even with the Elder wand; he probably never fought to kill, and Dumbledore did not either IMO; he only defeated, while when we compare with Harry it was always vanquishing Voldemort and killing him off to win the war; right from the Diary, Dumbledore and Harry were killing off voldemort piece by piece.

I have a question (sorry if it's already been asked I just kind of skimmed) anyway do you guy's think that Dumbledore's love for Grindelwald was requaited (sp)? I've always just wondered that....:relax:

Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
I don't think so. I think that eventually Dumbledore would've still seen the error of Grindelwald's ways.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished?
Somehow, I think not. If they had continued being friends, perhaps Dumbledore would've still thought that wizard rule over the muggles was a good thing.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?
I thought somewhere in DH, that Harry believed Grindelwald had started to feel guilt after all he had done, that's why he hadn't really cared that the Elder wand had been taken from him. However, I think, perhaps somewhere deep down, he still had love for Dumbledore, and perhaps that was why he started to feel guilt and remorse for all that he had done.

Would their friendship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
Have to disagree with what looks like the majority of the thread by s saying 'yes' to this question. JKR placed a huge emphasis on the power of love, and her revelation that Dumbledore was in love with Gellert immediately places a huge amount of significance on their friendship, even moreso than the way its failure shaped who Dumbledore became as he grew older. If Dumbledore's feelings were returned, as I believe and as seems to be implied by Harry's speculation concerning Gellert's motives for defying Voldemort, it is quite possible that, had the 'three-way duel' not resulted in Ariana's death, nothing would have sundered their 'partnership', since we know that Dumbledore was more than willing to set aside his scruples because of his infatuation with Gellert and his impatience/annoyance with the cards life had delt him.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished?
Yes. One of the most significant things that we learn in DH about Dumbledore is how much of his defining philosophies and characteristics were shaped by his realization of just how close he came to exemplifying some of the same ideologies put forth by Lord Voldemort. The three-way-duel between himself, Aberforth, and Gellert was the catalyst that caused him to see past his infatuation with Gellert and realize that there was a darkness he had never seen lurking beneath everything, but, in light of JKR's subsequent revelation about Dumbledore and how he viewed his one-time DH conspirator (Gellert), we also learn that, had not something like the duel occurred, Dumbledore probably would not have seen past his infatuation with Gellert, nor his own ambitions, and not realized the true wrongness of what he and Gellert had been conspiring to do.

I feel so sorry for Dumbledore. I mean, he was so deluded by his love for GG (can't stop saying that! It's so cute!) that he was driven to do all those things against Muggle borns.

Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
Yes, I think so. Albus agreed with everything that Grindelwald was suggesting. He was young and needed magical friendship, now more than ever as he had the family to look after. I think it would have stayed as friendship though, as I've perceived the love as strictly one way-I don't think Grindelwald loved Dumbledore back.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished?
I think so, because if their friendship had flourished then Dumbledore would have been enough to tame Grindelwald somewhat. He wouldn't have had to defeat Grindelwald, so would not have been as well known, therefore may not have become the headmaster of Hogwarts

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?
Just guilt I think. I don't think he was too impressed with Dumbledore after he put him into prison

Oh, old topic, but I'd really like to respond to this one.

Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?[B]
I don't think so. There was a darker side to Grindelwald that I think Dumbledore would have seen at some point.


[B]Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished?
As I said above, I don't think it could have. At some point, it would have come to an end, and I can't see it changing Dumbledore even if it had continued for some other length of time.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?
That's a very interesting question. I like to think that if Grindelwald had wanted to indicate an act of friendship or love to Dumbledore, he wouldn't have waited until it was basically too late. If his defiance was in the spirit of friendship or love, I don't think that was entirely the reason for it. Although I do believe that Grindelwald would have felt little remorse for what he had done, unless he saw that Voldemort was inflicting a reign of terror similar to what he himself had done.

Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
if Ariana hadnt died, im believe they would have remained friends, for at least a short while. i say short while, because i believe that had her death not taken place, Albus would have still realised the full implications of the plans they were constructiing, and in doing so realise that Gellert was a brilliant but highly dangerous wizard!

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished?
thats a great question! On one hand the person that one turns out to be, is very much shaped on life experiences, therefore if their friendship had flourished its quite possible that Albus Dumbledore would have been a different man! especially if Gellert had of felt the same "feelings" as Albus!
although i believe that even if those scenarios had of played out, that Dumbledore would have grew away from Grindelwald, because their magnificent brains aside, they were very different people at heart!

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?
in my opinion if he had wanted to aid Riddle in his reign of terror he could easily have told him where to find the Death Stick!
therefore while not doing so he was is some way, trying to repay his debt to society for the crimes he committed previously. so in my view it was more to do with guilt than an act of friendship to Dumbledore!

Would their friendship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?

No, I don't believe it would have. Even if Ariana was perfectly healthy and as capable of Magic as any other Child, the Friendship was doomed. Albus and Aberforth would have fought about Grindelwald and his real motives, Albus would have seen Aberforth as being jealous, etc. There still would have been a duel between the three of them.


Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished?
I'm not so sure about this one.
Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship to his lost friend, or just guilt?
I don't think it was for either of those reasons. I think Grindelwald saw the trouble he could get in and defied Voldemort out of fear.

Would their friendship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
I believe it would have. Until that point, Dumbledore hadn't shown any signs of hesitation or remorse for the horrible things he was planning. I think Grindelwald using the Cruciatus Curse on Aberforth angered him and clued him in that perhaps Grindelwald wasn't the great guy he thought he was.


Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished?
I think so. If what JK Rowling said is true and Dumbledore loved Grindelwald, then I think he'd be blinded by that love and he wouldn't see Grindelwald for the person he really was.


Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship to his lost friend, or just guilt?
I think probably a little of both. Grindelwald had quite a long time to think about his past deeds while he was imprisoned and he probably missed Dumbledore. I think their friendship, while it lasted, was so strong that it probably had a hand in changing his heart years later.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished
Dumbledore's weaknesses make him who he was; his friendship with Grindelwald did flourish and surely learning from this made him the tolerant muggle lover he became :)

So I was just reading TPS to my sick nephew when I came upon what I think might be a clue from J.K.

It reads: "Professor Dumbledore? Can I ask you something?"
"Obviously, you've just done so," Dumbledore smiled. "You may ask me one more thing, however."
"What do you see when you look in the mirror?"
"I? I see myself holding a pair of thick, woolen socks."
Harry stared.
"One can never have enough socks," said Dumbledore. "Another Christmas has come and gone and I didn't get a single pair. People will insist on giving me books."
It was only when he was back in his bed that it struck Harry that dumbledore might not have been truthful. But then, he thought, as he shoved Scabbers off his pillow, it had been quite a personal question."

Forgive me if this has already been brought up, im new. : ]

What I'd really like to know, and what I think would make all the difference in regards to analyzing Dumbledore, is whether he ever visited Grindelwald in Nurmengard. Was it possible for him to face his personal demons in that way? If I were to venture a guess, I would say that he probably didn't, but I'd be interested to know what others think.

In response to BalletJay: You raise an interesting quote and I would probably agree with you entirely, except that Rowling did reveal during an interview post-DH what Dumbledore saw in the mirror, and sadly it wasn't Grindelwald.

Allie: What did dumbledore truly see in the mirror of erised

J.K. Rowling: He saw his family alive, whole and happy – Ariana, Percival and Kendra all returned to him, and Aberforth reconciled to him.

Source: J.K. Rowling Web Chat Transcript, 7/30/07 (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2007/7/30/j-k-rowling-web-chat-transcript)

What I'd really like to know, and what I think would make all the difference in regards to analyzing Dumbledore, is whether he ever visited Grindelwald in Nurmengard. Was it possible for him to face his personal demons in that way? If I were to venture a guess, I would say that he probably didn't, but I'd be interested to know what others think.


I don't think Dumbledore saw GG in Nuremgard. He says 'They say he showed remorse in his later years', in King's Cross, which makes me feel he did not go and seek out GG.

I don't think Dumbledore saw GG in Nuremgard. He says 'They say he showed remorse in his later years', in King's Cross, which makes me feel he did not go and seek out GG.

Oh, thank you for mentioning that! I had totally forgotten that bit. You're probably right, then.

From Feminism in Deathly Hallows:

I wasn't being specific enough, so I apologize. What I meant by unhealthy is loving someone who has harmful tendencies, which could also lead in joining them in whatever it is their doing or want o pursue. I don't think being naturally blind to such tendencies is anywhere near healthy.

But it's only natural. When you're in love, especially if it's for the first time and you're in your teens, you do tend to see the other person as perfect, and idolise all they do. What's important is that Dumbledore did sober up after he was forced to see how dangerous Grindelwald was. What would have been definitely unhealthy is Dumbledore trying to rationalise and excuse Grindelwald's behaviour even after he'd had to see its grim consequences.

From Feminism in Deathly Hallows:



But it's only natural. When you're in love, especially if it's for the first time and you're in your teens, you do tend to see the other person as perfect, and idolise all they do. What's important is that Dumbledore did sober up after he was forced to see how dangerous Grindelwald was. What would have been definitely unhealthy is Dumbledore trying to rationalise and excuse Grindelwald's behaviour even after he'd had to see its grim consequences.
I agree it is natural, especially when one is still young and naive. But I think a line has to be drawn between not seeing faults and going along with dominating a whole population "for the greater good." But yes, the important thing is that DD did realize how wrong he was. Being niave and influenced easily is understandable, I just don't think it justifies their relationship to be a healthy one. There are situations where one person stays in a very bad harmful relationship because they blind themselves to the other person's faults.

1)Would their friendship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
It would have been prolonged...eventually something would happen to break them apart.


2) Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship had flourished?
Dumbledore really learned a lot from his mistakes and through his life. He may have done different things with his life, but I think that somehow things would have ended up the sane way.

3) Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship to his lost friend, or just guilt?
I think that Grindelwald decided to do the right thing. It was probably a combination of the two things, plus he probably learned a lot in prison.

I think Dumbledore genuinely believed in the "greater good" ideology. I think its possible for wizards and muggles to co-exist peacefully. I think wizards could help muggles in many ways and there are muggle stuff that would help wizards.
If done correctly, I could see massive benefits for muggles and wizards co-existing. Also, Dumbledore had a personal reason for wanting this as his sister suffered because of the existing statute of secrecy.
It would have been very difficult though. Muggles would have become paranoid and tried to resist so in all likely hood it would have turned out to be a messy affair.

I think Dumbledore genuinely believed in the "greater good" ideology. I think its possible for wizards and muggles to co-exist peacefully. I think wizards could help muggles in many ways and there are muggle stuff that would help wizards.
If done correctly, I could see massive benefits for muggles and wizards co-existing. Also, Dumbledore had a personal reason for wanting this as his sister suffered because of the existing statute of secrecy.
It would have been very difficult though. Muggles would have become paranoid and tried to resist so in all likely hood it would have turned out to be a messy affair.

While I agree with you that Dumbledore genuinely believed in the "greater good" ideology - I don't see it as being about muggles & magical people co-existing peacefully. In his letter to Gellert he used phrases such as 'wizard dominance being FOR THE MUGGLES OWN GOOD', 'we have been given power and, yes, that power gives us the right to rule' It seems to me he is, at this point in his life, saying things that Lucius Malfoy, and even Voldermort, would have agreed with most fervently.

Of course with time he grows out of these opinions and ends up very firmly opposed to them but I don’t think we can overlook or dismiss the seriousness of his dalliance with magical supremacist ideology without diminishing the depth JKR chose to give Dumbledore’s character. Personally I would love to know more about the relationship he and Grindelwald :)

While I agree with you that Dumbledore genuinely believed in the "greater good" ideology - I don't see it as being about muggles & magical people co-existing peacefully. In his letter to Gellert he used phrases such as 'wizard dominance being FOR THE MUGGLES OWN GOOD', 'we have been given power and, yes, that power gives us the right to rule' It seems to me he is, at this point in his life, saying things that Lucius Malfoy, and even Voldermort, would have agreed with most fervently.

Of course with time he grows out of these opinions and ends up very firmly opposed to them but I don’t think we can overlook or dismiss the seriousness of his dalliance with magical supremacist ideology without diminishing the depth JKR chose to give Dumbledore’s character. Personally I would love to know more about the relationship he and Grindelwald :)

:tu: I agree. The point is that Dumbledore really was talking about the subjugation of Muggles - for what he then saw as their own good. For that brief period, he was in sync with Grindelwald's philosophy, not with the philosophy he himself later came to adopt. He was arguing for Wizards dominating Muggles and subjecting Muggles to the will of Wizards.

Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?
I don't believe so. Dumbledore stated that he felt guilt the entire time, during talk of the "greater good", he knew deep down in his heart that it was not right, he at the time just managed to pacify his feelings by feigning excuses. Eventually DD's heart would have won out, whether this would have ment that their friend/relationship would have ended, I'm not sure. In his later years Grindelwald showed remourse for what had happend, so i wouldn't rule out the possibility that Dumbledore might have changed him.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished? Like i stated above, it could have gone another way, instead of assuming that Dumbledore would join the dark fight. If there relationship had flourished, I don't believe that dumbledore would have been able to submerge his actual opinion about what was going on and would have tried to stop Grindelwald much sooner, seeing as he would have had nothing to fear from battling the wand.


Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?
Oh I deffiniatly believe it was his way of trying to make up in the least for all that he had done. I don't recall if Jo had said that the feelings were mutual, if it was an actual romantic relationship, i just remember that Dumbledore did indeed love him. I never thought about it being grindelwalds last way of apoligizing to dumbledore, it was probably guilt.

While I agree with you that Dumbledore genuinely believed in the "greater good" ideology - I don't see it as being about muggles & magical people co-existing peacefully. In his letter to Gellert he used phrases such as 'wizard dominance being FOR THE MUGGLES OWN GOOD', 'we have been given power and, yes, that power gives us the right to rule' It seems to me he is, at this point in his life, saying things that Lucius Malfoy, and even Voldermort, would have agreed with most fervently.

Of course with time he grows out of these opinions and ends up very firmly opposed to them but I don’t think we can overlook or dismiss the seriousness of his dalliance with magical supremacist ideology without diminishing the depth JKR chose to give Dumbledore’s character. Personally I would love to know more about the relationship he and Grindelwald :)

I agree. The point is that Dumbledore really was talking about the subjugation of Muggles - for what he then saw as their own good. For that brief period, he was in sync with Grindelwald's philosophy, not with the philosophy he himself later came to adopt. He was arguing for Wizards dominating Muggles and subjecting Muggles to the will of Wizards.

I just read the letter that Dumbledore wrote to Grindelwald. He makes it very clear that the basis ("foundation stone") for their plan was that it would benefit the muggles. It makes sense because muggles would have benefited immensely if wizards could play a part. The ability to do magic puts wizards in a position to help muggles. Much like what we humans do with regard to other creatures. Dumbledore also understood that force should be avoided and must be used only when absolutely necessary.
After the Ariana incident, IMO he realized that deep down even though he knew all along that Grindelwald had no such plans and plainly wanted to be a dictator, he still went along with it. The realization that he was blinded by love had a big impact on him. He probably realized soon after that his plan would not work because muggles would not take well to it and that it would end up being a bloodbath. Not to mention that he'd have to deal with opposition from wizards itself. In short, going ahead with such a plan would lead to more harm than good.
IMO Dumbledore, being an extremely intelligent and powerful wizard who had already done things that made a difference to the wizarding world at such a young age, probably had some sort of idealistic view of the world and thought that with Grindelwald, they could really make it happen.

I wanted to reply to something from the Snape Character Analysis thread.

'Grindelwald. You cannot imagine how his ideas caught me, Harry, inflamed me. Muggles forced into subservience. We wizards triumphant. Grindelwald and I, the glorious leaders of the revolution.

'Oh I had a few scruples. I assured my conscience that it would all be for the greater good, and any harm done would be repaid a hundredfold in benefits for wizards. Did I know in my hearts, what Gellert Grindelwald was? I think I did, but I closed my eyes. If the plans we were making came to fruition, all my dreams would come true.'

Muggles forced into subservience; IMO there is nothing good about this.

I wasn't involved in this discussion, but I agree with this. I think Dumbledore would have turned out just as "bad" as Grindelwald if the Ariana-incident hadn't happened. I see both of them as opportunists, young, arrogant, in love with themselves and each other, planning the future of the world as they thought it should be.

And is the idea so bad? I would prefer to have wizards in charge of the world, solving all our problems, ending the need for oil and sorting out global warming, curing AIDS and other diseases, feeding the 3rd World ...but of course wizards aren't perfect people either, as Grindelwald and Voldemort show, and they got just as corrupted as any Muggles who ever had big ideas.

I often wonder whether their plan, which never really gets elaborated, was to find a wizard who would bring Muggles closer to wizards, sort of staging a sort of nonreligious Second Coming, to establish trust (and worship, which is where it gets bad.) and encourage Muggles to let wizards have power.

^ Sort of like in the Merlin miniseries, where Mab wants to use Merlin to make Muggles come back to the Old Ways of Magic, rather than Christianity. Which is odd, because I've only just watched that, but I found many parallels in what my partner and I already made up about Grindelwald and Dumbledore's plans, unaware that it was so similar.

I wonder whether little Tom Riddle was supposed to be that person ...but that's already descending into my conspiracy theory in which Dumbledore never actually gave up on the old plans completely, just decided that Grindewald was too much of a loose canon and he should go it alone.

1. I think so, it was the Ariana incident that broke the pair up, they were ready to go off and conquer the world until Aberforth burst their bubble. What was there to break them up, Dumbledore in love with Grindelwald, Grindelwald enthralled to finally find another equally talented. Their friendship was based in their shared greatness initially and then onto their shared vision of wizarding dominance. Remember Dumbledore does confess to Harry that he was captured by the image of the pair of them as the glorious conquerors and leaders of a wizarding revolution. Also remember how Ariana became how she was, she was tortured by muggles, it was muggles that had destroyed Dumbledore's family by sending his father to Azkaban and his sister to an uncontrollable state and bound him to his home, muggles had ruined the young Dumbledore's life, he fully believed in THEIR vision for the future. Beyond Albus' love for his family, what else could divide him from Gellert Grindelwald?

2. Absolutely, as I said above Dumbledore must have had a hatred of muggles for ruining his early life, I fully believe that he and Grindelwald would have set off to topple all the European ministries of magic. At the end of the day I believe both were far more similar, just Ariana's death triggered Dumbledore to condemn the dark arts and the search for power. Dumbledore believed in their vision and had Ariana's demise not halted him he would have become corrupted by the power of the Dark Arts just as Grindelwald was (Dumbledore confesses his lust for power and power being his largest fault).

3. When I said that Dumbledore and Grindelwald were very similar it extends to the feelings of remorse for what they'd done. Dumbledore had been involved in the death of his sister, or as he feared had been the caster of the curse that killed her and as such rejected the Dark Arts, Grindelwald fled and begun his campaign for wizarding supremacy. But Albus pointed out that he hid what he was doing behind the justification of 'for the greater good', all while being fully aware it would require them to kill the many who would oppose them. Grindelwald also hid what he did behind the same justification (note the other dark wizard who he's compared to LV, never had such a justification for his acts) Grindelwald believed in 'the greater good' so much that he inscribed it on the entrance to Nurmengard (also note he built a prison for his eventual enemies, LV did no such thing), because of this I think Grindelwald like Dumbledore realised that his justification did not justify his actions and his defiance of Voldemort was a way of renouncing the Dark Arts, and opposition to Voldemort.

I wasn't involved in this discussion, but I agree with this. I think Dumbledore would have turned out just as "bad" as Grindelwald if the Ariana-incident hadn't happened. I see both of them as opportunists, young, arrogant, in love with themselves and each other, planning the future of the world as they thought it should be.

I think Dumbledore would have changed later on, maybe sooner than later, because he changed this time, when Ariana died. Grindelwald never changed even after this, even knowing that keeping to this path he would lose Dumbledore forever. That was the difference between Dumbledore and Grindelwald at the time.

And IMO this was the difference between Snape and Bellatrix for example. Snape changed when Lily was targeted; which makes me feel that he had the potential to change even had Lily not been targeted; the only difference being that he would not have changed in the way he did in the Books, or at that time.

I think this is the difference between a Dark Lord/hardened Death Eater and someone who drifts into such organisations because they have a false idea of the whole thing like Draco, Regulus, Snape and Dumbledore, who either shut their eyes to the evil part, feeling it would somehow be overcome by the good promised by such organisations. They were deluding themselves and they were in a way cheating their good side, but somewhere at the bottom of their hearts was something inherently good that would wake up sooner rather than later and make them see that the evil these people perpetrated can never be over shadowed by the good that these organisations claimed to do.

And is the idea so bad? I would prefer to have wizards in charge of the world, solving all our problems, ending the need for oil and sorting out global warming, curing AIDS and other diseases, feeding the 3rd World ...but of course wizards aren't perfect people either, as Grindelwald and Voldemort show, and they got just as corrupted as any Muggles who ever had big ideas.

I would not vote for this idea. :) The question is whether we want our thinking/solving be done for us and I feel no; they should not be. I don't mind wizards solving our problems, but only if I want them to. I want to be able to make that choice, every time. :)

I often wonder whether their plan, which never really gets elaborated, was to find a wizard who would bring Muggles closer to wizards, sort of staging a sort of nonreligious Second Coming, to establish trust (and worship, which is where it gets bad.) and encourage Muggles to let wizards have power.

Their plan was what Grindelwald eventually went on to do, alone. Killing hundreds of muggles; a wizard equivalent of Hitler, I think.

"The problem is not whether machines think, but whether men do." - B.F. Skinner

I am using this quote to illustrate that wizards are men just like Muggles, and to show that it is very dangerous to rely on others to think for us.

But JKR decided to represent the only homosexual relationship in her entire series as ending very badly.

The relationship may have ended badly at the time, but I think there was something between them which lasted forever. They may not have been together, living as a couple happily and all that, nevertheless what they shared and felt was powerful IMO, shown by Dumbledore's words to Harry, and Grindelwald's actions to Voldemort before he died. While yes, I agree this relationship did not have what other relationships in the Books had like romance, marriage, I think it still had something potent that made it last forever and something positive for Grindelwald to feel remorse and protect Dumbledore even after he died.

'They say he showed remorse in later years, alone in his cell ....

Perhaps his lie to Voldemort was his attempt to make amends .... to prevent Voldemort from taking the Hallow ...'

'...or maybe from breaking into your tomb?' suggested Harry and Dumbledore dabbed his eyes.

Grindelwald lost to Dumbledore with the Elder Wand while fighting a duel to the death as it were; Rita Skeeter says Grindelwald did not fight to his potential, while others say that the war between them was an awe inspiring one. Perhaps Grindelwald did not fight to his potential because he could not fight Dumbledore.

I feel they had a great romance going on between them, even when they were far apart and even when they were enemies. JMO.

The relationship may have ended badly at the time, but I think there was something between them which lasted forever. They may not have been together, living as a couple happily and all that, nevertheless what they shared and felt was powerful IMO, shown by Dumbledore's words to Harry, and Grindelwald's actions to Voldemort before he died. While yes, I agree this relationship did not have what other relationships in the Books had like romance, marriage, I think it still had something potent that made it last forever and something positive for Grindelwald to feel remorse and protect Dumbledore even after he died.

'They say he showed remorse in later years, alone in his cell ....

Perhaps his lie to Voldemort was his attempt to make amends .... to prevent Voldemort from taking the Hallow ...'

'...or maybe from breaking into your tomb?' suggested Harry and Dumbledore dabbed his eyes.

Grindelwald lost to Dumbledore with the Elder Wand while fighting a duel to the death as it were; Rita Skeeter says Grindelwald did not fight to his potential, while others say that the war between them was an awe inspiring one. Perhaps Grindelwald did not fight to his potential because he could not fight Dumbledore.

I feel they had a great romance going on between them, even when they were far apart and even when they were enemies. JMO.

I don't think so. There's no canonical evidence to show that Grindelwald was homosexual, that if he was, he returned Dumbledore's feelings, or that they developed such a powerful relationship in, I believe, 3 months, that neither could shake it for the rest of their lives.

I don't think so. There's no canonical evidence to show that Grindelwald was homosexual, that if he was, he returned Dumbledore's feelings, or that they developed such a powerful relationship in, I believe, 3 months, that neither could shake it for the rest of their lives.

Grindelwald may not have been specified as homosexual in the Books; Dumbledore was and he had some intense feelings for Grindelwald IMO and I think they were returned in equal measure (for which I agree I have no specific canon except inferring from Dumbledore's words and actions). If they did not share anything romantic between them I don't think Dumbledore would have have put off fighting Grindelwald for some time, unable to face him, and neither would he have remained silent when Harry suggested that Grindelwald did not want Dumbledore's tomb broken into. That's pretty personal and peaks of a relationship between them. I think there was more between them than their apparent friendship, and in the three months they had fallen deeply in love, something that stayed with them all through. Though I agree I don't have explicit canon for what I say.

Grindelwald may not have been specified as homosexual in the Books; Dumbledore was and he had some intense feelings for Grindelwald IMO and I think they were returned in equal measure (for which I agree I have no specific canon except inferring from Dumbledore's words and actions). If they did not share anything romantic between them I don't think Dumbledore would have have put off fighting Grindelwald for some time, unable to face him, and neither would he have remained silent when Harry suggested that Grindelwald did not want Dumbledore's tomb broken into. That's pretty personal and peaks of a relationship between them. I think there was more between them than their apparent friendship, and in the three months they had fallen deeply in love, something that stayed with them all through. Though I agree I don't have explicit canon for what I say.

Mightn't it just be that he was showing remorse for his own part in how Dumbledore's sister died? Or, if he had truly turned from the evil that filled him earlier on in his life, just a wish against evil? I think Dumbledore put off fighting Grindelwald because he held himself somewhat responsible for Grindelwald's ascent, or that he just didn't want to be associated with him. I don't think it was out of love.

Mightn't it just be that he was showing remorse for his own part in how Dumbledore's sister died? Or, if he had truly turned from the evil that filled him earlier on in his life, just a wish against evil? I think Dumbledore put off fighting Grindelwald because he held himself somewhat responsible for Grindelwald's ascent, or that he just didn't want to be associated with him. I don't think it was out of love.

He was showing remorse for his sister too and for his own part in the whole mess that lead to her death; but he was also crying for what could have been; for the remorse that came too late for both of them and for the way Grindelwald left him at the worst moment of his life. While it is not explicitly mentioned that Dumbledore and Grindelwald had an affair in the three months they were together and that it was love, I think they did have a relationship that went beyond the boundaries of friendship and it was something that affected them deeply; Dumbledore from day one and Grindelwald once he was placed in Nuremgard; perhaps before but at that time he refused to acknowledge it or give in to it IMO.

Could be. I don't see any canonical evidence, and thus I see it as simply a redemption of his earlier intentions. I just don't think there's enough to read that sort of groundbreaking conclusion, but I could be incorrect.

Grindelwald may not have been specified as homosexual in the Books; Dumbledore was and he had some intense feelings for Grindelwald IMO and I think they were returned in equal measure (for which I agree I have no specific canon except inferring from Dumbledore's words and actions). If they did not share anything romantic between them I don't think Dumbledore would have have put off fighting Grindelwald for some time, unable to face him, and neither would he have remained silent when Harry suggested that Grindelwald did not want Dumbledore's tomb broken into. That's pretty personal and peaks of a relationship between them. I think there was more between them than their apparent friendship, and in the three months they had fallen deeply in love, something that stayed with them all through. Though I agree I don't have explicit canon for what I say.

I'm not sure Grindelwald returned Dumbledore's feelings. I believe Jo mentioned that Grindelwald was aware of those feelings and he used it to his advantage to an extent.

Whether Grindelwald returned Dumbledore's feelings is irrelevant to Dumbledore's dealings with him. Love does not work that way (not the healthy kind anyway). Dumbledore had strong feelings for him and that is what IMO dictated all his actions with regard to him.

There was undoubtedly a strong connection between the two when they met. I'd say that Albus was the first and only friend, a true equal, that Gellert ever had. I think Grindelwald valued and treasured it during his time at Nurmengard.

Would their friendship/relationship have survived if Ariana's death hadn't taken place?

Dumbledore was in love with Grindelwald and the two shared a belief in their superiority and the "greater good. " Ariana's death was a wake up call to DD - letting him know he was on the wrong path. Had she not have died, DD would have not have moved away from that relationship and that shared view.

Would Dumbledore be a different man if their friendship/relationship had flourished?

Certainly. DD enjoyed power, including wanting to collect the hallows at one point. Power can be used for benefit or harm, and GG's focus was on world domination, and DD thought the two of them were talented enough to run everything. Many years later, DD realized that power was corrupting, esp. for him. While he was willing to be the "head general" in the war against Voldemort, he had learned that others are also equally important, and their feelings have value as well, even if they see things differently from him.

Did Grindelwald's defiance to Voldemort indicate an act of friendship/love to his lost friend/lover, or just guilt?

I'm thinking it was remorse. GG, unlike Voldemort, seemed to have the ability to love, at least at one point in time, and I think he grew to regret his actions and was acting because of his guilt.

The relationship may have ended badly at the time, but I think there was something between them which lasted forever. They may not have been together, living as a couple happily and all that, nevertheless what they shared and felt was powerful IMO, shown by Dumbledore's words to Harry, and Grindelwald's actions to Voldemort before he died. While yes, I agree this relationship did not have what other relationships in the Books had like romance, marriage, I think it still had something potent that made it last forever and something positive for Grindelwald to feel remorse and protect Dumbledore even after he died.

'They say he showed remorse in later years, alone in his cell ....

Perhaps his lie to Voldemort was his attempt to make amends .... to prevent Voldemort from taking the Hallow ...'

'...or maybe from breaking into your tomb?' suggested Harry and Dumbledore dabbed his eyes.

Grindelwald lost to Dumbledore with the Elder Wand while fighting a duel to the death as it were; Rita Skeeter says Grindelwald did not fight to his potential, while others say that the war between them was an awe inspiring one. Perhaps Grindelwald did not fight to his potential because he could not fight Dumbledore.

I feel they had a great romance going on between them, even when they were far apart and even when they were enemies. JMO.

These are my thoughts precisely. I think the series has such a strong theme about the strength of love that it was that strength that meant that they couldn't face each other for so long and fought weakly when they did.

In the scene quoted above, IMO those tears are clearly tears mourning lost love. I know it's not strictly canon, but it just the emotion I instantly sensed.